Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/23/1999 - Regular~ pOAN ,~.~ ~, '°; ~ 183 ®~J~~J11~JL1 v' ~ ~®~~L.Jl u"1CILs1 ~Y 1L d~~LJIIDnI~ILe~1L 1L ®11OJL.s U' 1L~1L ROANOKE COUNTY'BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 1999 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on ThursdaXs at 7 P.M. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call ALL PRESENT AT 3:00 P.M. 2. Invocation: F. Douglas Sweetenberg Sheriff's Office 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS ECH ADDED EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM - 2.1-344A (3) DISPOSITION OF REAL ESTATE. ® Recyded Paper BLJ ANNOUNCED THAT INSTEAD OF EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH SCHOOL BOARD THERE WOULD BE JOINT WORK SESSION. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of February 22 - 26, 1999 as Social Services Eligibility Worker Week in Roanoke County. HOM MOTION TO ADOPT PROCLAMATION URC ACCEPTED BY BETTY MCCRARY WHO INTRODUCED ELIGIBILITY WORKERS D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request from the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to approve amendments to the Member Use Agreement. (Diane Hyatt, Finance Director) R-022399-1 FFH MOTION TO APPROVE URC F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING WITH ITEM 4 REMOVED AT HCN'S REQUEST 2ND AND PUBLIC HEARING - 3/23/99 URC 1. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct mini warehouses, located in the 7200 block of Barrens Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Vaughn Wilburn. a 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate a used automobile dealership, located at 7650 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Hash Investments LLC. 3. Ordinance to rezone approximately 10 acres from R-2 and C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional for retail sales and obtain a Special Use Permit for fast food restaurants and drive-thrus, located in the vicinity of Brambleton Avenue (Route 221) and Electric Road (Route 419), Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Associates LLC. 4. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a high school, located on the west side of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, south of Farmington Drive, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Roanoke County School Board. BLJ MOTION TOP APPROVE 1ST READING - 2ND AND PUBLIC HEARING - 3/23/99 AYES-JPM,HOM,FFH,BLJ NAYS-HCN 5. Ordinance to rezone 14.7 acres from AG-1 to R-1 to construct single family detached residences, located on the west side of Wildwood Road, north of 1-81, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Wildwood Development Inc. 6. Ordinance to rezone 11.66 acres from C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 925 North Electric Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Pinkerton Chevrolet). 7. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church). 8. Reconsideration of an Ordinance to rezone 11.93 acres from AG-3 to AR and obtain a Special Use Permit to allow a 9-hole 3 golf course, located in the 2600 block of Rutrough Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Randall Wayne Brown. 9. Ordinance to rezone 456.6 acres from R-1, Residential to Planned Technology Development District, for a business and commercial park, located in the 5300 block of Glenmary Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing quitclaim and release of a 20-foot water line easement within the boundaries of Belmont Court and located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2, and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates in the Vinton Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) HCN MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING. 2ND - 319/99 URC 2. Ordinance amending Ordinance 090997-5 authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project, Mountain Heights Water Project. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) FFH MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING. 2ND - 319/99 URC BOARD CONSENSUS TO DISCUSS AMENDING THE POLICY IN WORK SESSION FORMAT. H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second Reading of an ordinance approving the exercise of an option to purchase agreement with Salem Office Supply, Inc., for property located at 400 East Main Street, across from the Roanoke County Courthouse, in Salem, Virginia. (John 4 Chambliss, Assistant Administrator) ADDED TO EXECUTIVE SESSION -ACQUISITION OF REAL ESTATE AND ITEM TABLED UNTIL EVENING SESSION (HEARD UNDER ITEM S-7). APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans -Advisory Council 2. Commission for Senior and Physically Challenged Citizens HOM ASKED DEBBIE PITTS TO RECOMMEND CITIZENS FOR THIS COMMISSION. J. 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-022399-2 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO. URC 1. Approval of Minutes -January 23-24, 1999, January 26, 1999. 2. Request from Social Services to increase County vehicle fleet for Welfare Reform, Phase II. A-022399-2.a 3. Request to appropriate monies for Child Day Care Programs for the Department of Social Services. A-022399-2.b K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE N. REPORTS BLJ MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE - UVV 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Statement of Expenditures and Revenue for the month ended January 31, 1999 6. Update of 1999-2000 Budget Calendar 7 Accounts Paid -January 1999 P. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) pending litigation with General Electric Company 2.1-344A (3) discussion of the acquisition, disposition or use of real estate for public purposes, purchase of a water system and 3~; 2.1-344 A (7) to discuss a legal matter requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff, namely, negotiation of an agreement with the Town of Vinton; Section 2.1-344 A (5) to discuss the location of a prospective business or industry in the County. BLJ MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 4:00 P.M. URC OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:00 P.M. 6 O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) 1. Joint Work Session with School Board DISCUSSION ON AGREEMENT BETWEEN SB AND BOS ON SURPLUS OF PROPERTY AT MERRIMAN ROAD. CONSENSUS OF BOTH BODIES THAT WRITTEN AGREEMENT WILL BE DELETED. TOM LEGGETTE MOVED TO SURPLUS THE PROPERTY AND DONATE IT TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. SECONDED BY JERRY CANADA AND ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE SCHOOL BOARD. BOS AGREED TO PAY WATER AND SEWER CONNECTION COSTS FOR WOODS END SITE. 2. Work Session on potential uses for McDonald Farm PRESENTED BY MELINDA COX AND TIM GUBALA. BOARD CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND REZONING PROCESS. 2. Work Session on the Capital Improvements Program LIST OF CIP AND OVERALL RANKING BY THE CIP COMMITTEE BY BRENT ROBERTSON AND STEVE KLEIBER. DISCUSSION OF VALUE OF CIP WHEN THERE IS LIMITED FUNDING EACH YEAR. EVENING SESSION (7:007:00 P.M.1 Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-022399-3 BLJ MOTION TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION AT 5:00 P.M. AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION RESO URC R. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearing to elicit citizen comment for items to be included in the budget for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. 0 CITIZENS SPOKE 2. Public Hearing on the "effective tax rate increase" as a result of increased assessed value of real estate. 0 CITIZENS SPOKE 3. Public Hearing to set the following tax rates: a. To set a real estate tax rate of not more than $1.13 per $100 assessed valuation. 0 CITIZENS SPOKE b. To set a personal property tax rate of not more than $3.50 per $100 assessed valuation. 0 CITIZENS SPOKE c. To set a machinery and tools tax rate of not more than $3.00 per $100 assessed valuation. 0 CITIZENS SPOKE S. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES PLEASE NOTE: ITEMS S-7 AND S-2 WILL 1~V®7' BE HEARD THIS EVENING. THEY HAVE BEEN RECONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 1. Second reading of ordinance to rezone 11.66 acres from C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 925 North Electric Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Pinkerton Chevrolet). (WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING) s ~, 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church). (WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING) 3. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 40 foot addition to an existing monopole tower, located at 4135 West Main Street, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (West Main). (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-022399-4 FFH MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 4. Second reading of ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-1 Conditional to C-2 conditional to construct a restaurant, located on the north side of Electric Road, east of Colonnade Corporate Center II, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Blue Ridge Cafe, LC. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-022399-5 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT ORD AYES-JPM~HOM,FFH,HCN ABSTAIN-BLJ 5. Second reading of ordinance declaring a 5.111 acre portion of a lot fronting on Merriman Road and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District to be surplus and accepting/rejecting an offer for the exchange of same with portions of property owned by Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) 0-022399-6 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD AS AMENDED BY ECH REMOVING ATTACHMENT D AND DELETING #1 IN ORDINANCE. 9 URC 6. Second reading of ordinance to vacate a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 20, Page 89, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park and a portion of a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Book 15, Page 110, Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park, lot 18A, (Tax Map No. 86.01-10-18) and located in Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) 0-022399-7 JPM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 7. Second Reading of an ordinance approving the exercise of an option to purchase agreement with Salem Office Supply, Inc., for property located at 400 East Main Street, across from the Roanoke County Courthouse, in Salem, Virginia. (John Chambliss, Assistant Administrator) FFH MOTION TO EXTEND OPTION FOR 3 MONTHS AT A COST OF $2,000. URC T. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Nickens: asked ECH to follow up on correspondence concerning the possible loss of a post office in Vinton. He felt it was important to be assertive in this situation. Supervisor McNamara: Announced there was a community meeting scheduled for Wednesday, Feb. 24 at 7 p.m. at Cave Spring Junior High School to hear plans for the new South County_ High School, and there will be an artist's rendering of the school. Supervisor Minnix: (1) Advised he had received complaints from people who live near the mulch grinding business who have complained that the odor has become very bad. Asked staff to investigate. (2) Had recently toured the Transportation Museum and was impressed. Encouraged the Board members to take a tour and citizens to visit both the Transportation Museum and Explore Park. He felt both will contribute io toward Roanoke Valley becomina a tourist destination. Supervisor Harrison• (1) Advised he will also be touring the Transportation Museum ~1 Asked ECH to investigate a sewer backup on North Spring Street in North Lakes ~2) Wished Glenvar teams good luck in their regional playoffs ~) Announced that this weekend Glenvar High School and Salem High School will jointly hold one-act plays with the proceeds going to help a cancer victim. He felt this was an excellent example of cooperation. Supervisor Johnson announced that he has lost his Daytimer calendar. U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE V. ADJOURNMENT TO 12.15 P.M. ON TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 1999 AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, FOR A JOINT MEETING WITH THE ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL BLJ ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 7:45 P.M. ii i ,. P AN ~ ~warr cf ng surf ~ F ti. ~ ~ 1 3 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 1999 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7 P.M. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: F. Douglas Sweetenberg Sheriff's Office 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of February 22 - 26, 1999 as Social Services Eligibility Worker Week in Roanoke County. i ® Recycled Paper {' D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request from the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to approve amendments to the Member Use Agreement. (Diane Hyatt, Finance Director) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. 1. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct mini warehouses, located in the 7200 block of Barrens Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Vaughn Wilburn. 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate a used automobile dealership, located at 7650 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Hash Investments LLC. 3. Ordinance to rezone approximately 10 acres from R-2 and C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional for retail sales and obtain a Special Use Permit for fast food restaurants and drive-thrus, located in the vicinity of Brambleton Avenue (Route 221) and Electric Road (Route 419), Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Associates LLC. 4. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a high school, located on the west side of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, south of Farmington Drive, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Roanoke County School Board. 5. Ordinance to rezone 14.7 acres from AG-1 to R-1 to construct single family detached residences, located on the west side of Wildwood Road, north of 1-81, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Wildwood Development Inc. 2 i ,~ 6. Ordinance to rezone 11.66 acres from C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 925 North Electric Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Pinkerton Chevrolet). 7. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church). 8. Reconsideration of an Ordinance to rezone 11.93 acres from AG-3 to AR and obtain a Special Use Permit to allow a 9-hole golf course, located in the 2600 block of Rutrough Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Randall Wayne Brown. 9. Ordinance to rezone 456.6 acres from R-1, Residential to Planned Technology Development District, for a business and commercial park, located in the 5300 block of Glenmary Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing quitclaim and release of a 20-foot water line easement within the boundaries of Belmont Court and located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2, and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates in the Vinton Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) 2. Ordinance amending Ordinance 090997-5 authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project, Mountain Heights Water Project. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second Reading of an ordinance approving the exercise of an 3 i ~~ option to purchase agreement with Salem Office Supply, Inc., for property located at 400 East Main Street, across from the Roanoke County Courthouse, in Salem, Virginia. (John Chambliss, Assistant Administrator) I. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans -Advisory Council 2. Commission for Senior and Physically Challenged Citizens J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of Minutes -January 23-24, 1999, January 26, 1999. 2. Request from Social Services to increase County vehicle fleet for Welfare Reform, Phase II. 3. Request to appropriate monies for Child Day Care Programs for the Department of Social Services. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 4 r 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Statement of Expenditures and Revenue for the month ended January 31, 1999 6. Update of 1999-2000 Budget Calendar 7 Accounts Paid -January 1999 O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) 1. Work Session on potential uses for McDonald Farm 2. Work Session on the Capital Improvements Program P. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) pending litigation with General Electric Company 2.1-344A (3) discussion of the acquisition, disposition or use of real estate for public purposes, purchase of a water system and Merriman Road property; 2.1-344 A (7) to discuss a legal matter requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff, namely, negotiation of an agreement with the Town of Vinton; Section 2.1-344 A (5) to discuss the location of a prospective business or industry in the County. EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing to elicit citizen comment for items to be included in the budget for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. 2. Public Hearing on the "effective tax rate increase" as a result of increased assessed value of real estate. 3. Public Hearing to set the following tax rates: 5 a. To set a real estate tax rate of not more than $1.13 per $100 assessed valuation. b. To set a personal property tax rate of not more than $3.50 per $100 assessed valuation. c. To set a machinery and tools tax rate of not more than $3.00 per $100 assessed valuation. S. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES PLEASE NOTE: ITEMS S-1 AND S-2 WILL ITV®7" BE HEARD THIS EVENING. THEY HAVE BEEN RECONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 1. Second reading of ordinance to rezone 11.66 acres from C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 925 North Electric Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Pinkerton Chevrolet). (WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING) 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church). (WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING) 3. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 40 foot addition to an existing monopole tower, located at 4135 West Main Street, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (West Main). (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 4. Second reading of ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-1 Conditional to C-2 conditional to construct a restaurant, located on the north side of Electric Road, east of Colonnade Corporate Center II, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Blue Ridge Cafe, LC. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 5. Second reading of ordinance declaring a 5.111 acre portion of a 6 I lot fronting on Merriman Road and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District to be surplus and accepting/rejecting an offer for the exchange of same with portions of property owned by Charles R. Lemon 8~ Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) 6. Second reading of ordinance to vacate a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 20, Page 89, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park and a portion of a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Book 15, Page 110, Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park, lot 18A, (Tax Map No. 86.01-10-18) and located in Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) T. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. ADJOURNMENT . ~ `. ~ ~-/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 PROCLAMATION DECLARING WEEK OF FEBRUARY 22 - 26, 1999 AS ELIGIBILITY WORKER APPRECIATION WEEK WHEREAS, Virginia's landmark welfare reform legislation has significantly impacted the services provided by local eligibility workers, calling upon them to creatively promote individual self-sufficiency and personal responsibility; and WHEREAS, Virginia continues to experience unprecedented implementation of complex policies and procedures relating to Welfare Reform in all major benefit programs; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County's 22 eligibility workers have been at the forefront of public efforts to meet that need, steadily maintaining a high rate of application processing to ensure that those qualified for social services receive them; and WHEREAS, in Roanoke County 3,646 cases are served monthly through the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, Medicaid, Food Stamp and General Relief Programs, depending on the dedication and commitment of eligibility workers who handle their cases in an accurate and timely manner; and WHEREAS, eligibility workers are continually faced with reconciling an environment of rapidly changing policies, procedures, and technological advances with quality control requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim the week of February 22 through 26, 1999 as ELIGIBILITY WORKER 1 C-~ APPRECIATION WEEK; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors commends all of the eligibility workers in Roanoke County for a job well done, and calls upon all Virginians to join in acknowledging their public service and contributions on this 23rd day of February, 1999. 2 ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER FEBRUARY 23, 1999 RESOLUTION 022399-1 OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA AUTHORIZING THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY MEMBERS USE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority (the "Authority"), the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "County"), the City of Roanoke, Virginia (the "City") and the Town of Vinton, Virginia (the "Town") entered into the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement dated October 23, 1991 (the "Members Use Agreement"), as amended by the First Amendment to Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of June 1, 1992, (the "First Amendment") and the Second Amendment to Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of December 2, 1996, (the "Second Amendment"), among the Authority, the County, the City and the Town under which the Authority agreed to acquire, construct and equip a regional waste disposal system consisting of a landfill and transfer station and related structures and equipment (the "System"), and to provide financing therefor in order to dispose of all nonhazardous solid waste delivered to the System by or on behalf of the County, the City and the Town (collectively, the "Charter Members"); and, WHEREAS, the Authority issued its $33,830,000 Solid Waste Revenue Bonds, Series 1992 (the "1992 Bonds") to finance the System; and, WHEREAS, the Authority issued its $10,000,000 Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1998 and its $10,000,000 Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1999 (the "Refunding Bonds") to refund portions of the 1992 Bonds and sold the Refunding Bonds to Crestar Bank (the "Bank"); and, WHEREAS, the Bank has requested that the Authority and the Charter Members enter into a Third Amendment to Members Use Agreement (the "Third Amendment") in order to provide that the provisions of the Members Use Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, applicable to the 1992 Bonds shall also be applicable to the Refunding Bonds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. Approval of Amendment. The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the Third Amendment in substantially the form on file with the County Administrator. The County Administrator and such officers and agents as he may designate are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Third Amendment and the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is authorized to seal and attest the Third Amendment with such changes as such officers deem appropriate to carry out the purposes expressed therein. 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~. Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Allan C. Robinson, Jr., Chairman, RVRA John R. Hubbard, Chief Executive Officer Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE, Clerk, Roanoke City Council Carolyn S. Ross, Clerk, Vinton Town Council -2- ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Amendment to the Members Use Agreement of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: `~~~~ ~ ~'.-~`v"v~ SiTMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Valley Resource Authority recently took advantage of favorable market rates to refinance $20,000,000 of its outstanding original revenue bonds, Series 1992. This refunding was done in two $10,000,000 portions to take advantage of the more favorable bank qualified rates. This refunding will save the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority approximately $100,000 a year over the life of the debt. This in combination with other factors will allow the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to reduce its tipping fee for the Charter Members by $2 a ton for the 1999- 2000 budget. In 1991 the Charter Member Jurisdictions and the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority entered into a Members Use Agreement providing for the establishment and operation of a regional landfill facility. The Members Use Agreement, as amended, contains several provisions which apply specifically only to the Series 1992 Bonds. The Roanoke Valley Resource Authority's bond counsel, McGuire Woods Battle and Boothe LLP, has advised that Crestar Bank, the purchaser of the refunding bond, requires that the Members Use Agreement be amended to provide that all provisions of the Members Use Agreement apply to the refunding bond. The Members Use Agreement, as amended, remains in effect through the term of the 1992 Bond which originally was through September 1, 2012. After the refunding of the long-term bonds the original 1992 Revenue Bonds will be fully retired by September 1, 2004 and the refunding bonds will remain in place until September 1, 2012. The proposed second amendment does not extend the original time period of the Members Use Agreement however, it does incorporate the recent refiandmg into the language of the document. 2/18/99 G:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\2-23-99.WPD . ~_/ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving the attached resolution authorizing the second amendment to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement. SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance APPROVED: ~: ` Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To () Motion by McNamara Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens No Yes Abs 2/18/99 G:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\2-23-99.WPD -/ ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY Februazy 9, 1999 The Honorable Bob L. Johnson Chairman, Boazd of Supervisors Roanoke County P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 RE: Amendment to Members Use Agreement Deaz Mr. Johnson: In 1991, the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, the Town of Vinton, and the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority ("Authority"), entered into the Members Use Agreement ("Agreement") which provided for the establishment and operation of the Valley's regional landfill facilities. In 1992, the Authority issued its original revenue bonds to finance the acquisition and construction of the Smith Gap Landfill. and Tinker Creek Transfer Station. Recently, the Authority issued Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1998 and 1999 ("Refunding Bonds") totaling $20,000,000.00, in order to refund a portion of the Series 1992 Bonds. The refunding was completed in two issues to qualify as small issues, which allowed the Resource Authority to expedite the refunding and take advantage of low interest rates. The refunding will allow the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to reduce its annual debt payments by $100,000.00. The current Agreement contains several provisions which apply specifically to the Series 1992 bonds. The Agreement needs to be amended to provide that all of its provisions also apply to the Refunding Bonds. These provisions include the jurisdictions' agreement to deliver all acceptable waste to the regional landfill and the continuation of the jurisdictions' financial obligations under the Agreement. The amendment would not extend the amount of time that jurisdictions' obligations are effective under the Agreement. A proposed amendment, which has been adopted by the Resource Authority, is attached. In order to be effective, the amendment must be authorized by all of the jurisdictions. 1020 Hollins Road Roanoke, Virginia 24412 (54(1) 857-5050 Fax (540) 857-51)56 ~-~ Bond Letter (cont.) 2/9/99 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please let me know if you have any comments or questions or if I may be of further assistance. Sincerely, Allan C. Robinson, Jr. Chairman cc: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Members, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority John R. Hubbard, Chief Executive Officer Mark Allan Williams, General Counsel ~-i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER FEBRUARY 23, 1999 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA AUTHORIZING THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY MEMBERS USE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority (the "Authority"), the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "County"), the City of Roanoke, Virginia (the "City") and the Town of Vinton, Virginia (the "Town") entered into the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement dated October 23, 1991 (the "Members Use Agreement"), as amended by the First Amendment to Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of June 1, 1992, (the "First Amendment") and the Second Amendment to Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of December 2, 1996, (the "Second Amendment"), among the Authority, the County, the City and the Town under which the Authority agreed to acquire, construct and equip a regional waste disposal system consisting of a landfill and transfer station and related structures and equipment (the "System"), and to provide financing therefor in order to dispose of all nonhazardous solid waste delivered to the System by or on behalf of the County, the City and the Town (collectively, the "Charter Members"); and, WHEREAS, the Authority issued its $33,830,000 Solid Waste Revenue Bonds, Series 1992 (the "1992 Bonds") to finance the System; and, WHEREAS, the Authority issued its $10,000,000 Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1998 and its $10,000,000 Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1999 (the "Refunding Bonds") to refund portions of the 1992 Bonds and sold the Refunding Bonds to Crestar Bank (the "Bank"); and, WHEREAS, the Bank has requested that the Authority and the Charter Members enter into a Third Amendment to Members Use Agreement (the "Third Amendment") in order to provide that the provisions of the Members Use Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, applicable to the 1992 Bonds shall also be applicable to the Refunding Bonds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. Approval of Amendment. The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the Third Amendment in substantially the form on file with the County Administrator. The County Administrator and such officers and agents as he may designate are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Third Amendment and the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is authorized to seal and attest the Third Amendment with such changes as such officers deem appropriate to carry out the purposes expressed therein. M:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\2-23-99A.wpd ~-1 • 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. to adopt the resolution, the resolution was adopted by the following roll call vote as recorded in the minutes: On motion of Supervisor AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: • • M:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\2-23-99A.wpd A COPY TESTE: Clerk, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors -2- ~- i THIRD AMENDMENT TO ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY MEMBERS USE AGREEMENT THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY MEMBERS USE AGREEMENT (the "Third Amendment") is made as of February 1, 1999, by and among the ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY, as successor to the Roanoke County Resource Authority (the "Authority"), the COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (the "County"), the CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (the "City") and the TOWN OF VINTON, VIRGINIA (the "Town"); each of which are political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia. RECITALS WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement dated October 23, 1991 (the "Members Use Agreement"), as amended by the First Amendment to Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of June 1, 1992, (the "First Amendment"), and the Second Amendment to Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of December 2, 1996, (the "Second Amendment"), among the Authority, the County, the City and the Town under which the Authority agreed to acquire, construct and equip a regional waste disposal system consisting of a landfill and transfer station and related structures and equipment (the "System"), and to provide financing therefor in order to dispose of all nonhazardous solid waste delivered to the System by or on behalf of the County, the City and the Town (collectively, the "Charter Members"); and, WHEREAS, the Authority issued its $33,830,000 Solid Waste Revenue Bonds, Series 1992 (the "1992 Bonds") to finance the System; and, WHEREAS, the Authority issued its $10,000,000 Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1998 and its $10,000,000 Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1999 (the "Refunding Bonds") to refund portions of the 1992 Bonds and sold the Refunding Bonds to Crestar Bank (the "Bank"); and, WHEREAS, the Bank has requested that the Authority and the Charter Members enter into this Third Amendment in order to provide that the provisions of the Member Use Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, applicable to the 1992 Bonds shall also be applicable to the Refunding Bonds. In consideration of the foregoing, the Authority and the Charter Members each agree as follows: • G:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\2-23-99B.wpd E-~ ARTICLE I Amendment All references to Bonds and to the Series 1992 Bonds in the Members Use Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, shall be deemed to include the Refunded Bonds. The Members Use Agreement, the First Amendment, and the Second Amendment, as hereby amended, are ratified and confirmed. ARTICLE II Miscellaneous Section 2.1 Severability of Invalid Provisions. If any clause, provision or section of this Third Amendment is held to be illegal or invalid by any court, the invalidity of the clause, provision or section will not affect any of the remaining clauses, provisions or sections, and this Third Amendment will be construed and enforced as if the illegal or invalid clause, provision or section had not been contained in it. Section 2.2 Counterparts. This Third Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, will be an original, and the counterparts taken together will constitute one and the same instrument. Section 2.3 GoverningLaw. This Third Amendment will be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Section 2.4 Amendments. This Third Amendment may be amended only in accordance with the provisions of the Members Use Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Third Amendment to be executed as of the date above written. ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY ATTEST: By: By: Its: Its: • COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA G:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\2-23-99B.wpd '2- E-I i• 11 r~ ATTEST: By: Its: ATTEST: By: Its: ATTEST: By: Its: G:\FINANCE\COMMON\B OARD\2-23-99B.wpd G:\FINANCE\COMMOMBOARD\2-23-99B.wpd By: Its: CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA By: Its: TOWN OF VINTON, VIRGINIA By: Its: -3- 1 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: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for Public Hearing and First Reading for Rezoning Ordinances Consent Agenda COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions, rather approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for March 23, 1999. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct mini warehouses, located in the 7200 block of Barrens Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of to Vaughn Wilburn. 2) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate a used automobile dealership, located at 7650 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Hash Investments LLC. 3) An ordinance to rezone approximately 10 acres from R-2 and C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional for retail sales and obtain a Special Use Permit for fast food restaurants and drive-thrus, located in the vicinity of Brambleton Avenue (Route 221) and Electric Road (Route 419), Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Associates LLC. 4) An ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a high school, located on the west side of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, south of Farmington Drive, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Roanoke County School Board. 5) An ordinance to rezone 14.7 acres from AG-1 to R-1 to construct single family detached residences, located on the west side of Wildwood Road, north of I-81, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Wildwood Development Inc. ~~- j 6) An ordinance to rezone 11.66 acres from C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 925 North Electric Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Pinkerton Chevrolet). 7) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church). 8) Reconsideration of an ordinance to rezone 11.93 acres from AG-3 to AR and obtain a Special Use Permit to allow a 9-hole golf course, located in the 2600 block of Rutrough Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Randall Wayne Brown. 9) An ordinance to rezone 456.6 acres from R-1, Residential to Planned Technology Development District, for a business and commercial park, located in the 5300 block of Glenmary Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. MAPS ARE ATTACHED; MORE DETAILED INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: (1) That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for March 23, 1999. (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 9, 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 Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Action Motion by No Yes Abs Harrison Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens FROM ' JAN-13-1?99 .G~Sd .~ FAX N0. ' \~ I ~?-tHUUL 1 f-tF:tauSUlV i~{ri i ~v~ COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT, OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5Zt)4 Bernard Or. .. P.Q. Bax 29600 Roanoke. VA 24072 (540' 7~z-zosa Fax ts4o J 772-a i o~ Check type of apoifcation filed Ieheck all that apply): Cl REZONING ISl SPECIAL USE !]VARIANCE Appttcant's name: oauShn Wilburn Address: c/Q gdvard A. Nett, Esquire 1919 Electric Head, SW. Roanoke, 'VA ~~ Aug. • ~~ _lyya >75: eyrrl ror stair use only Owner's name: >TsiQtad9hip 2ianor Aparemont Village Corporation AdOreSS; 927 Horslsbmr~er ttosd. HW. p,oxno3ce, VA 2L012 Loe~tlon of praperty: 4.61 scree Barr>mns Road (Vs. Sec. Rt. 1832) lax Map Nulnder; 27 Magisterial Disufct: ]iollins Community Planning Area: Hollins • ...- 5~e of parcel (a): F~fstfng ZoninD~ ~ C-2 General Cat;mmercial 4.61 Acres Exlsting Land Usa: Vacant sa,ft. Phone: T74-1197 Zip Code: 24018 Phone: Zip Codt: Proposed Zoning: 0+Z General Cot~ercial - Sngcial Usa PQrmit For StaN Uao a~~r Mini Llarehouses Use Type: Pragoaed Land Use: Ooes the parcel meet the minimum tot area, widta, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES ~~ NO _. _ IF `1Q. A VAFIANCi= 15 RE4UIRED FIRST. NO Does the parcel meat the minimum criteria for the requested Use Tyge? YES x - - lF N0, A VALIANCE 15 R1:QUIRED F1RST. nditians being prorFered with this tegu®st? YES ~_ NO ,~~~ It rezarling raQuest -are co v~rtance of SactionlS] of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance In order to: rl Js tr+s mppRcattcn complete? Please check if enclosed. APPl.1CATtON WILL ivOT EE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ]TENS ARE Mt$StNG OR 1NCflMPL>='7'r. Ns v roe v w~ v 8 7/2' x 71' concept plan Application foe % Consultation proffers, if apolicabJe ~ AppUcation X MOtee end 5o~nds deRrrtpxlon % Water and sewer appGCatfon X AdJCininp property owners Jusdilcstlon . ~ hwaby certify that / am eitfter rht owner of the property or the owner's spent or cor,tracr p~~chss9r anG arrr ac:mg w%rh the know Owner's Signaturi4: Fv~ Staff Use Only: Case Number ,~, f ~+. . :...........: ....:.:.:...:...:.:... . ..:. •. ~~ Applicant Vau hn Wilburn The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification far the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the folfo~.^fing questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. ~J Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-31 as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the zoning ordinance. The provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance classify the property as general commercial. Mini warehouses are a permitted use in a general commercial district. The proposed use will provide for. the use of a commercial property without a heavy impact of traffic. No burden will be placed on County utilities for the proposed use. Please explain how the project conforms to the genera( guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The County Comprehensive Plan calls for the use of properties of this nature for commercial use. This commercial use is a low volume traffic generator with little noise and very little impact and therefore provides a good transition between the commercial uses on Peters Creek Road and the adjoining properties. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the propery itself, the adjoining properies, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/se~Ner, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. The use of the property is proposed and will have no negative impact on utilities or services provided by the County. '~ FROM .: FAX N0. : IAN-13-1999 10~~6 ~bltkHUUtt rGnuusuiv rvHi~~ PRt7F BR9 The following ProfferD are hereby submitted with the z'ec~ueet for the Special Use Permit of Vaughn Wilburn: 1, The property will be developed as a mini-warehouse facility in substantial conformity with the Layout, Aareds b~ Landscaping Plan for 1st Security Self storage prep Y Providence Engineering under date o£ December ~9, 1598. z. Sigriage will be as set forth on the l'.,ayout, Access & Landscaping Plan identified above. 3. A resident manag0r will occupy' the premise5_ 4. Exterior lighting will be ae shown on the Site P13n. On the outside of the front gate, lighting wild be located only on the trorit planter and the parking areas. Interior lighting will include fluor®acent wallpaks. Lighting will exist on all drives inside th® project. 5. A security gate will be located tot the entrance to th® property. The only access will be through the security gate. 6 , The outside wall on the front building located on Barrens Road will bn o£ a concretC Tiltwall construction with stucco swirl fiZish. This construction shall includ® the office. The outside wall on the remainder of the premiseR will be metal siding. C Zs~wSQ~CAko~~201i29G\UILBURN.PRO~LafO'1~93/99 / ~_ Aug. 22 1998 05:10PM P2 LVV~v ~ ~ .vv ~~+~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ F~ i• a ~o ~3a~ 3G~ ~ a ~~ ems ~'~,, ~`K ~. .\` Rqb $~ ~~ RiYY H • ~tq„~ ~ y\. ~ R/W A~~~E \`'\`' ~d~ ~~ C ~°~1 ~~€i ~~~ ~~ QI ~ ~ /" /~~/ ~~/~ '/ ~ R/W ~• ~~ z g~ z `a ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~a ~a---'--- ~ .~` g `~_ ~~~~ $~~r ~~~ ~~~~~ ~sF . ,,~` y TAJ \a ~ ~ ° N r ' 22a• e ~ o P°' n r 1/ F7 / v ~ .. , /// ~' 10''~y~~yc ~ 'kb ~°' x zzo. per,,, !b '" ~S k -. ~Gy~MC ?S P~_~ ~ sx +' zzo. ~Ip ~ ~-u; .:~ .. ~ x fit) ~. SF '~ ~1Ib J y~y~~~ fatl3Y_ Q R r p J ~ n /' a / rr / /U p / rJ~ ~ !l N' HF r ~ ri n ri i ~ ~ 9 € ~ n v r lI H ^'~ !~ l 1! rJ 4 ~ 11 ~ S 7 ~. ~ / , , r ~ /l r/ rr rr ~ l ~~ /r~ !/ rr / i / ~3 ~ / p p i r , lr ~ ~ g ~~~ l o rr ~ e ~ri 3 ~ ~ r r tn W ~~S an~ r~ r / ~~ r / ri' s~ ' o rr r ~Z~ r ~ ~ /x ~' ~ , X71 ~ i p p ~, ~~ u ul ~~ ~~ ~~ i~ ~~ , ,.. ,I, ,n ,,~ II I ' I , it II ~ , N (1 fl ' / ~ ~ i ~ r/ ~J ~. . \~~ ~% w .. ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ IS a-~,. ~, ~+ !~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ -{ ~_ ~~ w Providence Engineering umur, "~~ UiND~"~ ~"'" ~ C7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ sr sECU~rr saF srorucE _, ~- a 3 ~ Conaulfiing. Eng~,neers ROAt~OKE CO, ~VIRGIIJIA (9\ v / v.,, f.~yY \ .'~ _ 1B it ~1~~9+, y~~ :,1: L..+~ ,y ~r 1 ,,,w ~' x.,r V ~/ /.e.. ` 1 4 ~ , Norsh~Rounoka\\ ~'N "~~ ~ J' `~~ Hnps Church \ .,,""r ..i" ~a~ 3 L ,-7 \ ~~ , , ~~ r ~ ~ ~ rF" ; cur nn`, i ~ 1 ~, .~,~.,= ,s .~ .szl.; ,~ '; ~ ~ 3 4g B ~ ~+ 'k S _ i a . a ~ dl.K3i ,y~ ~i`~1 ~y~} as ~~~\ k yam) ^ ~j ~"~ ~ ~i a Y ) J J1 ,,( J .r 5 i`-' ~ ! ~'~ `.~, .~ r ~ ~ ~Yi-a r ~ ~ y,,,. ,,. ry9 ~ ut ~ \\\\\ ~rlnnnship ^Innar ~ ~ ~~ shy,. ,,.~~" ~ a ~ ao~ x. !yr ~~ ~~~ .3..12 ~ °~ t~~• \ ...> .'; •'~ .~ JAI ~ J.C;., , .$,:;. ~ ~~ /~~ f 3.33 Ao. .. .. '~, ~ ~A. \ ~~, ~ ~``, -~ro..~ \ ~ ~ \ ~.- ~ W ~ ~~ • • . /S~A~ For staff use only ~~~ 'S' COUNTY OF ROANOKE d ~ •~ - received byz~ ANNING AND ZONING `'' L DEPT. OF PL 2 5204 Bernard 0 r . .. ~ plicat on / r PCiBZA date: P.O. Box 29800 placards issued: oOS date: VA 24018 Roanoke , ( 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) ]72-Z i 08 Case Number. ~ ~* ~$ Check type of application filed (check all that apply}: ^ REZONING ~) SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: ~~ ~u~ `~`~""~' ,~ Fhone:~`~d-~~`~~~ ~ ry ~ v~no ~~ ~ ~ J /~ Zip Code: ~~ ~ ~ ' y Address: ,, ` L ,~ LI~Lj V T' ~~ i (~ XJ I 2 ~ ~ ~~ ' ` " - ~ ~ , c 1 V , ; " r Ar ;' ~ ~~ ~;i'Yk~ iP ;~ i5 ` h{ ~- ' Phone: Owner's name: 1'(1~~? ; - f~;, ``~~ ~%(~ /~~n - L-+ ~~~~ Zip Code: Address: cy ~ /~ rJ / / Location of property: Tax Map Number: ~,,-~'~ ~ f _ ~~ _,,~,~/ ~ n ~'rQ 5'~ Gt; ~ 1 I ~,sr~.5 ~~ n T1 ~. l~( Lv ~ Magisterial District: ~ ~ ~ yt ~~')~~'~~~ ~~~ ~'~"~' l~ Community Planning Area: ~ ~,~ ~ D , r, Size of parcel (s): '~ , Existing Zoning: (;~~, ,.,~ acres Existing Land Use: ~~~`~ ~LZ41C~~f~~~, t sq.ft. :,::~:: ~ ... ... . .. i Proposed Zoning: ,I?.~, ,~ ~, /~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ For Staff Use Oniy ' T u ~ ;jcii~E/j ~i ~ l~ ~ ~'~-~ i ~~ Proposed Land Use: ;; ~cl (? ~~.~~-I~e~ Lti~' ~~h ~l ~~ ype: - se ~~ Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES V~ NO IF N0, A VARI,~NCE 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 proffar~d with this request? YES NO I :€I`t`~~`~: . • • • ~ ~ ~~ . ••~.•. ~ '. I• Ordinance Zoning in ordar to: unty ke Co Roan f the o o Variance of Section(s) II Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPL1CATlON WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF TF{ESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/5 V R/9 V R/5 V Consultation 8 112" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee .,~ Application "'<' Metes and bounds description-- -< Proffers, if applicable Justification %~~ Water and savver applicaticn 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 copse t of the owner. 0 wn e r ' s Signature: /2-~~ ice. _~-~ r---". ~ t'7 ,f~ ~r) ~i`~ ~'~~'t-- f~ ! ~~-~ -- . ~ r.,.r For Star? Use Onry: Case Number • Applicant ~~~,~ ~~,%i~111~_~%~'~~,"L(`~`-~ ~,-`~~ 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 foflo~r~ing 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. -- j '~ P ~ U. t-1' Y' G{.`'~"' r ~ YtLy ~ ~--7 !i N f1 (' '1 t v •r? r~'fl. I cl' , r / ~ ~ ~ - 7 T" ~Orn mun ~ ~ • ~~„ t~„~i~.~,-, r^. U~ GP. iiu l,~G~ r~ r' ~hC~s 7 )`~ 5..5 64~- ~i 15 ~~J~~~t(/y~. >~ •) t r'.G(. ~~' ~'i~ ' ~ ~tv,l -( ~3 ~ ,~~ T1' , U? ~' ~-,~ ,~., ~t!fi ~>v' , ~ ~' /%t%t. ~ -v'~i;~, ;,(,, Z~. ~c; ~J j ~U~ ~;- . Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. C~7r~.... // ~. ~ ~rlv i ttlCl~i 'tau"n'ai~ ~U /~ UtL. r':+1~~'_.1 ~ ~ ~til~.`~ (~~i i ~ ~~. C~~i~`~'t`~. /~ J C~("}fi ~ ) f~'t~~ L(.) ' 1 ~ ~t~. ~~JIl ~.. ~~j ~l ~ i~~~.'Z.~( t ~~ l Y1 "'! c~ 1 Z L.. i~!I,j ~~ '-^l~._`~,L. ~Y~-LC..~~' ~,(J i I .~ 1~.1~"~ ~L~- `~ C~ i~ )~(~i ~ ~ s'~-cif s~. `j 7 ~• . ~ V ~ ~ c. ~1Lt,' '?%'in1 y^n i ~ rZ ~ f 1~ r~; '`fi:,~ ~'~vl C ~~ • it i,ii t~' ~ <., }"~i~, ^p ~ ~ ~~ `-G ,`f~'.1~ r" et, -it tj '"~ h;, i.:~ ~~.GC ~ ~ n ~, ~; ~ a 1,`~ f~~.~ :j i?O~ ~fll i:~ ~ ~5 ~.1~~(~ . ~ J 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/se~rier, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. ~r. (~~i; .tii' ~~/~~.~~' G'~t~t? ~2.f'~t u_u.i ~ ~~ri1 ~~-tu:~ J~~-rlcl;~ ~ C~:t~yi l ,,1~..~ ~.~,~,~~~fa!-~~ ~'~ !~'~' ~SG~;t,.~UtL1,2 '*~ /o ~ ~ jL /;~G~;r ~ ~= ~~PLvS Lyt.~~~ ,~ uv.~~~,~L t1 ~'S t/ G, A .~ r)~ ;t ~~ ~- .-lC J~ '~~,~< .,`~vl/l~c;l~j~y,! lY~1G~'rc ~- c, ~'^J + ~1(J~ ( ; +t / l J ,~ G~ L~ t v i ~~ + ~ t~ ~ J"' ~ ~ J~ ~ e. S rr~7 /i lJ ~ r i L/~-~ ~?~'L ~ t 'l-9 ~{, G t J (,~rfiU ~r v ri t n T u //, f lr~ ,/ ~-v i. ~..? J ~ ~~ , ,~ Lrl S ~~ ~ (,t C~ ~ L~ ~ JYT ~' 4E:. C(. t_+f ~~ ~-<' ~ r~ S~ ~ 4~ `71 L`am` ~?l ~ l'9J ~r!~C`S~n~ (u ~~ /J ~~ii rl' ~ i r t~ l' '~~Z? `;~~ ~Li~' ~1" ~ G, l~t. Y~ i tt, ~ {f t~ i a.L J ~ . ~4j~; ~ ~ .i'>,r.~ ~~,i ~ ~. l? r ,~,;~ (, i u t , ~d n ~ ~ ~ , 5~~ ~--~ ; (mot: ~l~"~'^ n ~,:~ ~, ~,i~-~( `-~ rY1~x.~ ~~-~~~ v t_ i t~ a F ~\ ~ ~ \ ~~ ~ \\ ~\ \ \ \ -.~ ~' i \ \ ~ \ \ 1 \ ~'~ s 4~ 4 ~~. ~~Gaa \~~2 V~ \,~,~ p 1 1 ' ~~ 1 ~\ \\:;::~:;;::::;:::' 4 ~t= 1 \ ~ 1 \ \ ... x ~~F \ \ 1 1 \\ \\ I a ~~ \\ \\ 11 \ ~ \ I / ~ 1 1 ~ \ , / i i ~ 1 1 ` ``.~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ a g C. a ~y! r~~ b p ~ ~~~ ~ ~' R~ R i~~ 6 8 ~i~ 3~8~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ x gx~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~I ~' ~ .~ i~~t 1 i ~_~( 5 a ~E~~t r I ~ ~ y1t1 i J ~ al1~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ < J a ~ ~ b\ ~ ~ a t\ ~ 6* \ ~ } ~ ~ ~ o \ R* ~ : ~ . :~~~ \ _ . \ ~': t \ ~i~ ~' ' ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~p \ ~ ::~ :::: . ::::::::: ;a p~ s ~ ~ aa° ? a° fi ~ s ~ a n e ~ '~ 9 ~ '~ ~6 C h b 1~ ~ ~ ~, pp qq ~ N pp e$ ~ ~ m~ 3 J I . 4~ 1 4 1 ° * ~ ~ a ~,:: ''.<` ~': Z s ~v~ J ~JU f~-- Z W~ wW~~ il>Z~' z ~N~ mSx w ~~ ~o >~ ~oG ~J F~ ~. A ..~~~4 ~~~~ dSS9 ROANOICE COtTNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Hash, Investments LLC Special UsQ Permit 21.11--1-24.1 • COUNTY O~ ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr. P.0. Sox 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 5'+0' 772-2068 FAX (5'-~0) 772-21 08 For star"f use only dat r ~ ~ ~'~ received ' ! ../`'" r app,}~atio e'• ClSZA date: r placards issued: 605 date: Case Numher~ ~~ :.;::~I:~.: Check type of application filed (check all that apply}: ~ REZONING ®SPECIAL USE INVARIANCE Applicant's name: Springwood Associates, L.L.C. 774-6500 Phone: Address: 3214 Electric Road, SW, Suite 200, Roanoke Zip Code: 24018 Contact: Edward A. Natt, Esq., 1919 Electric Road, SW, Suite 1, Roanoke, VA 24018 774 l Owner's name: SPringwood Associates, L.L.C.- FEE SIIKPLE OWNER ~ Phone: 774-6500 Address:3214 Electric Road, SW, Suite 200, CONTRACT PIIRCHASER d 24018 Roanoke Contact: Edward A. Natt, Esq., 1919 Electric Road, ~uRteol~' Roanoke, A'' Location of ro ert p p y~ Tax Ma Number: *24018 774-119 p SEE ATTACHED Vi i it f B bl A c n y o ram eton venue (Rt. 221) and Electric Road (Rt. 419) Magisterial District: Cave Spring Community Planning Area: Cave Spring Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: R-2 and C-ZC 10 +/- acres Existing Land Use: Residential, commercial and vacant sq.ft. .......j......_ `~• ~ Proposed Zoning: C-2 ~ Proposed Land Use: Retail and fast food restaurant Fv~ Staff Use Oniy use Type: Does the parce( meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO IF NO, A VARI~.NCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for t,e requested Use Type? YES X NO IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being prorfered with this request? YES NO Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/5 V R/3 V R!5 V X Consultation X 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan X Application fee X Application X ?F- Metes and bounds description X -«< Proffers, if applicable X Justification I'~< Water and sewer application X Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that 1 am either the owner of the Qroperty or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledgenand co(~nsent(~of the owner. Owner's Signature : ~ V, ~.,,,~, c~ Q '~ 1 ~ , e~~t ~ r~ t~s~.~.w.cw~~ ~~ ~ " ,..e~-..s~t~ . ~. t. C i• TAX MAP NUMBERS: 77.13-5-Pt. of 35 77.13-5-Pt. of 38 77.13-5-Pt. of 39 77.13-5-Pt. of 40 77.13 -5-43.1 77.13 -5-43.2 77.13 -5-47 77.13-5-48 77.13-5-49 77.13 -5-50 77.13 -5-51 Z:\WP50\CAROL\ZONING\SPRING.TAX:laf01/20/99 ~3 For Staff Use Only: Case Number F3 Applicant S • od Associates, L.L.C. The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the fo(lo~.^~ing 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 rezoning request furthers the purposes of .the zoning ordinance by creating a location for new commercial retail and service uses that serve the needs of the citizens in Southwest County. The area is identified as Core by the 1985 Comprehensive Plan and is adjacent to Route 419 and US Route 221 (Brambleton Avenue). Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The following general guidelines and policies in the Comprehensive Plan are met: Policy C-1 Encourage the development of intensive, mixed-use urban development in designated Core areas Policy C-2 Serve each Core area by an arterial or higher grade street Policy C-4 Coordinate the design of commercial sites with regards to on-site vehicular movement, access, building characteristics, signage and site amenities 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 rezoning request seeks to create a suitable location for new business development as specified in Objective 3 in the Roanoke County Economic Development Strategy (April 1998) Business Attraction Program Strategy- "Identify potential commercial and industrial sites and work with the property owner, community and County staff to have the property rezoned for an appropriate commercial or industrial use." l~ PROFFERS ~-3 1. The property will be developed in substantial conformity with the Conceptual Development Plan prepared by Shanks Associates, dated January 22, 1999, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. The large parcel (5.26 acres) will be developed for general commercial use in either one (1) parcel or may be divided into smaller parcels or a commercial condominium for conveyances and general commercial areas. 3. The three (3) parcels designated as Site A, Site B and Site C are to be granted Special Use Permits for drive through facilities for permitted uses including, but not limited to, fast food restaurants. 4. A buffer strip, as shown on the above plan, shall be located along the property line adjoining the properties on Westmoreland Avenue. 5. No parking lot light pole shall exceed 22' above grade. 6. No off premises advertising signs shall be allowed on the property other than for the uses within the zoned property. 7. All retaining walls constructed on the property shall be constructed as split faced architectural block or equivalent. 8. The finished floor elevation of any building on the 5.26 acre parcel shall be no higher than 1150 feet. 9. The total square footage to be developed on the 5.26 acre parcel shall not exceed square feet of commercial uses. Z:\WP50\LISA\ZONING\2SPRING.PRO:laf01/22/99 r~ • b o _ O p ~ - °'.. - ~ ~/ L ~ i ~,, ; \ ~ ~ ~+ ' Z / ~ ~ ~~ C ~' , ~y '~.. `~ ~ '~;'' I '' c "'ate„ ~ - ~ / ~ - /~ . ~ ~ I . , I , . ', ;r i r ~ ~ r / .+r'~ i / / r ~ ~~ r '/'i r r C,` 'i `~ 7 ~'p ~ i ^ 'i Q , , r __ _~ ~ ~~ ' .C p ~~ i a ~ '~ /' J row . , f' _ ~ ~' ~; ~ ~ ~, r, r.. -7 ~ ~ to i r ;rwa I ' ~. ~ .+ ~ ~ ~`r, C1 ~ 1 y ___ 11 ' / r i / / ~ ~ I / 1 r ~i ~ 1 ~~ ` I ;, , ; ~ ~ _ ~.,+~,.,, ~ ~ , .. _ r ,, , _ r ~ - r r _ '~ ~. Y/. / app 1 - '~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ;- ;; , ~1 .o ~ r It '~~ 2 it ~;~ ~ ~~ q ~_ A~~ n I II I ~~ ~~ I I ~~ .r ~ ~ .p I I 1 1 ~ ,1. 1 ~ 1 ! 1 ~,1 ,c 1 / l ~ , -' r / / / / / o p i p / / p 1I~.-~ _ _ ___.-. ~.-- Ipr T... .. .__ -- ILA (/ ~K U 1 - - - - - - ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Spring~wood Associcxtes, L.L.C. PROPOSED REZONING FROM R-2 AND C-2c TO C-2c Specticcd Use Permit For staff use only ~__[/ COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr. P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 t 540 772-2068 Fax t54o I 772-2~ 08 date .received:- received by: application fee: _. PCrB~A dace;,, _ . ~ ;n - ~.. ~ ~ placards issued: 80S date: ~ L~ Case Number: ~~ ~,, ~ ~ r Check type of application filed (check al( that apply): ^ REZONING SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE ~ ~' Applicant's name: /"~'J`.+4t.s~wCC ~",,,,~~- ,; ~ .;~~~. ~~~z!,-.f_• Phone: J~.`e • ,~ZO~' .- , .~, . Address: 5'~' ~ ~ ~""~' '~'';.>;` `{''^~`J Zip Code: ~ . Owner's name: ~~-t;,~ ~ ~°,f~.ts ~ r, t:.fo f' u..~I~ r~-s` f=ez, ^^~~~ Phone: Address: ~ ~,~~ ~ Gr-r~+~:~_~c T y''sre~~'~ ~~~.,>~K~} 1~'1.'!. Zip Code: ~ .Y~d t~ Location of property. ~~r:~~' Tax Map Number: `7(;.,,tyJ-~~-/E ~6.©?-j-~ ~^~;.,~~_.~_~~ Y',J/-'^a^r7lY~. %a3:..1 ~J4~~J ~~/'~r~ ~,. /'/fF.Af (.~.:: ~ /%Jr ! 3 1 ~. / Magisterial District: /p / `J/s• ~ `. ~ f Communit Plannin Area: Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: ,~'- ~ ` ~. acres Existing Land Use: '/ -- ,, sq.ft. Proposed Zoning: For Staff Use only Proposed Land Use: ~,~;~~~.>,~.~~ ~'"'~a,..~-.~ l,J;~r°~ ~,-.~-~,; {; Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES _~ NO IF N0, A VAnlA~'~1CE IS REQUIRED FIRST. / Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES _ \ ~JO lF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED F1RST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES NO Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MESSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/5 V R!S V R/5 V Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee Application `"'~~~ Metes and bounds description -% Proffers, if applicable Justification '`~f Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owners agent or contract pu~chase~ and am acting with the knowle g and consent of the ow r. ~' ~j~yf ~ ~%' Owner's Signature: _ /Ls; ~d ~t'/~J > ,~~,~f~ FED-U3-99 WFU U3 ~ ~~ ~'Cl ~.Nlr 1 Nh.tK 1 Nli UUNUtr I h Hl( NU b4U 4 I d 1 Gb4 r U 1 -ro : 'i`E~ N'~EKF..IF-l6eTo N • j .. i ~, 8 O~VELOP'MENT AGPL SCA TY'~!V ' APP ICANT INFORMATION •- pate; ~ 2a a0. (Please Type) ~~rol~ Ccut~ Sck,aaZS Appiicant;~n: M,ar~-t~ Rebi~o+'4 Address: `f13'1 GbyG 6Zo~ [~,{~(. (Contact Person) Phone: +~3~,7.-~-~oa • R4a~41~. 1!A• ?s#-Of°! (Ce+~+~~E:~ Owner: ~alip Co~vt~ 5~,~~~t~ Address: ~ag3'i Cby~,~QoadtN•t~l- Phone: ..51~~:...~i~4~~ _...__~. Engineer: E~9-vtcP~r'~rt~ Co--tcrof.S.'7~,~. Agent: ~~~- Elh+nwanc~ Phone : x'13 - lZ5 ~ R~~o~vA • 24o f~ po.apac' bi°~ ~sucz~~l~T~~ Zdo9r> Architect: G1~Cf? ~_T-,n~_ _ Address; _ 305 5v~.r1•(~~)e-~-{~~,rne~-~ St• went :. ~ri~t~_ L-e.:td i ct~~ ~ -- -4~ ~ °~ ~~ - Zd~D i f ~ zt~ Phone: ... ~.~`~"~~~ __. _.. _.---. szsxxazxzxz#xzx*x*xx:xszYxxtxszxt==;zzx***z*zsz;sxsx:x*ssxYSZSxrzrsxzxtsxsxx~x Site Information Otvelnnment Name; ~,ut~•~avlnkP l'ouu+t I-~ i4ln ~ic.uoal . location: !rl c~~y ~~.c~ P~Dalku ~~~~. ~,~r„n~+ti~k~~ '9r"tom . gto . 0"1 ~ (- l Mag7sterial District:_~.~1i~d~~-_~~_____ Tax Nap Number; $ta•yfS-A-~~3 1~•Zp b -1lp Crc~~~l~ ,4creaye: ~°~~_ Zoning: _R f i~~ Total Units: _••._„Lg n~ Tot31 LotS:,~_ Building Area:~•lZ~or~p_ft2 BOCA Use Description;_~._ Type Construction; Sewer Facilities: County: _~,^ Septic: Vinton:__ Private: Sewer Service Elevation (Use USGS Elevations) Minimum: !I!a O _ Haximum:Jj,~,Q_ water Facilities: County: X _ We11s: Vinton: Private: Wa[er Service Elevation (Use USGS Elevations) Minlmum:_Lt(o~i Haximum: lt~b Is building to be sprinkled? ~P7 Flow Requirea? '~i~b GPN Description of Nork (include any specific Questions): C,Qv~c.e~?t'- SLj ,,u~-~~,I 1 _~' ~yr~ ~. i N ~o_ iy,,~.,~ b r~ ~. D~_~ ~i o.~ r. to l Cl~,Q ~,,,,, 4 f ~ ~ ~ D ~ t CJ.'~"a a N ature of ApAlicant ' Arcf'~itecture Engineering Planning Interiors SFCS Sherertz Franklin Crawford Shaffner Inc. January 29, 1999 Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission of Roanoke County Attn: Mr. Terrance Harrington, AICP Director of Planning and Zoning P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: The Proposed South County High School On Behalf of the Roanoke County School Board and Roanoke County Schools Application for a Special Use Permit Dear Members of the Board and Planning Commission: Fy On behalf of the Roanoke County Schools and the Roanoke County School Board, we respectfully request that you accept this application fora "Special Use Permit". We have included in this submission a preliminary site development plan showing the proposed zones of development within which we will be locating a new high school and its associated support functions, such as athletic facilities and parking. We have also included a concept or schematic site plan that delineates our initial efforts at locating the school building, parking, athletic fields, and site access. With the assistance and encouragement of Roanoke County Schools, we have worked to include the community in the design and development process for this new school. To date, we have had several meetings with community groups and have arranged for monthly meetings with a committee of representatives from each of the adjacent neighborhoods. This committee has agreed to assemble a newsletter for distribution to the residents of the neighborhoods adjacent to the site containing a summary of issues discussed, decisions made, and pending developments related to the proposed high school. They have also agreed to solicit questions and concerns from the residents of the respective neighborhoods for discussion and resolution at the planned monthly meetings. 305 South Jefferson Street Roanoke, Virginia 24011-2003 540-344-6664 FAX 540-343-6925 entail sfcs@sfcs.com Fy We have met with VDOT on several occasions to discuss their concerns and requirements and to ensure that a high level of communication and cooperation is maintained throughout the entire development and design process for the proposed high school. A traffic study is currently being conducted along with the preliminary design of roadway improvements to ensure that VDOT will have accurate and comprehensive information for evaluation. The traffic study will also be used to ascertain the need and propriety of providing a traffic signal at the intersection Rt. 221and Pleasant Hill Dr. The access route to the proposed high school site as shown on the conceptual or schematic site plan included in this submittal reflects the most current thinking on the matter. As shown, it assumes that public road will continue from Rt. 221 up to proposed high school site. There are several residents that are likely to be affect by the roadway improvements that will be required by VDOT. The Roanoke County School Board has retained counsel to work through these impact issues with the affected residents, but a final solution has not yet been completed. It is expected that issues related to access route as shown on the conceptual or schematic plan will be resolved in the near future. We have contacted and met with all of the appropriate utility providers and determined that all utilities are available within close proximity to the high school site. It is envisioned that the utilities will be extended to the high school site through existing easements. Similarly, an emergency entrance (possibly gated) from Holland Road will also be provided via an exiting easement. In the discussions with the residents of the adjacent neighborhoods and other community groups, we have indicated that we are interested in designing this project in a manner that will be sensitive to their concerns related to property values, views, noise, lighting, etc. Specifically, the School Board has stated that lighted athletic fields will not be provided on this site. Further, they stated that a lighted stadium will not be provided on the proposed high school site. Lighting will be restricted to the security lighting for the buildings and associated facilities, roadways, and parking lots. In all cases, the lighting provided on site will comply with the County ordinances. The conceptual or schematic site plan reflects our best efforts at preserving the natural wooded areas along the property line adjacent to the residential neighborhoods. In general, we have attempted to keep grading efforts as far as practical from the property lines; however, there are one or two areas where the grading is likely to extend to the property line. We will be providing the required ~y screen planting in these areas, and possibly other areas where it is not required, in an effort to lessen the impact on the adjacent property owners. The School Board has indicated to the adjacent property owners that an effort will be made on the high school property to address long standing issues related to stormwater and flooding. Further, there has been preliminary discussion with Roanoke County regarding the incorporation of a larger stormwater management facility on the high school site that could function as a regional facility. These discussions; however, are very preliminary and the outcome is not conclusive at this time. We will continue to involve the community in the design and development efforts for this site and the proposed high school. We are also committed to continuing to foster a cooperative and productive relationship with all involved, especially the adjacent neighborhoods. If you have any questions or require additional information to facilitate your review, please do not hesitate to contact us directly. Respectfully submitted, Roanoke County School Board Roanoke County Schools SFCS, Inc. Engineering Concepts, Inc. Cc: Mr. Martin Robison Mr. Manjit Toor Mr. Dale Leidich Dr. Deanna Gordon Mr. John Schmidt Mr. Jack Ellinwood January 29, 1999 ~~ Site Development Narrative New South County High School @ Woods End Introduction Sherertz Franklin Crawford Shaffner Inc. (SECS) was contracted by Roanoke County Schools to provide architectural -engineering analysis and site evaluation of potential sites for the location of a new senior high school to serve south Roanoke County. Engineering Concepts, Inc. (ECI) was commissioned by SECS to assist them in analyzing site design feasibility. As a result of the site analysis phase the Woods End site was selected by the School Board as the best location for the development of the south county high school. Their site selection decision was made based on the consultant teams presentation of comprehensive feasibility and probable cost data of all considered locations. The following report will discuss the Woods End site characteristics, property information, utility disposition, and development potential. Woods End Site The Woods End site a largely undeveloped tract of land located west of Brambleton Avenue (Route 221) and Pleasant Hill Drive, and south of Farmington Drive. The site is bounded on all sides by existing single-family residential developments: Nottingham Hills on the north, Kingston Court on the east, Nichols Estates on the south, and Canterbury Park on the south and west. The initial site is comprised of three parcels of land totaling approximately 69.5 acres, having frontage on Farmington Drive, which is presently used as a residence/rental property. The main dwelling and ancillary buildings are accessed by means of a paved driveway running along the eastern boundary line, with an entrance onto Farmington Drive. The three individual parcels are currently under the ownership of Woods End, L.C. and are adequate in area to support the proposed building program for the School. Engineering Consultant Services, Ltd. (ECS) has performed a subsurface investigation of the proposed school site, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), and a wetland assessment. Per their findings, all soil borings were advanced to scheduled depth except for three borings, B-8, B-11 and B-15, which encountered weathered shale at depths of 19 feet, 9 feet and 30 feet respectively. Auger refusal occurred in these borings at 22, 16.5 and, 32 feet respectively. Proposed excavation in the vicinity of borings B-8, B-11 and B-15 are not expected to encounter rock. Per the ECS report, if weathered rock is encountered during grading operations, we do not anticipate that blasting will be required to facilitate its removal; however, isolated seam locations may require blasting in areas of the deepest excavation locations. The indications from this investigation are that the grading scheme as proposed is feasible and that the excavated material will be satisfactory for use in constructed fills and general site development. ~~ An area of uncontrolled fill was found in the vicinity of boring B-3 in the northwest portion of the site. The fill section is limited and there are no structures proposed in this area. This fill material should support site and roadway improvements with only slight modification. Some of the soils encountered on the site are moisture sensitive and may present some difficulty during grading operations due to the natural moisture content of the soil or exposure to rainfall and runoff when excavated. Final design grades and construction operations will be planned to preclude excessive or long-term exposure of areas of moisture-sensitive soils. The design of sediment control measures for the final site grading plan will attempt to intercept all overland rainfall runoff up-gradient from areas of excavation and direct surface flow to stabilized discharge locations. A preliminary earthwork tabulation based on the concept grading plan yields a cut volume of approximately 412,000 cubic yards and a raw (unadjusted for compaction) fill volume of approximately 377,000 cubic yards. Adjusting for compaction, we expect that the proposed grades can be adjusted to reach a balanced grading condition, probably in the range of 425,000 cubic yards of cut. The site is partially wooded, with the majority of tree cover occurring in the western portion of the property and along the stream valley of Mudlick Creek. The remainder of the site is open, lying in field or meadow condition. The main topographical feature of the site is Mudlick Creek and the associated stream valley that runs southwest to northeast through the entire site. Approximately three fifths of the site lies on the western side of Mudlick, and is typified by gentle to rolling terrain, with elevations falling 130 feet from the western boundary to the creek. On the east side, elevations fall approximately 50 feet from the present Pleasant Hill Drive to the creek. There is an existing pond, approximately two acres in size, to the west of the residence on the main tract. Mudlick Creek passes below and immediately to the west of this pond. There is a 100-year flood plain associated with Mudlick Creek that has been mapped as shown on Panel 61 of 90, Map Number 511610061-D, of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate map for Roanoke County, dated October 15, 1993. The approximate limits of this flood plain have been show on the proposed site plan by scaling measurement from the FEMA map. ECS has confirmed the presence of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on the property and are identified as Mudlick Creek and its tributary near the southern boundary. The delineation of possible wetlands was reviewed in the field by the Army Corps of Engineers' (COE) office in Christiansburg and were classified as non-jurisdictional (no wetlands). Included in the delineation was the existing surface pond that, based on the COE determination, may be drained and filled to accommodate possible recreation fields. The proposed utility extensions and the construction of the access roadway across Mudlick Creek will require permitting from the Corps of Engineers. A general nation wide permit will be obtained to allow these crossings to occur. ECS, Inc. has also performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the subject property. Per their report, the site would generally be considered developable with no major impediments to construction. ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS ry The required improvements will consist of the necessary site preparation operations including, grading, road/parking construction, recreational area construction, sediment control measure installation, utility construction and storm drainage -storm water management construction. Additional items of on-site construction will include a monitoring manhole where the gravity sewer connects to the existing trunk sewer along Mudlick Creek and amultiple-celled box culvert or bridge to accommodate the access roadway across Mudlick Creek. The creek crossing will be designed to accommodate the 100-year flood without over topping the access road. A flood impact study will be submitted with the final design documents verifying the 100-year criteria. OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS The off-site improvements required at this site are primarily transportation and utility-related issues that will be addressed in order to provide the basic infrastructure to support the physical operation of the facilities and effect a safe and efficient use of the site by stafF, students, and the general public. At Woods End, the off-site issues that were investigated by the consultant team were transportation and utility extension issues. Transportation Issues The major concern with transportation issues at the Woods End site is adequate site access. The existing main site parcel has a frontage entrance onto Farmington Drive, located approximately 1300 feet west of the intersection of Cave Spring Lane and Old Cave Spring Road. As they exist, Farmington Drive and Cave Spring Lane currently have narrow section roadways with relatively severe horizontal and vertical curve alignments. The existing entrance onto Farmington, as well as the intersection of Cave Spring Lane and Old Cave Spring Road are within the areas of 100-year flooding as shown on the above-mentioned FEMA flood map. Buses and vehicular traffic exiting the site at Farmington would have to travel out to the Old Cave Spring Road intersection, which is not signalized, and then travel either towards the signalized intersection at Brambleton Avenue and Old Cave Spring Road, or north on Old Cave Spring Road, then west on McVitty to the signal at Route 419. The majority of both of those routes are still within the 100-year flood plain boundary. In addition, Roanoke County has placed Old Cave Spring Road on the Six-Year Road Improvement Plan due to the high volume of existing traffic. We believe this reinforces the need to serve this site from an alternate location. Access to the other improved roadways associated with the neighboring subdivisions would only increase traffic on the lightly travelled residential streets and would provide a lengthy circuitous route back to any major thoroughfares. The access option proposed as shown on the concept plan is to enter the site by way of an extension of Pleasant Hill Drive into the property from the east. This will require reconstructing Pleasant Hill Drive beyond its intersection with Chippenham Drive to an adequate width to accommodate school traffic. The improvements to Pleasant Hill Drive will terminate at the intersection of Arthur Thurman Road (Paper Street). Arthur Thurman Road will be constructed to meet VDOT standards and extended to the school site properly. An access drive will continue across Mudlick Creek and enter the school site proper. As discussed f-Y in the On-Site improvement section above, the crossing of Mudlick Creek will require amulti- celled box culvert or precast-sectioned bridge to accommodate the roadway. The existing Pleasant Hill Drive intersects with Brambleton Avenue at a point approximately 900 feet southwest of the intersection of Brambleton and the end of Colonial Avenue/Old Cave Spring Road. At this location, Pleasant Hill has three travel lanes: one lane westbound towards the site and two lanes (a right-turn and left-turn lane) eastbound towards Brambleton. Moving west from the intersection, the three-lane section roughly ends at the intersection with Chippenham Drive and then narrows back to two travel lanes. At the top of the hill, Pleasant Hill Drive has a 90-degree bend to the south and continues on to its terminus at the A.M.E. Church site. At the Pleasant Hill Drive intersection with Route 221, Brambleton Avenue has four travel lanes (two each northbound and southbound) and a striped center turn lane. Directly east of the intersection of Pleasant Hill and Brambleton are two commercial driveway entrances. The entrance into the Most/y Sofas commercial site is immediately north of the alignment of Pleasant Hill, and one of the two entrances into St. John Lutheran Church is immediately south of the alignment of Pleasant Hill. Based on preliminary meetings with VDOT representatives and supporting design data the consultant team will pursue the necessary transportation improvements required at this site as follows: 1. Construct right-turn lane onto Pleasant Hill Drive from westbound Brambleton Avenue 2. Reconstruct center-turn lane into median separated left-turn lane onto Pleasant Hill Drive from eastbound Brambleton Avenue 3. Extend the two lane section of Pleasant Hill Drive from Chippenham Drive into the school site (30 feet maximum width) 4. Construct new intersection at 90-degree bend location on Pleasant Hill Drive. 5. Construct Arthur Thurman Road (Paper Street) to VDOT standards (30 feet width) 6. Realign existing entrances to St. John's Lutheran Church and Most/y Sofas into joint entrance aligned with Pleasant Hill Drive 7. Reconstruct center-turn lane into median separated left-turn lane onto church/commercial entrance from westbound Brambleton Avenue; extend median toward intersection at Colonial Avenue accommodating required turn lanes and tapers 8. Provide complete signalization of intersection if Traffic Signal Warrant and TrafFc Impact studies indicate that they are needed and are approved by VDOT. An additional on-site road connection is proposed to provide an alternate access to the site for emergency vehicles. This connection will be achieved by extending a roadway to the current terminus of Holland Drive at the northern boundary of the site. As proposed, this emergency access crosses an existing parcel of land within an existing 30-foot road easement. Utility Issues Contacts were made with all of the public utility providers to determine the existing services available in the vicinity of the sites. Where service was not available adjacent to the properties, the providers were asked to estimate the extent of work necessary and associated FY costs to extend service to the school. The following is a brief summary of each service contacted. Public Water and Sewer - ECI contacted Bob Fronk with the Roanoke County Utility Department to discuss the site. Public water is available at several locations along the perimeter of the property. There are existing 6" and 8" diameter lines in Pleasant Hill Drive, 4"and 8"diameter lines in Farmington Drive, and a 10" diameter line in Canter Lane that is at the extreme southwest corner of the site. The line in Canter Lane is the nearest location to the proposed school building location. According to Mr. Fronk, fire hydrant flow tests on hydrants in Canter Lane reveal that the available fire flow at testing time was approximately 1360 gallons per minute (GPM) with a residual pressure of 66 PSI. Residual pressure above 50 psi are usually sufficient to support sprinkler systems without the aid of booster pumps in the buildings; however, the point of the service connection, the size and length of the service main, and the elevation of the school building will determine the final available pressure at the fire service location. Based on the proposed finished floor elevations as shown on the concept plan, pressures should be sufficient to provide sprinkler service. Fire flow and pressures will be analyzed further as site design proceeds. Gravity sewer service can be accommodated on-site by connection to the existing 8" trunk sewer which runs along Mudlick Creek. All points of the site will be served by gravity sewer. Mr. Fronk indicated that the existing line should have sufficient capacity to serve the school site. Electric Service-Barbara Carter with AEP was contacted concerning service availability to this site. Three-phase power is available along Brambleton Avenue and Old Cave Spring Road. Single-phase underground service is available at Canter Drive. Ms. Carter is working on costing optional routes to extend service to the site. One suggestion is to upgrade the single- phase service along Canter Drive to three-phase service and extend the new service underground to the school site. This option will result in the shortest run to the building. ECI would anticipate that the revenue credit based on the proposed service level would allow AEP to provide service at little or no cost to the school. Natural Gas Service-Don Jones with Roanoke Gas Company was contacted for information on availability of natural gas service to this site. Existing gas lines are found in Canter Drive at Roselawn, Farmington Drive at Holland Drive, and Pleasant Hill Drive. The largest line available for service is the 4" diameter main in Farmington Drive at Holland Drive. We would propose that an extension be made along Holland Drive and the proposed emergency access road into the site. As with the other sites, we anticipate little or no costs associated with the extension of gas service to the site. Telephone/telecommunications-Bell Atlantic has indicated that fiber optic service is available along Brambleton Avenue and would be extended into the site along the proposed access roadway from Pleasant Hill Drive. As with the other sites, we would expect no additional costs associated with provision of service to the school. Cable-Cox Cable has indicated that service is available at numerous points along the perimeter of the site and that they can provide service connections at any point convenient to the site design. F~ CONCEPT PLAN The attached concept plan depicts a preliminary layout of proposed program elements necessary to support the proposed South County High School. This concept identifies specific requirements of development as dictated by Roanoke County ordinance. These requirements include screening, buffering, setbacks, parking access and storm water management. This concept is preliminary in nature and is subject to improvement and refinement as the design process continues. The enclosed conceptual diagram indicates general program development areas and access points. Site development permitting will be subject to the review an approval of Roanoke County and the Virginia Department of Transportation. Transportation impact studies, traffic signal warrant studies and road improvement plans are currently being developed for submission to the plan approving authorities. The following are general notes and a site tabulation that correspond to the enclosed concept plan. GENERAL NOTES: 1. THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS IDENTIFIED AS TAX PARCEL #76.20-6-16, 86.08-4- 33 AND 86.07-1-1 WITHIN THE LAND RECORDS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA. 2. ALL PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS OF THE R-1 AND R-3 ZONING DISTRICT (SPECIAL EXCEPTION) AND WILL BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY ROANOKE COUNTY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS. 3. ALL PRNATE ROADS, PARKING, OPEN OR GREEN SPACE AND STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER. 4. FINAL LANDSCAPING SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE AS A MINIMUM. 5. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO ROANOKE COUNTY AND VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 6. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS VERIFYING THE PRELIMINARY FACILITIES SHOWN WILL ACCOMPANY THE FINAL PLANS. 7. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS, NARRATIVE, AND CALCULATIONS WILL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE FINAL PLANS. DESIGN SHALL CONFROM TO STATE AND ROANOKE COUNTY REQUIREMENTS. 8. THE PROPOSED GRADES SHOWN HEREON DEPICT GENERAL SITE GRADES. FINAL PLANS SHALL INCORPORATE DETAILED SITE GRADING. BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY BALZER AND ASSOCIATES DATED NOVEMBER 6, 1998. Fy 9. ENTRANCE CONFIGURATIONS, ACCESS ROUTES AND TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY VDOT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF FINAL PERMITS. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY WILL BE INCLUDED IN SUBMISSION DOCUMENTS TO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. ZONING TABULATION AREA OF DEVELOPMENT 69.618 ACRES (TOTAL ACREAGE ALL PARCELS) CURRENT ZONING TAX PARCELS # 76.20-6-16 & 86.07-1-1 ZONED R-1 TAX PARCEL # 86.08-4-33 ZONED R-3 PROPOSED ZONING R-1 AND R-3 WITH SPECIAL EXCEPTION (SECONDARY SCHOOL) CURRENT USE RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED USE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL NOTE: THERE WILL BE NO BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN R-3 DISTRICT (TAX PARCEL # 86.08-4-33) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS R-1 MINIMUM LOT AREA PLATTED LOT AREA MINIMUM FRONTAGE PLATTED FRONTAGE 7, 200 S. F. 61.542 ACRES (2,680,770 SF) 60 FT. 460 FT. R-3 7,200 S.F. 8.076 ACRES (351,790 SF) 60 FT. NONE. ACCESS VIA 30' PRIVATE RIGHT-OF-WAY. PARCEL MEETS MINIMUM FRONTAGE AND AREA REQUIREMENTS. YARDS MINIMUM SETBACK REQ. 30 FT. MINIMUM REAR YARD 10 FT. MINIMUM SIDE YARD 25 FT. ALL YARD REQUIREMENTS MET THIS SITE. MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MAXIMUM COVERAGES 45 FT. 15 FT. 30 FT. 10 FT. 25 FT. 45 FT. 15 FT. PRIMARY BUILDINGS 30% TOTAL LOT AREA 35% TOTAL LOT AREA ~y ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 10% TOTAL LOT AREA 7% TOTAL LOT AREA LOT COVERAGE 50% TOTAL LOT AREA 60% TOTAL LOT AREA SCREENING & BUFFERING -SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. WHERE ANY OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREA, BALL FIELD OR COURT, OR STADIUM ADJOINS A RESIDENTIAL USE TYPE, ONE ROW OF SMALL EVERGREEN TREES SHALL BE LANDSCAPED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE ADJOINING THE RESIDENTIAL USE TYPE. WHERE NIGHTTIME LIGHTING OF SUCH AREAS IS PROPOSED LARGE EVERGREEN TREES SHALL BE REQUIRED. LANDSCAPING -SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. SIGNS -SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. LIGHTING -EXTERIOR LIGHTING WHEN PROPOSED SHALL BE DESIGNED, LOCATED AND ARRANGED SO THAT AS NOT TO DIRECT GLARE ON ADJOINING STREETS OR PROPERTIES. THE LIGHTING ITENSITY AT ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES SHALL NOT EXCEED 0.5 FOOT CANDLES. UTILITIES -THIS SITE WILL BE SERVED BY PUBLIC SEWER AND WATER. PARKING REQUIRED: EMPLOYEE - 1 SPACE/EMPLOYEE (MAJOR SHIFT) 100 EMPLOYEES = 100 SPACES STUDENT - 1 SPACE/ 4 STUDENTS IN 11TH AND 12TH GRADE 1 SPACE/4 STUDENTS x 450 STUDENTS (ESTIMATED) = 113 SPACES LOADING SPACES - 1 SPACE/100,000 S.F. OF BUILDING AREA (175,000 S.F. BUILDING (CONCEPTUAL) 2 LOADING SPACES REQUIRED. PROVIDED: EMPLOYEE/VISITOR - 160 SPACES STUDENT - 414 SPACES RECREATIONAL AREA - 45 SPACES SUBTOTAL = 619 SPACES HANDICAPPED = 2% x SUBTOTAL = 13 SPACES TOTAL = 632 SPACES 2 LOADING SPACES 17 BUS SPACES ~~ ~~ ~rJ ~ - -~~.cENl~c-, / ~~7botball anfl' ;` i 'n1°--~ C,; ~ ~L~>ENI~uA ~ ,' r;~Trac~..~. _!~ _~~ Y _ ;,, \~H. C(3NCEPT PLAl`~ ~~ \ ~ ' ~" ? ' ~~~" ' ti ~~ ~ South Roanoke Coun V ~ ~ - ~ ~:' ~~ /~~ v ~. ) ~-~- ~, 'e` , ~ ~~, 'A ~~ Hi h School ~~ i ~ ~Servfce ~ ~ ~ r, °~~; <°~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ` : ~~~ at Woods End r :- a_. y ~ >rr~ ' ~ I~~ ~ ~ ~- p ~' (~.~ a. ~., ,, ~T~k g 1 ~ ~'' err ."~:. -~~ ~.. ~~ ~. ~' ~ \ v ~ JI ''~"~:. ~ - ~ ~ ~`,, ~ F. i , ~~ ~ Rya i , ~ --t`'? ~ ---- A~ ~. v°'rei i.`,;. ~PFr `I --. Txw{`, ~/ ~ *~ ~ su' // d 'y~ ~,;,.- „ ~~_ ~ ~ ~; ' .s- • ~ e:• d,clvnl.v,~ soy ----__--. ~~' ~~ 1 _.~ - _ :~_ . ~\ ~~~~~N.,W ~ ?Lfltf-P~urpass' ~:..1/~ '~'^~•` i 1 ~`~ -/ ~\ / e. • -- ti~rft,iii~ ~ ~ . ror ~ '~Pur i -r.._._ ~,- t '-,.,err- k pi fir' ~ _ ~.; L ~ L-Z~" '~~ Y'^r tl'l`!,:[ ~ - ~ _ ~, zisttn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'' 1 I'~1^~ t~] IrI :Practice ~~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ w.~L ' x ~ H0116G \ '".. n I_'_ 4-..1~ L-4 i - ~ ~ ~+ `~ ~.,_ P ~ ~ n 1 F~c~d i _. i ~.. v GENERAL VOiFS\~•/~ ~ ~~/ 1 ~/~ I.TNE PAOPEATYSIIOwIV 1(S0.Ff5N IS IOENTFlPn.44 TAX PAR(F.i. ` ' ~ / ~ \\ ~~~1 .I-lwmnn'na: urvuuLVxo3 uF' n' ,~/! ~~ /~` \ ~'/~" "„"\ 0.0AN(»:EO000FT',Y'IRGINIA . ALLA KISEU IUGFI Y(15MLDXY'F10AIEM wILL DErv ACCORDANCE\Ylnl TnF. RBIIULAMINS OF n1E N~1 AND AJ%(MING '1° /`~+ UIStRIITtSA:LrAL¢XCEPt%MI AND wILL UESUBIECT TO AE1TEw ~ ~ ~iY -- \ AND APAOY'AL BY ROANORECCAINIY PRIORM THE IYSI!nNCF. ni PERMn3. \ K.~;T.. ~-;;-.~ -ALL PRIVATE M1OAD3, PARKMO.OPEN OA GAERN EPACE AND ~~ ' ~~ ST[MM wAIfA MANAGPAIFNT rnCILRIE43NALL BF M,\IMnLVFD AY \\\ THE UwNER. /~ X +. rwnLLArcDSCAPINC; sxnu MEErna AEOUIRFa>En'n of rxr: `'i,l ~/ ~~ ^~ ~ ~'\ 5. RoANnXe rourrrY Z(x+n(a oxDlNnnce nanMlNwusL ~`-"I C ~! I LJ ALL LVN.cI'XUCrION SxAU.(X).NFURM roRUnuN:e couNTV nNn ~C vluRNU lmrnATMENror rxnNXnlArnrxm srnmAxD3 ANO '1'1 C ~ II+ ~ ' ' ( ~~ ~ \~~1`~J ~-,r,A~ sPeclFx'.4r1oNS //// fi. Sr(MM wATE0. FInNADP.MFNr UI - INO THE ~ ~ 7' ~ ~~ ` r 1 '" ~ L I~ ~ ' >r,~ PAALxNx+wRY FACILIilE4 YIIO ' LL A AL I l - - .. `1 ., ~ PAOSXIN AND SFDINIFM CONTRO Y 4 X E. VD _ _ L _L_ CALCULAT ON9 WLLL tl45U15M k 1'' NE "LVALIYnN3. -~ PEO EP Lp4O ~, ~ bF910HXHALI CONFXOM ttI3TATF ANU MOAN()RF. CgMTY Ip"y, .~ RFOlXRA1ENTS. ~._~~. ~ 1 `4'~ ~ ~~ PEA UCl41HF~R1~/~ ~ ~/ 1 F r11E PROKISF.DOMUES SHOwN HEPEUN DEPICT GENI'AAL SIrE /~~ ~ ~ / ~(. A (VMDEb. PINAL ILAXS SNALL INCOXPOR,4TE DETAILED SITE {f [HUUING. tlOUNUANY ANUTORIONnPHIC SIIRVm'tlY'XnIlEX nn'U ~ ` , ~ ~~J A930CtATP_Y UATEn vn4EMHERA, I4NR JJJ `J- .~nl/ ~~w4NCe rnnncunnnoxs. access Aa.rTF_t nnD raP ~ ~ aFmxnnuH CALn.'Lnn(wS ARB SUUEnrnAEVImv ANn ~^' c J/~- APruFVAIRYVIXYrPAxrRlnrncl3suANCEUYPIHALPENMn) I ~ ~ '? 9~ / TMAIC IMPA(T.TWn' ANn TRAFnG31(INAL WARRANT SI'UIIY 4'l1,L BE a1C1.UDED INXURMISFN]H n(N]IMF.NT4 TO THE VRif.INIA CNfr~ ~ ~'{~' Uf:PAPTMF.NT OFT0.ANSnWTAt1UN. wn ~ z Sherertz Franklin CrawfDFA Shaffner Inc. ~~ -~. `-- --~~ py U'(L 221 [XGINlQSInC 3055v.ln Jxxxnon SnRM ` r"1 _ l fLLG :O r-1 2U 6 D :•raxm?a:u~ Hoarloxe, vxffwx uclT-aooo ~~ fz ~, • E• ISIY i~ r ~ - ,.~` rn ~ ~-'; ~'~ • ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ `\~ /~ ~ s ~ p W ~~, ~. .~ ~ ~,, \~/ ~ ~ L .IiI ,h ~ 1•I 1 W V1 I I ~~ / ~ ~' ~ I ~ e S ~ 1 ~~ _ ~ O A 1'! / % iI ~' ~ 1 r ~ 8 // ~ w P 1 J ~ r 1 IF ~ I N , 1 w ' ~7 , II I I ~t I _ 1 I _ ~I ~ `:. . P P J d i ' 1 ~ ', ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ I ~ .'• N ~ PI. ~~~ ~fv } i w ~ ( ~ 1P A l r ' i ~ r~ ,,~, r ~ ~., ~• ,rPf ; ~ ~~ '1~ ~~ ~ ~~ I - , (I '~f ~ ,- ~ s r r , ~' ~ -- ''... ~ ~. ~ I ,. .~ ,, I 1• ,.~+ T ~ /l ~~~ ~~ I ~1 ,I~~ 1 ~ ~-'--~ :~_I /~ ~ ~ ~ ~: h ' 1 _ , f~~l 'I ` I I ~ ~~ ~ c- I ~ , I 1 ; ~ -- - _ !I I ~ '\ /~~' III LI~'I ifl I~ III. {~) I~:'n ~~ 'I rr y~~Y %~MI M ~. ~,I ~ `J I .~'~ ~ ..~'~ - i _ ~ - _. - ~ \ is ~ '~ = r ; ,;. ,i ----------- I ~ I '~, ~~ _ I. ~ _ ~ ,~~ ~ ~I ~. ~_ ~~ ~~ .. _ _ ~ 4~i( 1 ~I~; I ,I~;I 1 y a _ I ~. I 1 s J / fill I tt , 1 ~'~ I ~'iI `- _ __ ___~.__ ~ ` ~ III \ ~ , ~ ~ I ~_1 ~ ~j ~ _ tltrtP i - P ~ j` ~ I ~~` 4 ~. '~ ~•~. ` ~ 'I i1 AI ~~' i ~~ ~ ~I,~C I~~ If~~ M __ Q 11111 S I I I .1I I i ~'. ~ I VV 1111 ' •~ .ti _ _ "`t 1 ~ /^}./• ~ 111 2 . (/ ~ ~S [/\/~ ~ / j.. ~ I / ` ~ / ~ r+~ - / I *~` ~ ~, ~ ~.~.~ ~-a~* ~ I ~~ ~ r CONCEPT DIAGRAM South Roanoke County High School at Woods End .:;,1 Existing ;:'Trees' r /L ~,Z Sherelix FranMln CrawFnrO Shaffner Inc. ws s~,m ~wr~ sir RosiWe, Nrylnla 2{p11.2ppp .7liRCG1\tl\V JVI~V~~~~~~~ ~ ...L.... u 1 -^~ ~s n ~ T "'"' < 1 ~ 1~ ~ ~ t ..~ _ ...... ~ ___ ~ ' ''" ~r i .' ~~- _,,._...... - __.-~----~ ,_, BRAMBLETON AVE. ...~.. --~-~ o __-~- _~, ~-_~ 100 Ro~NOxE eouNTr DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D.~'V~'LOP%ENT 3Poods End School Site S~oeciczl Use Permit 86.!17-1-1, 76.20-6-1, 86.08-4-33 I ~~~~ ~4~I~~~ ua~,,~~~~~~,~~;'~' _ NN1i~G A_ND ZCNIi~G ~ ., _ i ~, - ,~., ~ ~..' ~-i_ ~. i ~1S it-;t- ~~ ~~, T_~F ~.'.'I F;-. (5-~', 7%=-_'~:OS : ~;~ ~. :'~ ~:~-~ r`.1 _r.: ChEC?< t~/pe or" app!icatiari t'iled' ~(chec'.< ail that apply): .C .,~_0~~;ZINC ^ SP~~IA~ Us ^'~~a.F,IA.NC~ dote ~~~jf ~, ~ v",` 1 received by ''~ _ 7~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ appiica[io `_~~~',~CrB~A date:'a1~~~'r placzrds ss~edl.~` I cv5 dzte: case Nu-.cer. ,~~~z _ P'' ~ ~ i s ~ ~: .>~ _l I Applicant's name: rr'ji lcwcod Develcpment, Inc. c; o Mr, Gary riuff,~:an Fhone: SS ~- `193 Address; 1507 Ashley Drive, Salem, VA Zip Ccde: ~e153 Gwner's name: Wildwood Develcpment Inc. Contract Purchas2n Fhcne: 38?-7195 Address: 1507 Ashi.ey Drive, Salem, VP. G Zip Code; 241 Locaticn cf propern/: Tax Map Numcer: c5.01-1-5, 9 & 13 Wildwood Rcad, North cf I-81; west side of road Magisterial Dist; ict: Catawba Community Piar.ning Area: Glenvar Size or parcel (s'J: Existing Zoning: AG-1 la,'7 acres Existing Land Use: Two single famil~r residences, c=met.:r°~r & sq.; ~. pasture ~:~:: ::}~: ~~~~;:: ~-~' `i ~:'': .~fi~~` ~~ ~`: ilt ::~, •~~ t'. ~ . is {7 ~• ~ y `~ ~+`` at ~ `( ~~ '`' ' ~~~~~~~'` •`~~!`': '!~~?~i'' . . . 2 . .. ..r ; :r::~, r. : 9ir . r :~ r . r. • : : Fropased honing. R 1 _ ~ Mr Star,` Usa Ortiy 1 I 1 c ~ _ } Proposed Lana Use: Singe faml_v re~iden~~~1 ~ de,.ached } j u=e ~yFe: ~I E ................... Does the pcrC2i meet the mlfilmUm iOt arP3, YYldtil, and frontage fegUlrement5 Of thB requested ~Istr',Ct? YES X NO IF NC, A VA:RiA,NCE IS REQUIRED FIRST . Does the parcel melt the minimum crit8ria for ;~~e requested Use Type? YES ~ NO IF N0, A V,4R(A.NCE I5 REQUIRED FIRST. if rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES NO :~i;~ ;:7i;;: V ~;i~p0}' ~• ~"°':: iii~~t ' ~E~;:i~' ~`i'!"f~,. ~if. i~i~i':~i~i ~E~i~f~i~:'E~:~i'i?ii~ii~:ili~i;ilE~i~i;i~:;i~i;iii ~ ~~ ~ + .~• Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Loning Grdinarsce in ordar to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLiCATiON WILL NCT SE A.CCE? T EC iF ANY CF II-IESc ITEMS ARE iV11SS!NG OP, INCOMPLETE. R15 V Rr9 V AJS Y n i Ccnsuitation X~EE., ~ $ ~ ILA x I I ' CCnCept plan ~~~~ A.pQIICatOn fce xI ~ ApD!iCatlOn `Y K; 3 I~/ie:e5 and .CUndS deSCi]ptlCn I "'d j PrC~TCrS, ii 'appliCaCle ~~ ~ Justification X '~=a Water and saver acpiication I~ I I Adjeinine proper'~f oN~^~ers See available letter 9R-20nA I Hereby carter;~ that r am er'thar the owner or the property or ttre oavner's agent or contract pure.^,asar and am actr'ng wr'r;~ the xnow/edge and consent or tyre owner. Owner's Signature : ~~~ ~"'t~,~'~,~.~-y..~ ~ ,~ ~ .,~'_. ~ ~ .r~ ~ ~ ~.~ .~ .~ ~ i~''.= ~-~~rr~*- ~LISTIFI~ATIt~N 3F4R R.E~~NI~I~ R~~IJEST PROPOSED "WALK.ER IvIEADGWS" SUBDIVISION WILDWOOD DEVELOPMENT. LLC 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 proposal is consistent with the stated density of 1 to 3 units per acre contained in the purpose of the R-I residential district. Properties on Wildwood road in this vicinity are currently being developed with similar densities of single family detached dwellings, notably Vine Cliff Estates (Roanoke County) and Wildwood Forest (City of Salem). The surrounding area is expected to continue to develop in this manner now that public water and sewer have been extended to the area. The proposal will provide quality, affordable housing for a number of families within short driving distance of the commercial and industrial areas of Salem and surrounding areas. This will help to avoid increased traffic congestion due to long commutes that result from more outlying residential subdivisions. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan: The proposed project is in keeping with the developing nature of the surrounding area. Although this area was once primarily agricultural and forest land, it is evolving toward low density residential. This is evidenced by the surrounding residential y subdivisions named above and recent extensions of public water and sewer to the area. 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 pubiic services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire/rescue: The development of this parcel is expected to have only a minor impact on the adjoining properties and surrounding area. Careful planning, architecture, and the following design features will help to minimize the impact: 1) Approximately 4.4 acres along Dry Branch will remain undeveloped. This area will provide open space for recreation and visual buffering for the properties across Dry Branch to the west. 2) The developer proposes to extend public water to the site from Wildwood Road. With the recent extension of the "North Loop" water main to the vicinity, adequate water service capacity is available to serve this area. Please see County availability letter ~ 98-203A dated Oct. 19, 1998 (copy enclosed) for more information. ..~. ~ ~~ .- 1 3) The developer proposes to extend public sanitary sewer to the site from the intersection of Wildwood Road and Waldheim Road. As this proposed connection is to the City of Salem sewer system, the City will be asked to verify capacity in their system to receive the additional wastewater. 4) This development would result in a small increase in stormwater runoff rates. This increase will be very small when compared to runoff rates for Dry Branch. Measures to lessen the effects of this increase will be provided for during the site plan review process. 5) Portions of the property are located within the 100-year floodplain. Attention will be given during the planning and construction phases of the project to ensure that proposed residences are constricted according to Caunty regulations to minimize the risk of flooding. 6) Wildwood Road would be impacted by the proposed development. A slight increase in traffic volume will result. Traffic hazards are minimized, however, by the proposal to construct only one new entrance on Wildwood Road. The proposed new road is designed to provide adequate sight distance for traffic entering or exiting the proposed road. 7) The proposal to widen Interstate S 1, now in the planning stages, would have a minor impact on this site. 3) Impacts on schools, parks/recreation, and fire,~rescue, and other County services by this project are expected to be minor. ~ ~` ~~ '~`: ~~ / ~ ` c'ji 'P1 ' f ~t ~~ ~ / 7~ ~ ~ N 3f Q / Ff :.•, m ~ ~ ~ {;YG~M A7N! 310!6) ~ . r~~ .~tl:F. ~ / ~ ~ 3D A11C3~ld ~ /~ tl'a t / / k ° ~ ~ .' ° O.LY~c r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. a ~ ~, ,} W ~ - L~ ~ ' O hF.-,: -~ ~ ~ 1 -~,;;., ~' iii ~•..•1 ® \ }'J'ai 'I~IFi J~ t uN+cs wear o~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ ~ a ~ ~ tl ~ >o ~~ W `{ir'k' ~ / s 1 v j i ~'~'~ ~ t;[ ~ p ~ c W m ~, • 1 }~ W ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ \ / ~ ~~ ~i ~ p 07 m ? Z i + , i ~ ~] ~ O ~! a W ~": p Q ~ ~ E+ o~~Q~ m ~ } I p lL.lO~W LV r o o ~ Q ~! ~ /W~ '^ ~mmm~o~~ Z W W W < - spy ~ ~ t1 ~ ~L.NL~ _ 431 4. ~ L' W ~ ~~ Q'p ~ Lj.lO~f <~Z~ WWaC S F G~ p Q Li,~ ~' ii /_Ztt~~ Fly Z ~~~~~zQ4~1°s ~ CO U ~ ~ ~ ~ V LL ~ ~N~~~La 41Nl~y ~~ .~ a~ tJ7 Z ~ -~ s = ~ ~ W ~ ~ .-Nnr ~ X F ,~ ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~itd~,uood Development,lnc. Rezone from AG-1 to R-1 45.01-1-8,9,13 6 is the application complete? Please check if encicsed. A.PFL!C.~ T 1G~1 WILL SOT BE ACCEPTED iF A.NY CF T~-IE~c" ITEMS A.RE M1SSiNG OR INCOMFL= ~ E. fus v ars v ~-w-s-~v ~ Consultation S 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan I I I Application fee Application ''a Metes and bounds description "~_"~'"'~ Proffers, if applicable Justification ~~~~~ Water and sewer application ~~~ Adjoining property owners l hereby certr'fy that / am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contracr purc:~aser and am acting with the know/edg nd consen o ~h owner. Owner's Signature: G. Michael Pace, Jr., Esquire, Attorney for Triton PCS, Inc. ~r• ~1 P.pplicant's Warne: Triton PCS, Inc. Fhone: I (804) 323-95 Address: 9211 Arboretum Parkway, ~~200, Richmond, VA Zip Code: 23236 Owner's name: Pinkerton Properties, LLC Phone: 562-1337 Address: 925 N. Electric Road, Salem, VA Zip Code: 24153 Locaticn of prcpery: Tax Map Number: 36-15-1-11 ~~ ~~ ~ - ~ "?-~ ~'~~~ Pinkerton Chevrolet 925 North Electric Road (Route 419) Magisterial District: .Catawba Salem, VA 24153 Community Planning Area: Size of parcel Is): Existing Zoning: C-2 Conditional 11.66 acres Existing Land Use: Automobile dealership 505709.6 sq.ft. - :°::I .::.:.:.::.:.::::.;:~.,.:::::;:;;;;;;;i:;:;;i:;:;:::;::::;:;:;::i;:;;:;;;:::::;::::;:;:;::;::::::;::::::::;:::::i:::;i,:::::::;:;:;;::;:;::::::: ..:.: I ~ ., . Proposed Zoning: C-2--~~~_~. (,A~ax~ Prof~ered'Condition~s) ~ a~-' %~rscar';'Usz on~y Proposed Land Use: Telecommunications Facility ~ use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO IF NO, A VA.nlr^-.~~Cc IS REQUIRED FIRST . Dees the parcel meet the minimum criteria for tl-~e requesled Use Type? YEE X i'~'0 IF N0, A. VARfANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES X NO Variance of Secticnls) of the Roanoke County Zcning Ordinance in order tc: IO G~~ITRY LOCK RAKES & M~Rc Attorneys at Law 540.903.9300 Facsimile 540.983.9400 Direct No. 540.983.9312 December 18, 1998 I-IAND DELIVERED Mr. David Holladay Department of Planning and Zoning County of Roanoke 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Triton, PCS - Site No. 418D - Zoning Designation: Dear Mr. Holladay: l ~''"~~ .0 Franluu~ Roac, S.r. Posy Office Box 4001 3 Roanoke. Virgin!a 24038-001 3 Application for Rezoning to Amend Proffered Conditions and Special Exception for Telecommunications Facility 925 N. Electric Road (Route 419) Pinkerton Chevrolet Dealership, Roanoke County, VA C-2 (General Commercial District) Triton PCS ("Triton") respectfully requests that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors rezone the subject property to amend the proffered conditions to add a use and to grant a special use permit for the installation of a wireless telecommunications facility at the above-referenced address. BACKGROUND: Triton is the first licensed affiliate of AT&T, and has been assigned licenses by the Federal Communication Commission to develop and maintain a wireless Personal Communication Services (PCS) network in parts of central and southwest Virginia, including the County of Roanoke. Once the network is constructed, Triton will become a member of the AT&T Digital Wireless Network, which is licensed to cover more than 80% of the United States. The Triton network will use digital technology that assures the privacy of conversations, protects telephone numbers from fraudulent use, and provides clearer reception than analog (cellular) technology. Services offered will combine traditional wireless telephone features with numerous advanced features such as caller ID, alphanumeric and numeric paging, short e-mail messaging, and voice mail. Triton will market this new wireless telecommunications service to residential, business, pedestrian and motorist users at competitive pricing, making it available to virtually everyone. PCS telecommunications actually contribute to the safety and general welfare of the community. Wireless communication provides a public service that citizens can rely upon for safety, security and emergency services. ;I 14722\I\53I829.1 ---- ~~ I i F ~... GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & f~1C~RE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -2- F~ Because Triton is required to provide a satisfactory level of service to the community under FCC regulations, the placement of communications facilities is critical to Triton's ability to meet FCC objectives, without jeopardizing its licenses. Each of these facilities is linked to the other by a tower, and without any one of them, the network will have a gap in coverage. This site is therefore a critical component in Triton's and AT&T's network. Whenever possible, Triton locates on existing towers and structures to minimize the number of communications towers in a particular area. Triton has located a number of existing structures in the Roanoke Valley on which it will install one of its facilities. Triton has also considered and rejected a number of other locations and collocation possibilities either because of unavailability, for geographic or technical reasons, or because such locations were too close or too far away from existing or proposed tower locations in other parts of the Roanoke Valley. A list of all such locations is attached hereto. Triton's Radio Frequency (RF) engineers have identified the area that includes this property as a necessary location for antennae in order to provide uninterrupted service coverage to the citizens and business community in this part of the County. THE PROPERTY: The property is currently being used as the Pinkerton Chevrolet automobile dealership. In 1984, the County adopted an ordinance to rezone the property from Rl Residential District to B2 Business District, subject to the proffered condition that it be used only as a "new car dealership". Triton has leased a 1500 square foot portion of the property located behind the dealership facility from Pinkerton Properties, LLC, the owner. REQUEST: Triton requests that the existing proffered condition applicable to the property be amended to permit the use for the proposed telecommunications tower and that a special use permit be issued to permit the construction, operation and maintenance of a 160 foot monopole with antennae at this location. PROPOSAL: Triton has filed its detailed concept plan with this application which describes the proposed telecommunications facility. The improvements include a new 160 foot monopole with 9 panel 14722\1\531829.1 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & i~/1CORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -3- rb antennaes and aself-contained equipment enclosure located on a 10 foot x 12 foot concrete slab. The total area is 1500 square feet, enclosed by a new 8 foot high chain link fence. Access to the site will be via a new 12 foot wide access easement across the Pinkerton property to Electric Road (Route 419). The total height of the structure, including antennaes, will be 162.5 feet above ground level. This is the minimum necessary to obtain and maintain adequate coverage in this area. The facility will be unstaffed, after construction, and will not require parking. The facility will be regularly inspected and maintained by a company employee on a monthly basis. It will not impact County services such as water and sewer, and it will require only electricity and telephone service which are available on site. The facility will not interfere with any existing emergency communications equipment, business or residential communications equipment, or radio or television reception. In addition, the facility will not impact traffic or schools. The proposed monopole will provide for 3 additional collocation opportunities, thereby minimizing the proliferation of other towers in the area. C®DE COMPLIANCE: The property is located within a C-2 General Commercial District. Section 30-54(A)(6) of the County Code permits by right the use for a broadcasting tower, subject to the provisions of Section 30-87-2. Because this is a broadcasting tower, as defined by Ordinance 102798-L amending Section 3-87- 2, the maximum height restriction otherwise imposed by Section 30-54-3(C) is not applicable pursuant to Section 30-80(A). The application for a special use permit is appropriate pursuant to Section 30-19-1, and this location and the proposed use satisfy the County's Use and Design Standards set forth in Section 30-87-2 amending the proffered conditions to permit the use and for issuance of a special use permit in this case: a. The use is compatible with existing pattern of commercial development in the area; b. The structure has been designed as a monopole and so as to reduce its height and otherwise to minimize any adverse impact on adjoining properties; 14722\11531829.1 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & MCORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -4- F4 c. No demand on public utilities is created since it will need only electric power which is available on site; d. The use generates no traffic and does not increase the flood potential of the surrounding neighborhood; e. The use furthers the intent of Sections 30-28, 30-29-7 and 30-87-2 and the County's Comprehensive Plan by providing for the expansion of digital services to a critical business and residential area in a controlled fashion which will minimize the proliferation of telecommunications towers in the area; f. The use is not contrary to the public interest, but significantly furthers the public interest by expanding the availability of wireless personal, business and emergency services telecommunications, thereby enhancing the general welfare and safety of the community; g. The base of the monopole is not less than 40 feet from any residential structure on an adjoining lot; h. The telecommunications facility meets all of the County's minimum setback requirements; and The use otherwise conforms to the County's requirements. The intended use and design of the proposed monopole meets all of the requirements for issuance of the special use permit requested. The use is permitted as a principal use under Section 30- 54(A)(6) and satisfies all of the design standards required by Section 30-87-2. The subject property is particularly well-suited because of its remote location, the general development pattern of the surrounding area, its consistency with permitted uses in the C-2 zoning district, and its design assuring negligible impact on the surrounding area. This site is designated as Development on the County's Comprehensive Plan. There will be little change in this area, however, as the applicant merely wishes to expand on the existing commercial uses already located on this site. This proposal will not affect the operations of the existing use. In addition, no other reasonable alternative locations exist, and the proposed monopole and its location and design have been chosen to protect the scenic beauty of Roanoke County while at 14722\1\531829.1 GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & f~1C~RE ~~ Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -5- the same time providing a structure capable of offering the level of service acceptable to AT&T and as mandated by the FCC. There will be little to no impact on natural, cultural or historic resources in this part of Roanoke County. Triton PCS has been very conscious of the beauty of the Roanoke Valley when making decisions on where to locate future telecommunications installations. It is Triton's wish to become a good corporate neighbor and a contributing part of the future of Roanoke County. Accordingly, in order to build this vital network link, Triton requests that a special exception be issued in this case. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. If you have any questions concerning the application or otherwise, please call me at me at 983-9312. Yours sincerely, GE'~LTRY LOCKS RAKES & MOORS ,, ~:~!~ . -------~ / G. Michael ~, Jr.:' GMPjr/lgh Enclosure cc: Frank Shortall (w/encl.) John Slater (w/encl.) George Cununing (w/encl., via facsimile) Attachments: Application for Rezoning and Special lise Permit Concept Plan with: List of Adjoining Property Owners Photographic Simulations Propagation Studies List of Considered Alternate Sites Terrain Analysis (viewshed map) I4722\ I X531829.7 STATE OF VIRGINIA ~ / _ '~ (Q BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY IN RE: REZONING APPLICATION OF TRITON PCS, INC. 925 N. Electric Road (Route 419) Pinkerton Chevrolet Dealership AMENDMENT TO PROFFER OF CONDITIONS: TO THE HONORABLE CHAIRIvIAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COL{NTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, by Final Order entered on February 16, 1984, by the Clerk of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, a copy of which is attached, certain property described therein and described as 18.566 acres, more or less, owned by Allred Chevrolet, Inc. (the "Real Property") was conditionally rezoned from Residential District (Rl) to Business District (BS) in order to build and conduct a new car dealership thereon, on the condition that the Real Property which was the subject of the rezoning request be used only as a "new car dealership". WHEREAS, Pinkerton, LLC is the successor in title to the Real Property of Allred Chevrolet, Inc., and desires to modify the foregoing condition by adding an additional use to permit the operation, construction and use of a telecommunications facility, including a monopole with antennae and related equipment. NOW THEREFORE, being in accordance with Sec. 15.1-491.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the Petitioner, Triton PCS; Inc., and the owner of the Real Property, Pinkerton Properties, LLC, hereby voluntarily proffer to the County of Roanoke, Virginia, the following conditions to the above-referenced rezoning: That the Real Property which is the subject of the rezoning request be used only as (a) a "new car dealership", and (b) a telecommunications facility, including a monopole with antennae and related equipment. TRITON PCS, INC. By: WFI, Inc., its agent By. ~ Jo .Slater Its: Site Acquisition Specialist 14722\11536080.1 PINKERTON PROPERTIES, LLC r-- Mary L. Thomas Its: Secretary/Treasurer January 12, 1999 147?2\i\536080.1 BROADCAST TOWER PREAPPLIGATION GONSULTATiON CHECKLIST Applicant Name: Triton PCS, Inc. Date: ,~,~~~~ Consultant Staffi Member: ~~~ BROADCASTING TOWERS AND ASSOCIATED ANTENNA PERMITTED BY RIGHT: New and replacement broadcasting towers and associated antenna not exceeding thirty (30) feet in height and located within any commercial or industrial zoning district provided: a) the proposed tower is a monopole type design; b) the general area of the proposed tower is currently served by above ground utilities including electric power and telephone poles; and c) all other use and design standards for the construction of the broadcasting tower and associated facilities are met. ' Antennas may be installed on any existing structure within the County provided said antenna does not meet the definition of a broadcasting tower, does not increase the height of the existing structure more than ten (10) feat, and does not result in the structure and antenna exceeding the maximum structure height for that zoning district. ' Temporary towers erected for a period not to exceed twenty-one days. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION SHALL BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A BROADCAST TOWER IN ADDITION TO STANDARD APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS. P~~>~~~Lsit~c~ualities Utilities that are currently present on site: all Utilities required that are not currently present on site: none Expected route of linkage: Estimated noise level in decibels: zero B~Oss~1C~i T~Wei Structure Type: ~ Monopole ^ Lattice Tower ^ Guyed Tower ^ Stealth Design (description) Other (description) Proposed 'Height of tower excludine antenna: 160 feet Existing height of surrounding tree canopy and/or buildings: not applicable Construction material and finish of tower. see attached Specific tower location see attached Material: Finish: Longitude: "' Latitude: " Ground elevation in mean sea level of 'the proposed tower ate: see attached Tower has structural ability to accommodate: ^ One ^ Two ~ Three other providers. Zvoels~of Antenna o~Qther Devir•ps Attached To Tower see attached ^ Omni-Directional Antenna ^ Directional Panel ^ Parabolic Antenna ^ Whip Antenna ^ Other (description) f Material and finish of the proposed antenna(s). see attached Dimensions of Antenna(s) -height ;width /depth I Material: Finish: / / The following information must be submitted separately in either a written or mapped format. ^ Information on how the proposed site relates to the applicant's existing communication system, including X number of other sites within the Roanoke Vailey, and the location of the antenna at each site. see attached 0 A map designating the specific coverage area(s) desired with any overflow areas denoted separately. '~ "' see attached ^ A list, with a map, of all of the alternative sites considered or evaluated to serve the area of this proposed X tower, including other existing tower sites in the vicinity. This s. ~ouid include any co-locations considered and the specific technical, legal or other reasons the other site(s) were rejected. see attached Provide conceptual site plan drawn to scale, depicting the location of support structures, equipment enclosures, landscaped areas, fences, lightine, access, limits of disturbed land, average slope of the ste, ownership and use of adjoining properties, etc. see attached Provide accurate, to scale, photographic simulations showing the relationship of the proposed broadcast tower and associated antenna to the surroundings. Photographic simulations should include the relationships of any new or modified road or utility corridors necessary to serve the proposed broadcast tower site. see attached Provide a computerized terrain analysis showing the visibility of the proposed broadcast tower and X antenna at the requested height and location. If new or modified road, access or utility corridors are proposed, the terrain anaiysis shall also show the visibility of these ne~N or modified features. see attached (to follow) 0 Provide detail sheet for broadcast tower structure. see attached Provide an accurate description and photograph of the proposed tower structure, including antenna. see attached ^ Provide de±ail sheet of any antenna or devices attached to tower inciudina electrical and mechanical X spec;fications for antenna systems. see attached ~Otes I hereby certify that: Ail required submittal's to the FAA, as required by Zoning Ordinance Section 30-87-2D. 6. have been submitted. A required on-site balloon or comparable test will be pen`ormed on the dates of ~ /2 lq`~ for the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for 2/2/99 ,and on the dates of 2.~~.5 g for the Board of Supervisors public hearing scheduled for 2/23/99 1, the applicant, shall be responsible for all gees associated with the filing of the application, including the reasonable cost of any independe,~rt analysis deemed necessary by the Couniy to verify the.~eed for the new broadcast tower. Signature: Date: i2/1s/9s G. Michael Pace„~Jr.~'' Esquire, Attorney for . Triton PCS, Inca~.._-.-~~--~~ ~ I ~I 3 s ~i ~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I i~~ ~I WW ~ ~ ~ _3 f it it ~I ~ i ~ ~~ o ~ ,oi ~~ ~ i ~ m~ I ~ i~l ~~~~~ ~_ ~~~~ ~I~ ~I~I ~ f I~IW ~ - .. ~ - ~ ~ I~F z I r rr~~ w ~ ° ~- ~~'oi ~ °~~ WI ~ I ® z~ ', `~ I it ~ W ~ fall ~ -~ of i V I 'I ~ ~ a y '~ w~ ~ i ~/ / ~ u ~, ~ ~ ~- ~ -~~~ ~ ~~ ~ n ~' a i w I J ~~ i -- e `i°~- ~ rJ W u i J W i ~ I Z~ i ,~ N Q ~ ~ 1 Oh.W~~. <_ <~~ 2 C I ( ~~~ w~ ~Fl1E ;~~ / ~~~ %v° i ~ i i i i re" i ad i ~ ad ~ ' ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~° ~ ~ i) i ~ i ~6'~~ , n 5 uc~ w ~ Q . ~ >j @ a~ m w 3 ~ ~ N ~ j u .. ~ Y 3 d °- b~ ~~ ~ ~ b R 8 ~ ~W3~~ zi ~~t 8 8 8 5 ~ ^ R ~ st 9 I _~ O . ~ j I ! S: 4 ~ c~ ~ o < ;. W I ~ I ` C o 0 `~ ~ ~ Q I I i 5 ~ P f^ A i i 3 z~ ,^n i ~ § 5 ~ I ~ . a.~ i ~ ~ ~ $ .J J s ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 5 I 1 ,1 1 ~7~ E, L~° a p,~ x°~ ~~a a~ ~a~ 0 m ~~- < aiJ ~~~ ~ S inl u~ , U `H' o ~~~ TM1.. `" ~_ y3~^ ~i~ y~ry '3 ^a ~ ~ i < ` ~j~uz < `~i~c ~+v_,i~ 3 Y of y `"~~.s`"=Y~~='' ~~ ~a ? ~2~°z gff~ ~ _ z~ ~~g~ ~ ~ - g~~~~'6 ~ W~~~US' 3ffi, ~~~,W ~ ~~ I ~ ~~~j= ~.,~*- z- ~.y ~ 23 :a ~' y~~3 ~>« ~ a s~ aaN~ ° ~ ~ ~ iN ` ~y~~~4 ` ~~ ~~ '~ Ego ~~ ~ ~i '~~~~ ~ ~'^'~ z.,-,~...~ zi .. o ~ ~ W ~ °3g~~.z ~~'~3W g ~~~~6a~ ?~si ~_~ sk ~~ T I Z ,,,,,. _,~a-z." f w ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~ "a ~ a a3<~I~~~m~ 3~_-i~~ „~gz~Y~ "'bd w sg#~~ --vy I v ~Y~XNY.. w - ~ ~ ~ o ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ 'ad~~~~oa ~U3~~~~' ~Wafs~~~ ~cz < Y ~ u ~° `-~ w s _ ~ z i Z ~ t 5I $, _ o _ w ~ ~ ~ ,_ T ~ = < _ O u F ~ y T ~. I , i ~ L ~ C J ~_ ~ s I a `~ I , ~"' __ > > _ _ O ~.J ~ Y '~ I (~ ~ ~~I ' 2 8I ? 14 4 , J ~ J J~ I D L ; _ l i I I ~~ l I I HIS ~ w ~n ~ m~ n r m m o, N ~ 3 5 Vii.- S!~ o6 1 `o~ ' l •i'~ ~I~I ~f l I 81'~6~ '~~i I ~~ ~'s ~ l ~ p6 ' ~ ~ w ~I~p ~~ als olo ~ ~ ~ ola~~ I~:~ ;P~ ol°,a §la ~~io ~I ~ ~I¢ ~i _~ I~~ _~z a~,s - '~~ ~i ~I ~IEi~I '~~ II~f i , I ~ ~ °~ ICI ~Wl~i ~ W' ~ I ;I ~. wi = ~ W ~ ~I~i '~I= ~'=~ ~!=IWI~ - ~~ ~~ I j ~I~ °~SI a w PS ~ W m~31 el~~Sl~i ~'m ~ ~ ~ fs W olol, io mioolo ~ ~~ oIo v 0 ~~ =i y Y, S 1 ¢ ~ u G ~ ele '~' a~cl v°ilbi elo .~ ~ C of e ei ~~~ ~~ n~ ei ;~ ~ ~~~;,:, ~N!a r~~ ~ I ~ q ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ F I i ~~ 3 0 4~~ ~IS~~ig~~l~ ° z a W l I~ ~ ~ ~ o o c`yi '3~ ~ 3 ~ ~I Olo ~o~~ ol~i i c~i I I ~ ._ r N .°' .°a l~ ~.~mi.~ ~I~I ~~ J N ~ ~ I ~ = ~ °I~~_ I~~~~I~!~I~ W~ ~ I - _ -,~- ,~,~II~i>~Ym~ Q; I ~ dr ~~ 6 ~3 ~ i ~ 2 1 i 3<~'< ~ ~~ , J~1'd I w ~ , l ? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ r. ~. ~~>>~ a-~~vo a ~~ ~ z # j -~ ~ wc t ai~a ~ .i~y ~-^J k~ ~ ~ ~a iL:~ Ca c c~ W2I r d ~-- - v~ Q ~ 3$ ~ Z l\ WN ~. W I Q ._ \ ' '~ ~ ~ '.. s Z i o ~w.lt`~_.. ~ o 4I I I Z ~o ~-- ~ t -+~- ~ ~ j 4 ~ ~ w - i-- W i .P.. 3 a~a~ ~ W ~ W~~ °~~o ~TCffm.:~~. na ~~iF~J ~ ~ix~ a ^~3~ $~`d2 3 6~ _~~~~ g ~41~°~ -°Jg~<6 3~V~ ^~xW° a^aas a S ~ gg °'~ d3 ~ ~ ~ S'~ w Q ~_ o ~~ 'a: s3 ~s _ ~e ~x '~~ d ~ ~ a3 ¢ ~ a~ ~~ j~ w _~ ~~ » ~= ~ W sW qs Y ~' m~ yS1 ?a ~ ~ W ~~~ ~~ 3 ~ ~ ~~ ~3 W 3-i9 ~ _a- :~8 <n _ ~ .. --- t _ _: -- _ s, r ~~ Nm :y--- ~/ z~ /~'~ u // ~... ~' ~~ , ~" ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ t ~ ~~ '~ o ~r~~ ~~ ... , ~ ~ W ~ , ~ /(~/ \ ~qc v ~e ,~i ~ -l \ ~ ~.,3a1 ir r 1 ~~ ~ 1 i\', ~ , i 4 \ \ ~~ ~ ~ \ ~ !i 1 ,~! ~ .~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~^ ~ ~ t ~'\ ~ O ¢. ~I w J WI W{ a o~- z ~~H 3~~ ~~~ ri~ ~ .d % ~bj~> ~ - :~'° sY a ~/ ~GJ ~I ~ ' // ~~' 3\~l/ / ¢I j ~~ 1 J~ ~~, ~ If W U.o ~I W~ i ~ ~ I ~ r ~, ~' I .,.--r T-, i -, l*.,~ ;r ~ ~ it I i ~I ?j0 X6.10-".-14 \ ~ _ ` "-, C~' ~ J 1~! ~~~~ ~"'~ 2. I 26.46 ~ I_ fiL~O Cov. 1 I . 4 ~~~. Q ~,1 ~° '~ 5 a /J ,~ o,„ ~ 1 `~; o ~~' ~ G~ a ;! O~ ~ ~~~ ~ , odd ` \ ~ - n~. l,7evro'~a[ '~~ v~ r ~a it '~~ ~~~ \ '~ ~z~1 ..- -~ ~ -2 ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Trita•n PCS,Inc./Pinkertan Rezon~,ng/Spec~,ad Use 36.15-1-11 COUNTY OF ROA.NOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 520 Bernard Or. P.O. Box 29300 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2068 FA;C (~=0 I 7 i ?-2 ~ 0 For sta;";" use only dace rece;vim:'}~ clued b application'feer~ rCiE~~ da_~= Ilplacards issues.: ~,~ ~cCS date: I Czse Nunder. i l:nec!c type or application filed (check a!i that apply): ^ RE%ONING ~1 SPECIA,L USc ^VA,P.IANCE Applicant`s Warne: Triton PCS, Inc, Fnone: (g04) 323-9500 P,ddrpss: 9211 Arboretum Parkway, ;'200, Richmond, VA Z'~p Cade: 23236 Owner's name: Trustees of the Good Shepherd Church F.cne: 774-8746 =.ddress: 1887 Electric Road, Roanoke County,. VA Zp Code: 24018 Location or propery: ~ ax Map Number. 67.18 Good Shepherd Church 1887 Electric Road (Route 419) ~'~lagisteriai Dist; ict: ~....~,~ ,, ,~-°, ~ ,~,~.' ~ ~ ~.~r ~ , ,~, Roanoke, VA 24018 Community Planning Area: Size or parcp! (s): existing Zoning: C-1 Office District 3.88 acres =xisting Land Use: Church x.69012 8 sq•fit. :.:.'':.:~:.....!ii Y n.~ .. . .. ~ YrOpC52d ZCnln r ~, <: _ 1 i 9 C-1, ~rrcz-cars-~ ~~~ ~ J r~t~ Fr d L l ~ ~ ~~ ' ~~ ~ ,=:r Star= Use Sniy I+ oeosp and Usa: Te ecommunications Facility {use Type: ~ ! ~-i i ~; i:. C'OeS ;('~ ciCpi flip°_? tr1E minimum i e= ~ n, rcn r-J r tC~ Ct as"i WlCtii, a. d iiOntcyp ..yUlre.~ e.it5 Ci ~i~e ra^yUeStp~. CISUIC;~ Y33 X NC' IF N0, A~VA~=,ir.,yCE iS Rr=~:.~UIR3D FiRj i . 'vCpS file poi Cpl iTie°_: tliC minimum Crltprla iCr iiie fp^yUc~ied USe Iypp~ Y`J X NQ IF NG, r^-. VA,°,iA.NCF IS RP~C.UfRED ~r=iRST. i. rzcning recuest, ar= conditions being prorere with t~`~is ,-^uest? YES ~JC X .. y ;, ..; .:: .; .:i Vai;ar,,,= cr Se..ticr,(s) o. t~~e R.canokp County Zoning Crdinanca in crd=. :~: ~S flip appllCaUCn ..CmC)leip~ P~paSe C'leC!{ iT pnC:~Scd. Ar'FL1Cr~ 1 iCN V~/ILL NC' I C~ i--~~~~ C~~ ~F ~.iJ~~ Ci' ~ , ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~Vis ^,=,~ ral,ssNG o~ iNCOr~~PL~~~. R/S V RJS V A!S V CCnSU!tailOn ~ 8 ~ /2" X ~ ~ ' CQnCept pion I l ~f ~.ppliCa't,On cp I Apciicatien ``'`~ Me*.ps and bounds descri fish "~ p ~.`:`<<+ Fro~rars, if applicable Justification Water and sewer application ( Ad;cining property ov~~ners l nere~y card;"y '/7a(l am e'lher the owner or the property Or (f7B GVV,'7e%'$ cQent o/ CQr'ir3C'1^.C,'rC,'7a'Sc'.' cn0 am ec:ing Y~rm the know/ec'g~ ~r~a°`cm~enr of,r-~.l~_r, Owner's ~;gr,ature: u. rilcciael race, ur. , esquire, Attorney for Triton PCS, Inc. Attorneys at Law 540.983.9300 Facsuniie 540.983.9400 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & MORE Direct No. 540.983.9312 December 18, 1998 LAND DELIVERED Mr. David Holladay Department of Planning and Zoning County of Roanoke 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Triton, PCS - Site No. 417B - Zoning Designation Dear Mr. Holladay: 10 Franklin Roao, S.E. F-~ i'ost OfFire Box 4001 3 Roancke. `/irgnia ~403o-OGU Application for Special Exception for Telecommunications Facility 1887 Electric Road (Route 419) Good Shepherd Church, Roanoke County, VA 24018 C-1 (Office District) Triton PCS ("Triton") respectfully requests that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors rezone the subject property to amend the proffered conditions to add a use and to grant a special use permit for the installation of a wireless telecommunications facility at the above-referenced address. BACKGROUND: Triton is the first licensed affiliate of AT&T, and has been assigned licenses by the Federal Communication Commission to develop and maintain a wireless Personal Communication Services (PCS) network in parts of central and southwest Virginia, including the County of Roanoke. Once the network is constructed, Triton will become a member of the AT&T Digital Wireless Network, which is licensed to cover more than 80% of the United States. The Triton network will use digital technology that assures the privacy of conversations, protects telephone numbers from fraudulent use, and provides clearer reception than analog (cellular) technology. Services offered will combine traditional wireless telephone features with numerous advanced features such as caller ID, alphanumeric and numeric paging, short e-mail messaging, and voice mail. Triton will market this new wireless telecommunications service to residential, business, pedestrian and motorist users at competitive pricing, making it available to virtually everyone. PCS telecommunications actually contribute to the safety and general welfare of the 14722\1\531891,1 I- --~ ~r.. . i GENTRY L~GKE RAKES & NICORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -2- ~~ community. Wireless communication provides a public service that citizens can rely upon for safety, security and emergency services. Because Triton is required to provide a satisfactory level of service to the community under FCC regulations, the placement of communications facilities is critical to Triton's ability to meet FCC objectives, without jeopardizing its licenses. Each of these facilities is linked to the other by a tower, and without any one of them, the network will have a gap in coverage. This site is therefore a critical component in Triton's and AT&T's network. Whenever possible, Triton locates on existing towers and structures to minimize the number of communications towers in a particular area. Triton has located a number of existing structures in the Roanoke Valley on which it will install one of its facilities. Triton has also considered and rejected a number of other locations and collocation possibilities either because of unavailability, for geographic or technical reasons, or because such locations were too close or too far away from existing or proposed tower locations in other parts of the Roanoke Valley. A list of all such locations is attached hereto. Triton's Radio Frequency (RF) engineers have identified the area that includes this property as a necessary location for antennae in order to provide uninterrupted service coverage to the citizens and business community in this part of the County. THE PROPERTY: The property is currently being used as the Good Shepherd Church. Triton has leased a 1225 square foot portion of the property located behind the church from The Trustees of the Good Shepherd Church, the owner. REQUEST: Triton requests that a special use permit be issued to permit the construction, operation and maintenance of a 120 foot monopole with antennae at this location. PROPOSAL: Triton has filed its detailed concept plan with this application which describes the proposed telecommunications facility. The improvements include a new 120 foot monopole with 9 panel antennaes and aself-contained equipment enclosure located on a 8' 6" x 10' 6" concrete slab. 14722\I\531891.1 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & [V1C~RE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -3- r--~ The total area is 1,225 square feet, enclosed by a new 8 foot high chain link fence. Access to the site will be via the existing gravel road running behind the Church facility to Electric Road (Route 419). The total height of the structure, including antennaes, will be 122.5 feet above ground level. This is the minimum necessary to obtain and maintain adequate coverage in this area. The facility will be unstaffed, after construction, and will not require parking. The facility will be regularly inspected and maintained by a company employee on a monthly basis. It will not impact County services such as water and sewer, and it will require only electricity and telephone service which are available on site. The facility will not interfere with any existing emergency communications equipment, business or residential communications equipment, or radio or television reception. In addition, the facility will not impact traffic or schools. The proposed monopole will provide for 3 additional collocation opportunities, thereby minimizing the proliferation of other towers in the area. C(JI~E C®MPLiA~1CE: The property is located within a C-1 Office District. Section 30-53-2{B)(5) of the County Code permits by special use permit the use for a broadcasting tower, subject to the provisions of Section 30-87-2. Because this is a broadcasting tower, as defined by Ordinance 102798-12 amending Section 3-87- 2, the maximum height restriction otherwise imposed by Section 30-53-3(C) is not applicable pursuant to Section 30-80(A). The application for a special use permit is appropriate pursuant to Section 30-19-1, and this location and the proposed use satisfy the County's Use and Design Standards set forth in Section 30-87-2 amending the proffered conditions to permit the use and for issuance of a special use permit in this case: a. The use is compatible with existing pattern of commercial development in the area; b. The structure has been designed as a monopole and so as to reduce its height and otherwise to minimize any adverse impact on adjoining properties; 14722\ 11531891.1 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & NICORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -4- r--~ c. No demand on public utilities is created since it will need only electric power which is available on site; d. The use generates no traffic and does not increase the flood potential of the surrounding neighborhood; e. The use furthers the intent of Sections 30-28, 30-29-7 and 30-87-2 and the County's Comprehensive Plan by providing for the expansion of digital services to a critical business and residential area in a controlled fashion which will minimize the proliferation of telecommunications towers in the area; f. The use is not contrary to the public interest, but significantly furthers the public interest by expanding the availability of wireless personal, business and emergency services telecommunications, thereby enhancing the general welfare and safety of the community; g. The base of the monopole is not less than 40 feet from any residential structure on an adjoining lot; h. The telecommunications facility meets all of the County's minimum setback requirements; and The use otherwise conforms to the County's requirements. The intended use and design of the proposed monopole meets all of the requirements for issuance of the special use permit requested. The use is permitted by special use permit under Section 30- 53-2(B)(5) and satisfies all of the design standards required by Section 30-87-2. The subject property is particularly well-suited because of the general development pattern of the surrounding area, its consistency with permitted uses in the C-1 zoning district, and its design assuring negligible impact on the surrounding area. In addition, no other reasonable alternative locations exist, and the proposed monopole and its location and design have been chosen to protect the scenic beauty of Roanoke County while at the same time providing a structure capable of offering the level of service acceptable to AT&T and as mandated by the FCC. This site is designated Transition in the County's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use will have little or no adverse impact on the orderly development of highway frontage strips and land 1472211\531391.1 GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -5- r--~ use buffers between high and los density development in this segment of Electric Road (Route 419). This small project area will also not impact future land uses on this parcel. Triton PCS has been very conscious of the beauty of the Roanoke Valley when making decisions on where to locate future telecommunications installations. It is Triton's wish to become a good corporate neighbor and a contributing part of the future of Roanoke County. Accordingly, in order to build this vital network link, Triton requests that a special exception be issued in this case. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. If you have any questions concerning the application or otherwise, please call me at me at 983-9312. Yours sincerely, GE~,TRY LOCKS RAKES & MOORS ;' _ ~' G. Michael Pace; "Jr. ~ GMPjr/lgh Enclosure cc: Frank Shortall (w/encl.) John Slater (w/encl.) George Cumming (w/encl., via facsimile) Attachments: Application for Special Use Permit Concept Plan Development Application for Telecommunications Facility List of Adjoining Property Owners Photographic Simulations Propagation Studies List of Considered Alternate Sites Terrain Analysis (viewshed map) 14722\1\531891.1 ~_~ M1 E d ~~ 5 _ ~ Q ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ; ; ~ a ~~~ $$ a ~ 5g Ug~ ~V ~~~ ~~ ~ i ~~~I I ~ ~ ~ a ~, ~~~ ~ N ~ ~~ ~ ~ N ~ ~~~ I ~ ~ ~ m ? _ ~ O { C ~I ? " ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ Y ~ Y ~ n m e~\~ ~ V ~ 2 00C W 0 W~ a _i-~ ~ I oJ _ W o ~ wcn F u YI o' - ~ ~ ~ I ~ '~ '~,.~.~ E' W ~ ~ C~J N ~ -, r,~ ~ d ~! ~' `'~++ ;i d $ ~Q ~ ~~ ~~ rl~ _ 0 ~-gym '~ aa'°~ ~w~~ ~~~ ~ ,~ .. I' °,. ~`~"~ it ayfy Q,C~,~ ~ = n ~ ~ _ - a m ,~„ l-f, ~ ~~<~ X004 'N'` L ``` ~rlli cfl ~ .. (fF r~ 1 _~~ ~~ I rl!. ~~ ,:_ a ;_ ;''..fn_ a a ~ o '~.I. ~~a r 4 m . ~ = o i ...ohm oya m .a.U.^.. 1 ~ ~ m ,OLIO 5tl NN 31 Ntl NOliMl 7 3lOdONOW ,OZI M3N 11Y15N1 ~ _~'._ ~ LL ~ F ~: -.,,. aio° 0 0 3 a ; x u ~ z s zw ; ~7 '~ `~ I~ ~m i ~~c= . _ T ~ Q ~ D W Z ~' N `_ / ~ /~~ ?~.. v ~ ~ w^ i ~~ c ,L ,0-,l z~ ~+ ~m ' ~' ° z~ J2 w $ ~ U ~ ~ p U~w ~ ~ ¢w =cai °~~2i o i ~=~4 ~ um b~~ ~ a ~ a~ _ ~ f C , ~\ ~~g ~ ~ ~ ¢~ a 8 rc ~n" - ~ g ~~~ °w o 9 n g v m a U ~ 0 a -w m -+~ F mo a ~~ `''" ~ i ~ ~z 0 ~~ ~~ =o <p~ ° ~Qa p oz Z oo§ ~~ - uo"' O i a W .. a~¢ ~ a mUj m U e~W N~a g~~ ~_~ - z6oo ,~ m~a 9. u J Q ~ Z W44~ ~I~ w is p _u ~~z mo u w aw a ~ ~ ~ ow ~~ ~ N~_y 1 0~ my a a~~-~ `.i¢u ~W~s aa~ ~ ~~< ~ ~ 0`3 xi ~ u ~~ %~ a- ~'~ ,Ian ~~. ~J ~~.~ gm waLL mm~~ N ~¢2 <w ~~~g \~! \~ /~ ~ ~ /~ i/~ ;; ~/ ~~~ o ~ o m ~ F--y ~ W lJ ' ~ Z U a n u U '^ f-% 0 Z~ Q~ti ~I ~~ a S Wz U Z~i W~yi i i ~ Y~il ~ ~ $ I ~I ~s i i ~I la ~„~ 6 i I ~ I j O $ r NI I ~~i I ~~ I L ? ~ ~ . _ .._ ..._ _.. .. ~.. _ .. ~_ L c^~ J~~ ~{ o I ~ I Z ~~ ~ d' I ~ h a ~ _ ~ d3 ~ z ~ 4. Y ~~ ~~ I ~ ~ I l ~- ? I ~ W m UW~ ' {~ ;, i `K y ~ - ~ gr 3 I ( ~ up ~ ~ '; p _ ~ ~ ~ C O ~ U!d~ ~~~ ~ aa ~ < W w I ~ sag F F W ~ W = F- o w Z 'f ' Z i ~ 2 I I ~ ~ I ~I ^ ~ o~~ I ~ N ~ z ~ ~o -__.- ' ~ m I wI _- ,t rn . I I if // \ o $ = 1 6 I d W / ^N \ \ ~ / "w? P1 vVi ~s.', _ i~ , ~,. u ~,/ ~ `\ ' ~~~~ - -:~ I ~~ ~.` ~ .' .. ,\ j I ' ~ ~ ~\- L'' eta, ;g a \ ~ ~~ .24~b a. ~'~~, ~ ~ ~~. \ sr+ ,. .. - -- -- ~. ....~ 2' W ' ~~ ' egj9 ~~`9 '~-N~s ~ - ~,° ~gy,ri{-e ~ `:g~' :3~'y~_ ~~Cq ~ -~ - ~ iPo~Aa~ W I ~ ~ ., s~a~ ~ ~ Iw tae - ! L ~ tl ~ § .- ~ sa~Y~ ~~ ~Y ~ J I ~_ „ i ~~~y.. 33t" a~ 3b~N3~=-~ bb 0 1 °r e3 f ! s _"gWW W I b~g~g~ g S S s ~~ . o~ ; a . ~ i i l vVi I g s5a. 'WO ,'" s o d 3 ~' l ' e ~ I ${' ry „ b ~ o ~ p I ~ i 4 i .S °E° ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ F : I ;' I S fi ~ 5 ~ -ac: 5 5 l i= i li~j ~ I t I ~~ ~• I '~ _ Y k d:~F - ~ z ~~g_ S ~ ~ y~g~ ~e W~~ a ~~ gg gX I ~ o r r I ~ o = ~ ~ I ~ ' I ~ " m m E r~ ` 2 ~~ M1 ?6„°, w F Pr ~oo 0 00 ~ ~ , aW ~ o ~ ~ ~ b~8~~ ~ 3~~$a 3 ~~,:~ F °~ ~ ~° ~n h~= °~~~ a ` '" l ~ W < ~ I , , ~ a 7k ~4 ` ~ ~i a ag8° k - ~ <aWa ~ G~Wg^ ^~ ~ Y~ 3 mE ~I~ ~, ~~ g~~g ~ W~ ~ : ,~~ ~~a ~ = ~~59$k a~g~~~pW "~aW o "~ - ~ I Y z ~ a ~~~ 3~ I 'N ~, ~ w g w ~ .z m ~ ~3 3~^~ 8 ~-k ~~ e~ ~ 33ya~rk I= :d $ 3~S 3°s 8 a S3 ~n-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `_ ~ jW W s ^ ~ ~5g~ ~~ I ' ~ aka ~ `3 o Fa 3 ~o3hs¢< ~ gg~' ( o ~ : 8 $'a p al . F- 'lo! 'izl I I gg ~; 3~3 ¢ W~ ~N i ~uaW~ 3o ~ x 8 ~~o ~ ~ W'`k'=W 3hm Jyb= ~b~g, b~a ge~"'k;•- W~23 ~ 8 Q v ~ ~~ ~ W ~o W^ ~w E- ~I FI i -' l l W= W ~ ~ ~~ ~ < d ~ s 3 ~og~ibuC o~WW~a`<= E2~ "c ~Y~ ~ ~ " ~ ~_~ r-. ~ ~ R' ° i tR ZI i iw ' $ ~ "a ~ T y d y ~ b s = ~ z"~~~od3 ~?~gtk~~ ~~b~=gk »€~ ~~ e =ti ., 9 W ~ ~ k ~ 4 ~ ~ ~8~ b e VI ~ ?~ _ u~ z I I~ W ~_ ~ _ g , ~ 4 ~ 3~ ~ g c Y $ k o a s a 5 3 ~ _ "' ~i W ~' d~~~$3 Y."J~~3~~~ g~$~ai ~~ I < W ¢I ,b ~ . ~' f-~ BROADCAST 'TOVl/ER PREAPPLICATION ` CONSt~LTATION CHECKLIST Applicant Name: Triton PCS, Inc. Date: 12/18/98 Consultant Staff Member: ~„ ~... BROADCASTING TOWERS AND ASSOCIATED ANTENNA PERMITTED BY RIGHT: Ne~N and replacement broadcasting towers and associated antenna not exceeding thirty (3G) feet in height and located ~r~ithin any commercial or industrial zoning district provided: al the proposed tower is a monopole type design; b) the general area or" the proposed tower is currently served by above ground utilities including electric power and te!ephor,e poles; and c) ail other use and design standards for the construction of the broadcasting tower and associated facilities are met. • Antennas may be installed on any existing structure within the County provided said antenna does not meet the de*mition of a broadcasting tower, does not increase the height of the existing structure more than ten (10) feet; and does not result in the structure and antenna exceeding the maximum structure heicht for that zoning district. Temporary towers erected for a period not to exceed twenty-one days. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION SHALL J3E REQUIRED AS PART OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A BROADCAST TOWER IN ADDITION TO SfiANDARD APPLJGATION REQUfREMENTS. ~9~~Ss^- L~si~q~a l iti es. l.~tiiities that are currently present on site: all Utilities required that are nct currently present on site: none Expected route of iini<age: Estimated noise .eve. in decibels: zero B_roadc~Zo~e~ -- Structure Type: ~ Monopole ` 'Lattice Tower ^ Guyed Tower ^ Stealth Design {description} ~ Other (description) Propcsed heicht of to~.ver excluding antenna: 120 feet Existing height cf surrounding tree canopy and/or buildings: See attached Construe:icn ma.eriai and tlnish of tower. see attached Specific tower location Material: Finish: see attached Longitude: " Lartude: ° Ground @!eVaiigr' n m231 Sea ~eVe! Of the prgDGSeg tOLVer Site: o se.. attached Tower has structural ability to accommodate: C One C Two $ Three other providers. ~~~~ Qf~.a~eEn~q~he.r~~~~.sAttg.eh ~~-osQ~cer see attache d r` C.Jmnl-DIreC:iOnai Antenna C Directional Pane! ^ Parabgiic Antenna L ~d~!hlp A:n[e.nna ^ Other (descriction) Material and finis. ~ of the proposed antenna(s). Material: Finish: Dimensions cf A.ntenna!s) - height l width /depth / ~ The following information must be submitted se~arateiy in either a written or mapped format. ^ fnfermation on he~n~ the proposed site relates to the applicant's existing communication system, includine X number of other sites within the Roanoke Valley, and- the location of 'the antenna at each site. see attached ~' A moo designative the specific coverage area(s) desired with any overflow areas denoted separately, -~ see attached A, list, with a reap, of all of the alternative sites considered or e~.~aluated to serve the area of this proposed v tower, includine other existing tower sites in the vicinity. This should include any co-locations considered and the specinc technical, legal or other reasons the other site;s;; were re;ected. see attached ^ Provide conceptual site pion drawn to scale, depictine the location of support structures, equipment X e,,^,c!osures, landscaped areas, fences, liehting, access, limits or' disturbed land, a~~reraee slope of the site, ownership and use of adjoining properties, etc. see attached Provide accurate, to scale, photographic simulations showing the re!aticnship of the proposed broadcast tower and associated antenna to the surroundings. Photographic simulations should include the relationships of any ne~.v or modified road or utility corridors necessary to serve the proposed broadcast tower 51Ie. see attached ^ Provide a computerized terrain analysis showine the visibility of the proposed broadcast tower and X antenna at the requested height and location. If new or modified road, access or utility corridors are proposed, the terrain analysis shad also show the visibility of these ne~.v or modified lea*.ures. see attached (to follow) L`=! Provide detail shut fcr broadcast tower structure. see attached Provide an acc ~ ~- ura:e de..~ription and photograph of the proposed tower structure, inc,udira antenna. see attached a Provide detail sheet or any antenna or devices attached to to~Ner including electrical and mechanical spec,fications for antenna systems. see attached I~Ote~ I hereby c~rtiry that: All required submittal's to the FAA, as required by Zoning Ordinance Section 3C-87-25~. =. have been submitted. A. required on-site balloon or comparable test will be pel-formed on the dates of Z- g~' for the Plannirc Commission public hearing scheduled for 2/2/99 of 2 23 ~ p p ~ ,and on the dates fcr the Eoard of ~.u e,rvisors ublic hearing sche~uled r"cr _ 2/23/99 1, the apoilcant; shall be responsible for all fees associated with the fiiinc or'the aNcilcat/cn. inc,'uding the reasonable cost of any independent anaiysl's dee,~ned necessa.~y by the Count~i to verify the~~~r thefae~~~dcast tower. Signature: ~ Date: 12/18/98 G. Michael Pace, ., s r Attorney for Triton PCS, Inc. LIST OF ALTERNATE SITES 1887 Electric Road, Roanoke County, VA 24018 ~~ 1. Good Shepherd Lutheran Church 2. Allstate Insurance Co. -collocation opportunity, but failed because lease not granted by Allstate 3. Showtimers Property (Roanoke City) -failed because not zoned properly, direct adverse impact on adjoining residential neighborhoods I4722\1\531941.1 ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Triton PCS,Inc./Good Shepherd Special Use Permit 6'7.18-1-3 ", t . :..:.:....:.::.:.:::::::::.:.:::: i:::::::;:isi:::::::::;:::.:::;;;;;:;:.:;;::::::::;::::;;;;;::::::;.:;: .:~.:~::::::;;::::,:. ~;::y - - ~~'~°;;~;~>~~'-~'";;iiiiii':;i;;i;ir.i;'i;ii `; isisij5i°-i:::i: c°i:iii ~i'~i'~'~i ~'~: '3',, .... ......... i Proposed Zoning: ~ ~ ~ ~~ sra,~~ usz o~iy i Use Type: Proposed Land 'Jse: i d d` ~ Does the parse[ meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements or" the requeste ~stric:. {ES ~; NO IF NO, A VA=,IA.~~ICE .S REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parse! meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YEE ~% NQ. IF NC, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST . If rezoning request, are conditions being prcrfered wit? this request? YES NO I I ~~arfanC2,0i.SeCUCn(SI Of iiie RCanOiCe GCUnt`J Zoning GrdlnanCe In CrGc. t0: (nation complete? Please chec!< if enciesed. APPLICATION W(LL NOT 8E ACCEP ED lF %='N~' CAF Is the app T!-IESE ITEMS ARE M1SSiNG GR INCGlv1PLr T E. ,415 'J R/5,% V R/9 V ~ Consultation ~ v A, glicatign fee ~ 8 11'2" x 1 1" conc..pt pian p. ~« Proffers, if applicable ~f Application a's". Metes and bounds description Ad'aining prapery cvvners ~,j Justification Water and sa~wer application _~ 1 l hereby cer~ity that 1 am either the owner of the Rroperty or the owner's agent or contract ;ourcnaser and am acting with the knowledge a~ndc;yns~e/nr or" trre owne Owner's Signature: " ""~^~~~ ~~ -'~-- t Wayne Brown Estimated Construction Cost: $ 47,000 ~g Impact on Neighborhood: I don`t see much of an impact factor other than cleaning up the site and improving the way the land looks now, Vehicles and equipment will not be in plain view from the roadway. I have spoke to and have been approached by several people in the area and they all have been happy to heaz_that a golf course might be built in this area. As far as any year round activity, I won't know until I see how responsive play will be. Future Plans: I have no future plans for expansion. I will be using most of my land for these nine holes. Traffic: On the subject of traffic in the area, I don't feel that rnore than fifteen to twenty more vehicles a day would travel to the site and some of these are likely to already be driving by to and from home, Most golfers travel in pairs or groups, Reason for Zoning Request: Some of this property is already zoned for A.R. A11 that is needed is to move the zone line to the property line. If you have any questions or need any additional information please call me at 342-4022. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Randall Wayne Brown ,c-~ ~ ~ .,~~ ,_ ;~;..., ,. ~::~~~ ._~, .. t ' -. .'~-..'w.~~ ~.. - ~~ \,, '`.~;; ~~\ ~~ ~) I~ ,:/. j ! i ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ /J ! i ~ , ,:%% i •~~ ~, ' F-g ~~ ! 1 ~~ ` r t~ ~ ~~ / ~ ~_ ~ ,,. ~. ~ ,. ~~ `, ~ 1, ,~ . ~ ~~ - ~. ~ ~ .~..: ` '~"~.. ~- ~~ ~~~ ~ ,/ .` r !~ / , j ~, - ~~_ ~ , it` \ a. ~.~\ '~, . l~ -~~ ~ `. ~`,y l •~~ ~°r~owRuC7~,iut~ -S„h ~ ¢,4n 7 a i •~^'~ ~~~~~ ,.~.~~~ ~.~« Fg F& ~~c~~~c ~~ r ~~ ~~~ F S NORT~1 ,,,._ '" t DEPA~4'I"~NT CF PT_~A1vTN ~ NG BROWN S i T E ,- ~_• ~~ zoN?rre TAX MAP tt 79,02-1-23,2 ~ '" ~~ ,~ ;. ~. For staff use only F" / 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 received;; received by: application fee: PC/SZA da;e: _ Y/ `/ ~' placards issued: 805.dace.: Case Number: ,.. Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, wi::th, and frontage requirements of the requested dis,riot? YES X NO IF N0, A Vr,'1~.`JCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria fcr , ~~ requested Use Type? YES x NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffe~~~ with this request? YES NO X 't~ '' II`~~I Variance of Section(sl of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in crier to: r Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL MOT EE ACCEPTED IF ?.~`Y OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ws v rvs ~ v Consultation 8 1 /2" x i i" concept plan Application ~ Metes and bounds description Justification %~>~ Water and sewer application ., ws v Application fee Proffers, if appiicabie Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that l am either the owner of the property or the o~~ner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and,c~nsent of tn~wner. Ov~:ner's Signature: CORPORATE TECHNOLOGY PARK REZONING REQUEST OCTOBER 24, 1997 Executive Summary F9 This report is a request to rezone the former Glenn-Mary Farm Site to a Planned Technology Development district (PTD) to support the development of the Corporate Technology Park. The park will contain four major districts: Corporate Village District A village center with businesses, support services, and commercial buildings Corporate Circle District Corporate buildings with select commercial business ventures adjacent to the Corporate Village Technology District Progressive R&D and technological manufacturing entities which encircle the Corporate Village and Corporate Circle Lone Eagle District Residential and commercial mix for self-employed or limited small business endeavors A Preliminary Concept Plan for the site was developed by the citizens and staff in a five month Community Visioning Process under the facilitation of a Design Team of architects and engineers. Concurrently, the Design Team used the same five months to qualify the site. Copies of the subconsultants reports are included in the. attachments. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment found no~major environmental obstacles to the purchase and development of the land. A Preliminary Subsurface Exploration Report determined the site suitable for development and that costs should be "normal" in the areas investigated. Adequate public water and sewer facilities exist, or are planned to be extended, at locations near the boundary of the site. A preliminary review of current and proposed stormwater, runoff impacts and water quality issues was conducted. With proper design, stormwater management and flow quantity can be controlled while the established stream ecosystem and drainage pattern can be utilized to lessen the impact of thermal loading and achieve some natural water quality management. The property is completely surrounded by a minimum 100' landscape buffer that will provide screening for adjoining residential neighborhoods. A Phase I Archeological study of the site was performed to identify historical resources. Several test digs revealed some artifacts with one area is eligible to receive further research if warranted by the State of Virginia. A preliminary traffic study focused on the alternative access road options, traffic projections, and existing road upgrades as a result of the projected traffic counts and safety concerns. Executive Summary Page Two F-9 The Corporate Technology Park's preliminary concept plan and design guidelines incorporate innovative and site responsive development methods. It allows the opportunity to develop a carefully crafted and rigorously controlled business park which protects and enhances natural resources, while facilitating high-quality, leading edge, mixed use development. Corporate Technology Park will provide Roanoke County the opportunity to become a part of the technological growth of this portion of the state. ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER Cam- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING QUITCLAIM AND RELEASE OF A 20- FOOT WATER LINE EASEMENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF BELMONT COURT AND LOCATED BETWEEN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, SECTION 2 AND LOTS 12 AND 13, BLOCK 1, SECTION 2 OF TRIPLE CROWN ESTATES IN THE VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Gk~~~u~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is the first reading of the proposed ordinance to authorize quitclaim and release of water line easement within the boundaries of Belmont Court located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2 and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates. BACKGROUND: By deed of July 15, 1987 recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, Deed Book 1271, Page 1482, the Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County a 20-foot water line easement extending in a southerly direction from Carson Road through the Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals property. In August 1994, C&D Builders, Inc., the owner of the property, subsequently subdivided the property by plat showing Section 2, Triple Crown Estates, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office, Plat Book 17, Page 123. The 20-foot water line easement described above lies within Section 2 and is beneath Belmont Court. ~r' - In order for Belmont Court to be accepted into the State Secondary Road System, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requires that the right-of-way be free and clear of any third party rights or encumbrances. The quitclaim and release of the subject portion of the water line easement to the Commonwealth of Virginia would be subject to VDOT issuing a permit for such facilities and the condition that the facility located within the 50-foot right of way, with the boundaries of Belmont Court located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2 and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates, may continue to occupy the street in the existing condition and location. The release would be for as long as the subject section of Belmont Court is used as part of the public street or highway system; however, said easement would not be vacated by the Board and would revert to the County in the event of abandonment of the street or highway. The Utility Department is in agreement with this request. Adopt the proposed ordinance authorizing the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents for quitclaims and release of the water line easement within the boundaries of Belmont Court located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2, and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates. 2. Decline to adopt the proposed ordinance, which would result in Belmont Court remaining a private road. Roanoke County staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the proposed ordinance as provided in Alternative 1. MITTED BY: APPROVED BY: J Arnold Covey, Direc r Elmer C. Hodge Department of Community De elopment County Administrator 2 G-1 ACTION VOTE Approved ()Motion by: Denied () Harrison Received () Johnson Referred () McNamara To () Minnix Nickens c: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney GARY ROBERTSON, UTILITY DEPARTMENT No Yes Abs 3 ~-f ~~~'- NOFTH - F~/SNN / Sfff fAS ,3. 1 `Ore pB J4fNw, rfq /~/ p~\ ., p` u, p~E' ~q AoNFSS = ~ m 176 ~Or / / P SF q~lY C _. - I,ISLM: :U' W>rEF.MC ~. V• N, 31. 9 .B ,~ ON FS ART ..... Fay:4E!+` SEF D8 '•2'%I ~y ~~W~~~ry ryg ~boLOT 8 ~ ~ a OAT 5 /ti.J or ° ' ~~~ // / , ,' ° 9' - 3 g° J°js~ `° /'`XS 20' waterline Easement to be 2 0J ~ 8' ~~\ >.lr ~~. _ ,.yh, / OO E r Pl / ~F q4/N° 1~ ~'~F ° ~ ~~i t s; ,~%,o• . `'~1\/%~ ~`'~° ~6 4 ~ eo°13j. / / p° ~.SfF SE ~4q~ "Quitclaimed and Released ~e ry~ j,\µ11\O6 7>• M ~ NEW IS'. -- > ,o°' ~° / ,1 .1/ MfF ~ } a / >r en s ~ ~,£ ~\ r, EA:E4ENr ~ a, ~ v\~ b LOT 3 % oc 40 ~ s / -TRIPLE CROWN ESTATES p 0.220 AC. ry > ;Err On ~ P'. t ~Q°,`' a ti r~~ ~~\ ^ ~p ~ 3 B e s `>e \ g~P M P„ &/o ~o ~ ~ r ~ ' '~ • v e 1 ` c^ [p ` \ ~ 'G `MOj,/ O JS O k j r yy ry . y9. / / ~ I .... ~.. LOT . \ \ ?e 9e_ ~\ 4J~' COIJLT \ tiI a LOT 1 P '-' ' ~ . `or 6 ` O 0.446 C `}1 ~U uL \\\\ ~ ~~~ _~y,\ 6\7O. `TS•fhh'' Sp,R Q' 3J ~` `s _ `r 02.4 AG. JJSi` ~i ~~~2i R(OCkz ~ 11 6J16. /,,~.1 ~,\ LOT 8h ~Wrv~ .max BOOS>o. r'w h° ~ \,LI_" f It1 a:-:. .76 t.1:~ ate) i I N 7]•10'0}` E ~ ~ ~ Y 0~~ f.. f4S Oq4 Ig.04~. ¢ m' 2'31 SF.' i~- I>"' ~ ~' 3 MB 5 fMr4 LFrr E- 1 Y u ,<9 \ ~ LOT 9 p ~ ~-SS,2. ' '~ ~ ~ LOT 1 91. T y \ G N 19'CS'1 0.722 AG o / . ;} 42' , w BLOCK 2 o s~o Ac. 3 +.l a 5J -~ ". :rl~ n ^ /e f ' ~.r \ ~ 6t 64' ~ ~ T ~,' - ~bL'p~,1 AOc~ / ~.. `_."__ _ _..". G'I SS ~.~ JI S 19'24':5' W w e1> .~ 'P '•°, ry~/ ~ - hti ! - ____-~ ~ ~. n ` ~ , I LOT 2 291.-~ .\ `\ ~ gFhs~~ ' aJl ~ /• f>/LOT 11 ~~ ;v4 r~ ~. ~ I ` ~_ PI _ J r .vt \ 15 uRANAGE ~• Sf['O O.p s `''~31 "/1 0 )13 AC ~ ~ LGT 13 3 4 N ~~. ''.f,."l 6 ~N 0 yPPP{iUY D' ~ J4 AC y~l T ~ f~a \\ . \ p S Cr f ,~qr SYS OO o \ " / 7 ~~ oDEa pA N / LOTS 12~ ~''" .• \ ~ y %+ ,~ ~gl 1 _ ~ ;~ _ ~ / y _ 1 1 2'4Fi, SfN p\ __ _~.7 >C3 AC / rL r'ti ,\ ^~> / 90 "r ~4 `` ~fw ~ '00' > > x~\~ ~9'n ~ ) iO n N X04. 0.. c. 65 J.' 6i.5B'.. g REMA!VINO PRnPERiv CE \:. '~Cq ~Afq AM;Sq ee c\'\ %~o ~/ ZZ'±89". •, E~ \6S ~ P~ v (,. 1 ry VEP 20 WR'Ek L:N;-~, I \C k D BUILDERS, INC. l _ _leoer tir_ _ _ _ _ _ _,`~ ~ 05 r ~ ~ 21.) PC.i _ ~ S _ / S IJ'04'}p' W 2094' ~'''pp 'NEW l'ARIABLE MfOJM ~1 _ \ . 7 / - _ - - - - - - -~ yr~ ~' SANITARY $E WER ANC % f `~ '~ DR AIN •GE EASE4ENr j= \` r "ny.v NEW 20' DR AIN 4GE a 5EG4EN r5 GE CJL-OE-SAC' ~ ~ '~",,. Sf., yC, yf #St• EASE1AFNi 70 HE ~/ER7 10 AOJCaNMG , OYMER UPON EXTENSION ,` ' ANO OEUICAiION OF Proposed Waterline Easement to be Quitclaimed and Released shown in Gray Description: A 20 foot waterline easement (Deed Book 1271, Page 1482) within the boundaries of Belmont Court and located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2 and Lots 12 & 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates. ROANOKE COUNTY Quitclaim and Release of a 20 foot Waterline Easement DEPARTML'NT OF' within the boundaries of Belmont Court and located COM1YfUNITY DEVELf1PML'NT between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2 and Lots 12 & 13, Block 1, Section 2 of Triple Crown Estates G-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING QUIT-CLAIM AND RELEASE OF A 20- FOOT WATER LINE EASEMENT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF BELMONT COURT AND LOCATED BETWEEN LOT 1, BLOCK 1, SECTION 2, AND LOTS 12 AND 13, BLOCK 1, SECTION 2, OF TRIPLE CROWN ESTATES IN THE VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WI~REAS, in order for Belmont Court to be accepted into the state secondary road system, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requires that the right-of--way be free and clear of any third party rights or encumbrances; and, WHEREAS, VDOT has requested quit-claim and release of an existing water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, within the boundaries of Belmont Court and located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2, and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2, of Triple Crown Estates, being a portion of the easement acquired by deed recorded in Deed Book 1271, page 1482, and further shown on plat recorded in Plat Book 17, page 123, to the Commonwealth of Virginia, subject to certain conditions; and, WHEREAS, it will serve the interests of the public to have Belmont Court accepted into the state secondary road system and the release, subject to the issuance of a permit and other conditions, will not interfere with other public services and is acceptable to the Roanoke County Utility Department. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on February 23, 1999; and a second reading was held on March 9, 1999. ~-~ 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be released are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia for acceptance of Belmont Court into the state secondary road system by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 3. That quit-claim and release of the water line easement within the boundaries of Belmont Court and located between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2, and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2, of Triple Crown Estates, to the Commonwealth of Virginia, is hereby authorized subject to the following conditions: a. VDOT issuance of a permit for the water lines or facilities. b. The facilities located within the 50-foot right-of--way, between Lot 1, Block 1, Section 2, and Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Section 2, of Triple Crown Estates, may continue to occupy the street or highway in the existing condition and location. c. The release would be for so long as the subject section of Belmont Court is used as part of the public street or highway system. 4. That the subject easement is not vacated hereby and shall revert to the County in the event of abandonment of the street or highway. 5. That the County Administrator or an Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. G:~ATTORNEl'~VLHWGENDA~BELMONT.ORD 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: AGENDA ITEM: February 23, 1999 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 090997-5 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MOUNTAIN HEIGHTS WATER PROJECT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND ~.wr,,,~.-n( ~~7 Several residents in the Mountain Heights Subdivision petitioned Roanoke County for public water service. The residents in this subdivision have experienced poor water quality as well as a shortage of water. Letters were mailed to the residents in the Mountain Heights Subdivision on May 2, 1997. The purpose of these letters was to determine if a majority of the property owners were willing to pay $4,500 for water service. Upon review of the responses it was determined that there were enough participants to go forward with the project. On September 9, 1997, the Board adopted Ordinance 090997-5 which authorized the creation of and financing for the Mountain Heights Water Project. A "Project Service Area" was created for a period often years. Any owner of real estate within this service area could participate in and benefit from the public water extension by paying the sum of $3,155 toward construction costs plus the off-site facility fees applicable at the time of connection (presently $2,690). As an incentive for property owners participation, the Board approved a reduction in the off-site facility fee from $2,690 to $1,345 and provided financing for a maximum of 10 years at an interest rate of 8% per annum of the payment of their portion of the cost of extending the public water system to their properties. In order to benefit from these incentives, property owners had to elect to participate on or before December 9, 1997. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION This matter is once again on the Board's agenda due to a citizen request. Mr. Randy Grisso purchased a home in the "Project Service Area" at 1459 Mountain Heights Drive (Tax Map No. 35.04-1-22). in October of 1998. The previous owners had declined to participate in the water project. Mr. Grisso stated that the well on his property had failed and that on January 29, 1999, he requested connection to the County water system. The Utility Department connected Mr. Grisso to the County system on January 30, 1999. At that time Mr. Grisso requested financing of the connection costs. Section 22-82 (2) of the Roanoke County Code provides for landowners to make payments on the off- U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\MNTHGTS.RPT -~ site facilities fee portion of connection costs in 36 monthly installments, under certain terms and conditions, one of which is an increase in the fee of 20 percent. In Mr. Grisso's case, the off-site facility fee is $2,690 and a 20 percent increase would increase that amount to $3,228. Mr. Grisso would be eligible to finance this amount ($3,228) under Section 22-82 (2) of the Code. However, the construction cost of $3,155 cannot be financed under this Code section. Mr. Grisso has requested that he be allowed to finance all of his costs to connect to the County water system under the same terms and conditions as the other property owners in Mountain Heights Subdivision. The attached ordinance amends Ordinance 090997-5 to allow a new property owner in the "Project Service Area" who applies with the Utility Director within three months of the acquisition of their property to participate in this public works improvement project. This ordinance would allow Mr. Grisso to participate, to receive a reduction in the off-site facility fee, and to finance his cost to connect over a 10-year period at 8% interest. FISCAL IMPACTS: This amendment will reduce the incentive to participate in the early stages of these utility extension projects, it will result in additional carrying costs to the County, and it will delay the cost recovery for this Project. At this time there is a loan payable to the General Fund of $70,055 for this project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Board directed staff to provide a means to assist Mr. Grisso. This amendment provides relief to Mr. Grisso. Respectfully submitted, ~~ County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Vote No Yes Harrison Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens Abs U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\hIIdTHGTS.RPT 2 r ~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 090997-5 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MOUNTAIN HEIGHTS WATER PROJECT WHEREAS, by Ordinance 090997-5 adopted on September 9, 1997, the Board of Supervisors authorized the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project, namely Mountain Heights Water Project; and WHEREAS, certain terms and conditions were imposed by this ordinance upon property owners in the Project Service Area wishing to participate in this project, one of which was that they elect to participate on or before December 9, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Board desires to expand those terms and conditions to include new property owners in the Project Service Area who acquired their property after the December 9, 1997 deadline stated in Ordinance 090997-5; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 23, 1999; the second reading was held on March 9, 1999. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That Ordinance 090997-5 authorizing the creation of and financing for the Mountain Heights Water Project be amended to provide that new property owners in the Project Service Area may apply and receive the benefits provided in Ordinance 090997-5 provided the new property owners apply with the Utility Director within three (3) months of their acquisition of the property. 2. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as maybe necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved the by the County Attorney. 3. That this Ordinance shall take effect on and from the date of its adoption. U:\WPDOCS WGENDA\UTILITY\MTNHGTS.ORD ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of an Ordinance Approving the Exercise of an Option to Purchase Agreement with Salem Office Supply, Inc., for Property Located at 400 East Main Street, Across from the Roanoke County Courthouse, in Salem, Virginia COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~~y~~~i,~~~ BACKGROUND: At the January 12, 1999 meeting, the Board of Supervisors authorized staff to place a $3,000 option fee (to be applied to the purchase price) on the Salem Office Supply, Inc. property located across from the Roanoke County Courthouse at 400 East Main Street in Salem, Virginia. The property is a lot approximately 17,754 square feet with a two story building currently used as a showroom, office, and warehouse operation. By exercising the option, we plan to acquire the property by May 1, 1999, renovate the space for office use and storage, and occupy the building in the summer of 1999. MarshWitt, Architects and Engineers, has worked with staff to design the space for use and to determine the improvements required. Attachment A shows the anticipated costs for the acquisition and renovation of the Salem Office Supply Building. There were two areas that the estimates of the A/E were significantly different from staff estimates. The electrical service is currently a 60 amp service and it is suggested to upgrade this to a 400 amp service to meet current code requirements for an office configuration. The mechanical system including the HVAC system must be completely replaced because of the age of the system being beyond the suggested life based on industry standards. Also, the existing system only served the front half of the building. The architect projected the renovations to cost $506,720. This includes the cost to replace the roof on the back half of the building which is approximately 15 years old and in good condition. This cost of renovation is compared to the staff estimate of $425,000. We plan to locate the Court Service Unit and related grant function offices in the new space, part of the Sheriff's Office, and storage for the Clerk of Circuit Court. We will still have some room for future expansion. Moving the Court Service Unit out of the Courthouse is necessary to allow the improvements previously approved by the Board of Supervisors. These improvements include the relocation of the Sheriff Administrative offices and the demolition. of the Guy House and Sheriff Annex building. The demolition will allow the creation of much needed parking for the Courthouse complex. The purchase price for the Salem Office Supply property is $325,000. The consultant's estimated cost for renovations is $506,720 with an additional $20,000 for related fees and expenses. It is suggested that the $150,000 previously set aside for the jail expansion be reappropriated to this project. $620,000 is available in the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance (current balance is $631,042.93). The balance of $81,720 is requested to be appropriated from the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the General Fund. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the Second Reading of the attached ordinance authorizing the exercise of the option to purchase the Salem Office Supply property to be renovated to accommodate the office space needs in Salem and appropriate the monies necessary to carry out the project. 2. Do not approve the purchase of the Salem Office Supply property. The County will then need to authorize the rental of office space for the Court Service Unit. This action will allow the space within the Courthouse to be improved to meet the needs of the offices remaining on the site. The estimated annual rental for the space of the Court Service Unit is $30,000 and an additional $5,000 will be required to move to the facility (phone line, computer lines, etc.). FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the purchase and renovation of the Salem Office Supply building is estimated at $851,720. Jail expansion project fund of $150,000 will be reappropriated, $620,000 will be appropriated from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance, and the balance of $81,720 is suggested to come from the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the General Fund. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative 1 to authorize the approval of the second reading of the ordinance authorizing the exercise of the option to purchase agreement for the Salem Office Supply building and to appropriate the monies necessary to complete this project. Respectfully submitted, Appro d b hn M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator 2 ~-{- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Harrison Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens 3 Attachment A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE ~{-I BUILDING RESTORATION /RENOVATION COSTS AREA 1 Abatement 8800 2 Demolition 1 3 Electrical Service Upgrade 19110 4 Mechanical Systems Replacement 19110 5 Plumbing Systems / Restrooms 13710 6 Roof Replacement 9000 7 Sprinkler System 19110 8 Floor Levelling 9000 9 Exterior Wall Repairs 1 10 Window Replacement 47 11 Interior Wall (shell) Renovation 8000 12 Suspended Ceiling System 13410 13 Interior Lighting 140 14 15 16 Contingency 1 17 UNIT COST PER TOTAL sf $ 1.00 $ 8,800.00 job $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 sf $ 3.51 $ 67,000.00 sf $ 7.00 $ 133,700.00 fixture $ 1.82 $ 25,000.00 sf $ 4.44 $ 40,000.00 sf $ 2.00 $ 38,220.00 sf $ 1.67 $ 15,000.00 job $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 ea $ 1,000.00 $ 47,000.00 sf $ 1.88 $ 15,000.00 sf $ 1.94 $ 26,000.00 ea $ 185.71 $ 26,000.00 $ 481,720.00 n/a $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 506,720.00 lbrrc /f-/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXERCISE OF AN OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH SALEM OFFICE SUPPLY, INC., FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 EAST MAIN STREET, ACROSS FROM THE ROANOKE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, IN SALEM, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, by Resolution #011299-7, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County approved an Option to Purchase Agreement dated January 5, 1999, with Salem Office Supply, Inc., a Virginia corporation, for an option to purchase a 17,754 square-foot rectangular lot (66' x 269') located at 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia, identified on the Salem City Tax Map as Parcel #107-6-1 ("the Property"); and, WHEREAS, under terms of said agreement, the purchase price for the Property is $325,000.00, and the option must be exercised on or before March 5, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the agreement provides for settlement within 60 days from the date of the notice of exercise of the Option, or as soon thereafter as possible, but no later than Apri130, 1999; and WHEREAS, the property is necessary for use as additional office and storage space, and the funds are available in the Capital Fund; and, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 1999; the second reading was held on February 23, 1999. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to exercise the option to purchase from Salem Office Supply, Inc., the following described real estate, to-wit: /-/-/ All that certain tract or parcel of land, together with any improvements thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in the City of Salem, Vuginia, containing 17,754 square feet, more or less, and located on the south side of East Main Street, and bounded on the west by Strawberry Alley and on the south by East Calhoun Street, and more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the South side of East Main Street where the east line of Strawberry Alley intersects the South line of Main Street, and which beginning point is N. 77 ° 16' E. 263.3 feet from a point where the East line of College Avenue intersects the South line of Main Street (.3 of one foot West of the Northwest corner of the Salem Theatre Building) and which said beginning point is also S. 77° d16' W. 3 feet from the North west corner of the present brick building located on the herein conveyed lot; thence leaving Main Street and with the East line of Strawberry Alley, and with aline 3 feet from and parallel with the West side of said brick building located on herein conveyed lot, S. 13 ° 25' E. 269 feet to a point in the North line of Calhoun Street, N. 77° 16' E. 66 feet to a point, marked by South east corner of a building located on herein described lot; thence leaving Calhoun Street N. 13 ° 25' W. 269 feet to a point in the South line of Main Street, which said point is 3 feet East of the Northeast corner of brick building located on the within described lot; thence with the South line of East Main Street S. 77 ° 16' W. 66 feet to the place of BEGINNING; known as Lot 69, Old Town Plat. There is excepted from the above description that certain 10 foot strip of land which was conveyed by Carlos G. Bowers and Maria Cristina Bowers to the Town of Salem by deed dated January 31, 1953, and of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 485, page 513. BEING the same property conveyed to the Grantor by deed from Carlos G. Bowers and Maria Cristina Bowers, his wife, dated December 11, 1975, and of record in the Clerk's Office of the City of Salem, Virginia, in Deed Book 40, page 658. Said real estate is further shown and designated upon the Salem City land records as Tax Parcel Number 107-6-1, and having a street address of 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia. 2. That the sum of $620,000.00 is hereby appropriated from the Capital Fund and $81,720.00 is hereby appropriated from the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the General Fund for the acquisition of this real estate and related expense. In addition, $150,000.00 is reappropriated from the Jail Expansion capital project to this capital project. 2 h-/ 3. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is 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, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. G:~.ATTORNEY~VLH~AGENDA~SALEMOFF.ORD 3 ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER ~f AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 SUBJECT: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS -ADVISORY COUNCIL The one-year term of Thelma Ihrig will expire March 31, 1999. 2. COMMISSION FOR SENIOR AND PHYSICALLY CHALLENGED CITIZENS Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss has received resignations from Betty Dangerfield and Nancy Hall who represent the Cave Spring Magisterial District on this Task Force, and these representatives need to be replaced. There is no set term for these appointments. Additionally, Wilton B. "Webb" Johnson recently passed away. While Mr. Johnson lived in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, he was appointed by Supervisor Bob Johnson. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ~~ Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ACTION VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Harrison _ Denied () Johnson _ Received () McNamara- Referred () Minnix _ To () Nickens _ 1 ~ J~ 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 RESOLUTION 2399-2 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for February 23, 1999, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 3, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes -January 23-24, 1999, January 26, 1999. 2. Request from Social Services to increase County vehicle fleet for Welfare Reform, Phase II. 3. Request to appropriate monies for Child Day Care Programs for the Department of Social Services. 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 Nickens to adopt the Consent Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 1 A COPY TESTE: ~• Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Betty R. McCrary, Director, Social Services John M. Chambliss, Assistant Administrator Brent Robertson, Finance Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance John Willey, General Services ~.~ January 26, 1999 61 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 26, 1999 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January, 1999. N RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bob L. Johnson, Vice Chairman Harry C. Nickens (Arrived 3.:04 p.m.), Supervisors Fenton F. "Spike" Harrison, Joseph McNamara, 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 Supervisor Minnix. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. January 26, 1999 63 worker in the Social Services Department ;and WHEREAS, Joan A. Nelson retired from Roanoke County, as a Senior Social Worker on January 1, 1999, after thirty two years and 6 months of services; and WHEREAS, Joan A. Nelson has focused her career on serving children in foster care and adoption, and has been recognized as an expert in adoption services for the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, Joan A. Nelson, through her employment with Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life for its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to JOAN A. NELSON for over thirty two years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Auoroval of the 1999 Board Appointments to Committees; Commissions and Boards (Mary H Allen, Clerk to the Board A-012699-2 Supervisor Nickens announced that he was no longer a member of the VACo Finance Steering Committee and asked that this committee be deleted. There was a discussion on the School Construction Advisory Committee and Supervisor Johnson suggested that the committee be abolished if there are no meetings by April 1, 1999. Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the Board appointments with Supervisor Nickens deleted as a member of VACo Finance Steering Committee. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson January 26, 1999 65 The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 3 t?equest from Schools to appropriate $889.84 Goals 2000 educate America Grant for technology training. (Dr Jane James Director of Technology) A-012699-4 Dr. James advised that this grant was received under the Goals 2000 Educate America Grant and the funds will be used for technology training. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the grant. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 4. Request from Schools to appropriate $39 084 29 Goals 2000 Educate America Grant to purchase Windows 98 Computers (Dr. Jane James, Director of Technology) A-012699-5 Ms. James explained that these funds will be used to purchase 31 computers for secondary schools to be used for research in the library media centers. January 26, 1999 6r1 3 First reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 lectric Road Windsor Hills Magisterial District upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church 4 First reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 40 foot addition to an existing monopole towers located at 4135 West Main Street, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (West Main. 5 First reading of ordinance to rezone 3 77 acres from C-1 Conditional to C-2 conditional to construct a restaurant located on the north side of Electric Road, east of Colonnade Corporate Center II. Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Blue Ridge Cafe, LC. IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance. authorizing the acquisition of real estate for the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project to reduce the number of structures in the Carvin Creek Floodplain (George Simpson, Assistant Director of CommunitX Development) Mr. Simpson explained that the Board of Supervisors held a work session on December 15, 1998 on the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project. Drafts of the proposed acquisition policy and purchase agreements were given to the Board members at the work session. The Board later agreed to accept a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to purchase flood-prone homes in the Sun Valley/Palm Valley area of Roanoke County. The purpose of the grant is to reduce the number of structures located in the floodplain and subject to flooding damages. FEMA is funding this January 26, 1999 ~~ NAYS: Nane 2 First reading of ordinance to vacate quitclaim and release the maior portion of a 15' sanitary sewer easements across property of Cave Spring Baptist Church located in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) Mr. Covey reported that the petitioner, Cave Spring Baptist Church, has requested that the Board vacate, quitclaim and release a major portion of the sanitary sewer easement to eliminate the encumbrance. The Utility Department advised that the sewer is not expandable, and is of no benefit to the County. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for February 9, 1999. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing the conveyance of Well Lot #1 in Section 1, Campbell Hills to Thomas, Ltd (Paul Mahone Coun Attor e 0-012699-6 January 26, 1999 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-012699-7: R-012699-7 d Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012699-7 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for January 26, 1999 designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes -January 4, 1999. 2. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission. 3. Acceptance by the Police Department of a grant from Bureau of Justice Assistance for Data Imaging.. 4. Acceptance by the Police Department of a V-Stop grant from the Department of Criminal Justice for prevention and investigation of violent crimes against women. 5. Acceptance of Carlsbad Circle and a portion of Bloomfield Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. January 26, 1999 73 of Interstate 81. Mr. Hodge suggested February 9, 1999, or March 9, 1999. IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. David Courey, 3419 Ashemeade Dr SW * suggested that the County consider changing to at-large elections instead of election by magisterial district to eliminate the sectionalism that he feels currently exists in the County. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Minnix moved to receive. and file the following reports. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. 1 .general Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5 Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investments and Portfolio Policy as of December 31 1998 6 Reuort of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program 7 Statement of Expenditures and Revenue for the month ended December 31, 1998 8. Accounts Paid -December 1998 it January 26, 1999 75 _t The work session lasted from 4:55 p.m. to 5:35 p.m. and was presented by Gary Robertson, Utility Department Director; Bob Benninger, Utility Department Assistant Director; and Diane Hyatt, Finance Director. Mr. Robertson presented an overview on the Tinker Creek Interceptor Sewer, the Roanoke River Interceptor Sewer and the Roanoke Regional WPCP. Ms. Hyatt reported on the funding for the Wastewater Treatment Project. She explained that the project has increased from $42 million to $66 million. She advised that Roanoke County's share is estimated to be $19,794,900 with funds coming from the State Water Quality Loan Program and the Sewer Fund Balance. She explained that they will come back to the Board for approval of a $5.7 million loan. 3. Review of 1998 Economic Development ~4ctivity Report. The work session was held from 5:35 p.m. to 5:55 p.m. The summary of 1998 economic development activities was presented by Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director: He reported on the economic development highlights for 1998, product development, business development, industrial, office and commercial construction, existing business and industry retention activities, the Industrial Development Authority, tourism development, and neighborhood development. IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION At 4:00 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to go into Executive Session following the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (3) acquisition of real estate for public purposes Merriman Site and purchase of water system; ~~ January 26, 1999 77 On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES Chairman Johnson announced that item 2 under the second readings and public hearings would be the first item heard by the Board. 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to allow adrive-through restaurant located at 3944 Brambleton Avenue. Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Grant Avenue Development. Inc (Tent' Harrington, Countv Planner 0-012699-11 Mr. Harrington advised that this request is for a Special Use Permit on a .75 acre parcel in order to operate a fast food restaurant with drive-through facilities. The proposed use is an Arby's Restaurant. The property is currently zoned C-2 Commercial and is designated Core in the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission recommended approval with a limitation on light pole height of 22 feet. Richard Baldwin, 3326 Westmoreland Avenue, expressed concern about the lighting and trash that will come into his yard. He also advised that the trash is picked up from the dumpster early in the morning which wakes up the neighborhood. Supervisor Minnix asked Ed Natt, attorney for the petitioner, if he was willing to fence the area to eliminate trash going into the neighborhood. Mr. Natt responded January 26, 1999 79 above grade, and the fixtures shall be designed and located to insure that no glare or direct light source is visible from residential properties. Lighting intensity shall be governed by Section 30-94 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (2) A six foot high stockade-type wooden fence shall be installed along rear (east) and side (north property lines. The purpose of the fence is to help insure that any litter from the site remains on the property. (3) The dumpster and enclosure shall be installed on the site in the general location shown on the concept plan prepared by Lumsden Associates, dated November 19, 1998. (4) Commercial trash collection (dumpster) service shall only take place between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p. m. 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. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance amended with conditions 2, 3, and 4 added, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance amending the Roanoke Count Procurement Code. Sections 17-86, 17-88, 17-90, 17-91, 17-91 1, 17-92. and 17-93, to increase purchasing limits (Elaine Carver, Director of Procurement) (CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 12, 1999 BECAUSE OF TIE VOTE) 0-012699-9 Mr. Mahoney reported that this item was carried over from January 12 because there was a tie vote and one member was absent. He explained that the Board held a work session earlier in the meeting to define the various purchasing limits in the %' ~ January 26, 1999 81 (Ord. No. 3350, § 2-57, 12-14-82; Ord. No. 85-33, § 1, 3-12-85; Ord. No. 22586-54, § 1, 2-25-86; Ord. No. 92292-8.j, § 1, 9-22-92) **** Sec. 17-88. Compliance with procedures; contracts not to be artificially divided so as to constitute small purchase. Any contract not exceeding ''~~t~~may be made in accordance with small purchase procedures; provided, however, that contract requirements shall not be artificially divided so as to constitute a small purchase under this division; and provided further that all procurements exceeding ~> shall require specific award by the governing body as made and provided by law. (Ord. No. 3350, § 2-15, 12-14-82; Ord. No. 85-33, § 1, 3-12-85) **** Sec.17-90. Purchases ~j~"`»"'~~~i (a) This section shall apply to purchases i~`.~1:the authority to make purchases from vendors of choice so long as the purchase price does not exceed '~ Contract requirements shall not be artificially divided so as to come within the provisions of this section. (Ord. No. 3350, § 2-59, 12-14-82; Ord. No. 101188-5, § 1, 10-11-88) Sec.17-91. Purchases <`~~;it?:e?tai'".{..,.<.......~,.r,.>:::.: .>,,,~~.y, (b) A using department or agency may make purchases -e# January 26, 1999 83 and 17-92. When, in the judgment of the purchasing agent, it is in the best interest of the county to use purchasing procedures other than those specified in sections 17-90, 17-91 ~~~~. ~~ '` `'''' and 17-92, he ma rescribe, after consultation with the count administrator suitable purchasing procedures. The rationale for such decision shall be documented and put on file in the purchasing agent's office. (Ord. No. 3350, § 2-61, 12-14-82) The effective date of this ordinance shall be January 26, 1999. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance with changes discussed in the work session, and with the final ordinance brought back under reports at meeting on February 9, 1999, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a private stable, located in the 4100 block of Garst Mill Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the aetition of David Sult. ferry Harrington. County Planner 0-012699-10 Mr. Harrington advised that this request was for a Special Use Permit to allow a private stable on a vacant R-1 zoned property . At the Planning Commission, Mr. Sult explained that he plans to have a fence at least 8 feet back from the bank of the stream; that he was agreeable to granting a greenway easement; that the barn will be constructed of wood; and that he would only be boarding his own horse. Lee Eddy, 2211 Pommel Drive, spoke on behalf of the Greenway -' January 26, 1999 SS (1) The number of horses shall be limited to three. (2) A wooden fence shall be constructed along the creek and shall be setback a minimum of 15 feet from the eastern boundary of Mudlick Creek to mitigate waste runoff. 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. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ~ Second reading of ordinance to rezone 11.93 acres from AG-3 to AR and obtain a Special Use Permit to allow a 9-hole golf course. located on the 2600 block of Rutrough Road. Vinton Magisterial District. upon the petition of Randall Wayne Brown. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-012699-12 Mr. Harrington reported that this request is for a rezoning and Special Use Permit for the construction and operation of a golf course on Rutrough Road. Mr. Brown plans to construct and operate a nine hole par three golf course. The Planning Commission first heard this request on December 1, 1998, and continued the request until January 5, 1999, to give Mr. Brown time to present more information on the proposal. The Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) Lighting shall be limited to the last three holes on the golf course; (2) Height of the light poles shall be limited to a maximum of 24 feet; and (3) Lights shall be turned off 1/2 hour after !I January 26, 1999 87 THE APPLICATION OF RANDALL WAYNE BROWN WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on November 17, 1998, and the second reading and public hearing were held January 26, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on December 1, 1998 and January 5, 1999; 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: On motion of Supervisor Nickens to deny the rezoning and special use permit, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 4 ,second reading of ordinance authorizing the conveyance of 0 251 acre (Tax Map Parcel 77 13-5-30) and 0.254 acre (Tax Maw Parcel 77-13-5-31) of real estate to the Home Depot. Inc. (Paul Mahonex, County Attorney} 0-012699-13 There was no discussion and no citizens to speak on this ordinance. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ORDINANCE 012699-13 AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF 0.251 ACRE PARCEL OF REAL ESTATE (TAX MAP PARCEL 77.13-5-30) AND 0.254 ACRE PARCEL OF REAL ESTATE (TAX MAP PARCEL 77.13-5-31) TO THE HOME DEPOT, INC. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of January 26, 1999 ~~ the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ORDINANCE 012699-14 AMENDING AND REENACTING A PORTION OF CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL, OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO INCREASE THE FEES FOR BOARDING OF ANIMALS WHEREAS, the County's new contract with the Roanoke Valley SPCA includes an increase in the daily boarding rate for any domestic animal to $8.75 and the current pickup fee for confined animals no longer covers a reasonable portion of the County's cost involved in impounding such animals; and WHEREAS, this ordinance amends a portion of Ordinance 121796-12.a which was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 17, 1996; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 12, 1999, and the second reading and public hearing for this ordinance was held on January 26, 1999. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows. 1. That Chapter 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL of the Roanoke County Code be amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 5-29. Same--Impoundment. (e) A pickup fee of twenty dollars ($20.00) for the first offense, thirty-five dollars ($35.00) for the second offense, and fifty dollars ($50.00) for the third offense shall F.!!4i:r,.};!.v.~'i'frl.!; ~ i:!_ ~.: r: i~v,;: fl..4i:.;:i%F::!.i':.; ~.:.:. ~:!:.; be im osed in addition to the normal board fee of 3~!"~#~~~€~~i'~`',v>`~`~ ~~~"~~~~: ~`~"<~ :>?< `>~' ~ ~~;:~~~<:: per day when any dog or cat or domestic animal is claimed by its owner or custodian. All such fees shall constitute a civil debt owning to the county and may be enforced against such owner or custodian by civil warrant, suit or action at law or other legal proceeding. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 6. Second reading of ordinance to vacate a portion of the right-of- way of LongX~dge Drive, and for that right-of-way to be combined January 26, 1999 91 subject portion of right-of-way of Longridge Drive, the Petitioners have requested that a portion of Longridge Drive, along the western property line of Parcel C-1, be vacated pursuant to §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, WHEREAS, the Petitioners have agreed that the vacated portion of right-of- way will be combined with and made a part of Parcel "C-1" (the stormwater management area); and, WHEREAS, this vacation, subject to the conditions herein, will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by §15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 12, 1999; the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on January 26, 1999. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a portion of Longridge Drive, (0.007 acre) extending along the western boundary of Parcel "C-1 ", being designated and shown as "Right-of-Way to be vacated..." on Exhibit A attached hereto, said right-of--way having been dedicated on the resubdivision plat entitled `Plat of Resubdivision for Frank D. Porter, III & Beverly V. Porter and the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia creating hereon "Longridge"' dated May 19, 1995, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 18, page 19, and being further shown on plat entitled "PLAT OF RESUBDIVISION FOR FRANK D. PORTER, III & BEVERLY V. PORTER CREATING THEREON `NEW LOTS 21A THRU 29A AND NEW PARCEL C-1'..." dated March 27, 1996, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 18, page 168, in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), subject to the following conditions: a. That fee simple title to the vacated portion of Longridge Drive shall vest in the owner of the abutting property (Parcel "C-1 ") as provided in §15.2-2274 of -the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and subject to the condition that the vacated area of land shall be added and combined, by deed or by plat, to said abutting property, in compliance with the Roanoke County Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances, and other applicable laws and regulations. b. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioner; and, 2. That the County Administrator, an Assistant County Administrator, or any County Subdivision Agent is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. January 26, 1999 ~~ members read it. He advised that he understood that the Committee considering charging for EMS calls is no longer functioning and asked Mr. Hodge to investigate. (4) He read a newspaper article on the Rising Star Camp and asked that staff make an unannounced visit to make sure that they are in compliance with the zoning. Terry Harrington advised that he had met with Mr. Pollack and his attorney, Ed Natt, and he was advised that there is a difference between league play and sports camp games. Supervisor McNamara• (1) He announced that the Board discussed snow removal on private roads and asked for an update. Mr. Hodge advised that a letter will be sent to property owners and renters explaining that they live on private road and providing them with a list of private snow removal contractors. Staff will also explain to the property owners the process for their reads becoming eligible for acceptance in the VDOT secondary road system. Supervisor Minnix: (1) He advised that there is again a business vehicle parked at Poplar and Martinell, only it is now covered with a tarp. He asked Terry Harrington to investigate. (2) He explained that he has received phone calls concerning special use violations pertaining to parking at a used car lot on Brambleton Avenue. He asked Terry Harrington to investigate. IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. James Gams: (1) He asked about the status of the proposed short-term rental tax. Mr. Hodge advised that staff is investigating the effect on local businesses and January 26, 1999 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 912699-16 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 member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting to 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 Caunty, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Johnson declared the meeting adjourned at 8:59 p. m. Submitted by, Approved by, Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Bob L. Johnson Clerk to the Board Chairman -~"- ~ January 23 - 24, 1999 45 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 23, 1999 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at Holiday Inn, Tanglewood, this being an adjourned meeting from January 12, 1999 for the purposes of a planning retreat. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bob L. Johnson; Vice Chairman Harry C. Nickens; Supervisors Fenton F. "Spike Harrison, Joseph P. McNamara, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator, Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator; Diane Hyatt, Finance Director; Anne Marie Green, Community Relations; Timothy W. Gubala, Economic Development Director IN RE: REQUESTS TO ADD OR CHANGE THE AGENDA There was a general discussion on various school issues including entrance January 23 - 24, 1999 47 to emphasize. IN RE: RECESS At 12:00 noon, Chairman Johnson declared a luncheon recess. IN RE: RECONVENEMENT At 1:10 p.m., Chairman Johnson reconvened the retreat. IN RE: TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION The following topics were discussed, and direction, if any, was provided by the Board of Supervisors ~ Non-School Capital Improvements Program a. Courthouse space and jail expansion -purchase of Salem Office Supply building Mr. Hodge advised that staff is working on the courthouse space and updated the Board of the purchase of the Salem Office Supply facility for additional courthouse space. b. Discussion of Roanoke River Greenway Plan (construction and funding) It was Board consensus to continue support for the Roanoke River Greenway. It was suggested that staff should investigate the possible impact of January 23 - 24, 1999 49 Mr. Gubala advised that they need budget figures from Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern prior to the budget process. b. Funding for Blue Ridge Parkway Orientation/Interpretation Center Supervisor Nickens updated the Board on the Orientation Center and advised that they now had a total of $900,000 funding for the project. c. What should be our balance of residential/non-residential development There was discussion on whether 75% residential -25% non residential is a realistic goal, given the available, buildable land in the County. Following discussion, there was no consensus to change the goal. d. C-ffect on local tax base of tax exempts land use taxation tourism, residential development Supervisor Nickens explained that he felt that the private sector should be encouraged to donate more towards tourism. e. 'tLeQional industrial parks with New River Vallev Bedford/Botetourt Counties f. Review incentive policies for public-private partnerships Supervisor McNamara suggested that in the future, staff discuss these incentives with the Board in Executive Session before requesting public approval. There was discussion on what types of businesses should receive public private partnership January 23 - 24, 1999 51 4 Review of current financial conditions and related issues for the next fiscal- year (Diane Hyatt/Brent Robertson a. Mid-year review of 1998/99 b Preliminary revenue projections for the next fiscal year c. ~gnificant issues that may im..._pact current and future ud ets d. Review of existing and proposed debt e. Changes in budget process to include performance measurements Mr. Robertson and Ms. Hyatt presented the proposed budget calendar for 1999, the mid-year expenditure analysis, and the revenue summary for 1998-99. They also presented the preliminary revenue analysis for 1999-2000 and potential funding issues to consider during the budget process, and presented the school revenue projections including proposals from the General Assembly. 5. 1.999 General Assembly Issues (Paul Mahoney a ~ladate on 1999 eneral Assembly ~ 599 funding c school construction funding Mr. Mahoney updated the Board on the General Assembly. He advised that Legislative Day is February 11, in Richmond, and that Mr. Hodge, Supervisor Nickens and he plan to attend. T January 23 - 24, 1999 53 Caverns Exit1 Mr. Hodge suggested that staff and the Planning Commission rank corridors that are similar to Colonial Avenue to determine which should be changed from residential to transitional. However, it was the Board consensus not to change the community plan but treat each corridor separately with a special use permit when changes are requested. Mr. Hodge also suggested development of a master plan for the one to two mile radius surrounding the Dixie Cavern I-81 exit. d. Snow removal on private roads (.coordination with VDOT) Supervisor Johnson advised that he had received complaints following the recent ice storm from residents on private roads that their road had not been plowed. Other Board members advised they had received similar complaints, and that these residents don't know that their roads are not in the state system, particularly if they are renters. There was the Board consensus that Community Relations Director Anne Marie Green would draft a letter to residents on private roads and that Mr. Hodge will investigate the use of "private road - no maintenance" signs. Mr. Hodge advised the Board of a similar problem with residents who owned condominiums and who are paying taxes for residential trash collection from the Resource Authority but are actually receiving commercial collection. There were several suggestions including providing them with a 90 gallon County container or crediting their real estate taxes, but no consensus on specific direction. 7. Uadate on Strategic Planning Process Mr. Robertson and Mr. Mahoney reported that the staff is trying to develop January 23 - 24, 1999 55 c. Increasing volunteers d. Staffing Mr. Hodge will refine these with more specificity and bring them back to the Board for approval. IN RE: LUNCH WITH SCHOOL BOARD Chairman Johnson declared a recess for lunch with the members of the School Board at 11:40 A.M. IN RE: DISCUSSION WITH SCHOOL BOARD ON SCHOOL ISSUES Chairman Johnson reconvened the meeting at 1:10 P.M. with all members of the Board of Supervisors present (Supervisor H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix left at 2:52 p.m.). Others present were: School Board Members Present: Chair Marion Roark, Members Thomas Leggette, William Irvin, III, Michael Stovall School Board Members Absent: .Vice Chair Jerry Canada School Staff Present: School Superintendent Deanna Gordon; Assistant Superintendent Martin Robison; Assistant Superintendent James Gallion; Director of Budget and Management Jerry Hardy; Construction Coordinator Sandy Barber; School Board Clerk Brenda Chastain, Administrative Specialist Dale Waters 1. Earlv retirement rogram The proposed plan was presented by William Irvin, School Board member. January 23 - 24, 1999 57 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-012499-1 At 2:40 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to return to open session, that the Executive Session was held from 2:05 p. m. until 2:40 p.m., and to adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012399-1 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 member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting to 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 Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McNamara January 23 - 24, 1999 59 The following issues were discussed. (1) Mr. Hodge advised that he, Chairman Johnson, School Superintendent Dr. Gordon, and School Board Chair Marion Roark need to schedule a meeting in February to begin the budget process. (2) Chairman Johnson and Chair Marian Roark agreed that their goal is to create a good relationship between the two bodies. (3) Chairman Johnson recommended that the School Construction Steering Committee schedule meetings so that they can report to Board of Supervisors. (4) Supervisor McNamara suggested that both bodies schedule joint public meetings more frequently. IN RE: ADJOURNIItfENT At 3:09 p.m., Chairman Johnson adjourned the Planning Retreat. Submitted by: Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board Approved by: Bob L. Johnson Chairman A-022399-2. a ACTION N0. ITEM AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Request by Social Services to Increase County Vehicle Fleet for Welfare Reform, Phase II COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: F . °~""~r BACKGROUND: The Department of Social Services will begin Welfare Reform, Phase II, in March. Phase II will focus on the "hard to serve" population of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Program. Those recipients remain unemployed, have substance abuse problems, low education, mental illness, criminal convictions, and a variety of other problems which inhibit employment. Phase II will focus on securing employment for this group. Services to be provided are intensive case management, multi-disciplinary assessments, job readiness training and coping, job search, work activity, increased education and training, day care, transportation, counseling - just. about anything needed to facilitate employment. These activities are funded in the VIEW program by 1000 Federal money. The Department of Social Services has received funding which can be used to purchase a car for staff to use in provision of these services. (Currently, the department has only 2 county vehicles, which are shared among 26 staff who are required to use a car daily in the performance of their job. When a county car is unavailable, staff uses personal vehicles and are reimbursed mileage.) The request to the Board is to increase the county vehicle fleet by one, allowing the Department of Social Services to purchase a vehicle to be used in Welfare Reform - Phase II. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The money for purchase is 1000 reimbursable Federal money available to the locality by the State Department of Social Services. :. STAFF RECOb~IENDATION: Staff recommends increasing the County vehicle fleet by one to allow the department of Social Services to purchase a vehicle to be used in Welfare Reform - Phase II. Respectfully submitted, Appr ved by, ~~~~ Betty Mc rary, Ph.D. Elmer C. Hodg Director of Social Se v ces County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to approve Johnson _ x Denied () Harrison _ x _ Received () McNamara- x Referred () Minnix _ x _ To () Nickens _ x cc: File Betty R. McCrary, Director, Social Services John M. Chambliss, Assistant Administrator Brent Robertson, Finance Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance John Willey, General Services A-022399-2.b ACTION N0. ITEM _~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Appropriate Monies for Child Day Care Programs for the Department of Social Services COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Department of Social Services receives, throughout the year, additional appropriations for public assistance and services delivery. The State has made available $100,000 additional Federal money for the Non-VIEW Day Care Program. This money is 1000 Federal money, no local match required. The Department of Social Services cannot access these state funds until the County has appropriated the same. The Board of Supervisors is requested to appropriate $100,000 to the Social Services budget and to appropriate the related revenues from the State. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The total amount for the additional funding is 100% reimbursable Federal money available to the locality by the State Department of Social Services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of $100,000 to the Social Services budget for Non-VIEW day care. ~- 3 R ectfully submitted, ~ V ~. Betty R. cCrary, Ph.D Director of Social Ser 'ces ACTION Appro d by, Elmer C. Hod County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to approve Johnson _ x Denied () Harrison _ x Received () McNamara- x _ Referred () Minnix _ x To () Nickens _ x _ cc: File Betty R. McCrary, Director, Social Services John M. Chambliss, Assistant Administrator Brent Robertson, Finance Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance John Willey, General Services N- I GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Audited Beginning Balance at July 1, 1998 $7,947,047 7.71% July 28, 1998 Second installment on West County Business Park ($1,115,300) Balance at February 23, 1999 $6,831,747 6.63% Changes below this line aze for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $6,831,747 West County Business Pazk -balance ($1,057,650) $5,774,097 5.60% Note: On December 18, 1990, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25% of General Fund Revenues 1998-99 General Fund Revenues $103,087,232 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $6,442,952 Respectfully Submitted, ~~-~, .~. Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance Approved By, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Boazd\Gen98. WK4 ~~~ CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Audited Beginning Balance at July 1, 1998 $768,458.71 Amount added from 1997-98 operations per rollover policy $471,083.00 Projects appropriated in 1998-99 original budget Center for Reseazch and Technology (100,000.00 Blue Ridge Pazkway Interpretive Center (30,000.00 South County Pazk Development (100,000.00 North County Soccer Field (50,000.00 Police Firing Range (50,000.00 Courthouse Renovations (75,000.00 McDonald Farm (100,000.00 1, 1998 Purchase of land at library headquarters (91,550. 15,1998 / Underground storage tank remediation (to be replenished 4, 1999 with year end rollover) (11,948. Balance at February 23, 1999 $631,042.93 ote: $100,000 of these funds have been temporarily advanced to the Mayflower Hills Park Respectfully Submitted, <a,rn, yJ.7~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance Approved By, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Boazd\Cap98. WK4 N~ RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIlZGINIA Amount From 1998-99 Original Budget $210,000.00 June 23, 1998 Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Center (107,500.00 Sept 8, 1998 Contribution to TAP Transitional Living Center (9,650.00 Oct 13, 1998 Matthews Electroplating SuperFund Remediation (22,790.00 Nov 17, 1998 Demolish abandoned structure (10,000.00 Jan 12, 1999 Roanoke Regional Chamber dues (2,500.00 Balance at February 23, 1999 $57,560.00 Respectfully Submitted, Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance Approved By, e~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board\Board98.WK4 N-4 FUTURE SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Savings from 1996-97 debt budget $670,000.00 Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund 1,113,043.00 FY97-98 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00 June 23, 1998 Savings from 1997-98 debt fund 321,772.00 FY98-99 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00 Balance at February 23, 1999 $6,104,815.00 Respectfully Submitted, Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance Approved By, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board\Schoo198.WK4 ~ r ,~~ ~ _' ~. ~ N + + H ~ W O A ~ o bD ~ ~ e > :~ ~ ~ ~ y W y Ri R r7"' 'C N V _ • CC RS 61 ~-+ i. CO CC .~ i.i 0 a 0 ~., 0 b D J ~, ay M ..~ .~-~ ~ O ~~+ 'C Q ~ ~ w a ~ ~ g b a; a ~ s ~ ~ o 4.n ~ O ~ i+ ~ Z a~ w L O ~ ~ r.+ CC w C/~ a 0 0 00 v N d w y L ~ ~a a. y t 7 C y O a a bD 7 c 0 ea L 6~ C C7 0 0 C 7 Gtr ^-~ O~ O M o0 ~O 00 00 ~ ~ O O ~ 00 00 Do O M r [~ N N M ~ O N ~ v'~ O~ v'i 't7 O~ O N C ~D O ~ 0o O O a\ oo ~ oo ~--~ oo .-~ ~ O ~ M M O M oo O h oo M t~ O M --~ [~ N N ~ ~ vi M oo O ~--~ O N ooM oo~DO~o~c~iOrn~Goo ~rrN~~c~ir~ori~o~c~oo~o.-ooo~rrNiv c.i r ~ ~ ~ ~--~ ~ ~O ~ V't O~ N cf V"1 M V' I~ ~ I~ ~ Vl \O M Vl ~^ ~ N N ~ ~ M V N ~ I~ ~ ~ 00 O~ t~ ~/'~ N ~ 00 N O N ~ M ~ M O~ N O .•. ~/'~ M N O ~-+ ~--~ Q\ 00 N 00 \O u7 O~ O ~O ~t ~/'~ [~ 00 O~ ~_ ^+ l~ M ~ ~ V"1 O O t~ ~D [~ M O~ 01 O~ ~ 00 M M ~--~ I~ M I~ ~+ O~ M vl M M o0 O ~ oo M ~O ~ N O ~ N [~ oo O O~ M v'i N ~O ~O l~ O~ t~ t~ ~ O~ M O ~n O ~ ~ O M 'ct O ~ 00 N ~O M Q~ O ~--~ M M ~--~ M ~O ~ I~ O r O ~ ~ N --~ N M ^~ v'i .-~ ~-+ 00 ~ ~--~ ~ ~ O N O N N ~ a0 r o0 00 O ~ DD D\ ~--~ M ^~ O ~ O O ~ ~ ~--~ OD N '~Y ~--~ ^~ ~--~ N M N N Q~ ~ DD M ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 O O~ ~ O~ ~O ~-•+ rY C' M rf M Q~ .-. ~--~ M ~--~ ~ [~ N ~ ~--~ ~ h M ~ .-. '--~ O M ^~ N N N M ~--~ ~-+ .-y M ~--~ N N M ~--~ ~ N ~ M v'~ 00 ~D N o0 00 ~O l~ ~ [~ ~-+ 00 O O~ ~ l~ N ~ ~ O~ O~ M 00 ~--~ ch N ~--~ M N ~+ Q1 vl 00 N ~O M M ~ O~ N M N ~O O O O M ~--~ ~D ~O ~--~ ~f 00 N ~--~ I~ ~ O\ ~o ^~ Vl M M ~t N 00 W ~ ~ 00 [~ N ~--~ ~ O ~O ~ l~ M M N O N N M N ~-+ ~ ~ V'l lp V1 00 ~O M O~ ~ tf ~O O O M ~O DD .--~ M ~ [~ r ~ ~ ~ v'~ `O v'1 a0 M .--~ 00 M 1~ O 00 00 ~ ~ O Q~ I~ N O V t~ ~ ~ ~ M O O~ u> O~ l~ ~ ~--~ ~t M N N M ~ ~ ~' N O~ ~--~ O~ ~O N o0 00 l~ D, [~ ~O O~ N oo ~D ~ ~ ~O N N ~--~ r» N ~t t~ ~O --~ N N N O N ~--~ N N ~--~ ~--~ N .-. .--~ ~. N vl M_ M ~ ~/'1 \O N M N V't ~--~ \O N 00 ~ ~ M oM0 O~ O D\ M ~ ~ ~ ~ O M ~° ~ N .-. 00 I~ ~O ~t Q1 ~ M V1 N I~ M ~O 00 N O~ 00 ~--~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ rt O ~ M [~ O~ O ~ N_ M v'~ N O\ O~ [~ ~ O~ O ~ O~ N v'~ v'~ ~ v'~ v'i et 'ct ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ O~ O ~t ~--~ ~O N N oNO vMi oOO ~ ~D ~D oo O~ oo ~O 00 000000000000000000000~00~00--00~o~oo~v0o 00 0000000000000000000000.---ooc~ovovooo~oo~o 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O~ O O O M N~ O~ ~--~ O O~ O t~ O~ M N O O O ~ O vi O ~ O O ~ O Ui O O ~--~ DD o0 00 ~--~ vi ~ O ~--~ ~ ~ O ~--~ O, ~ N O O~ v'i l~ O~ t~ M ~O a0 O~ O t~ ~ ~ ~--+ ~ ~ O ~ M ~ M N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O DD ~ N N O ~ v'~ v'i et N .-r ~ 'ct ~O ~D M ~--~ l~ N ~/'i oo v'~ ~ ~ ~ N M N vi ~ ~ M M v1 et oo O M oo N --~ N ~O ~--~ N V'~ ~/l M ~--~ N ~--~ N M ~--~ N~ M N V N N ~ °~ ~3 ~ oo ~~ UT's ~ ~ O E-' ckv k C ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ O ° ~ ~ C ~ U ~ ~ 'b w o ~ ~ y''~ E" = `° ~ o w °' D1p °' " ~' `~ ~ . ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ',b, ¢ von x ~U :? o x~ ~ ~~°E-~c~: ~ w a w °;o~aCC~~~.oau; ~a a .`~ y•e°w ~ 0n ed 0. y ~ ~ ca a.. N X .a: OU ~ N ~ ° ~ ~. .~ +4".r G ~ N ~ .b ~ 0 U v7 U ~ U .d '~ 1". E-' o . ~ ~ H ~ ~ cv ~ ~ ~ ~- p ~ ~ ~ ~ o U o 0 o rn a ~, ~ U ~ ~ ~° U ~° ¢ °on a ~ ~ p ~ ti ~ ~ a. ~ U ~v U a b ~ ~ 4, ~...~ A „ „ x ~ Y 023 a ~s i•, ~ G U Q ~ ~ o X ^- X ~ ~ ~ ~ o > > cC ca U ~ ccs y .C N ~ .C .~ ca c~ a a a a a U~ w~ E~ ~ x E~ O d~ a w U a w c~ w U U r~ ~ a: Z c'°n 3 0 3 w 0 0 E" _O ~--~ N_ _M ct O ~--~ N M ~ v1 ~ ~ 00 U O ~--+ N ~f I~ oo O1 O ~--~ N o0 O --~ ~D O ..-. ~ M O N ~ N M N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M~~~~ Vl Vl Vl ~~~ [~ 00 00 00 O1 O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ~ O+ N ~ Q ~ C ~ o pA a~ a~ O y ~ ~p ou ~ "' > tS 3 a ~ ~ tYi R ~ y a ~ ~ a " .. M .° ~ o v d a W C ~ o ~ ~ ~ a a w _ o ~ ° ~ ~ ~ W r A `"' o ~ o V y ~ +"' O ~ ~" CC ~.+ 4 M O ~ ~ z N Lc. '~ N U C .~ _~ L CC 67 ++ ~ ~ A~ O O .+ y L NN~ W ~~ a o ~ ~' a .+ d0 b L' R L C d 0 rl C ,T~ Q~ 00 M 00 .r R O N M Q r o~ a ., M Q~ ~o M y CQ r+ O [r .fl q R L a rn INr M ~ ~ ~ 1~ ^' ~ ~y O O G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ fd :: .v.. .~. ~" LU W (i ~+ ,C ~ 00 O ~ ro c ~ o ^ ~ ~ o` y ~ L R U V1 N'S .u. L ~ 'O E O ~ 00 M N 00 1 Q C 7 e o M M '""' ~ N _ rn p u u .0 t~ ~n . 1ry rn .. a ~ ~ o v-~ v~ ~n ~ N ~ ~ G ~ m yy y ~ ~ '~ z, Q °' L o,~oN r a i ai ~ ~ ~.. O .Q u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u O N ~--~ ~ ee C ~ •-• (~ ~ Q~ a + ~--~ n O 00 C .--~ [~ .-• O~ ~ '~ N N v u :: L L ~ « O 0 'O E w y V L G. C u W ~ ~" p pa u C ~ ep 'O L C ~ e~ .+ _ y ~ u OW H T L 7 Z y C ~ O C p a K W ~. .C 7 m '~ C O G4 R L c r41 V 0 0 0 C 7 ~/'~ 00 ~ [~ M 00 ~ ~ ~ M Oi M ~ ~ 0~0 cr ~G O M N ~ ~O ~ O ~O 00 M 00 ~p v~ M [~ 'd' M ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Vl M ~1 ~ O 00 Vl 1~ M V1 N V1 I~ 00 ~ ~O 7 O N ~ V~ 00 M 00 O\ 00 00 .-• l~ ~O N O ~n M ~ p~ N 00 ~O \O vl l~ p, O~ O ~D I~ ~O N pp ~n ~o ~n •n ~, ~o v, l~ O~ ~--~ vi I~ O O~ ~O M ~--~ l~ v~ N \O ~ ~D ~ O N N O V~ V' N O M a\ U'n O H ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~' 0 0 N M M ~--~ 00 N rY ~ N~5 O~ O O --~ ~O M N V" ~ ~--~ O ~f M V1 M ~/1 00 M O~ V'1 M ~D ON V'1 Vl ~ 0o O M ~O N O O V M O O [~ N ~U O O N O~ H M O O M O ~f ~ N O~ 00 O O~ N ~O O~ 00 .-. l~ ~O M ~O ~--~ O~ O~ O~ [~ N !~ ~ N c!' N ~ M N ~n O ~D ~ V1 N l~j M ~--~ N O M '--~ N M O~ v~ M ~O M M --~ N O S O~ ~ N O M o0 O O ~O O h I~ ~O O o0 M ^+ ~--~ [~ vi O~ ~! vl N O v~ ~ 00 IfJ O~ O ~O O~ M O O l~ ~O O ~n ~--~ 00 O ~O r N O M O r O~ ~--~ ~O ~O ~ O O O ~O ~--~ [~ M O~ I~ ~D O ~/1 O~ ~ ~ v~ .ter ~ ~ ~ O\ ~D M 00 N O N N O O~ M N O ~--~ ~ ~--~ M v~ C t~ t ^ l~ N O v~ ~O op Q~ O _ vl M ~--~ [~ I~ ~D M ~O [~ N o0 ~ M N O~ O Vl ~ ~ ~O p~ v~ N O ~O N [~ l~ O o0 N N N Vl O ~/l O~ 00 ~ '~l ~ O ~ v'i ~ O~ ~ O .-~ O h ~ 00 ~ 00 M O N M N O ~ ~ M M ~--~ ~ .-. ~D ~ M [~ t~ ~ N ~--~ tt v'i O ~n ~--~ M [~ '~? v'i ~D oo N M M M ~ M N O N ~--~ ~--~ ~p ~--~ M ~--i l~ ~ O ~ ri ~C N N In ~--~ M M [~ .--i ~ ~ N M ~O .~ _ r. O M O O O .Mr 00 N ~ ~ N .-. 1fi ~ ~ ON O N O~ O O~ N N M M ~ ~ N ~ ~D ~O O~ 1n M O~ M N N ~ ~ ~ O O~ ~ v1 O 00 M O N O ~O N M O~ O ~ N ~D 00 [~ 00 ~O O~ R O O M ~ vl N h ~ ~ 7 0 t~ 0 0 O~ O O v~ ~n O ~n (~ ~ ~n [~ ~G O M ~O O~ ~--~ N ~O O\ O~ O\ 00 ~n N O~ ~--~ O O O\ ~O t~ 00 N M N 00 1 I~ N~ U M O N 00 N ~D u~ ~D V~ N 00 ~ O v1 O ~O O ~G 00 00 On N Vl ~ ~ N o~0 ~+ oNO ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 ~--~ 0 0 0 0 0 .~ N N M M l~ O l~ [~ ~ O O M t- ~ O O\ 00 M O O v"~ n M O ~O t~ oo O O oo iIi ~D M M N ~ 00 O N M O~ ~--~ ~D '~ 00 v'~ ~ O~ N M R . -~ N M ~-+ N in oho ~D oMO Obi M [~ N ~ N M M ~ ~ ~O ~t M ~ O o0 N O O M M ~--~ \O N 00 [~ N ~--~ l~ ~ N N ~ O M O t~ .r M ~O v~ ~ O o0 00 00 '~ O~ ~O 00 ~ N ~' N M ~O p~ v1 O~ M N ~ v1 l O~ N N 00 O o0 ~--~ ~O o0 1A H ~ ~O ~-+ O 00 O O ~D I O ~ ~ ~ N N N ~O O [~ 00 I~ N O N N ~O ~O ~ .-i 00 ~ ~ 00 L y .~ .~ '~ . ~ .-.i ~+ c~ 'b U L Q ~ ~ ~o ~ U ~~ js, O C >~~ a~ ~ a c ~ .Ni ~ o~io y y o aC7W o .-. N M _O _O O_ O O O 0 L], a ~ 'v '~ b ~c N "-~ 0 .+~..- O U O o ^~ N O O O O ~+ 3-'. O U U w [-~ O v ~ ~~ w ~ ~; ~_ C Q O ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w~" U a o W `~° °U' ~ Q~ N o O a w U Q o ^~ N M ~ O O O O M M M M O O O O O O M vl oo O~ V1 N ~D ~ N O O N O OO ~n M ~n ~ N N ~ ~ ~ O M .-~ O O ~D M M O~ vi O~ h ~ ~ .-. O~ ~ (~ O 0 0 M N N ~--~ O ~--i C.' O c~ ~ _y "V L O 3 y C ~ v o U O ~ ~ a . ~~~ ~~~ . C7c~~W~C7 0 ~--~ N M C' v~ ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O M~ O O O O IMfi I~ ~ 00 7 O O~ M ~/1 N M O\ N V'~ I~ 00 ~O N ~O M t7 ~ ~O O~ N N 7 O~ ~ ~O l~ M ~ 00 O ~ '~+ U O y L '~ w fn ~ ~ C"r v ~. y 3 ~ .~ ~ ~' ~ °: O ~ Y O O ~G~,ciUa~v°~~ o ~--~ M ~ v1 \O 1~ 00 O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V1 Vl ~1 V1 Vl Vl V'1 ~1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i y ~ C 'e 8 ° ~ C C o ~ Vl m N ~ ~ ~ ea N N A ~ 6~ 6. D L u a~ G u ce C CC u C y Ca O .r ~..1 .~ it .~ O ^L .1 i1 O~ ..~. ~ M ~ ~ ~ '~ O y .n U 'C ~ ~ y^ ~ C W .Q 'S7 O O ~ .~ a a a W '~ ~ ~ O L ~ ~ p ~ r O ~ U a ~ a a W ~ W O a> U n. N N J .~ z '^ r% u u w V ~ ~ i ~ « y ~ L a C ~ W ~ ~" pp u C C 'D L C N ~ ~ u C Gtl u ~ L 7 C 'fl O y ~ a Grp +r b 7 m ^C C '~ R L C /1d V 0 0 .. '0 C G4 O~ O d d n d l~ ~--~ N N O~ N O O O O .-i O r ~p 1A{ L O~ O~ ~ p (~ (~ M ~ O o0 00 ~O O O O O .r C~ M ~p "'" I 1 /_ v/y O~ l~ M ~ M d o0 d .-i O~ O t~ O~ ~ 'n V7 O I( Y d h l~ ~ d l~ O~ ~p ~-+ ~--~ d d d M d ~ ~D l~ O M o0 l~ I~ O N ~ O l~ O O O O 00 O~ O O~ ~!1 ~n a0 O d D\ O M O d M N [~ O O O O N ~ d O~ 00 O V7 O~ Vi [~ 00 ~n O .-~ O~ O v~ O O O O ~ N ~n [~ ~ ~O d N M ~ O~ l~ O l~ O ~O O O O ~--~ O 00 O ~n ~ V1 M v1 O O~ d o0 O~ ~n 00 d ^~ ~ O O l~ M l~ ~O ~O N O O~ 00 O~ ~D O ~O ~ vi l~ O ~ ~O O O O~ ~n V7 O o0 O~ M ~O d ~O 00 O~ t~ ~D M t~ M l~ O ~ ~ •-+ R M oo ~--i In d l~ N M ~ ~ d •--~ •--~ d •--~ •--~ N o0 00 l~ P ~-+ N .-~ ~--~ .~ N ~p M M Ui ~n ~n O O d M d 0 ~ ~ [~ 00 0 0 0 0 d .-~ 00 O~ O~ M oo O N O O~ l~ O [~ O d I~ O O O O M N O~ ^" .-+ O O N ~ .-. v'~ O N M N [~ O O O O M l~ M .~r O~ ~O oo ~O O ~n N O ~--~ O~ D\ a\ ~--~ O N o0 ~ t~ v1 N 00 ( ~ Q~ 00 I~ O\ M N M l~ R O~ [~ [ 00 00 O~ O 00 M M l~ N 00 `O ~O O~ N O\ d R N ~O N O~ 00 O O~ O~ O~ .--~ ~--~ ~D O .--~ oo O .~.i ~ O ~O M ~ O~ .--~ O N O d ~ .-~ .-. .-. N .--~ .-i ~ r r N N In --. v~ O ~O t~ O O O [~ O O --~ O O O O .~r O O O O 00 O O 00 O~ 0 0 0 O: O O O~ O O O O O~ O O O N ~O O ~ d 0 0 0 ~ O O O 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 O ~ ~ O N N 00 00 ~t ~ '~t O~ d M [~ l~ ~O ~D Vi .-. N ~ O O .~ 00 ~O O ~ O~ M oo O O O O O O o0 00 O O~ oo O h d N ~-+ O 00 O O O~ O O O O .~ ~D O~ ~ N M N O ~O O M O~ O N (~ M I~ O O O O 00 N V1 00 ~D 00 t~ ~ O o0 O a\ ~--~ N ~ .-i ~ ~--~ r V i 00 Q~ 00 ~/'^ d M N ~--~ M 00 M O l~ [ ~ ~O d l~ N t~ O~ ~ N ~ ~ 00 ~ R ~ M~ d N ~O M fi N . -i , r N d [~ P O O ~ N O M N O ~-+ O M O t~ v'i O O O O N O o0 00 d O~ t~ O ~O O O -~ O .~ d ~O ~n O O O O ~D oo M .r O ..~ ~ a, [~ M O -~ O of N N M O O O O 00 O~ O~ C~ .-+ N N oo M ~/1 N oo ~--~ ~O O ~!1 N O O ~--~ O 00 N M ~O M 01 00 00 ~O d l~ ~O ~ N [~ N N O O [~ M .--~ v) d Q~ Q~ [~ t~ O~ ~ ~ O N oo ~O ~D O ~O O O Q~ ~ 00 O M M 11i M ~ ~n r rn oo ~ o, M oo v~ d o -~ ~ -~ et v, ~ N ~o O~ [~ N O~ ~D I~ ~O v"i ~-+ N d ~--~ d o0 M N 00 N~ R .-+ N ~--~ N o0 ~--~ O M v7 ~O .r eC L '~ + ~ + + . ~ . ~ 6~ ~ ~y O ~. ~ O U O ~ ~ ~ ~ A x a 8 ~ ~ ar ~ y 0 y O bA ~ O ~ ~ tom, C y C ~ ~ q cO •+ ~ O O Q 0 . O ~ Y R ~ k ~ W G C ~ ~ 'b ?~ ~ A C C v~ O ~ ' xy, N a i Q C O ~ ~ ~ p W -p >, . ca ~ C `w° ~ ` c v Fri W ~ a. ~ ,> U . ~ O U ~ ~ y c. .. ~ ~ 4. O Z c-' F L N ~y ~ on ~ ~ ro ~,~U a~ o bb a ~ o ~~ o a.-lU o UwU o WL1 F-~u:U~ ~--~ N M N M v1 N M d ~O I~ 00 N O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O ~o ~a ~o 0 0 0 r t~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 o0 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ o~ 0 0 h CO •r O C ~a L C7 Pro osed Bud et Calendar ~" ~ p g As of February 23, 1999 October -December • Annual update of departmental CIP requests • Budget Kickoff - Phase I Business Plans (Teams) • Governor releases proposed state budget • CIP submissions due to Budget Department January • Phase II Budget Kickoff-Investment Budgeting (1/13/99) • Targets distributed to departments • Business Plans Due (1/15/99) • CIP Draft completed • Preliminary revenue projections complete (1 /22/99) • Revenue Team meets to discuss projections (1/28/99) • Investment Budgets Due (1/29/99) • Mid Year Revenue and Expenditure reports to BSS (1/30/99) ** February • CIP: Work Session with Board of Supervisors (2/23/99) ** • Public Hearing: General Comment on the FY 1999-00 budget (2/23/99) ** • Public Hearing: Tax rates and tax assessments (2/23/99) ** • Functional Budget Team presentations (week of 2/22/99) March • Functional Budget Teams present to County Administrator (week of 3/8/99) • Board of Supervisors adopts. tax rates (3/9/99) ** • Work"session: ,FointCounty- School Board (3123199) ** • Work session: Contributions to local human, cultural, and tourism service agencies; Volunteer Fire andRescue Chiefs (3/2 3/99). ** AUril • School Budget Due (4/1/99) • Board Adopts School Budget (4J13199} ** • County Administrator presents budget to Board (4/13/99) ** • Public Hearing on Proposed Budget (4/27/99) ** Mav • _ Beard Ad~Bts FY 1999-00 Budget and CIP (5/11/99) ** • First Reading of ap~ropriarion ordinance (5/11:!99) ** • Second Reading of appropriation ordinance (5/25/99) ** Notes ** Shading indicates dates in which Board of Supervisors involvement is needed. ACTION # ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid -January 1999 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Checks Direct Deposits Payments to Vendors Payroll 1/8/99 $226,479.45 $454,562.09 Payroll 1/22/99 232,649.00 446,615.13 Manual Check 1/11/99 75.14 Manual Check 1/25/99 311.62 Void Check 1/22/99 (520.39) $458,994.82 $901,177.22 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. SUBMITTED BY: J~ C.Ci~f ~j . Jet. sc1~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance $4,904,471.95 1,360,172.04 $6,264,643.99 N-7 Approved Denied Received Referred To • ~) ~) ~) ~) ~) Motion by No Yes Abs McNamara Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens Item No. ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, 5204 BERNARD DRIVE, SW., ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Work session on the McDonald Farm in East Roanoke County. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: McDonald Farm is a 99.53 acre tract of land owned by the Town of Vinton but located outside the corporate town limits in the County. Over the past two and one half years, the County and the Town have informally agreed to develop the property as a joint venture or a public partnership. In October of 1996, Hill Studio of Roanoke and Abbott & Partners of Williamsburg were hired to conduct a design workshop with the community. The end result was an architectural Master Concept Plan for pazk development. In May of 1998, ZHA, Inc., of Annapolis, MD, was hired to conduct a marketing feasibility study of the land uses recommended in the Master Concept Plan. The marketing analysis was completed and presented at a Public Presentation on October 28, 1998. The land uses which tested well in the analysis were as follows. Business Parcel Development which includes office, "flex," and industrial space received a positive evaluation for compatibility and feasibility as compared to retail or lodging. Retirement Housing Development also received a positive evaluation for compatibility and feasibility. Recommendations are outlined on pages 90-93 of the Technical Memorandum dated October 28, 1998. Staffis requesting that the Board of Supervisors review the final recommendations from the Market Analysis Study and make appropriate recommendations on land uses that the County feel are feasible a~ compatible. Approved: Economic Development `Specialist Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator -87- O ~'' ! ~ i~ VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This final section of the report summarizes findings of the market analysis for land uses proposed for development on McDonald Farm, and presents recommendations for the revision of the McDonald Farm Master Plan, based on economic considerations. A. CONCLUSIONS The preceding market analysis has been intended to evaluate the feasibility of various types of development on McDonald Farm, and to assess the compatibility of feasible development types with the stated objectives of the community, Roanoke County, and the Town of Vinton. The following table illustrates the conclusions reached by this market analysis: TABLE 6.1 FEASIBILITY AND COMPATIBILITY OF PROPOSED LAND USES Land Use Feasibili Compatibility Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant - 0 Neighborhood Retail - - Lodging Facility - + Business Parcels + + Retirement Housing + + Conventional Housing + - Empty-Nester Housing + + College of Health Sciences 0 + "+" means positive evaluation, "0" means neutral evaluation, "-" means negative evaluation 98006/ mcd_conc ' Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development faces strong challenges to feasibility due to poor visibility and regional accessibility, low traffic volumes, a lack of synergy with other tourist destinations, and demographic weaknesses in the local ____. -88- - - k ~ ~~ t- t t~ market. On the whole, this type of development receives a negative evaluation for feasibility. ~ ~- r Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development of the scale described in the P Master Plan may not attract significant new traffic to Hardy Road or add many students ~~ E: to the eastern Roanoke County public schools. The development described may be able f: to preserve some of the existing structures on the property, and likely can be designed to limit any negative aesthetic impact from the Parkway viewshed. However, Specialty _ Retail and Theme Restaurant development will not create many new well-paying jobs, nor command high prices for land, given the likely difficulties in sales performance. On the whole, Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development receives aneutral evaluation for compatibility. Neighborhood Retail development on McDonald Farm would also face significant challenges to feasibility, including the proximity of competitive developments, and the weak spending power support from the primary market area. Under current market conditions, Neighborhood Retail receives a negative evaluation for feasibility. However, the addition of new households and employees on or near McDonald Farm may improve the prospects for Neighborhood Retail in the future. Neighborhood Retail will not add many new students to the public school system, and may command relatively high land values if market support improves dramatically through other developments. However, Neighborhood Retail is likely to have negative impacts on the local environment, as it is dependent on high traffic volumes and bold visibility and would likely incorporate very generic commercial design. Moreover, few well-paying jobs would be created by Neighborhood Retail development. On the whole, Neighborhood Retail receives a negative evaluation for compatibility. Lodging Facility development faces strong challenges to feasibility, due to poor visibility and accessibility from both tourist and business destinations, as well as the relatively poor performance of nearby lodging facilities compared to the regional lodging market, which is showing evidence of over-development. Lodging Facility development receives a strongly negative evaluation for feasibility. A Lodging Facility would not add many students to the public school system, nor does it add many new vehicles to Hardy Road traffic. A Lodging Facility could be designed with limited aesthetic impact on the site or from the Parkway viewshed, and could create amenities and public access. However, a Lodging facility would not likely add many new well-paying jobs to the area, nor command high land prices given the -89- ~_ i strong challenges to its operating performance. Nonetheless, Lodging Facility development receives a positive evaluation for compatibility. Business Parcel development on McDonald Farm faces the challenge of slow local and regional absorption of new developments. However, occupancy is high among office, "flex," and industrial space in Vinton and eastern Roanoke County, despite an aging inventory of buildings. Also, the demographic and employment characteristics of the local population is compatible with Business Parcel development. Finally, the locational attributes of McDonald Farm makes it a more appropriate site for Business Parcel development than for other revenue-generating uses, such as retail and lodging. Business Parcel development receives a positive evaluation for feasibility. Business Parcel development is likely to generate well-paying jobs which are compatible with the skills and education of the local labor force. Business Parcels will not add a significant number of new students to local schools. Many businesses do not generate a significant amount of additional traffic on local roads. While certain businesses and building types may present negative aesthetic impacts on the site, these can be mitigated to some extent by design guidelines. Overall, Business Parcel development receives a positive evaluation for compatibility. Retirement Housing development on McDonald Farm would benefit from an aging local and regional population, a lack of proximate competition, and the physical and locational attributes of the property. Market support for this type of development is strong. Retirement Housing receives a strong positive evaluation for feasibility. Retirement Housing development would not generate significant new traffic on Hardy Road, nor add many students to the local school system. The development's need for an attractive campus would contribute to the preservation of greenspace, amenities, and the Parkway viewshed, and public access to the site could be maintained. Some new well-paying jobs would be created by Retirement Housing, and land prices are likely to be relatively high. Retirement Housing development receives a strong positive evaluation for compatibility. Conventional Housing is the least risky type of development, in terms of feasibility. Households and housing units are growing more quickly in eastern Roanoke County than in the region generally. Nearby developments have shown indications of strong sales performance and the existence of a middle- to upper-income housing market. The site and locational attributes of McDonald Farm make it a highly attractive site for residential development. The feasibility evaluation for Conventional Housing development on McDonald Farm is strongly positive. -90- v ~ Conventional Housing does not, however, address many of the objectives of the community. New children will be added to the schools, and additional traffic will be present on Hardy Road during peak hours. No significant number of new well-paying jobs will be created. While housing development may command acceptable land prices, residences can often represent a net loss to local governments in terms of service costs. Finally, Conventional Housing developers and residents may be less inclined to preserve viewsheds and public access to McDonald Farm than in other types of development. Overall, Conventional Housing receives a negative evaluation for compatibility. Empty-nester housing, however, receives a positive evaluation for both feasibility and compatibility. The success of nearby housing developments oriented toward older households supports this feasibility conclusion. Just as importantly, empty-nester households do not generate the school burden or traffic volumes that conventional housing does, and can be designed to minimize aesthetic impact and to preserve greenspace. The College of Health Sciences is not amarket-driven development, and feasibility is not determined by traditional supply-and-demand factors. The feasibility evaluation cannot, therefore, be either positive or negative. However, the College has expressed an interest in developing its planned campus on McDonald Farm. The College of Health Sciences is likely to generate a significant amount of new traffic on Hardy Road, due to the large number of students and employees. Also, the College does not intend to purchase land for its campus, nor will it pay property taxes. However, the number of students added to local public schools is likely to be minimal. The College's need for an attractive campus would contribute to the preservation of greenspace, amenities, and the Parkway viewshed, and public access to the site could be maintained. The number of well-paying jobs provided by the College is unlikely to be matched by any other prospective tenant. The economic impact on other retail and service establishments in Vinton and eastern Roanoke County is likely to be substantial. And the College would provide a prestigious anchor for the community which could assist in the attraction of upper-income and highly educated households as well as other commercial and retail developments. The College of Health Sciences receives a positive evaluation for compatibility. B. RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions of the preceding market analysis indicate that the original Master Plan for McDonald Farm is not likely to produce an economically successful development program. While the land uses proposed were generally consistent with o-~ ~:: ~ i _. the stated goals of the community, the County, and the Town of Vinton, some of those land uses will not receive sufficient market support to attract interest from profit-driven investors and developers. At the same time, some other types of development may attract interest from the development community, and still be compatible with the original objectives of the Master Plan. Based on the market analysis for alternative land uses, the following recommendations are presented: 1. Eliminate the Specialty Retail, Theme Restaurant, and Lodging Facility land uses from the McDonald Farm Master Plan, due to lack of market support. 2. Retain the Business Parcel land use option, due to perceived opportunities in the development market and the compatibility of this land use with planning objectives. 3. Retain the option for Neighborhood Retail on the portion of McDonald Farm directly accessible from Hardy Road, to allow such development to occur if market support increases in the future. 4. Incorporate Retirement Housing into the Master Plan, due to market feasibility, positive economic impacts, and compatibility with the planning objectives. 5. Include Empty-Nester Housing development as a minor element of the Master Plan, as it is highly feasible and generally compatible with the -- planning objectives. 6. Consider the inclusion of the College of Health Sciences into the Master Plan, weighing the positive employment benefits and aesthetic and image considerations against the cost of not receiving direct property taxes and land sale revenues. Based on these recommendations, the following development program is recommended for McDonald Farm: • Retirement Housing -- Up to 15 acres of land to be developed with _ independent living and assisted living units, as well as indoor and outdoor ~_ common spaces for residents. Absorption of this space will likely be incremental, with more facilities being constructed as additional units are _ -92- o-/ demanded in the market. It is reasonable to assume an absorption rate of five acres every three years, for a total build-out time of six years. • Business Parcels -- Up to 20 acres of land, preferably located on less visible portions of site, to be developed with design guidelines to minimize aesthetic impacts. An average absorption of three acres per year may be attainable on this land, with total build-out in not less than seven years. Neighborhood Retail -- Roughly nine acres of land to be developed for neighborhood-serving retail and services, with some design guidelines but allowances for signage and visibility. Absorption of this land will likely be possible only after other development occurs on the site, and should not be expected in the first five years of development on McDonald Farm. Empty-Nester Housing -- Up to 15 acres of land for a small residential subdivision (less than 60 units), with design guidelines to minimize aesthetic impacts. Annual absorption may be estimated at 10 units, or roughly three gross acres. Total build-out should be expected in not less than five years. • Opportunity Area -- Market analysis indicates that, in the next seven to ten years, at least 25 acres of land on McDonald Farm is not likely to be absorbed for revenue-generating development that is compatible with the master planning objectives. The College of Health Sciences, which will pay neither land costs nor property taxes, has expressed an interest in 25 acres of McDonald Farm land for a new campus, on which development could begin in roughly two years. If the dedication of land to this institutional tenant is not determined to be in the best interest of the Town of Vinton, these 25 acres should be retained for the expansion of the business parcels, retirement housing developments, or other revenue-generating uses as demanded in the long term. Buffers, Greenways, and Circulation -- Roughly 15 acres of land specifically for wetlands and habitat preservation, pedestrian and vehicular access, and buffers to minimize impacts on existing developments nearby. Additional buffers, greenways, and circulation are also likely to be included within each of the land use areas described above (retirement housing, business parcels, neighborhood retail, empty-nester housing, and opportunity area). An illustration of one possible configuration of these land uses on the McDonald Farm site is shown on the "Site Utilization, Transportation and Utilities Map" at the end of this document. This recommended development program is responsive to economic - __ ___ -s _ -93- ®~ i^~ i ~ forces, and should attract interest from the real estate development community. The land use elements of this development program also address the objectives of the community, the County, and the Town of Vinton. 98006/ mcdfin2 I r z e. VJ .yi ~' ""'r ~ 1/N ~ ~ ~„~ ~ ~~ ~a ~ Q a ~ G ~ c~ ~+~~ E~U~ O ~ ~ nc~ z .' 1 ~ ~ o . - - ~.~~ ~ uQ,-~ Z ~ s ~SSQO z Qn Q ~ r ~ V W Z Z H ,~~, ~o o'^~ Iv r ~ o a~==Z a n .{ F " ~ ~ ..,~. Q Q Q ~ '2~~~ _ ~~~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ W ~. J Q' i j~j m O y u 11 r - °_' Q ~ III u vi H ~ Illf IIII ~ o ,. ~ ~ I~ '~ ' F~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~`~ • lw i ~ o ~ ~ ea .a. ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~, ~ ~ \ \ o w b ~ Y Q` I\ I 4 ! V ~ ~ ` ~ '~~ i .a ~ ` [ Q V ~ ~, (~ E ' D ~ ~~ ' ~ , ~ ~ a' f /~~- ~"~+'t}-zy ~ Jam, / =~_ • U ~ ~ Z ~~ ~ ~i 00 ~ ,~,~~ ; '~ E w , is 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~. Q ~ xx '' \ 1 ~ ~ ~ M,~ ~ ; . <' ~ auk R~,odo~ ..;!~4p ~~•~ tom -9\' ' a~,o'colo 0 0~ O~~ O G "J ~ / : ~ ~,~, ate. ~~, c~ ~ ~ ~ 'o o , O ~.~ d ,., ~+~ -. s --. ,. , p -''~ ~ . ~: e. ~= ' '`~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, V ~ ~~~ ,! f' - ~ ~~ ~~~ ~, Jrf ~ 7i4 ~ b. ''t ,, ~ ' 4 ,~ a ., a ~ ~ ~; ~~~a ._ ~ ~ ~ Q -~~ ~~ ~~ '~~ a .h~a ~ ~ r i~ ~ ~ I 1 sy,. {r ~ 1~ ~~ ,rG. ~.~ 4 ~ ~~~ ~. _ .~ r~ . ~, ~~ ,., ~ .~ yy'},,y~ } ~. .. .. `~ ~ ~' ~ ~~ ~. ~`7 fi~ ~` ~~ ~ ~ .~ ~s ~ ~ R ~ h,~ . .~- _.. ~ . 4 5 ~q ~ ~L~ ~~ , 3 ~~ ~~ ~ ~.,~ ~ ,9. d~y1 saz~TTT~II ~ uoz~~~zodsu~.zs 'uo?~~z?Tz~II a~TS KHZ Hill & Abbott Master Plan ~~ 1 ~.4~,;: :~ -- :~ Bl.i'€ RII)GF. PAR(~V4'A1' K~n~rr~t~ '1~°I~ster Flan ~~ ~' Y Y' T ~~~ (' ~~ rr:~iti.~~EU~' s~ ~ , ti ~, h~.:~. .~ ~~ `; ~.. ,~ ; ~ ~~ ~~-: ri -r. a~r~ r a ~. ~}, ~ `"~ t. ~~, ~' -.~ , ~. ~ '~ 4 ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ f ~~% ~ ~~~ ~: .' ~ a t_ rs'* `~ 'R ~ ~, c ~~ .~ ~~~ ~ E ~. ~> ,r .. ~. fju ~> ti. ~~ .t _ ;~ a :.. s ., '( ,t '~ r~ 'z .;''6r.~ .. t Q V 1. j~c ~ '~~ ~~, ,. `~ ,~~ :; ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Budget Work Session on the Capital Improvement Plan for FY 2000-04. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This is the first look at the Capital Improvement Program and will be very preliminary. It may be necessary to have several other work sessions to incorporate the Board's priorities in the operating and capital budget. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a budget work session to discuss items related to development of the FY 1999-2000 budget. This work session will focus on the following item for discussion: Preliminary draft of the FY 2000-04 Capital Improvements Program The CIP Draft document will be distributed at the work session along with the FY 1999-2000 Budget Work Session Notebooks. The Notebooks will contain information, organized by topic, to allow for easy reference of work session "working papers" throughout the budget process. Respectfully submitted, Bre t Robertson Budget Manager Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator % y -- r ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Harrison _ _ Received O Johnson _ _ _ Referred () McNamara _ _ _ To O Minnix _ _ _ Nickens Q AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 RESOLUTION 0 2399-3 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 WHEF~EAS, 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 member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting to 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 McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CCM.AAE Clerk to the 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: February 23, 1999 ITEM: Public Hearings for Citizen Comment on the following items: • Real Estate, Machinery and Tools, and Personal Property Tax Rates • "Effective" Real Estate Tax Rate Increase • General Comment on the Upcoming Annual Budget for FY1999-2000 ('OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS SLT1vIMARY OF INFORMATION: As requested at the February 9, 1999 Board meeting, staff advertised the proposed Real Estate, Personal Property, and Machinery and Tools Tax Rates for calendar year 1999 as follows: Real Estate Tax at a rate of not more than $1.13 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. Personal Property Tax at a rate of not more than $3.50 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. Machinery and Tools Tax at a rate of not more than $3.00 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. In addition, state code mandates that when reassessment of real property in a locality results in a real estate revenue increase of 1% over the previous year, the locality must either reduce the tax rate, so that the revenues are no more than 101% of the previous year's or hold a public hearing indicating an "effective" real property tax increase. Also, consistent with past practices, the Board has expressed a desire to hold a public hearing to elicit "general" comment on the upcoming annual budget early in the development process. This hearing gives citizens the opportunity to express their priorities and concerns for the Board to consider during formulation of the upcoming budget. R~-3 The public hearings scheduled for today are for receiving written and oral comment on these three topics. The public hearing on proposed Tax Rates were advertised on February 9 and 16, 1999, the "Effective" Real Estate Tax Rate Increase was advertised on February 16, 1999, and the General Comment for the FY1999-2000 Budget was advertised on February 16, 1999, thereby satisfying state code requirements for public notice. Attached is a memo that highlights specific points of today's public hearings. Respectfull submitted, Brent Robertson Budget Manager Approved by, C~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Harrison _ _ _ Received () Johnson _ _ Referred () McNamara _ _ _ To () Minnix _ _ _ Nickens _ _ _ ~~- ~ I N T E R MEMO O F F I C E To: Members, Board of Supervisors From: Brent Robertson, Budget Manager Subject: Public Hearings on 2/23199 Date: February 23, 1999 On February 23, 1999 the County will hold three public hearings related to the FY1999-00 budget. These hearings will allow citizens the opportunity to comment on various items that impact development of the upcoming budget--assessments, tax rates, funding priorities, increases in revenues, etc. Listed below are comments relating to the public hearing and/or to the composition of the advertisement that appeared in the newspaper: Tag Rates The Board indicated a desire to advertise and set tax rates early during the budget process. This demonstrates the Board's commitment to not increase taxes and to develop a budget within existing means. Adoption of the rates are scheduled for the March 9 meeting. The tax rates were advertised at the County's current rates. The Board may not adopt tax rates above these advertised rates, (without readvertisement and another public hearing), but could adopt tax rates less than the advertised rates. "Effective" Real Estate Tag Rate Increase • The content and composition of this ad is dictated by state code. This ad is confusing and may alarm some citizens who do not understand its intent. • Identified increase in assessments for 1999 (over the previous year's assessments) averaged 2.82%. Increase assessments in 1998 (over 1997 assessment) averaged 2.57%. • The average assessment increase of 2.82% (individual properties may be higher or lower) is comparable to other cost of living increases. CPI, nationally, is currently running at or slightly below 2%. • Total increase in the proposed FY99-00 budget over the FY98-99 budget is 4.2%. Members, Board of Supervisors ~ ~ ~, `~j Page 2 February 23, 1999 C~neral Comment--FY1999-2000 Budget This forum provides citizens with the opportunity to comment on maintaining, increasing, or decreasing funding for services and/or programs for the upcoming fiscal year. This hearing affords the citizen a proactive voice (what they would like to see) as opposed to a reactive voice (what the County AdministratorBoard of Supervisors have proposed). s-, Roanoke County Department of Community Development Memorandum TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Terrance L. Harrington, AICP ~~ County Planner DATE: February 16, 1999 RE: Planning Commission Reconsideration of two Special Use Permit Requests of Triton PCS; Intersection of Route 419 and I-81 (Pinkerton Chevrolet site) ~~--1~~-7 -~~ee~te-~~e~a s~e~}-~ At their regularly scheduled meeting on February 16, 1999 the Planning Commission approved a motion to reconsider the above referenced two SUP requests of Triton PCS. The Planning Commission will legally schedule and hold a new public hearing on each of these requests on March 16, 1999. Mr. Witt made the motion for reconsideration of these two requests. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission requests that the Board reschedule their public hearings on these two requests for March 23, 1999, at which time the Commission's recommendations on these two proposals will be presented to the Board. s- ~ Roanoke County Department of ~'ommunity Development Memorandum TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Terrance L. Harrington, AICP ~~ County Planner DATE: February 16, 1999 RE: Planning Commission Reconsideration of two Special Use Permit Requests of Triton PCS; Intersection of Route 41 9 anr3 T-R 1 ~Ui nJ{artnn ccrrnl Gt C~tg'T and 1887 Electric Road Lutheran Church site) At their regularly scheduled meeting on February 16, 1999 the Planning Commission approved a motion to reconsider the above referenced two SUP requests of Triton PCS. The Planning Commission will legally schedule and hold a new public hearing on each of these requests on March 16, 1999. Mr. Witt made the motion for reconsideration of these two requests. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission requests that the Board reschedule their public hearings on these two requests for March 23, 1999, at which time the Commission's recommendations on these two proposals will be presented to the Board. r ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE 022399-4 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO TRITON PCS, INC. (AS LESSEE) AND OHIO STATE CELLULAR PHONE CO. (AS OWNER) TO ALLOW THE EXTENSION OF AN EXISTING BROADCASTING TOWER AT 4135 WEST MAIN STREET (TAX MAP NO. 54.04-1-10.1), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Triton PCS, Inc. has filed a petition to allow the extension from 120 feet to 160 feet of an existing broadcasting tower in order to collocate on the tower owned by Ohio State Cellular Phone Co. located at 4135 West Main Street (Tax Map No. 54.04-1- 10.1) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 2, 1999; and made the following Findings of Fact: (1) The proposed tower extension appears to meet the requirements set forth in Section 30-87-2 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (2) The proposed tower extension is on property zoned I-1 Industrial, which has been designated as a preferable zoning district for this use. (3) The proposed tower extension is a collocation on an existing tower; Roanoke County seeks to reduce the proliferation of towers by encouraging such collocations. (4) The use is not anticipated to have any impact on the provision of public services (fire and rescue, police, utilities). (5) The proposed tower extension is outside the critical view sheds of the Appalachian Trail and Blue Ridge Parkway. (6) The proposed tower extension is providing additional communications options for the residents of the Roanoke Valley and people passing through the area along a major transportation corridor. (7) The proposed extension is located on a tower that previously received approval, thus showing that this is a favorable location for such a use. 1 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on January 26, 1999; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on February 23, 1999. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board of Supervisors concurs in the Planning Commission "Findings of Fact" and further finds that the granting of a special use permit to Triton PCS, Inc. , as Lessee, and to Ohio State Cellular Phone Co., as Owner, to allow the extension of an existing broadcasting tower from 120 feet to 160 feet in order to collocate on the tower located at 4135 West Main Street (Tax Map No. 54.04-1-10.1) in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 1999 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The height of the proposed tower, excluding any antenna attached to the tower shall not exceed 160 feet above grade. Any extension of the existing tower above 160 feet shall require a Special Use Permit. (2) Any costs associated with relocating or modifying the tower and related equipment resulting from the proposed widening of I-81 shall be the responsibility of the applicant and/or owner of the tower. (3) The tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. (4) No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. (5) This tower shall be structurally designed to carry sufficient loading and the site shall be developed to accommodate the additional equipment necessary for at least two other vendors/providers in order to minimize the proliferation of towers in the vicinity of the site. In 2 addition, by executing the Special Use Permit, the applicant and the owner of the land agree to make the tower and tower site available for lease within the structural capacity of the tower and at reasonable costs adequate to recover the capital, operating and maintenance costs of the tower location required for the additional capacity. (6) If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications is discontinued ,the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. (7) The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the undated plan included with the application entitled "Equipment Plan and Elevation, Lee Highway RO-1-413C, 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA 24153," as prepared by HSMM. 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. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: L-C-~,C~¢i~~ Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 3 ~ ~ r~ ~ ~r~rr...~~+ ~~ s G a} ~ J~ ` "J ~' 3 4319 ~ 5 4560 1 ? 'j0' J ~ ~ e'r 4541 v i ~ H39 ~ ~ 4. 45so 9 ~~ 1.06 Ac. ~ 443s °' ,yh ~ ~~~ ry ~ 8. ,~ ~j ry' 4321 5' ,O° 1.58 Ac. ,~ ` ~ +~. `5 ~. ;: .g 4136 /?p f51J ~~• 2 3, ~, ~~ ~~ h'~ 411, ,~ ;~ ~o~ Ohio State I Ce//u/a~ Ap' 44 ~' ` 4~'s ~' Phone Company /nc. e 6 4321 ~~ 'BO b p 2 Sti 1 ~ ~ G Q T 1 376 ~ry,4+J. 4504 ~~ ~59 .{-.. i ~^'^ 46. 1 1.30 Ac. ~ ~, '/'{'/~ J 7 /` 1 Gp 4410 y ~t 1 ~ 1 4127 e ry ~, J? Q\~\~ 4 (. 4476 a~ \ 5 Si ~~ 1.30• Ac. 51 1Q. ~~ w ~"°~ City Of Sa/ern 3 Z 51 s 15.87 Ac. 2-R y sl eo -,, 48. h 12. `~~,y ~ 9 ~' ~ 3.25 Ac. J J p4727 ~plsl / Wofer FiR2tion P/anf °! 9k ~ 4715 4715 ~ `99~ ~ - Z ~6 .t ' 129 i~~9?" f 17. 13.4173 ~ Fort L e w!s ~° 2aoa9 Boptlst Church 1.38.Ac. 2.83 Ac.(D) 1 rJ. / / ` 2.42 Ac. C 6 1.50 Ac. {/ `g °• 14. '° / N 4213 N 4143 18. f763 Fort Lewis ~'`~ Baptist Church / / ~~s ~ 1.75 Ac. I aBo 111 `~ ~/ q / 4790 1 / 1.00 Ac. 1. 7.57 Ac. Z ' 2. 16g 4206 3. 1.0o ac. ~~ ~ t.oo AC. ,z5 ~4. s° 4335 ~ ~6 ~ ~ r 4N104 ~1 ~ry J 4120 5 ° O ~ ~ a~~ ti4 ~ ~ -uoo ~~ ~~ ~' u7a ~ _/ ROAN0I~E COUNTY Triton PCS,Inc./Ohio State Cellular ' DEPARTMENT OF Special Use Permit COMMUNITY DEVE.~OPMENT 54.04- >--10.1 , s- 3 PETITIONER: TRITON PCS, INC. CASE NUMBER: 6/2-99 Planning Commission Hearing Date: February 2, 1999 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: February 23, 1999 A. REQUEST Petition of Triton PCS, Inc. for a Special Use Permit on approximately 0.98 acre, to allow the extension of an existing broadcasting tower from 120 feet to 160 feet in order to collocate on the tower. The property has an address of 4135 West Main Street and is in the Catawba Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission stated that this type of co-location is favorable to erecting a new tower. A question was asked of the applicant if there was enough room below their proposed antenna array for an additional co-locator. The applicant stated that there should be enough room between their proposed antennae and the existing antennae for an additional user. D. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1) The height of the proposed tower, excluding any antenna attached to the tower shall not exceed 160 feet above grade. Any extension of the existing tower above 160 feet shall require a Special Use Permit. 2) Any costs associated with relocating or modifying the tower and related equipment resulting from the proposed widening of I-81 shall be the responsibility of the applicant and/or owner of the tower. 3) The tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. 4) No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. 5) This tower shall be structurally designed to carry sufficient loading and the site shall be developed to accommodate the additional equipment necessary for at least two other vendors/providers in order to minimize the proliferation of towers in the vicinity of the site. In addition, by executing the Special Use Permit, the applicant and owner of the land agree to make the tower and tower site available for lease within the structural capacity of the tower and at reasonable costs adequate to recover the capital, operating and maintenance costs of the tower location required for the additional capacity. 6) If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications is discontinued, the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. 7) The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the undated plan included with the application entitled "Equipment Plan and Elevation, Lee Highway OR-1~13C, 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA 24153," as prepared by HSMM. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Ms. Hooker moved to recommend approval of the petition with the recommended conditions, based upon the following findings of facts: ~" 1) The proposed tower extension appears to meet the requirements set forth in Section 30- 87-2 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. 2) The proposed tower extension is on property zoned I-1 Industrial, which has been designated as a preferable zoning district for this use. 3) The proposed tower extension is a co-location on an existing tower; Roanoke County seeks to reduce the proliferation of towers by encouraging such colorations. 4) The use is not anticipated to have any impact on the provision of public services (fire and rescue, police, utilities). 5) The proposed tower extension is outside the critical viewsheds of the Appalachian Trail and Blue Ridge Parkway. 6) The proposed tower extension is providing additional communications options for the residents of the Roanoke Valley and people passing through the area along a major transportation corridor. 7) The proposed extension is located on a tower that previously received approval, thus showing that this is a favorable location for such a use. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Ross, Thomason, Witt, Robinson, Hooker NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Terrance ar ' gton, cretary Roanoke C unty Pla Wing Commission ~-~ • STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: Triton PCS, Inc. CASE NUMBER: 6-2/99 PREPARED BY: David Tickner, AICP DATE: 01/28/99 PARTI A. Executive Summary The request is for a Special Use Permit on a parcel approximately .98 acre, with an address of 4135 West Main Street, in order to extend the height of an existing wireless communications tower for the placement of additional antennae arrays. The property is currently zoned I-1 Industrial and is designated as Principal Industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. Although there is not a direct correlation between the land use determinants and policies of the Principal Industrial land use designation and usage of land as a tower, the use does conform to the spirit of that designation. The adjacent land uses are a mix of commercial, industrial, vacant, and a major highway. There is an existing structure (mechanical building) and tower on the property, which is a 120-foot monopole tower. Access for the proposed project is via a private access road off West Main Street. B. Description This is a request by Triton PCS for a Special Use Permit on a .98 acre parcel of property located off West Main Street, in the Catawba Magisterial District. The proposal is an extension of the existing 120 foot tall monopole tower for placement of Wireless Communications antennae on property zoned as I-1 Conditional. The property is located adjacent to interstate 81. The applicant also proposes the addition of a mechanical building, on an 8 1/2 foot by 6 foot pad. At this time, no architectural blueprints or plans have been submitted for the building. C. Applicable Regulations Towers are allowed by Special Use Permit in the I-1 Industrial according to Section 30-61-2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The following requirements are applicable: The tower extension would have to meet the requirements set forth in Section 30-87, for tower design standards, lighting and airport safety, and site plan review. Site Plan review and approval by County Staff, in accordance with Section 30-90 of the Zoning Ordinance, will be required. The tower would have to comply with the conditions set forth on the property from the original Special Use permit issued for the tower in April of 1998. Federal Regulations - In 1996 the federal government amended the laws that apply to the cellular telephone industry, including guidance on local zoning authority. The federal communications Act of 1996 preserved local zoning authority in the siting of broadcasting towers. However, Section 704 of the Act states that such local regulations I) shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; and • II) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services". S -3 . In adopting this language it was the legislative intent to "provide localities the flexibility to treat facilities that create different visual, aesthetic, or safety concerns differently to the extent permitted under generally applicable zoning requirements". The act also clearly maintains the FCC's jurisdiction over radio frequency emissions and any radio interference. Finally, the act requires substantial written evidence in a written record for any decision to approve or deny a cell site. Local Regulations - In the interest of preserving the scenic and natural beauty of Roanoke County the goals of the County are: to achieve a long term reduction in the number of towers, to achieve a reduction in the height of towers, especially those located along or near ridgetops of major mountains and landforms, and to relocate towers that exist within a high visual impact area. It is the official policy of the County to encourage and promote the co-location of antennas on existing public and private structures within the County. Therefore permits for new broadcasting towers should only be requested and granted when no other reasonable alternative exists for locating needed antennas. When no other reasonable alternative exists for co-location, broadcasting tower locations at elevations lower than surrounding ridge lines are preferred. PART II A. Analysis of Existing Conditions Location The property is located in the Catawba Magisterial District, approximately 1300 feet east of the intersection with Route 777, Church Road, and approximately 1070 feet back off West Main Street. Lot The lot currently has a 120-foot monopole tower and a building on a 12 foot by 24-foot concrete pad. Access The developer proposes access to the property off West Main Street, via a private ingress/egress easement, running approximately 200 feet. Surrounding Ne~hborhood The surrounding environs consist of a mixture of commercial, industrial, and institutional uses along West Main Street. Immediately adjacent to the use is the Salem water treatment facility, Interstate 81, and vacant land zoned I-1 Industrial. The closest residential development to the site is to the northeast along Crossmill Lane, and across I-81 in the Fort Lewis Church area. B. Analysis of Proposed Development Property Characteristics: The property is proposed for the extension of an existing 120-foot tower by 40 feet in order to colocate on that tower. The property is zoned I-1 Industrial and allows this use by Special Use Permit. The existing tower was approved for this site in March of 1998. Within that approval, there were several conditions imposed by the Board. Those conditions are as follows: 1. The height of the proposed tower, excluding any antenna attached to the tower shall not exceed 120 feet above grade. The structure constructed shall be constructed to accommodate a structure capable of being increased to 160 feet; however, the tower structure shall not be increased to 160 feet unless the increase is to accommodate co- location of equipment for another vendor/provider, and any increase in tower height above 120 feet shall be subject to an additional special use permit application. • 2. Any costs associated with relocating or modifying the tower and related equipment resulting from the proposed widening of 1-81 shall be the responsibility of the applicant and/or owner • of the tower. 3. The tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. 4. No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. This tower shall be structurally designed to carry sufficient loading and the site shall be developed to accommodate the additional equipment necessary for at least three other vendors/providers in order to minimize the proliferation of towers in the vicinity of the site. In addition, by executing the Special Use Permit, the applicant and owner of the land agree to make the tower and tower site available for lease within the structural capacity of the tower and at reasonable costs adequate to recover the capital, operating and maintenance costs of the tower location required for the additional capacity. If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications is discontinued, the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. 7. The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the undated plan included with the application entitled "Proposed City of Salem and United States Cellular 120' monopole Tower located on the Glenvar Water Treatment Plant site; prepared by DanCell Inc." • The Planning Commission can recommend conditions to the Board to insure that this development meets the specific and general standards for this use. In this case the Planning Commission, and Board, if this project is approved, should re-adopt these conditions to reflect the tower extension and new ordinance requirements regarding broadcasting towers. Those revised conditions can be found in the staff recommendations of this report. Site Lavout/Architecture: The petitioner's proposal includes a 120-foot existing tower and mechanical building. The extension of the tower is proposed at 40 feet, bringing the overall tower height to 160 feet. The proposed mechanical equipment housing is approximately 3 %Z feet x 5 feet x 7 feet on a concrete pad 6 feet x 8 `/2 feet. It is unclear from the submitted plans how far the building is from the property lines; however, it does appear to meet all setback requirements. Access/Traffic Generation: Access to the site from West Main Street is via a private 50-foot ingress/egress easement. According to the applicant, the only regular traffic generated will be a monthly inspection and maintenance visit by a company employee. It should be noted that, as in the original tower application for this site, VDOT is cautioning about the possible widening of Interstate 81, which could affect this property. Fire & Rescue: Emergency vehicle rescue time is estimated at four minutes or less. The development itself should have little if any impact on the levels of service. However, the applicant should be aware that the tower must comply with Section 30-73 of the County Code, which deals with the emergency communications system, to assure that the tower extension does not interfere with the system. -3 Draina~e/Floodplain: The previous project received approval for its plan, and since the land disturbance is minimal, no extra stormater management is anticipated. Screening & Bufferine: Because adjacent properties are also zoned I-1 Industrial, and minimal parking spaces are required, no screening or landscaping is required. Water/Sewer: The lot is served by public water and sewer; however, use of these facilities is not anticipated. As it relates to Roanoke County's goals and official policies pertaining to the placement of new telecommunications facilities: Yes ,Ncy ~/ ODo an reasonable alternatives exists Are there other existin structures that are ~~ • ~- Y g of suitable height and location in the surrounding area? 0Is the height lower than the surrounding ridgelines? 4Is the height the lowest height necessary? Is the tower design a monopole design or other of least visual impact? Is it within a critical viewshed of the Blue Ridge Parkway or Appalachian Trail? Is it within or adjacent to an area designated as being an area of local scenic, historic, ecological or cultural importance? ©Can the facility provide the opportunity for at least 3 other providers to colocate? Is the site currently served by existing roads and necessary utilities? OAre the base and top elevations of the proposed tower relative to surrounding landforms and structures? Is the proposed tower compatible with adjacent land uses, i.e., neighborhood compatibility? The following section is taken from the checklist required for each application, and conversations with the applicants. The tower itself is monopole in design, which is the most favorable type as set forth in the Broadcasting Tower ordinance. Without rehashing items contained within the application and supplemental information, the tower is a 40-foot addition to an existing tower, with 9 pane! antennae (dimensions 53.2" x 6.3" x 2.7"), and one self-contained equipment shed on an 8 '/z' x 6' concrete slab. The site itself is comprised of a 60' x 60' fence-enclosed area on the northeast corner of the lot, approximately 70' from Interstate 81. The tower addition will be made of hot-dipped galvanized steel. ©The applicant did find several locations in the area where they were prepared to erect a new tower. However, at the prompting of the Planning and Zoning department, the developer decided to propose a coloration on an existing tower. This is a significant factor, as one of the County's goals is to reduce the S -3 proliferation in number of towers. OThe height of the tower is higher than immediate surrounding property, along a "flat" strip in the I-81 corridor. However, it is not higher than the closest mountains, Fort Lewis and Brushy Mountains With regards to the height of the tower, the engineer that we met with told us that the entire cell network is designed based on a set of predetermined heights. When asked if the tower could be reduced in height, he told staff that he could not do so without redesigning the entire system. ®The original tower application required the ability to colocate three additional users. This is the first of those three. So the tower logically would only have to support two additional colocators if this tower were approved and installed. The applicant did not provide information on adjacent foliage and tree cover, in relation to the height of the tower. Much of this question can be answered by viewing the photographs. The tower is higher than surrounding landforms, with the exception of the ridgeline of Fort Lewis and Brushy Mountains. Although it will not be found in this enclosed packet, staff has requested that the developer bring to the hearing information on how this site relates to the existing communication system. It is anticipated that this will be available at that time. The enclosed maps with the green, red, and yellow areas depict abefore-and-after scenario for communications coverage for the area in proximity to the proposed tower. The red shows areas of weaker signals or possible "dropped" calls; the yellow shows slightly stronger coverage areas; and the green shows the strongest coverage of all. There are several areas where coverage would improve; the most significant increase in coverage is to the east of the proposed tower site. Because there is not a scale bar on the map, and significant features are not labeled (streets), it is a bit unclear to what extent this increase m coverage is. The photographic simulations show how the proposed addition to the existing tower would look from several perspectives. With the case of this particular tower, it is simple to see the height of the existing tower, and get a better grasp of how great (or little) of a change the addition will have to the immediate environs. The photograph from West Main Street is a little deceiving; the tower appears to be above the ridgeline on the horizon, when it is in actually much lower in elevation than the mountains. As can be seen from the same photo, the access for the property will be along the existing ingress/egress easement. From the site plan, it can be seen that little land disturbing will be taking place. Most of what is shown (the fence, the road, the gravel area, and structures) is already existing. The housing for Triton's equipment is smaller and shorter than US Cellular's, and does appear to be far enough set back from the property lines (25 feet is required). C. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan This property is designated as Principal Industrial in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. The Principal Industrial category designates a variety of land use types, and existing and planned regional employment centers with suitable highway access. Additionally, Principal Industrial areas are not appropriate for tax- exempt facilities. Desirable land use types include large-scale manufacturing, storage, marketing and wholesaling of agricultural products, small industries and custom manufacturing, mining and extraction, and other industrial uses and parks. Some of the favorable land use determinants that this project possesses include availability of water and sewer, locating where industry has historically developed, favorable topography (outside of designated flood plains), protection of natural resources, favorable access, and being in an economic opportunity area. Although the use itself may not be thought of as a traditional industrial use, besides satisfying several land use determinants, broadcasting towers are uses allowable by right in all Industrial zoning districts. D. Conformance with County Development Standard The proposed project is in general compliance with the new Broadcasting Towers Ordinance section of the Zoning Ordinance. The overall height of the tower is less than the maximum allowable 199 feet. The tower appears to meet the setback requirements (as the previous tower was approved). The tower has the capacity to locate three additional service providers, and is monopole in design. Finally, and most importantly, this tower is a colocation on an existing tower, which reduces the total number of towers in the region. Towers not exceeding 30 feet in height are uses by-right in the I-1 Industrial Zoning District, indicating that this district is favorable for locating towers. The project, if approved, would be required to meet site design review and approval as set forth in Section 30-90. PART Ill Staff Conclusions According to the Comprehensive Plan, this area has been designated as Principal Industrial, which is suited for wholesale agriculture, small industries and custom manufacturing, and industrial uses. The adjacent properties consist mainly of other industrially-zoned property, a major utility service, and a major interstate. According to the Zoning Ordinance, broadcasting towers (and extensions over 30 feet) are allowed by Special Use Permit. The proposal is fora 40 foot extension of an existing tower. Roanoke County has made it clear that this type of colocation is desirable in order to reduce the proliferation of towers in the Valley. The site is along a major transportation corridor in Southwest Virginia. The addition will have minimal impacts on traffic, utilities, or other public services. The applicant asserts that this is the height needed for them to provide their communications services. However, this has been backed with little factual data or other information. The site plan is relatively straightforward, and many elements of it are already incorporated into the existing development. In the photo simulations, the tower extension appears to have little additional impact in relation to the existing tower. If the Commission is in support of this Special Use Permit application, then the following conditions, remaining from the original tower application, and reflecting the new ordinance, must be imposed: 1. The height of the proposed tower, excluding any antenna attached to the tower shall not exceed 199 feet above grade. Any extension of the existing tower of thirty (30) feet or less shall not require a Special Use Permit. 2. Any costs associated with relocating or modifying the tower and related equipment resulting from the proposed widening of I-81 shall be the responsibility of the applicant and/or owner of the tower. 3. The tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. 4. No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. 5. This tower shall be structurally designed to carry sufficient loading and the site shall be developed to "` ,~ accommodate the additional equipment necessary for at least two other vendors/providers in order to minimize the proliferation of towers in the vicinity of the site. In addition, by executing the Special Use Permit, the applicant and owner of the land agree to make the tower and tower site available for lease within the structural capacity of the tower and at reasonable costs adequate to recover the capital, operating and maintenance costs of the tower location required for the additional capacity. 6. If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications is discontinued ,the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. 7. The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the undated plan included with the application entitled "Equipment Plan and Elevation, Lee Highway RO- 1-413C, 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA 24153," as prepared by HSMM. • ~® For staff use only ~a Is the applicaticn complete? Please chec!~ if encicsed. AFPL!CATION ~~l1LL NOT EE ,^-.CCE?TED IF A~'ti''~ OF T..;ESE ITE~~1S A.RE MISSING OR INCO~~IFLE T E. Rrs v ars v ais v I Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan ~ A.ppiication fee I Application ''~' Metes and bounds description ~"~ Proffers, if applicable Justification ""~~ Water and saver applicaticn ~ A.djoining properr/ owners I hereby certify that l am either the caner of the propert~or the owner's agent cr contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge a c nsent f the o net. Owner's Signature: G. ichae Pace, Jr., Esquire, Attorney for Triton PCS, Inc. COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr, P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke. VA 24018 ( 540 772-2068 FAX (5~0 1 % % =-? 1 08 Owner's name: Ohio State Cellular Phone Co. Address: 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA Fhcne: 871-0099 Zip Code: 24153 Location of prapery: Tax Map Number: 54.04-1-10 4135 West Main Street Salem, VA 24153 Magisterial District: Catawba Community Planning Area: ~~ c~ iJ Size of parce! {s): Existing Zoning: --~- " 1 0.988 acres Existing Land Use: Telecommunications Facility sq.ft. ;:sl;::::_::::::::; Proposed Zoning: I-1 Industrial District ~ 4ti?' ~~~~ ~ r--r staff usz Gnry Proposed Land Use: Telecommunications Facility ~ Use Type: Does tf;e parce! meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements cf the requested district? YES X NO IF N0, A, VAnIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST . Does the parce! meet the minimum criteria for th~__ 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 X ~. ~~ .....I iVarlanCe Cf CeCtiCn15) Oi the RCanOke CCUnty LOning C'fdlnanCe In GrGcr :C: date rec=i received by• applicati fe rCi6ZA dote: placards issued; / oOS date: Case tiumber. ~ ~,p BROADCAST TOWER PREAPPLlCATiON CONSULTATION CHECKLIST Applicant Name: Triton PCS, Inc. Date: 12/18/98 Consultant Staff Member: s_ BROADCASTING TOWERS AND ASSOCIATED ANTENNA PERMITTED BY RIGHT: New and replacement broadcasting towers and associated antenna not exceeding thirty (30} feet in height and located within any commercial or industrial zoning district provided: a} the proposed tower is a monopole type design; b) the general area of the proposed tower is currently served by above ground utilities including electric power and telephone poles; and c) all other use and design standards for the construction of the broadcasting tower and associated facilities are met. Antennas may be installed on any existing structure within the County provided said antenna does not meet the definition of a broadcasting tower, does not increase the height of the existing structure more than ten (10) feet; and does not result in the structure and antenna exceeding the maximum structure height for that zoning district. Temporary towers erected for a period not to exceed twenty-one days. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION SHALL BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A BROADCAST TOWER IN ADDITION TO STANDARD APPLICATION REGlUIREMENTS. r ~O~OSQ~~i~uaiities Utilities that are currently present on site: all Utilities required that are not currently present on site: none Expected route of lini<age: Estimated noise level in decibels: zero Br~~sl~ast Tower Structure Type: ~ Monopole ^ Lattice Tower ^ Guyed Tower ^ Stealth Design (description) ^ Other (description) Proposed height of tower excluding antenna: 160 feet Existing height of surrcundine tree canopy and/or buildings: not applicable Construction material and finish of tower, see attached Specific tower location see attached Material: Finish: Longitude: "" Latitude: "' Ground elevation in mean sea level of the proposed tower site: see attached Tower has structural ability to accommodate: ^ One ^ Two ~ Three other providers. Zy~~s_~of~n_tenna or Other Devices Att~~}~d To Tower see attached ^ Omni-Directional Antenna ^ Directional Pane! ^ Parabolic Antenna ^ ~I~Jhip Ar;tenr:a ^ Other (description) Material and finish of the proposed antenna(s). see attached Dimensions of Antenna(s) - height /width /depth Material: Finish: / / The following information must be submitted separately in either a written or mapped format. ^ Information on how the proposed site relates to the applicant's existing communication system, including X ~ number of other sites within the Roanoke Valley, and the location of the antenna at each site. S-3 see attached A map designating the specific coverage area(s) desired with any overflow areas denoted separate! . ee ttached y ^ A lisp, wit~i a map, of all of the alternative sites considered or evaluated to serge the area of this proposed X tower, including other existing tower sites in the vicinity. This should include any co-locations considered and the specific technical, legal or other reasons the other site(s) were re;ected. see attached Provide conceptual site plan drawn to scale, depicting the location of support structures, equipment enclosures, landscaped areas, fences, lighting, access, limits of disturbed land, average slope of the site, ownership and use of adjoining properties, etc. see attached ^ Provide accurate, to scale, photographic simulations showing the relationship of the proposed broadcast X tower and associated antenna to the surroundings. Photographic simulations should include the relationships of any ne~.v or modified road or utility corridors necessary to serve the proposed broadcast tower site. see attached Provide a computerized terrain analysis showing the visibility of the proposed broadcast tower and antenna at the requested height and location. If new or modified road, access or utility corridors are proposed, the terrain analysis shall also show the visibility of these ne~.v or modified features. see attached (to follow) 0 Provide detail sheet for broadcast tower structure. see attached Provide an accurate description and photograph of the proposed tower structure, including antenna. see attached ^ Provide derail sheet or"any antenna or devices attached to tower including electrical and mechanical X specincations for antenna systems. see attached ~0~~ ~ I hereby certiry that: ,~.1! required submittal's to the FAA, as required by Zoning Ordinance Section 30-37-2D. 6, have been submitted. ^ / A required on,-site balloon or comparable test will be performed on the dates of ~f2~~~ for the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for 2/2/99 of 23 9 ,and cn the dates fer the Eoard of Supervisors public hearinc scheduled for _ 2/23/99 1, the apciicant, shall be responsible for all fees associated v~rith the filing or" the app/icaticn; inciudinc the reasonable cost of any indeoe,7de,nt analysis deemed necessary b,i the County to verir"y t~~ for the new broadcast tower. Signature: ~'--'~ 12/18/98 Date: G. Michael Pace, Jr., Esquire, At rney for Triton PCS, Inc. GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MOORS Attorneys at Law 540.983.9300 Direct No. 540.983.9312 Facsimile s40.983.9400 December 18, 1998 HAND DELIVERED Mr. David Holladay Department of Planning and Zoning County of Roanoke 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 s~ 10 Franklin Road, S.E. Pos[ Office Box 4001 3 Roanoke, Virginia 24038-001 3 Re: Triton PCs, Inc. - Application for Special Use Permit for Telecommunications Facility Site No. 413C - 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA (Roanoke County) Zoning Designation: I-1 (Industrial District) Dear Mr. Holladay: Enclosed on behalf of Triton PCS, Inc. are the following: 1. Transmittal Letter; 2. Application for Special Use Permit; 3. Check in the amount of $40 representing the fee for the Special Use Permit; 4. Development Application for Telecommunications Facility; 5. List of adjoining property owners; 6. List of other sites considered; 7. Photographic simulations of the site; 8. Propagation Studies; 9. The computerized terrain analysis (viewshed map) -will be delivered to you under separate cover as we agreed; 10. Broadcast Tower Preapplication Checklist; and 11. Four (4) small and four (4) large copies of the proposed Concept Plan, which includes: a. Land survey with metes and bounds description of the site; b. Elevation and Site Plan; c. Site detail; d. Electric Power; e. Grounding Detail; and f. Miscellaneous Details. !4722\1\531904.1 _ - _-- - r< , II ."'~ i _ i `\ GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MCIORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -2- ~+ This will confirm that this application is submitted more than thirty (30) days after the preapplication meeting with you on November 13, 1998. We understand that this application will be considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals at its hearing scheduled for February 2, 1999, and by the Board of Supervisors on February 23, 1999. We look forward to presenting more detailed information concerning the application at that time. In the interim, if you have any questions, please call me at 983-9312. With best wishes for the holidays, I am Yours sincerely, GElaTTRY LOCKS RAKES & MOORS ~ G. Michael Pace, Jr. GMPjr/lgh Enclosure cc: Frank Shortall (w/encl.) John Slater (w/encl.) George Cumming (w/encl., via facsimile) • 14722\i\531904.1 s-3 Attorneys at Law 540.983.9300 Facsimile 540.983.9400 Mr. David Holladay Department of Planning and Zoning County of Roanoke 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MQ~RE Direct No. 540.983.9312 December 18, 1998 10 FraNdln Roaa. S E. Post Office Box 40013 Roanoke, Virginia 2403&001 3 HAND DELIVERED Re: Triton, PCS - Application for Special Exception for Telecommunications Facility Site No. 413C - 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA (Roanoke County) Zoning Designation: I-1 Industrial District Dear Mr. Holladay: Triton PCS ("Triton") respectfully requests that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors grant a special use permit fora 40 foot addition to the existing wireless telecommunications facility owned by Ohio State Cellular Phone Co. at the above-referenced address for collocation of Triton's antennaes. BACKGROUND: Triton is the first licensed affiliate of AT&T, and has been assigned licenses by the Federal Communication Commission to develop and maintain a wireless Personal Communication Services (PCS) network in parts of central and southwest Virginia, including the County of Roanoke. Once the network is constructed, Triton will become a member of the AT&T Digital Wireless Network, which is licensed to cover more than 80% of the United States. The Triton network will use digital technology that assures the privacy of conversations, protects telephone numbers from fraudulent use, and provides clearer reception than analog (cellular) technology. Services offered will combine traditional wireless telephone features with numerous advanced features such as caller ID, alphanumeric and numeric paging, short e-mail messaging, and voice mail. Triton will market this new wireless telecommunications service to residential, business, pedestrian and motorist users at competitive pricing, making it available to virtually everyone. PCS telecommunications actually contribute to the safety and general welfare of the community. Wireless communication provides a public service that citizens can rely upon for safety, security and emergency services. 14722U~531905.1 r- - ' ~ GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & MCORE • Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -2- S- 3 Because Triton is required to provide a satisfactory level of service to the community under FCC regulations, the placement of communications facilities is critical to Triton's ability to meet FCC objectives, without jeopardizing its licenses. Each of these facilities is linked to the other by a tower, and without any one of them, the network will have a gap in coverage. This site is therefore a critical component in Triton's and AT&T's network. Whenever possible, Triton locates on existing towers and structures to minimize the number of communications towers in a particular area. Triton intends to collocate on the existing 120 foot monopole owned by Ohio State Cellular on this property. Triton has located a number of existing structures in the Roanoke Valley on which it will install one of its facilities. Triton has also considered and rejected a number of other locations and collocation possibilities either because of unavailability, for geographic or technical reasons, or because such locations were too close or too far away from existing or proposed tower locations in other parts of the Roanoke Valley. A list of all such locations is attached hereto. Triton's Radio Frequency (RF) engineers have identified the area that includes this property as a necessary location for antennae in order to provide uninterrupted service coverage to the citizens and business community in this part of the County. THE PROPERTY: The property is currently being used as a 120 foot monopole to support Ohio State Cellular's existing antennaes. Triton has agreed to increase the height of the existing monopole from 120 feet to 160 feet to permit it collocation and lease space on the enlarged monopole from Ohio State Cellular. REQUEST: Triton requests that a special use permit be issued to permit the construction, operation and maintenance of a 40 foot addition to the existing monopole with antennae at this location. PROPOSAL: Triton has filed its detailed concept plan with this application which describes the proposed telecommunications facility. The improvements include a new 40 foot addition to the existing monopole with 9 panel antennaes and aself-contained equipment enclosure located on a 8'6" x 6' concrete slab to be located within the existing area on which Ohio State Cellular's equipment • 14722\1\531905.1 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & MOORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -3- ,S- 3 is currently located. The total area will continue to be enclosed by the existing 8 foot high chain link fence. Access to the site will be via the existing 50 foot ingress/egress easement to West Main Street (U.S. Route 11/460). The total height of the structure, including antennaes, will be 160 feet above ground level. This is the minimum necessary to obtain and maintain adequate coverage in this area. The facility will be unstaffed, after construction, and will not require parking. The facility will be regularly inspected and maintained by a company employee on a monthly basis. It will not impact County services such as water and sewer, and it will require only electricity and telephone service which are available on site. The facility will not interfere with any existing emergency communications equipment, business or residential communications equipment, or radio or television reception. In addition, the facility will not impact traffic or schools. The proposed monopole will provide for a total of three collocation opportunities, thereby minimizing the proliferation of other towers in the area. CODE COMPLIANCE: The property is located within a I-1 Industrial District. Section 30-61-2(A)(6) of the County Code permits by right the use for a broadcasting tower, subject to the provisions of Section 30- 87-2. Because this is a broadcasting tower, as defined by Ordinance 102798-12 amending Section 3-87- 2, the maximum height restriction otherwise imposed by Section 30-61-3(C) is not applicable pursuant to Section 30-80(A). The application for a special use permit is appropriate pursuant to Section 30-19-1, and this location and the proposed use satisfy the County's Use and Design Standards set forth in Section 30-87-2 amending the proffered conditions to permit the use and for issuance of a special use permit in this case: a. The use is compatible with existing use on site; b. The addition to the structure has been designed so as to minimize its height to the minimum required for collocation and otherwise to minimize any adverse impact on adjoining properties; . 14722\1\531905.1 s - .~ GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & MCORE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -4- c. No demand on public utilities is created since it will need only electric power which is available on site; d. The use generates no traffic and does not increase the flood potential of the surrounding neighborhood; e. The use furthers the intent of Sections 30-28, 30-29-7 and 30-87-2 and the County's Comprehensive Plan by providing for collocation on existing structures and the expansion of digital services to a critical business and residential area in a controlled fashion which will minimize the proliferation of telecommunications towers in the area; f. The use is not contrary to the public interest, but significantly furthers the public interest by expanding the availability of wireless personal, business and emergency services telecommunications, thereby enhancing the general welfare and safety of the community; g. The base of the monopole is not less than 40 feet from any residential structure on an adjoining lot; h. The telecommunications facility meets all of the County's minimum setback requirements; and The use otherwise conforms to the County's requirements. The intended use and design of the proposed monopole meets all of the requirements for issuance of the special use permit requested. The use is permitted as a principal use under Section 30- 61(A)(6) and satisfies all of the design standards required by Section 30-87-2. The subject property is particularly well-suited because of its remote location, the general development pattern of the surrounding area, its consistency with the existing and other permitted uses in the I-1 zoning district, and its design assuring negligible impact on the surrounding area. In addition, no other reasonable alternative locations exist, and the proposed monopole and its location and design have been chosen to protect the scenic beauty of Roanoke County while at the same time providing a structure capable of offering the level of service acceptable to AT&T and as mandated by the FCC. This site is designated Principal Industrial on the County's Comprehensive Plan. There will be little change in this area, however, as the applicant merely wishes to expand on the existing uses 14722\1\531905.1 GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MARE • Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -5- S- 3 already located on this site. This proposal will not affect the operations of the existing use. This subject parcel has been chosen in part because it does not border any residential properties. It is important to Triton to be able to provide a high level of wireless service to the community, without imposing on its citizens. The future land use section of the County Comprehensive Plan states that this area is to be used for the development of major industries. Having state of the art communications available to these businesses will be a draw to future developers and their employees. Dependable wireless service is a benefit to all parties. There will be little to no impact on natural, cultural or historic resources in this part of Roanoke County. Triton PCS has been very conscious of the beauty of the Roanoke Valley when making decisions on where to locate future telecommunications installations. It is Triton's wish to become a good corporate neighbor and a contributing part of the future of Roanoke County. Accordingly, in order to build this vital network link, Triton requests that a special exception be issued in this case. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. If you have any questions concerning the application or otherwise, please call me at me at 983-9312. Yours sincerely, GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MOORS _~ ~ -- ~~ >chaol race, J ~ GMPjr/lgh Enclosure cc: Frank Shortall (w/encl.) John Slater (w/encl.) George Cumming (w/encl., via facsimile) 14722\1531905.1 GENTRY LOCKE RAKES & M~JRE Mr. David Holladay December 18, 1998 Page -6- Attachments: Application for Rezoning and Special Use Permit Concept Plan with: List of Adjoining Property Owners Photographic Simulations Propagation Studies List of Considered Alternate Sites Terrain Analysis (viewshed map) • S-3 14722\1\531905.1 S-3 GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & 1V100RE Attorneys at Law IO Franlln Road, S.E. 540.983.9300 Post O'i~~ce oax 4G013 Facsimile 54G•983.940G Mr. David Holladay Department of Planning and Zoning County of Roanoke 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Direct No. 540.983.9312 December 30, 1998 Roanoxe, Virginia 24x38-0G~3 Re: Triton PCS, Inc. - Application for Special Use Permit for Telecommunications Facility Site No. 413C - 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA (Roanoke County) Zoning Designation: I-1 (Industrial District) Dear David: • Enclosed is the visibility analysis prepared by Anderson & Associates for Triton PCS with respect to the proposed telecommunications tower at this site. Also included is a separate visibility analysis of a structure with a height of only 25 feet at this location. As you can see, there is very little difference between the visibility of a 25 foot tower and the tower proposed by Triton PCS. I believe this completes the application package for this matter. If that is not the case, or if you have any questions concerning the visibility analysis, please call me at 983-9312. Yours sincerely, GMPjr/lgh Enclosure cc: John A. Slater Mr. Frank J. Shortall GENTRY LOCKS RAKES & MOORS G. M hael Pace, Jr. 14722\1\533727.1 s-.~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~o~~~~~~ mg. ~ 92 ~~ qq pp ~~ fMf £ 8 8 7~€ m ~~ Y iF~ ~ ~~ g v~ ~ E e 8~ ~ ~ a $ m~ ~ ~~ '~~ • ~, ~m in Z o ~~a ~ "nz~ m ~m m ~~ w rlAz i zT <~o N A a U~n~ c,+z0~ n~o mz ~D zm ~_ O A y0 m~ O ~ ,C A 0 m ~m a ~~ 8~ ~ I aY= ~ ~ ~ ;~~ N ~~ - ---1_ m N ~ ~ ~~ A m Z .'' m a ~, ~ oa <I x _A ~ c ~N o ° ~m ,-,I A ~, I ~1 ~~ -- - . Nr~~~ i Bgm: bs ~ v~ zz.. w- \~ ~t ~~ r =_ _ ~ --- - -~.-E- 'n v i f 4 ' rQz r4:I G.GG~~ ~. '=q p~ ~~~ 8RN88~~ °S~~ ~p~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~m ~ _~eu's~ U~uP° sa ua~~~ RuaJ~Y$6~g Sg° ~y=~us~g~ ~~ ~ s~~~~a ~~ ~€ e~~ m #~ ~og~g ?~~¢ ~ i °~a 9 ~`'°ra A I~x~~' m~\ tires i ~~ P T ~ ~p °-~ N., °~ yy~ ~~~~$ ~ ~ ~ Y " ~% no d~~~ ~ ~O ~ ~ ~s i £F~~ ,£ - s- --- ~ D oq r g ~~~~~ I ~ ~~ o~$~z Deaf ~ ~ ~©oUia a r°t ~~~ o Y~yc A> _ m~ mS ~ozmc ~ ~~ o ~ n O N ~imzN~\ f~ O "AC~SoAg~~°~ !7 0 o i ~ _ 0 21 x n i~°~; mZ ~ n ~ ~ ~O s 0 ~ J- s ~~ ~O 8 ~~ \~., q., , , ~,~ .r --' ~_ __ ~``~ 0. ~~ ~s ~-„-t -`~ `~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~r~~~ ~~gs ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~J " ~ a ~ ~ d ~;g ~~ r ~ l J ~ V `m" ~ ° ~ ggL,5,3 a~ Y~ g+~~~ !n a i ~ ~ i &o.v D O n x W` 8 9 $N 0 N fTl ~g des na ~ _~'._ . • C7 ~/ r0 son ~a~N.~~~~gNO ~~~~~$"III ~c~ _ m~~r~'~ ^ns n m z D y°~ o ~'9 v°at i$ £F ° ~~ °ROnosEO N ~., ~ ~ n N ° l z ~~ 3 0 / ~`o ~ § non ao k~ ~ ~ ~g~g / -- T.~g - _ a ~n 7. ~o m 3 - ~~z ~mg~ o~ ,~V A ~- a~ -m p a ~ o a~Y ~ gaR ~ ~g = °s A ~ gp b V ~~ ` N °sa n _ i' = y "' $ s a= f-~ O A._D. 'si m~ ~ G m ii jp~`_, L' Fla ~°~ ~ z °•5 I r $ n m j ET~ c ~~. II ii~~' ~ iii ~I~ ~~_. ~ ~ ~ ,~ li tiY __ ~ s~~ 5~~g r ~~ \`i; ~~ ~ s - _ < ~1 5 r"~ ~ _~~i Y m ~ _ ~lr ~ ~ g i - . it t ~ g _50 -D .-__ _~ o I N 150'-0' ([N0.VOING PROPOSED AO'-0' ADDITION) AGl i0P Of ANTENNAS u~ 15]'-O' (INOlV01NG PRMOSEO AO'-0' ADDITION) AGl ANTENNA nAO. CENTER 7 ~ -_ -~ ~ >~ Ex ISTING I)O_0' ALl fOP Of ANTENNAS O z K'~ ExISTING It - AGE ANTENN_AD C NLEP O _. -. ___ ~ _ ~~~ €a„ r, >°~~a aka ~~~g~ E- ~~ fTt ?'no 'yo D ~~`~~ ~A~ ~.~N Y~ -~ ~. O j "q J R° ~ ~a~ Z - _ / / _ - , F~g~ ~~ .jam ~B ~ _ i ~ ~~ ~o Ffj m o c m r lJ ~< N a R' o ~ a N A 'o £ „ o ~ r- W Z7 E- "' 7 ~ - - - - - mm om ~ D 4 ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ cn _ __ ~ s ~o I ~ G7 OD D ~_ O ~ ~ a -~ Zo pZ (~JD V ; n ~'' ~ C7 < ~^ ~ a J Y~ r 0• .A ,~ ~<,aa ~ < ~.o DQ .~.. P °P ~ ~v~ 0~ D n •'•.~ A - aN -- ~~ s a ~, ~°4 3 ~ 4,549 p05 4560 - ti ~ 0~0 ~'~ s~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ 9S 454J 4 ~ ,, 4458 S`3 / 11 ~ . ~ 1.06 Ac. ~ 4550 9 a ~ ~ ~° 44J6 ti.' ~ / ~~~ ~~ / 6 ~ ~~. U- .~ ORT ~ ~ ~ 4521 [~ 70 1 ,~ 4536 1~N Y 2Q 4515 ~°9 2 ~ JVK_ / 3 • so e J .~0 457, ,~ h~ ~ " ~ ~ ~p u",hio / State Ce//u/or n~. 44 $ z ,9 ~ S ~ ,, Phore Company /nc. o~ aszz ti' Sss ''1 ' j/ d0 ~~.~' 2e h590 45. 4504 ~_ 1 ~~~, 46. 1 1.30 Ac. /~^~~ 7 /L ~` l ~ J~O. ~ G 6470 _ ~t o 1 IZ7 ~~l 5 .s c '_`' 11. 7. 4416 0~ Ac. , 10. \ ~0~51 3 City Of ~~a/em 2y~s~ e° 6~ 15.87 Ac. 8. 5 ~ 12. n ~' i 3.25 Ac. w «r Flr~ao~ ~ vio~r fi 0a 41J5 09 x735 ~ / • 279 `6 OO90a ~ 17 ;] 7.57 Ac. 0~ 4206 3. 1.OQ AC. Cj'~ ,~ ~.oo Ac. 0 4335 ~ '16 ~ O 4304 c'a 6 0 `~aa 5. i \'~ 4220 ,- [~J~ ~ J O ~~ 4300 \60 ~' I N \ / 4328 ~ ~_ ' / 1°. 4173 Fort Lew/s 5° 13. ze°a9 BOpf/St° ChUrCh 1.38.Ac. 2.83 Aa(D 1rJ_ / / ` 2.42 Aa(C3 1.50 Ac. / 16. `~° U 6 ~}. o' ~ \ rn ~ ~ ,~ 14. / p4215 ~- i745 / 1 8 , 4183 ~ y Fore Lewis 1,4~ L ~(7 Baptist Church j/ ~ I 1.75 Ac. / 4~eo /-- 50 / / 419C 1 1 .00 Ac. 1. ROANOICE COUNTY Triton PCS,Ine./Ohio State Cellular DEPARTMENT OF Special Use Permit COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~ 54.04->-10.1 ~ S-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO TRITON PCS, INC. (AS LESSEE) AND OHIO STATE CELLULAR PHONE CO. (AS OWNER) TO ALLOW THE EXTENSION OF AN EXISTING BROADCASTING TOWER AT 4135 WEST MAIN STREET (TAX MAP NO. 54.04-1-10.1), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Triton PCS, Inc. has filed a petition to allow the extension from 120 feet to 160 feet of an existing broadcasting tower in order to collocate on the tower owned by Ohio State Cellular Phone Co. located at 4135 West Main Street (Tax Map No. 54.04-1-10.1) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 2, 1999; and made the following Findings of Fact: (1) The proposed tower extension appears to meet the requirements set forth in Section 30- 87-2 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (2) The proposed tower extension is on property zoned I-1 Industrial, which has been designated as a preferable zoning district for this use. (3) The proposed tower extension is a collocation on an existing tower; Roanoke County seeks to reduce the proliferation of towers by encouraging such collocations. (4) The use is not anticipated to have any impact on the provision of public services (fire and rescue, police, utilities). (5) The proposed tower extension is outside the critical view sheds of the Appalachian Trail and Blue Ridge Parkway. (6) The proposed tower extension is providing additional communications options for the residents of the Roanoke Valley and people passing through the area along a major transportation corridor. (7) The proposed extension is located on a tower that previously received approval, thus showing that this is a favorable location for such a use. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on January 26, 1999; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on February 23, 1999. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\TRITON.1 S-~ as follows: 1. That the Board of Supervisors concurs in the Planning Commission "Findings of Fact" and further finds that the granting of a special use permit to Triton PCS, Inc. , as Lessee, and to Ohio State Cellular Phone Co., as Owner, to allow the extension of an existing broadcasting tower from 120 feet to 160 feet in order to collocate on the tower located at 4135 West Main Street (Tax Map No. 54.04-1-10.1) in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 1999 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The height of the proposed tower, excluding any antenna attached to the tower shall not exceed 160 feet above grade. Any extension of the existing tower above 160 feet shall require a Special Use Permit. (2) Any costs associated with relocating or modifying the tower and related equipment resulting from the proposed widening of I-81 shall be the responsibility of the applicant and/or owner of the tower. (3) The tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. (4) No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure. Security lighting maybe provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. (5) This tower shall be structurally designed to carry sufficient loading and the site shall be developed to accommodate the additional equipment necessary for at least two other vendors/providers in order to minimize the proliferation of towers in the vicinity of the site. In addition, by executing the Special Use Permit, the applicant and the owner of the land agree to make the tower and tower site available for lease within the structural capacity of the tower and at reasonable costs adequate to recover the capital, operating and maintenance costs of the tower location required for the additional capacity. (6) If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications is discontinued ,the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. (7) The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the undated plan included with the application entitled "Equipment Plan and Elevation, Lee Highway RO-1-413C, 4135 West Main Street, Salem, VA 24153," as prepared by HSMM. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All U:\WPDOCSWGENDA\ZONING\TRITON. i 2 S .~ ,~ 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. U:\WPDOCSWGENDA\ZONING\TRITON.1 3 ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE 022399-5 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 3.77-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ELECTRIC ROAD, EAST OF COLONNADE CORPORATE CENTER II (TAX MAP NO. 76.16-1-39) IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2, CONDITIONAL, UPON THE APPLICATION OF BLUE RIDGE CAFE LLC WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 26, 1999, and the second reading and public hearing were held February 23, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 2, 1999; 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 3.77 acres, as described herein, and located on the north side of Electric Road east of Colonnade Corporate Center II (Tax Map Number 76.16-1-39) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Conditional, Office District, to the zoning classification of C-2, Conditional, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Blue Ridge Cafe LLC. 3. That at the May of 1988 rezoning of this property the owner of the property voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of 1 Roanoke County, Virginia, accepted and the Petitioner/Owner is now requesting be removed: o..,... n..,,-.,•a....a,. 4. 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. Preliminary concept plan, prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, dated 11 /14/98 is proffered. B. There will be no additional entrance/exits on Route 419. C. There will be minimum of 80 feet of natural ground cover including trees and brush to be left on the rear of the property, to be displaced only by necessary water drainage systems. D. All lighting will be directed away from the adjoining residential properties. Poles shall not be more than twenty feet in height. E. One monument-type freestanding sign is permitted. Maximum size 2 of the monument sign is 40 square feet and ten feet in height. The sign shall be ground lit. F. No residential uses will be placed on the property. G. Architecture-the exterior of the principal building shall be wood frame with brick as indicated on the preliminary concept plan. H. An easement across the front of the property connecting First National Exchange Bank and Colonnade Corporate Center shall be made available for purchase at a reasonable cost that allows the petitioners to recover costs they incur associated with the easement. Dumpster location shall be screened and directed away from adjoining homeowners. J. There will be a minimum 50 foot buffer, containing either natural ground cover including trees and brush or planted materials, to be left on the west side of the property between petitioner's site and the adjoining property as shown on the proffered concept plan. 5. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly side of Virginia Route 419 and the southeast corner of property of Colonnade Corporate Center II; thence leaving Virginia Route 419 and with the easterly line of Colonnade Corporate Center II N. 07 deg. 51 min. 18 sec. E. 380.00 feet to a point on the easterly line of property of The Hobart Companies, Ltd. (DB 1298, page 750); thence along the easterly line of the property of The Hobart Companies, Ltd. N. 14 deg. 39 min. 00 sec. W. 275.43 feet to a point on Mud Lick Creek and the southwest corner of Lot 15, Block 16, Section 4, Cresthill; thence S. 58 deg. 02 min. 00 sec. E. 256.70 feet to an old pipe on the southerly side of Lot 14, Block 16, Section 4, Cresthill; thence N. 89 deg. 00 min. 00 sec. E. 168.72 feet to an old pin on the southerly side of Lot 13, Block 16, Section 4, Cresthill; thence S. 70 deg. 50 min. 00 sec. E. 41.23 feet to a pin on the northwesterly side of Tract 2; thence with the westerly line of Tract 2 S. 19 deg. 37 min. 09 sec. W. 559.22 feet to a point on the northerly side of Virginia Route 419; thence N. 82 deg. 08 min. 42 sec. W. 222.00 feet to a point of Beginning, said property being Tract 1, containing 3.7755 acres as shown on the plat for Westclub Corporation dated August 18, 1994, prepared by T.P. Parker & sons, which plat is of record in the Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Plat Book 17, page 58. 6. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 4 ~ ~ i~7 / F 110. }, • ~ 1'~ {~~ 9. ]Jb nU. ~'~.. }#.4Bp4 ~% 7. )lI) • 13. r~ v ~a,e, n ttt~~~ggq ~n n masn " ezs• u _ ~~ 3 ~ 3. ~ ~nrr '~R rs 2. ' ~iJ, r/ ~ ~ ~- ,e '" ~ 98. ' ~~ ,.,, ~. ~, J. - .x,. ~~~~~p »R ~, a ~~ iw~- IOM, 9• ,~ )lb s-~ ~ r---~ ~~ i • T 40.01 1. i.~ x. 40.10 40.11 40.03 ~., - .~ 40.09 .fey: eao ° _ Oetentian 39.01 ~~~ Bosh ~~ 3.]] x f6 $ 3p ~ - ~ t~ f 4s.0•B ~ R ~"~ U rYSd Slates ?arro/ Service O cr.,..m cw..,e'. r .v.. s r wu~a. i~`. uxnn (w w. a/ ~ 40,04 ~r Rd :s: ~• ~... ~,,,..,.e. "~ .~... ~a~rc a0.97~ q~$ 49.02 cw~° '~" ~. 419 ~_ :w >< .o~ ~~~ GNired Scoter Posto/ Ssrviie ~~ ~d $ 40:04 ^~-` ~ Oefantion ` ° BosrnT! t; s C ^ 1 sur R j \ i3 .. ` ~ \` ~•. q 40.05 31x. ~ ^ '~~ le. ,4°onoke Cavnry !ibrory Main a ncir RC3.5. .ueane.':''.: ~ ~ <a. ,are 17. "~ ~ /~~~ c~ r e, ° , _ ~. ROANQKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEYELOPMENT 2. b K ~81 ID IIL Blue Ridge Cafe`,LLC/West Ctub Corp. Rezone from C1-C to C2-C 76.16-1-39 p x ~~~ w PETITIONER: BLUE RIDGE CAFE LLC `S CASE NUMBER: 7-2/99 Planning Commission Hearing Date: February 2, 1999 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: February 23, 1999 A. REQUEST Petition of Blue Ridge Cafe LLC to rezone 3.77 acres from C-1 conditional to C-2 conditional to construct a restaurant, located on the north side of Electric Road, east of Colonnade Corporate Center II, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Paul Bell, Cresthill Civic League, said he has talked with eight adjoining property owners and seven of them are opposed to the request. He said that proffers are not being enforced in the area and property values have dropped. Lee Eddy noted that the 419 Frontage Development Plan encourages office type facilities along the corridor and approval of this request would set a precedent. He said that he had hopes that the C-1 office category would be preserved by the 419 plan in this area. Sarah Martin expressed concem with destruction of the woods and view. She said that she was at the community meeting and was very much opposed to the project. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission asked about the proffer relating to an easement. Staff has suggested that applicant amend that proffer. In response to the Commission, the applicant said it will be a family type restaurant, no loud music. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS 1) Preliminary concept plan, prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, dated 11 /14/98 is proffered. 2) There will be no additional entrance/exits on Route 419. 3) There will be minimum of 80 feet of natural ground cover including trees and brush to be left on the rear of the property, to be displaced only by necessary water drainage systems. 4) All lighting will be directed away from the adjoining residential properties. Poles shall not be more than twenty feet in height. 5) One monument-type freestanding sign is permitted. Maximum size of the monument sign is 40 square feet and ten feet in height. The sign shall be ground lit. 6) No residential uses will be placed on the property. 7) Architecture-the exterior of the principal building shall be wood frame with brick as indicated on the preliminary concept plan. 8) An easement across the front of the property connecting First National Exchange Bank and Colonnade Corporate Center shall be made available for purchase at a reasonable cost that allows the petitioners to recover costs they incur associated with the easement. 9) Dumpster location shall be screened and directed away from adjoining homeowners. 10) There will be a minimum 50 foot buffer, containing either natural ground cover including trees and brash or planted materials, to be left on the west side of the property between petitioner's site and the adjoining property as shown on the proffered concept plan. s- y E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason moved to recommend approval of the petition with proffered conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomason, Robinson, Ross, Hooker NAYS: Witt ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE Mr. Witt said that he was reminded of the 419 plan by Mr. Eddy's comments and that plan was initiated because of pressures to develop Route 419. In the plan, that area was designated as C-1 office category. "... I think we need to stand by our plan," approving this will open up other C-2 uses . G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Staff Report ~\~ Terrance Harri ~, Roanoke Co t~ _ Vicinity Map _ Other ... ., r_. _._., Planning Commission .~ _ .~/ • STAFF REPORT Case Number: 7-2/99 Prepared by: Janet Scheid Applicant: Blue Ridge Cafe, LLC Date: February 2, 1999 PART I A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Petitioners' request to build and operate a restaurant is generally consistent with the Roanoke County Community Plan. Petitioners are proposing to use an access easement through an adjoining property and will not be requesting any additional access points directly to Rt. 419. B. DESCRIPTION OF PETITION The petitioners' request is to rezone 3.77 acres from C-1C Office to C-2C General Commercial to build and operate a 4,800 square foot restaurant. The site is currently vacant and is heavily wooded. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 1. The property is currently zoned C-1 Office District with conditions. The following proffers are currently on the property: A. Project will be developed in substantial conformity with the site plan prepared by Ernie Rose Architects, submitted herewith. B. There will be no additional entrance/exits on Route 419. C. Screening and buffering will be as proposed on the site plan of Ernie Rose, Architects. D. All lighting will be directed away from the adjoining residential property. Poles shall not be more then 20 feet in height. E. Signage will be similar in size and configuration to the existing sign on Phase I. • s_y F. No residential uses will be placed on the property. • G. Architecture will be compatible with Colonnade Corporate Center. H. Dumpster location for Phase 1 to be approved in staff review. 2. The C-2 General Commercial District allows a wide variety of commercial and retail uses including restaurants. 3. Site plan review will be required. • I• S -- ,c~/ PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS i• 1. Background Information - The Board of Supervisors rezoned this site from R-1 Single family residential to C-1 Commercial in 1988 at the request of The Hobart Companies. It was originally intended to be a part of the Colonnade Corporate Center with two-story office buildings being built on this site and the adjoining site to the west. 2. Lot Area - The site is approximately 3.77 acres primarily wooded. It rises steeply from Rt. 419, levels off towards to middle of the site and then drops off again towards the residential homes on Hillbrook Drive. 3. Location - The site is located off Rt. 419 next to the First National Exchange Bank and the U.S. Postal Office. 4. Buildings/Structures - The site is currently vacant. 5. Access - This site has approximately 220 feet of frontage on Rt. 419. Since the site is currently vacant no access has been constructed into the site. There is an access easement from the adjoining property to the east. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Use - Petitioners propose to build and operate a 4,800 square foot, 174 seat restaurant with accompanying parking facilities. The proposed restaurant is a one-story building while the current proffers on this site allow a two-story office building. There are obvious differences between the operation of a restaurant and the operation of an office building - hours of operation may be significantly different and depending on the nature of the restaurant noise impacts could be significantly different. The site is bordered to the north by a residential single- family neighborhood. The proposed restaurant building is located approximately 390 feet from the nearest house. • 3 2. Access to Site - Access is proffered to be from the adjoining . site to the east, through an access easement. No new access to Rt. 419 is proposed. There is a median cut on Rt. 419 at this location so vehicles could access the site traveling either east or west on Rt. 419. 3. Circulation and Parking - Petitioners show a preliminary concept plan with traffic entering the site from the east through the bank driveway then traveling north into the parking lot area. Parking is behind and to the side of the restaurant building. 4. Traffic Count - Signalization, turning movements, accident data and traffic counts are currently being studied on the Rt. 419 corridor by the Virginia Department of Transportation. Peak hour traffic on this corridor and at key intersections is a level of service "D". 5. Public Services - Public water and sewer are available to this site. 6. Amenities - Petitioners are proposing to retain the wooded • area to the north of the restaurant building. They have proffered to retain a minimum 80' buffer area of natural ground cover in this area. Petitioners have also proffered that the architecture of the restaurant will be compatible with Colonnade Corporate Center. Petitioners have indicated that this means that the building will be brick but staff has asked for clarification of this proffer. 7. Signaae - Petitioners have proffered that signage will be in harmony with existing Rt. 419 businesses. Staff has requested that this proffer be clarified and petitioner has indicated a willingness to proffer a monument sign. 8. Community Meeting - A community meeting was held on December 17, 1998. Four citizens attended this meeting. Petitioners exhibited the site plans and described the project. Petitioners and staff answered questions. There did not appear to be significant opposition to the proposal. • s- y 9. Impact on Neighborhood - The petitioners request will have • minimum impact on the adjoining residential neighborhood. Visual impact of the restaurant building is mitigated by the existing terrain, the proposed finished grade and the proffered 80 foot buffer yard. Use of the buffer yard for the water drainage system will result in some level of visual degradation. Petitioners submitted two cross-sections showing existing houses and the proposed building. The restaurant is proposed to be 24 feet in height with first floor elevation at 1157'. The finished building will be approximately 40 feet higher then the houses separated by at least 100 feet of which 80 feet is to be left in natural vegetation and basically undisturbed. 10. Proffers - Petitioners are requesting the removal of all existing proffers on this property to be replaced with the following proffers: 1. There will be no additional entrance/exits on Route 419. 2. There will be a minimum of 80 feet of natural ground cover including trees and brush to be left on the rear of the property adjoining home owners to be displaced only • be necessary water drainage systems. 3. All lighting will be directed away from the adjoining residential property. Poles shall be not more than twenty feet in height. 4. Signage shall be in harmony with existing 419 businesses. 5. No residential uses will be placed on the property. 6. Architecture will be compatible with Colonnade Corporate Center. 7. An easement across the front of the property connecting First National Exchange Bank and Colonnade Corporate Center shall be made available for purchase. 8. Dumpster location shall be screened and directed away from adjoining homeowners. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN This area of Rt. 419 is designated Transition in the newly adopted Roanoke County Community Plan. This designation is intended to serve as developed buffers between highways and nearby or adjacent lower intensity development. Intense retail and highway oriented • s_y commercial uses are discouraged in transition areas, which are more suitable for office, institutional and small-scale coordinated retail uses. The proposal does conform with many of the design guidelines for Transition in the Community Plan. Petitioners propose to coordinate vehicular movement with an adjoining site and are proffering the availability of an access easement to the site to the west. In addition the petitioners are allowing enough space between the street and the building to provide a desirable transition, i.e., plantings, terraces, etc. The petitioners are proposing a wide buffer to the north (proffered) and west (not proffered, but shown on preliminary concept plan) to protect less intensive uses and are proposing signage that will be compatible with nearby sites. As stated earlier, clarification is needed on several of these proffers to fully understand what their potential impact may be. PART III STAFF CONCLUSIONS Given the orientation and road frontage of this site it is an appropriate commercial site and the petitioners' request, along with clarified proffered conditions, is compatible with the Transition designation. Staff recommends approval with the following additional and clarified proffers: Additional Proffers: 1. Preliminary Concept Plan, prepared by Pierson Engineering and surveying, dated 11/14/98 is proffered. 2. There will be a minimum 50 foot buffer, containing either natural ground cover including trees and brush or planted materials, to be left on the west side of the property between petitioner's site and adjoining property as shown on the proffered concept plan. • s_y 3. Access easement to the adjoining property to the west is proffered. Clarified Proffers: 1. Signage - One monument-type freestanding sign is permitted. Maximum size of the monument sign is 40 square feet and ten feet in height. 2. Architecture - Exterior of the principal building will be wood frame with brick as indicated on the preliminary concept plan. 3. Buffer yard - The size of the buffer yard needs to be clarified. The cross-sections and the preliminary concept plan show a 100 foot buffer to the north while the proffer indicates an 80 foot buffer. PREPARED BY: JANET SCHEID DATE PREPARED: January 26, 1999 r~ AflanfQ'S if r alerv ruu: ~~~ DAV9D YEAMA~J -~" Assistant General Manager ~ i ~ ~- ~ ~, 3013 Peachtree Road , Atlanta, Georgia 30305 www.atlantabeergarten.com Phone: 404.261.9898 '~ ~ ~'~ Fax: 404.261.0283 Atlanta Newport News .~_ ~'~ ~~ ~ ~''" . `~ r ~j ~~~ il~~ J ~ ~ ~ C n r~ ~ ~ Far staff use onl (~ R O r~--.: `1 ~ K~ datz received:' aNNING ANG ZONING ` apolicauan f Dr. 1 ~~ placards issy~d 10 ~ 2 ~ „T> 3 ;( (Cua) /-~__ 108 ~asz Numcer. ~ r. sy roc rC; Z^~ '~ ~/~/ cOS d-'e: ~ ~~ ~.. >~ Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, widt~~, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES ~ NO IF NO, A VAi~1:=.~1Cc IS RECUIRED FfRS I . Does the parcel meet the minimum criterid for t..e requestad Use Type? YES ^iC IF NG, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. YES i~_ NG if ra~nnina rEaUest, are conditions being pfOffci ed `Nltn thls request? Variance of Section{s) ------- ~~' s! Is the application complete? PleasE check if encesed THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. or' the Roanoke County Zoning Grdinance in orde, to: APPLICATION ~NILL I`f0 18E ACCEPTED IF r^.NY Or R!s v R!5 V ft!5 ~~ 1 4 iication fey ~, Consultation 8 1 iZ" x 1 1 " concept plan " f PP ,:tea ~/ ~ Application ::. Metes and bounds description ~::>«<, Prorters, i. applicable ;f Justification '•'w`:~~ Water and sewer application ~ Adjoining property owners l;~ereby certiry that / am either the owner or the property or the owner's agent or contract purc,~aser and am acting with the know/edgy ano conse,.~r or the e~wner. Owner's signature: ,~~r~:i.ui ?J, I,rt~.~ tL~:+~ iL,v4i:. ~,~~ v.,~.G ' .: ~~:iiiit~'~:.::: • :: ~.:.:.:.:.:.:~:.:::~..;.:.:•:.::..~ .:..::...:.:.:.~i:[=i~i_ipii:i~~~iii~riiiii:c~i:i:i~'i: i; ::5;::,, .,,...i..:;.:;:;:;,i: ;::,:......:..,;..::. ~... ...,'~`.~ :.:i.iii.~.i.:;ii~iiiiji,E•.i is i!i!iii: 'ii ~i;5ij; ii'~:~iji `~ ~ I Proposed Zoning: ~~ .- ~. =~~ star' Use Oniy I; Use Type: Proposed Land UsE:~~" f 1 n ~~ 7 I. The res~uest for rezoning furthers the purposes of rezoning ordinance in that it encourages economic development activities that provide desirable employrrrent and enlarge the tax base. It also facilitates the creation of a convenient restaurant which will blend in with other buildings, be attractive, and involved with community. In no way does it provide any threat to overcrowding of land, travel, or transportation. It also furthers the purpose of the C2-C zoning in that it will offer aservice-related activity within the community and several neighborhoods in the area. Our site development plan shows compatibility with adjoining building and land uses. The C2-C zoning is also for commercial districts found along major arterial thoroughfares which serve as large segments of the county's population as Va. Route 419 does. Il. Blue Ridge Cafe's concept and rezoning request conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive plan in that we are taking into account the a 19 corridor as a whole and do not intend to mangle, reshape, or destroy this suburban corridor. ~Ie plan to use the land primarily on its 419 road frontage side. The back 1 ~~ fe°t which borders the I~illcrest subdivision will remain unused except for the rip rap channel'oore to drain the retention pond. Leaving the existing hard woods on the rear of the property will provide a pristine, parr-like view from the neighboring sub- divisionback yards while preventing the appearance of haphazard strip development. in support of the county's 75/25 economic development policy, we will be utilizing the ~ 19 frontage parcel for commercial development. Our proposal calls for this particular parcel to be zoned C2-C for restaurant use instead of the existing C 1-C for office use. Our proposal proffers continuing the access road from First National Exchange Bank through our property to the Colonnade Office Park . By proffering the existence of this access road we will be further promoting the office space usage of the entire corridor while at the same time limiting entrance and exit points onto 419. • ~~ ~s mentioned above, our proposal .takes into account neighboring businesses and homes to provide proper 'suffering so that separate land uses may coexist. ~T,T e have proposed a 100-foot buffer to the rear of the property and a 50-foot buffer to the left bordering the undeveloped site. Our building design is brick to match the existing architecture. The piece of land proposed for rezoning holds magnif cent scenic views to the Roanoke Valley. These views were a primary factor in selecting this property. The property is bound by steep slopes to both the front and rear with a somewhat level space on the top. Our current engineering plans call for a reduction of fifteen feet from the highest point of the properly. The rear slope will remain almost totally in tact except for the rip rap ditch which will be bore for storm drainage. The slope to the front of the property will remain in tact except to clear site visibilit/i from the road and for the proffered access road connecting First rational Exchange Bank and the existing Colonnade office park. III. The rezoning and proposed development will impact the stated property in thai it will have an approximate 5,000 square foot building on x.77 acres of land. T'he building will coincide in appearance with all other existing buildings nearby. Its effect on adjoining properties will be minimal in that a 100' buffer will remain between the development and the four residential properties to the north. Lighting and building plans are set as not to impose on neighboring property's view r~or will it create any lighting dist~~rbances. Traffic will be entering and exiting through the adjoining bank property easement which already exists. This easement provides access to Route 419 in either direction. ~n easement will be granted to the undeveloped property to our west which may at some point continue to the Colonnade Office Park. Lmpacts on public services such as water and sewer, which are already run through the front of the property, are very rriinimal. No hazards will be posed to roads, schools, parks, or fire and rescue er`forts. ,8f ANO Ptn Oaf ~MSOEPV~M 105 POOP`Of.. A POF~CJP`~ci Q P.AA~ Vgg3 ~~ N MA y 2 Z t LU VN p a: ~SVON - ~A} ~f ZEO V .~tIG aNE ORO EO UgOV 0 7 Or' ~ >;1 NESS µ SNSUAA CQE B} O p`~ ~ Si~O.M SE ~pA50EN ~P? 91~ £0 tN ~ G S. p ~ Le ' i1t1 fL000 AtO MA N5 PARCEL PRX 9Y PB' t s REOORO ~+ L~ 5µ~A5E0fVEL05ELE~lA}to ONp REGOm1t_t., 5 ~nnN a~ , ,ACN AL p Oa£5 ti ~ SE~',10N ~ - in` p , 2 W m 13 X07 12 P 8, 5. 2 a \ `C5 1-0 `OS 11 O 0 P1 £ ~ D VN SOT 1C LCj 9 8 OL L1N OS• P Otp 0~ g9.7O~ ~,~ ON VN52 }0 P~ A~ 1,0• 0+'•0 8•- t 0 ~ 212.40' ~1N S 70'gp'00- E 4L2J' o~N \ 171.17' S Sg OLE~RS ~J91g~0p•E N8~4Q0'`v RO t V 5~ ' pVN SEj 1 ' ~U ^i LINE , n ~ Q X15 t8 ~(R AG ~ 3. 755 A 7 CORNERS PC.~ ~ti .2~ 6 flp~SNpEO 9Y~t), t~12 UN~~RS~~NS ' . }0 ~ VNOL175V C~ t,L ~ A0.8 3 PQx~ 75.18 Q~rg41 to 25 3 * 0 g. 12 ' N OI .~ N O .ti N h 'i T f7 ,~ OLO P1N ~p ENE SH1 ~N, ON28~_~ ~~ W, pLD ~,r PVN ~" a~ "3~ ~'~ RCS ~ ~ 8~ 7818 G~93`' „h SAX d V 229. P /^"~ O~B• ZAX v ~ttA M ~ e~,;k OtD PIN 45 ' EASE~AENT ACCESS R ---- AT 159.82' TO ADJACENT PROPERT ~ 0.72' VrE57 OF LINE l (ESµ'T) 273. t5' L~79.98~ 142.-~~ P1N1 10 }.51' TO P.I. OF POS i Al OR I VE, S'r~~' O 2-a = }54.30 O j OS R~ 04 p0a5. PVtV S e 79 98 • ~ S ~.p510 5~ 100 1. ' g0 GN• ~9 g7' S~ 0 ~n 25 ... e~ G ~~- C Gc'lu~i.tr,cx,cJ' 9 ,~ '~ , ~ s 1L o t f (~~ B9~ ~ 4!~ i g S- w ~ ~~ ~I Z Q ~ ~~ w az (~ U ~ z O O w U UpGw ~ ~ ~ O a wz Z_ ~ 4 ~ O ~ m ~ J W ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ a ~ ~1 ~ , a a ~ a ~~ ~ _ ~ i t/ ~ j ~ ~ ~~ i ~ i ~ ~ j I ~/. ~ ~ /A'' °y~ ppate J~ a$ ~~ ~~ s~ ~~ ~~ 0 8~ ~o ~~ ~ ~ ~= 3 ~ l~ ~~~ 01 f/) ~a `~ -. o ~~ ~ ~ a; ~ ni ~, N .ti o m ~` d~ m ~o ~ ~i ~ ~~ w~~Q> ~.° ° o r N ~ ~~ , m d r o ~ ~ C c1.~~t~~ ~~~~, 9. h ~--~~ H ~.r ~ st o~ mr i06.3"I aJ>s A z. /-~v~ 11. 42. ~~ ~i 7' zp~y 8. ~\ ~ on + x, zrc 5 'O 13. _ n~ +aaae " Syr ~ $ f ^ ~ 40.01 zo ' ise.n r~,z - 1 3. ~ 1. ~ ~a. , l 2. ~ ~ ~~ oo 1 O ~ io J0.10 "1 r ~ /9A ~ 38. O i1 71J k. !W _ M1 4 40.1' A 40.09 40.03 ~ o 39.01 ~ Detention Bosin ~2 x o i9 4Z.OB ~' ,~ 96 ~ •,06 ° ~ *. ~ ;ted saes ~nsxnt sen,;~z O 1 r ,. ~.~., ~,~.~a:~~M~. 40.08 ____ Rd .x~~, .,>e.R,b,~,. ~,~.>~ '` ` ~ ~ ~, 419 ~°' ~ " 2. ~K ~~_ .. a~'' i~ LLI~ / ~.~,~ United Stoles Pas!c/ serv L'e ~' .0~ sze,~ ~~ +~ `~ e 40,04 ~' Oet ntian xu~ / ` do ~." f m u ~po`:~,~al,~l ~ } . / r~or A ~R q .A R.C.B. ~~" 3 ~s a' z B. as x. ` ~ 4 rn~OY L t e. ~ ~r 19. docnoFe Caun c!iG+ro Main 3ro n ~ ~ a~ o.e5 R C. 4. S, ~.+n ~' ~ 0 ~ u . 20. V ~xva~y~i :017. ROANOKE COUNTY Btue Ridge Cafe',LLCfWest Ch.cb Corp. DEPARTMENT OF Rezone from C1-C to C2-C COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 76.16-1-39 s_y AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 3.77-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ELECTRIC ROAD, EAST OF COLONNADE CORPORATE CENTER II (TAX MAP NO. 76.16-1-39) IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2, CONDITIONAL, UPON THE APPLICATION OF BLUE RIDGE CAFE LLC WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 26, 1999, and the second reading and public hearing were held February 23, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 2, 1999; 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 3.77 acres, as described herein, and located on the north side of Electric Road east of Colonnade Corporate Center II (Tax Map Number 76.16-1-39) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Conditional, Office District, to the zoning classification of C-2, Conditional, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Blue Ridge Cafe LLC. 3. That at the May of 1988 rezoning of this property the owner of the property voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, accepted and the Petitioner/Owner is now requesting be removed: 1 S_y 4. 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. Preliminary concept plan, prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, dated 11/14/98 is proffered. B. There will be no additional entrance/exits on Route 419. C. There will be minimum of 80 feet of natural ground cover including trees and brush to be left on the rear of the property, to be displaced only by necessary water drainage systems. D. All lighting will be directed away from the adjoining residential properties. Poles shall not be more than twenty feet in height. E. One monument-type freestanding sign is permitted. Maximum size of the monument sign is 40 square feet and ten feet in height. The sign shall be ground lit. F. No residential uses will be placed on the property. G. Architecture-the exterior of the principal building shall be wood frame with brick as indicated on the preliminary concept plan. H. An easement across the front of the property connecting First National 2 S_y Exchange Bank and Colonnade Corporate Center shall be made available for purchase at a reasonable cost that allows the petitioners to recover costs they incur associated with the easement. I. Dumpster location shall be screened and directed away from adjoining homeowners. J. There will be a minimum 50 foot buffer, containing either natural ground cover including trees and brush or planted materials, to be left on the west side of the property between petitioner's site and the adjoining property as shown on the proffered concept plan. 5. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly side of Virginia Route 419 and the southeast corner of property of Colonnade Corporate Center II; thence leaving Virginia Route 419 and with the easterly line of Colonnade Corporate Center II N. 07 deg. 51 min. 18 sec. E. 380.00 feet to a point on the easterly line of property of The Hobart Companies, Ltd. (DB 1298, page 750); thence along the easterly line of the property of The Hobart Companies, Ltd. N. 14 deg. 39 min. 00 sec. W. 275.43 feet to a point on Mud Lick Creek and the southwest corner of Lot 15, Block 16, Section 4, Cresthill; thence S. 58 deg. 02 min. 00 sec. E. 256.70 feet to an old pipe on the southerly side of Lot 14, Block 16, Section 4, Cresthill; thence N. 89 deg. 00 min. 00 sec. E. 168.72 feet to an old pin on the southerly side of Lot 13, Block 16, Section 4, Cresthill; thence S. 70 deg. 50 min. 00 sec. E. 41.23 feet to a pin on the northwesterly side of Tract 2; thence with the westerly line of Tract 2 S. 19 deg. 37 min. 09 sec. W. 559.22 feet to a point on the northerly side of Virginia Route 419; thence N. 82 deg. 08 min. 42 sec. W. 222.00 feet to a point of Beginning, said property being Tract 1, containing 3.7755 acres as shown on the plat for Westclub Corporation dated August 18, 1994, prepared by T.P. Parker & sons, which plat is of record in the Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Plat Book 17, page 58. 6. 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. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\BLUERIDG.RZN 3 S-.fit The following proffers are proposed as part of C-2-c rezoning request for parcel No. 76.16-1-39 in the Roanoke County Tax Records: (1) There will be no additional entrance/exits on Route 419. (2) There will be a minimum of 80 feet of natural ground cover including trees and brush to be left on the rear of the property adjoining home owners to be displaced only by necessary water drainage systems. (3) Ail lighting will be directed away from the adjoining residential property . Poles shall be not more than twenty feet in height. (4) One monument-type freestanding sign is permitted. Maximum size of the monument sign is 40 square feet and ten feet in height. The sign shall be ground lit. (S) No residential uses will be places on the property. (6} Architecture-the exterior of the principal building shall. be wood frame with. brick as indicated on the preliminary concept plan. (7) An easement across the front of the property connecting First National Exchange Bank and Colonnade Corporate Center shall. be made available for purchase at a reasonable cost that allows the petitioners to recover costs they incur associated with the easement (8) 1~umpster location shall. be screened and directed away from adjoining homeowners. (9) Preliminary concept plan, prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, dated 11/14/98 is proffered. (10) There will be a minimum 50 foot buffer, containing either natural ground cover including trees and brush or planted materials, to be left on the west side of the property between petitioner's site and the adjoining property as shown on the proffered concept plan. The above proffers are the only proffers to be held as part of the requested C2 conditional zoning.. ~.,, Jo' ~d omas, Sr. West-C1ub Corp. ., ~,. L . .,~ - .:~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE 022399-6 DECLARING A 5.111 ACRE PORTION OF A LOT FRONTING ON MERRIMAN ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 97.01-2-11) AND A 0.16 ACRE PORTION OF A LOT OPPOSITE THE INTERSECTION OF STARKEY ROAD AND MERRIMAN ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 97.05-1-1) IN THE CAVE SPRING DISTRICT TO BE SURPLUS AND ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR THE EXCHANGE OF SAME WITH PORTIONS OF PROPERTY OWNED BY CHARLES R. LEMON 8~ ANNE L. LEMON AND CURTIS L. LEMON ~ DOROTHY D. LEMON (TAX MAP NOS. 97.01-2-10 8~ 97.01-2-12) WHEREAS, Charles R. Lemon, Curtis L. Lemon and their wives are owners of two parcels of real estate in the Cave Spring Magisterial District totaling approximately 20 acres and each extending from Merriman Road to Back Creek and adjoining property of the County of Roanoke and the Roanoke County School Board; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board is owner of a parcel of real estate of approximately 11 acres situated between the above described parcels owned by the Lemon family; the Roanoke County School Board no longer foresees any potential use of this parcel for future school construction or as a school bus lot and is willing to declare this real estate as surplus and to deed this property to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors for use, in whole or in part, for parks, playing fields or other public purposes; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors at its meeting on October 14, 1997, appropriated funds for the design of Phase 1 of the proposed South County District Park and authorized negotiations with the Lemon family for an exchange of real estate in order to assemble a parcel of approximately 16 acres along Back Creek for the South County District Park which would connect with two existing County park facilities as well as provide , ' ~ for a park access road from the intersection of Merriman and Starkey Roads; and WHEREAS, the Lemon family has indicated a willingness to exchange approximately 9 acres of their two parcels closest to Back Creek for approximately 5 acres of property owned by Roanoke County adjoining Merriman Road to facilitate the expansion of their current manufacturing operations in the County and, in addition, to pay the County an additional sum of $13,115.00 as the difference between the appraised values of these exchanged properties; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 1999; and the second reading and public hearing for this ordinance will be held on February 23, 1999. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: _, , 2 1~. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.10 of the Charter of Roanoke County, Ch. 617, 1986 Acts of Assembly, the subject properties, as more particularly described below, having been made available and deemed unnecessary for other public uses, are hereby declared surplus; and 23. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading was held on February 9, 1999; and a second reading and public hearing was held on February 23, 1999, concerning the exchange of a 5.111 acre parcel of real estate, being a portion of a lot fronting on Merriman Road (part of Tax Map No. 97.1-2-11), which the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, is willing to declare as surplus and to convey to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot lying south and east of a new park access road to be constructed opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road (part of Tax Map No. 97.05-1 -1 ), property of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, for two parcels of land containing 5.015 acres and 4.128 acres, respectively, owned by Charles R. Lemon and Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon (part of Tax Maps No. 97.01-2-10 and 97.01-2-12), as shown on a plat of survey prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated February 26, 1998; and 34. That an offer in writing having been received to exchange said properties, the offer of Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon is hereby accepted, and further the terms of the Contract of Sale and Exchange Agreement dated May 29, 1998, are hereby confirmed as the binding terms for the completion of this exchange of real estate; and 3 45. That as a condition of this exchange, Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon and the County of Roanoke have agreed to execute an exchange of easements in order to provide such drainage easements and temporary construction easements as shall be necessary for drainage improvements to the properties of both parties and to provide an easement for ingress and egress over property of Roanoke County for fire protection and other public safety needs of the currently existing Plastics One facility on property retained by the Lemons; and 56. Further, as a condition of this exchange, Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon have agreed to enter into an agreement for the sharing of cost on an equal, 50-50, basis of all reasonable drainage improvements which shall be located upon the property of Roanoke County adjacent to the remaining property of the Lemons subsequent to this exchange. Roanoke County will be responsible for maintenance of these drainage improvements and will provide reasonable opportunity for the Lemons to review the design and bid documents prior to the public procurement process. 6~. That the County Administrator , or an Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the property exchange, specifically including the conveyance and acquisition of respective properties, all of which shall be of such form as approved by the County Attorney. 7S. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance as amended by Mr. Hodge 4 removing Attachment D and deleting #1 in the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board 5 ATTACHMENT A s`5 Roanoke County Proposed Exchange of Land Department of Between Roanoke County School Board Community Development and Plastics One No Scale Date: February 5, 1999 Item No. S S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~IIA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMII~TISTRATION CENTER, ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGIlVIA MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance Declaring a 5.111 Acre Portion of a Lot Fronting on Merriman Road and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot opposite the Intersection of Starkey Road and Memman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District To Be Surplus and Accepting/Rejecting An Offer For The Exchange of Same With Portions of Property Owned by Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Funds were included in the 1992 General Obligation Bond Referendum for purchase of property for a new South County High School. The Board of Supervisors transferred those funds to the Roanoke County School Board for the purchase of land on Merriman Road for this purpose. Additionally, the School Board planned to exchange some of that acreage with Plastics One, Inc., a company already located adjacent to the site. The intent was to use this tract, the existing Merriman Park, and the 28 acre Taylor property to build a high school and provide joint-use athletic facilities adjoining Starkey Park. This exchange was to benefit Plastics One by allowing the company to expand out of the flood plain, and benefit the County by providing recreational areas along Back Creek. Since that time, the School Board has obtained an option on the Woods End property located off Route 221, and has indicated that the property on Merriman Road will not be used for the new high school. At a recent joint meeting between the Board of Supervisors and the School Board, School Board members indicated a consensus to declare the property surplus and turn it over to the County, so long as a suitable area could be provided in the general vicinity for a school bus parking facility. The Board of Supervisors recommended several changes to the agreement at the February 9th meeting, and the School Board has also made additional revisions. These changes will be discussed in work session prior to consideration of this item. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This is a request to accept the 11.10 acre tract of land from the School Board, and then to declare 5.1 acres of that surplus, and exchange that acreage with Plastics One fora 9 acre tract close to Back Creek and $13,115.00 as the difference between the appraised values of the exchanged properties. The transaction needs to be completed as soon as possible, because Plastics One is ready to begin construction, and the Parks and Recreation Department needs ownership to complete a grant for recreational access funding. This transaction S-,~ will benefit the County in several ways: o Parks and Recreation -This land exchange will provide an opportunity to build additional recreational facilities adjoining Starkey Park. There is a tremendous demand for additional facilities in Southwest County, and this will allow room for playing fields, a greenway and picnic facilities. Additionally, the Parks and Recreation Department has pre-qualified for a recreational access grant in the amount of $187,000 during the current fiscal year, but the County needs ownership of the property to make this application. This will make the Department eligible to apply for access funding for a different park in the next fiscal year. o Economic Development -Plastics One plans to expand its existing facility by an additional 30,000-50,000 square feet. The estimated value of the expansion is $1 million, which will increase the County's tax revenue, and there will also be additional employment opportunities. Plastics One is very crowded in their current facility, and the owners are anxious to begin construction on the addition to alleviate those problems. o Schools - In exchange for surplusing this land, the County will provide funding for the purchase of the Woods End site, and has agreed to pay the water and sewer connection fees for the new school. The Superintendent and County Administrator will determine a suitable site for a bus parking facility to replace the current Cave Spring High School lot, if it becomes necessary. ATTACHMENTS: Attached are several documents pertaining to this transaction: Attachment A is a plat showing the relative shapes, sizes and locations of the parcels before the exchange. Attachment B is a plat showing the County property and the Plastics One property after the exchange. Note that the parcels have been reconfigured. Attachment C is the ordinance authorizing the exchange of land with Plastics One, Inc. Attachment D is the proposed agreement between the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Roanoke County School Board. Attachment E is the conceptual drawing of the expanded recreational facilities at Starkey Park. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no immediate fiscal impact to this request. Staff will bring back specific figures for the purchase of the Woods End site and the water and sewer connection fees when the School Board makes that request. 2 S- S STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the attached ordinance, which contains the following actions: 1. Authorizes the County Administrator to execute an agreement with the Superintendent of Schools accepting 11.10 acres of land on Merriman Road from the Roanoke County School Board. 2. Exchanging 5.1 acres of that property with the Lemon Family, owners of Plastics One, Inc. in return for 9 acres of property and $13,115.00. Respectfully submitted, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved Denied Received Referred to ()Motion by: () () Attachments No Yes Abs Harrison - - - Johnson - - - McNamara - - - Minnix - - - Nickens 3 ATTACHMENT A S- S' Roanoke County Department of Community Development Proposed Exchange of Land Between Roanoke County School Board and Plastics One No Scale Date: February 5, 1999 ~ ~~ ~ ~a ~a ~ ~ Jy~ ~ ~ d~ Ql a r v Q W ~ Y ~' ~ ~~~ d g,ro ~ ~~~ Q ° ~ } ~ dp~~ ~ ~i~F LL.1 > J ~~m1~ 3~ a ~aa~~~ r ~ ~ a ATTACHMENT B ~ ~ > r -1 a r ~ J ~ ~< 3 mm ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n 9 d ~,, A ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a ~ c° o a~ ~ r 9~~ w ~~~ ~S~ff~adg~ig~wW W ~ ~a ~--~ ~~8 Q~ !L~ i , ~ ~ ~ I i I I lip ~ I g Q ° p~ O I I IIII~~I;I ~ ' _ ~~o a ~ 0 . ~~~ ~~ o \ ~ ~~~ o ~ ~ ~ r~ \~ ~ ~~ g o '\~ o p F' ,~ ~ 0.J p~ -.....,.,~ ~~ T f 1 1 ~.' ~~ ~.. ~.: ~,_. g~ ~ ~ d w a F ~ I !':'-JJII ~~~ ~~~ Jd Jrs ar / !,I ~~f~r ~Sd ~~ ~ ~~ ~Z r Q ~ ~ r ?q Nt~ Z ~3 °~ u°'9NN0. ~~d e°v JQLL W ~ LL ~ 0. ~ ~ ~ ~ O ., . ,; ; ~ ;j ~~ D ~ ,,,- D • .: ~~ n a /~~~~~ ~~<.:\ i~ .. ! ,`, .. J ? ~ i, ` q _ d Cq yr } 2 ~ µ 3 I.. ~~, °, 6 - ~~+ ~d~ lL r 1 \~~ I ~ ~ a v 4 wa ~ a8~ r~~~ ~ u ~ m ~ a ~ ~ o ~ ~ w W ~ ~ s~~9 ~ ~ ~ ~ F- ~ o r o 1 .':1 ~•.: ~~ ~~ !. ~~ a ~~ ~ ~~ o~~~ ~g~ ~ p ~ t= iJ a 5~~' N a ~ d~ rod ~Z~~ ?a_3 s?~ ~~a a 3 ~ ((~~ ,j d ~, .'i 1 lG ~ ? ~ j ~ J ~= J ~ ~ er u° ~~mn~ ¢~ a e~ ~~ ~~ n a~ ~~ ~~Q~a _ a ~ ~ ~ 3~ ~ d~ ~a d ~ z~ u.l = ~ nn S~ ATTACHMENT C S ;,~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA., HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE DECLARING A 5.111 ACRE PORTION OF A LOT FRONTING ON MERRIMAN ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO.97.1- 2-11) AND A 0.16 ACRE PORTION OF A LOT OPPOSITE THE INTERSECTION OF STARKEY ROAD AND MERRIMAN ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 97.05-1-1) IN THE CAVE SPRING DISTRICT TO BE SURPLUS AND ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR THE EXCHANGE OF SAME WITH PORTIONS OF PROPERTY OWNED BY CHARLES R LEMON & ANNE L. LEMON AND CURTIS L. LEMON & DOROTHY D. LEMON (TAX MAP NOS. 97.01-2-10 & 97.01-2-12) WHEREAS, Charles R. Lemon, Curtis L. Lemon and their wives are owners of two parcels of real estate in the Cave Spring Magisterial District totaling approximately 20 acres and each extending from Memman Road to Back Creek and adjoining property of the County of Roanoke and the Roanoke County School Board; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board is owner of a parcel of real estate of approximately 11 acres situated between the above described parcels owned by the Lemon family; the Roanoke County School Board no longer foresees any potential use of this parcel for future school construction or as a schoolbus lot and is willing to declare this real estate as surplus and to deed this property to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors for use, in whole or in part, for parks, playing fields or other public purposes; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors at its meeting on October 14, 1997, appropriated funds for the design of Phase 1 of the proposed South County District Park and authorized negotiations with the Lemon family for an exchange of real estate in order to assemble a parcel of approximately 16 acres along Back Creek for the South County District Park which would connect with two existing County park facilities as well as provide for a park access road from the intersection of S..~~ Merriman and Starkey Roads; and WHEREAS, the Lemon family has indicated a willingness to exchange approximately 9 acres of their two parcels closest to Back Creek for approximately 5 acres of property owned by Roanoke County adjoining Merriman Road to facilitate the expansion of their current manufacturing operations in the County and, in addition, to pay the County an additional sum of $13,115.00 as the difference between the appraised values of these exchanged properties; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 1999; and the second reading and public hearing for this ordinance will be held on February 23, 1999. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: That the County Administrator is authorized to agree to and execute an agreement dated February _, 1999, between the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, and the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, providing the terms for the conveyance of certain surplus property from the School Board to Roanoke County and to accept on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, the conveyance from the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, of a parcel of real estate of approximately 11 acres, identified as all of Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel # 97.01-2-11, in accordance with the terms of this agreement dated February ~ 1999, all of which shall be of such form as approved by the County Attorney, and to record such deed; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.10 of the Charter of Roanoke County, Ch. 617, 1986 Acts of Assembly, the subject properties, as more particularly described below, having been made available and deemed unnecessary for other public uses, are hereby declared surplus; and 2 S^ ,S 3. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading was held on February 9, 1999; and a second reading and public hearing was held on February 23, 1999, concerning the exchange of a 5.111 acre parcel of real estate, being a portion of a lot fronting on Merriman Road (part of Tax Map No. 97.1-2-11), which the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, is willing to declare as surplus and to convey to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot lying south and east of a new park access road to be constructed opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road (part of Tax Map No. 97.05-1-1), property of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, for two parcels of land containing 5.015 acres and 4.128 acres, respectively, owned by Charles R. Lemon and Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon (part of Tax Maps No. 97.01-2-10 and 97.01-2-12), as shown on a plat of survey prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated February 26, 1998; and 4. That an offer in writing having been received to exchange said properties, the offer of Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon is hereby accepted, and further the terms of the Contract of Sale and Exchange Agreement dated May 29, 1998, are hereby confirmed as the binding terms for the completion of this exchange of real estate; and 5. That as a condition of this exchange, Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon and the County of Roanoke have agreed to execute an exchange of easements in order to provide such drainage easements and temporary construction easements as shall be necessary for drainage improvements to the properties of both parties and to provide an easement for ingress and egress over property of Roanoke County for fire protection and other public safety 3 ~.• ~~ S-5 needs of the currently existing Plastics One facility on property retained by the Lemons; and 6. Further, as a condition of this exchange, Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon have agreed to enter into an agreement for the sharing of cost on an equal, 50-50, basis of all reasonable drainage improvements which shall be located upon the property of Roanoke County adjacent to the remaining property of the Lemons subsequent to this exchange. Roanoke County will be responsible for maintenance of these drainage improvements and will provide reasonable opportunity for the Lemons to review the design and bid documents prior to the public procurement process. 7. That the County Administrator , or an Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the property exchange, specifically including the conveyance and acquisition of respective properties, all of which shall be of such form as approved by the County Attorney. 8. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. g:\...\jbo~schools\plastics\plastics.2or 4 S- ~ ATTACHMENT D THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of February, 1999, by and between the COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~TIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, its successors and assigns, party of the first part, hereafter referred to as "School Board," and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~iIA, a charter county of the Commonwealth of Virginia, its successors and assigns, party of the second part, hereafter referred to as "Roanoke County." WHEREAS, by an Exchange Agreement, dated May 29, 1998 entered into between Charles R. Lemon and Anne L. Lemon, husband and wife, and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon, husband and wife hereafter referred to as "the Lemons," owners of two parcels of real estate fronting on Merriman Road in the County of Roanoke, the School Board, and Roanoke County, agreement was reached for a mutual exchange of adjoining parcels of real estate in order to provide to the Lemons a more suitable parcel for expansion of their existing manufacturing facility in Roanoke County in order to increase their present employment and productivity with accompanying economic benefits to the County and its citizens and to provide to Roanoke County a suitable parcel which will join two existing County park facilities so as to provide for the expansion of and complementary enhancement of existing parks and recreation facilities; and WHEREAS, the agreement by the School Board to purchase the Woods End property consisting of approximately 70 acres as the location for a new high school in Southwest Roanoke County and the agreement of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to fund the purchase of this property and to consider the necessary rezoning and permit approvals for the construction of s _.~ the proposed new high school has substantially removed the likelihood of need by the School Board for additional property on Merriman Road for a school bus lot. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration as described herein, the School Board hereby agrees to act by resolution in accordance with § 22.1-129A of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to declare surplus and to convey to Roanoke County all that certain lot or parcel of real estate containing approximately 11 acres, identified as all of Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel # 97.01- 2-11, as more particularly described in Attachment A hereto. In consideration of this conveyance, Roanoke County hereby covenants and agrees (1) that in the event that the School Board needs real estate on which to relocate its school bus lot currently housed at Cave Spring High School on Chaparral Drive, Roanoke County will make available .real estate comparable to its current school bus lot at no cost to the School Board.T(2) that the School Board shall have no obligations to clean-up or to pav for the clean-up of the properly being_declared surnlus and being transferred to Roanoke County; (31 that it will provide the School Board with funding to ,purchase the Woods End site for a new South County high school;,.(41 that it will pav for the water and sewer connection fees for the new high school on the Woods End site; and ~S) provided that all costs associated with (1) and (~) will be accomplished within the $28,231,152 allocated, or the South County School in Phase I of the school construction program. W WITNESS the following signatures and seals: COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA By: By: Division Superintendent Roanoke County Schools 5937 Cove Road, NW Roanoke, VA 24019 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA County Administrator County of Roanoke, Virginia P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 ' ~ - I ;~ ~=. ~; ~: ~= ATTACHMENT E S-~ `~ .~ $. ~~. ', ,. r' , _ ~ ~ "' - ~ 1 ~~~, ,~ r t 1 ..~ ~. F _ ~ I ~ k .- z ~,.-. ~° ~ ~ r~ i ~. ~~ ^., , -' r: = q ~ '~~~~ _ ~~, ~ f`~ vC _ z ~t ~ d( ~ 5 ~ _ -N ~ ~r1 J ~ 1 t' i i ~ { 1 ~. r ? ~;~; -. ,, ~ r ~ i ' ~ s~ ,,~~, x ~ _ "~ ~ ~ R1 tin 1 ~ f Y, y~ k i ~ ti~ ~ ~ _ ~ _, ` i~ f f 'R ~ ~' '-~ . ~ ~,, _, t ~, h' fi,• 4 ~~ ' ~#, _ _. , ,v _y ~~ .~ r' . '. ~ '' ',r f i yn ~ ' w t r _ ~ .~. - Qt f~ f ' I ~S ~.. ~ ;.w '' f ~ j ~- ~r ~ ~ r, r xr f r. s •- r ^ _ ~, ~.. _ ... ,... ~ .. r ,. „. } i ". .a~ :: :^ ~ ~ ~ _ 'i ~, , ,~ { i ~ ~ , ~r~ ~~ - ~~ _ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ s ~~~~ `y ~ ! ~: ,, _ "' } +. .1 1f ~ r ,- .. ,. ,{ °t '~-,. ~-~.- ~ -~ :~ .1 :~~~ `;. _..~ ~, , . . - ~~.. ~,. _ _._ Y W,. , ;_ -_ ~., Y t4"^.,,~ k.~ y~~,,.-~ ~ ~ x 1° - L¢ t A P ~ .,, t ~'~ S-C, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE 022399-7 TO VACATE A 20-FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, PLAT BOOK 20, PAGE 89 (SECTION 12, CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK), AND A PORTION OF A 20-FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, PLAT BOOK 15, PAGE 110 (SECTION 9, KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK), LOCATED ON LOT 18, SECTION 12 OF CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK, AND FURTHER SHOWN ON LOT 18-A ON RESUBDIVISION PLAT OF CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK, PLAT BOOK 21, PAGE 26, IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (TAX MAP NO.. 86.01- 10-18) WHEREAS, by subdivision plat entitled `PLAT OF SUBDIVISION FOR SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated October 20, 1997, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 20, page 89, a twenty-foot (20') sanitary sewer easement was shown and created on Lot 18, the subject easement being designated on said plat as "NEW 20' S.S.E."; and, WHEREAS, by said subdivision plat entitled `REVISED PLAT SHOWING KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK, SECTION NO. 9', dated May 6, 1993, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 15, page 110, a twenty-foot (20') sanitary sewer easement was shown and created along the boundary line of Lots 14 and 15 and extends in a northerly direction outside the boundary lines of the subdivision, the subject easement being designated on said plat as "NEW 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT"; and WHEREAS, the subject easements are further shown on Lot 18-A of `PLAT SHOWING THE RESUBDIVISION OF ORIGINAL LOTS 18, 19, 20 AND 21, SECTION N0. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated February 23, 1998, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 21, page 26; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioner, Boone, Boone and Loeb, Inc., and Palm Hermitage Corporation, are the current owners of Lot 18-A, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park, and have requested that the above-described existing 20' sanitary sewer easements, or portions thereof, be vacated; and, WHEREAS, the construction of a proposed dwelling on Lot 18-A will result in an encroachment on the subject sanitary sewer easements and the Petitioners have requested that they be vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 1999, and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on February 23, 1999. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the sanitary sewer easements being designated and shown as "Easement to be Vacated" on Exhibit A attached hereto, said easements having been dedicated on `PLAT OF SUBDIVISION FOR SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated October 20, 1997, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's 2 Office in Plat Book 20, page 89, "REVISED PLAT SHOWING KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK, SECTION NO. 9', dated May 6, 1993, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 15, page 110, and further shown on `PLAT SHOWING THE RESUBDIVISION OF ORIGINAL LOTS 18, 19, 20 AND 21, SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated February 23, 1998, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 21, page 26, in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), subject to the conditions contained herein. 2. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioner. 3. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 3 A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner Gary Robertson, Director, Utility John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 4 Z w TA v noc n. ... .. Easement to be Vacated 5 ~~"- - LOT 14 r SECTION Na 9 ?(EN.9NGTDN a` LAN7FR9URYPARK' I P.B. ?D, PG 84 Request to Vacate A 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement Recorded in Plat Book 20, Page 89 And A Portion of a 20' Sanitary Server Easement Recorded in Plat Book 15, Page 110 Located on Lot 18A, Section 12 Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park Plat Book 21, Page 26 Tax Map No.: 86.01-10-18 ROANOKE COUNTY Request to Vacate a 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement, Plat Book 20, DEPARTMENT OF Page 89, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury.Park & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT portion of a 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement, Plat Book 15, Page 110, Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park, and further shown EXHIBIT A ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER .S' ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE TO VACATE A 20-FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, PLAT BOOK 20, PAGE 89 (SECTION 12, CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK), AND A PORTION OF A 20- FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, PLAT BOOK 15, PAGE 110 (SECTION 9, KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK), LOCATED ON LOT 18, SECTION 12 OF CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK, AND FURTHER SHOWN ON LOT 18-A ON RESUBDIVISION PLAT OF CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK, PLAT BOOK 21, PAGE 26, IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (TAX MAP NO. 86.01-10-18). COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This is the second reading of the proposed ordinance to vacate a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement (Plat Book 20, Page 89) and a portion of a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement (Plat Book 15, Page 110), lot 18A, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park. By plat of subdivision of May 6, 1993, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, Plat Book 15, Page 110, Boone, Boone and Loeb, Inc., as owner of Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement extending in a northerly direction from Scotford Court to the remaining property of Boone, Boone and Loeb for future development (Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park). 1 S - Co By plat of subdivision of October 20, 1997 recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, Plat Book 20, Page 89, Boone, Boone, and Loeb, Inc., and Palm Hermitage Corp., a Virginia corporation, as owner of Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement extending in an easterly direction from the existing sanitary sewer easement (Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park) to the adjacent lot to ensure sewer availability. The petitioner, Boone, Boone and Loeb, Inc., and Palm Hermitage Corporation, are the current owners of lot 18A, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park, over which the above described easements are located, said lot being situated along Wertz Orchard Road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District and being designated on the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map No. 86.01-10-18. Boone, Boone, and Loeb, Inc., and Palm Hermitage Corporation, have requested that the Board of Supervisors vacate the easements described above, and as shown on Exhibit "A" attached, in order to allow the construction of the proposed dwelling on lot 18A. The Roanoke County Utility Department was notified of the request to vacate the sanitary sewer easements on lot 18A, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park. The Utility Department has determined that the vacation of the easements will not affect the operation and maintenance of the existing sanitary sewer system. The Utility Department agrees with this request. All costs associated with the adoption of this ordinance will be the responsibility of Boone, Boone, and Loeb, Inc., and Palm Hermitage Corporation. Staff recommends that the Board adopt the proposed ordinance. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ~°(old Covey, Direc or Elmer C. Hodge Department of Community D velopment County Administrator 2 S - !.~ ACTION Approved ()Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) c: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Department VOTE No Yes Abs Harrison Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens 3 • Cf` T t '~Ci.1,l11gLiHAM V,ri-~„ ~~`~~~•. '~, . \ Qom/ I q Cq ~GhA~~~~~G10 1 Qe a56 ~ .~ ~ ~ ?• ~'E,~ CA~NTE CIR. 4PP v~p~A ~'~/ f ~¢~';rQ~ :' `v ''AN7Lti38I1RY HILLS (//,' •~~s~'~r' ~` ~` ~`~' SCOTFpRO! CT. ~"• KirlES7 ' 4r tiCi RT 0 ~~• 6g ~y ~ R ~? i C /~ h~RMhVR 2~ 7"a~ CaNO~, ~, N~'~ ~ ~~'Rpa °w. ~.. VICIIVIT~' M_gP~ . ~ _.~ S-(o y NOPTH I TAX ,86.01-10-18 I SEC OT 1BA TION No. 12 I CARR/AGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK' z P.B. 21, PG. 26 ~, I FUTURE °. I~ I _ ONEZLING~ ~ ~ I i I 5 „-,,r;~ ~ ~3A ~ 6 a I n d ~,n._. _ ~ v _..._. ,,, i 3 ~ I - I ~ ~ ~I PORTIGbY OF ~, EXISTNNG 20' SAN/TARY / ` l SEWER EASEi/ENT ~ (P.B. 1w PC 110) ~/~ \ /~~ ~ i ~ 2 ~ r E,ITSnrvc s' tf'ALL ' ~AiNTENaNCE FA.SEA/ENT EXISTING 20' SAN/TARY z Pg ~ PG 69 SEWER EASEh/ENT pg 21, pG 2B (P.B. 20, PG. B9) ,•, ti. ~ Errsnyc ~ w w P P~.r/~T~~ ~~ \\ ~ l ~ l ~ w ~,9r Sr T5 55'10 LOT 1f S£CnON Na 9 ?CEN.S/NGTLW Lim CAN1Fh'6URY PARK ' P.B. ?0, PC 89 Easement to be Vacated Request to Vacate A ZO' Sanitary Sewer Easement Recorded in Plat Book 20, Page 89 And A Portion of a 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement Recorded in Plat Book 15, Page 110 Located on Lot 18A, Section 12 Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park Plat Book 21, Page 26 Tax Map No.: 86.01-10-18 ROANOKE COUNTY Request to Vacate a 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement, Plat Book 20, DEPARTMENT OF Page 89, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury.Park & COMMUNITY DEYELOPIKENT portion of a 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement, Plat Book 15, Page 110, Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park, and further shown ~~ nn" t t 8-A. Plat Book 2 EXHIBIT A Vim-- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIlZGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1999 ORDINANCE TO VACATE A 20-FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, PLAT BOOK 20, PAGE 89 (SECTION 12, CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK), AND A PORTION OF A 20-FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, PLAT BOOK 15, PAGE 110 (SECTION 9, KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK), LOCATED ON LOT 18, SECTION 12 OF CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK, AND FURTHER SHOWN ON LOT 18-A ON RESUBDIVISION PLAT OF CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK, PLAT BOOK 21, PAGE 26, IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (TAX MAP NO.. 86.01-10-18) WHEREAS, by subdivision plat entitled `PLAT OF SUBDIVISION FOR SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated October 20, 1997, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 20, page 89, a twenty-foot (20') sanitary sewer easement was shown and created on Lot 18, the subject easement being designated on said plat as "NEW 20' S.S.E."; and, WHEREAS, by said subdivision plat entitled `REVISED PLAT SHOWING KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK, SECTION NO. 9', dated May 6, 1993, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 15, page 110, atwenty-foot (20') sanitary sewer easement was shown and created along the boundary line of Lots 14 and 15 and extends in a northerly direction outside the boundary lines of the subdivision, the subject easement being designated on said plat as "NEW 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT"; and WHEREAS, the subject easements are further shown on Lot 18-A of `PLAT SHOWING THE RESUBDIVISION OF ORIGINAL LOTS 18, 19, 20 AND 21, SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated February 23, 1998, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 21, page 26; and, ~..,,, ,, WHEREAS, the Petitioner, Boone, Boone and Loeb, Inc., and Palm Hermitage Corporation, are the current owners of Lot 18-A, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park, and have requested that the above-described existing 20' sanitary sewer easements, or portions thereof, be vacated; and, WHEREAS, the construction of a proposed dwelling on Lot 18-A will result in an encroachment on the subject sanitary sewer easements and the Petitioners have requested that they be vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 1999, and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on February 23, 1999. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the sanitary sewer easements being designated and shown as "Easement to be Vacated" on Exhibit A attached hereto, said easements having been dedicated on `PLAT OF SUBDIVISION FOR SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated October 20, 1997, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 20, page 89, "REVISED PLAT SHOWING KENSINGTON OF CANTERBURY PARK, SECTION NO. 9', dated May 6, 1993, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 15, page 110, and further shown on `PLAT SHOWING THE RESUBDIVISION OF ORIGINAL LOTS 18, 19, 20 AND 21, SECTION NO. 12, "CARRIAGE HOMES OF CANTERBURY PARK"', dated February 2 ~" 23, 1998, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 21, page 26, in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), subject to the conditions contained herein. 2. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioner. 3. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). G:~.ATTORNEY\VLH~AGENDA\CANTERBY.ORD 3 ~ aoaNO~.~ `Y~' ,~ . ~-~ ~ z c~ z a 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE MARY H. ALLEN, CMC ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 240]8-0798 CLERK TO THE BOARD (703) 772-2005 FAX (703) 772-2193 February 24, 1999 Mr. Allan C. Robinson, Jr., Chairman Roanoke Valley Resource Authority 1020 Hollins Road Roanoke, VA 24012 Dear Mr. Robinson: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Attached is a copy of Resolution No. 022399-1 authorizing the Third Amendment to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members Use Agreement. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, February 23, 1999. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC, AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Attachment cc: Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance John R. Hubbard, CEO, RVRA Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE, Clerk, Roanoke City Council Carolyn S. Ross, Clerk, Vinton Town Council ®~.yaea P~ NOTICE OF PROPOSED REAL PROPERTY TAX INCREASE The County of Roanoke proposes to increase property tax levies. Assessment Increase: Total assessed value ofreal property, excluding additional assessments due to new construction or improvements to property exceeds last year's total assessed value of real property by 2.82 percent. 2. LoweredRateNecessarytoOffsetIncreasedAssessment: Thetaxratewhichwouldlevythesame amount of real estate tax as last year, when multiplied by the new total assessed value of real estate with the exclusions mentioned above, would be $1.10 per $100 of assessed value. This rate will be known as the "lowered tax rate." Effective Rate Increase: The County ofRoanoke proposes to adopt a tax rate of $1.13 per $100 of assessed value. The difference between the lowered tax rate and the current rate would be $0.03 per $100, or 2.73 percent. This difference will be known as the "effective tax rate increase." 4. Proposed Total Budget Increase: Based on the proposed real property tax rate and changes in other revenues, the total budget of the County of Roanoke will exceed last year's by 4.2 percent. The County will adopt the FY99-00 budget late spring, 1999. Individual property taxes may, however, increase at a percentage greater than or less than the above percentage. A public hearing on the increase will be held on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. Special Instructions This notice shall be at least the size ofone-eighth page of a standard size or a tabloid size newspaper, and the headline in the advertisement shall be in a type no smaller than 18-point. The notice shall not be placed in that portion, if any, of the newspaper reserved for legal notices and classified advertisements. This notice must be published on February 16,1999, and billed to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. O~ AOANp~~ ~ ~ A ~ a~ 1838 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE February 10, 1999 C~o~tz~#~ o~ ~o~t~o~P Roanoke Times & World News Legal Advertisement Department 201-209 Campbell Avenue, S W Roanoke, VA 24011 To Whom It May Concern: DIANE D. HYATT, CPA DIRECTOR PENNY HODGE, CPA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Please publish the enclosed public notice as a block advertisement on Tuesday, February 16, 1999. Bill the cost of publication to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at the following address: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors ATTN: Mary Allen P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 A copy of last year's ad is attached. This year's ad should be of the same approximate size. I would like to review the proof when completed. My fax number is 772-2186; phone is 772- 2021. Thank you. Sincerely, W. Brent Robertson Budget Manager Enclosure c: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney -Allen, Clerk to the Board :. Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations Elmer Hodge, County Administrator M~fmance\budgdw~i is~Ltbl~i~a~~iRiary2,~`NOKE, VA 24018-0798 • (540) 772-2020 FAX (540) 772-2186 EMAIL: Imurphy@www.co.roanoke.va.us ® Recycled Paper COUNTY OF ROANOKE PUBLIC HEARING CITIZEN INPUT FOR THE 1999-2000 BUDGET The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County invites citizens of Roanoke County to offer written or oral comment for items to be included in the budget for the 1999-00 fiscal year. An informational public hearing, to receive citizen comment, will be held on Tuesday, February 23, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, S. W . , Roanoke, Virginia. All interested citizens are invited to attend this meeting. M:~fmance~budgat~advertise~Qubhear.ad February 2, 1999 ~ ' 1 y f y I COUNTY OF ROANOKE . PUBLIC NEARING CITIZEN INPUT FOR THE 1998-99 BUDGET The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County invites c~tlzens of Roarwke County to offer written or oral comment for items to be included in the txidget for the 1 sse-std Nscal re~cefvs dtlzen oomrt~ant~iivil~ beheld own Tuesday, February 24, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon therosftsr as may bs heard. at the Roarwke Courriy Adminbtratlon Center. 5204 . 8emard Drlve, 3.W., Roanoke, Vi-~inie. All kiterssted dtlzens orb kMted to a this• W- - -- --- -- .. - l72575~ . ~ c-~~i, ~ t ~~~ 1 ~~ O~ ROANp~~ ~, ; ~~ Z v a~ 1838 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE February 10, 1999 (~o~xxt#~ of ~Zo~~t~a~e Roanoke Times and World News Retail Advertising Division 201 W. Campbell Avenue Roanoke, VA 24011 To Whom It May Concern, DIANE D. HYATT, CPA DIRECTOR PENNY HODGE, CPA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Enclosed you will find a "Notice ofProposed Tax Increase" advertisement for the Courrty ofRoanoke. Please publish this as a block ad on Tuesday, February 16, 1999. Bill the cost of publication to: County of Roanoke ATTN: Mary Allen Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 I would like to review a draft of the advertisement before publication. My fax number is 772-2186. Sincerely, W. Brent Robertson Budget Manager C: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Mary Allen, Clerk to the Board Anne Marie Green, Community Relations P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2020 FAX (540) 772-2186 EMAIL: Imurphy@www.co.roanoke.va.us ® Recycled Paper facsimile TRANSMITTAL to: Deanna Gordon fax #: re: Proposed agreement regarding exchange of land date: February 19, 1999 pages: 4, including this cover sheet. Dr. Gordon, Elmer asked that I fax you a copy of the amended agreement concerning the exchange of land at the Merriman site. The portions deleted by the School Board have been struck through, the additions recommended by the School Board have been underlined and the addition (5) recommended by the County staff is underlined and in italics. From the desk of... Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke„ VA 24018 540-772-2003 Fax: 540-772-2193 w ~ • { ~ ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Joint Work Session with School Board COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a joint work session with the School Board to discuss the following items: (a) To receive an update on the Phase I School Construction Projects (b) To review the agreement on the exchange of property at the Merriman site. At the February 9 meeting, the Board of Supervisors approved the first reading of an ordinance authorizing several exchanges of land at the proposed South County Park on Merriman Road. The Board will consider second reading and adoption of the ordinance this evening. The agenda item also included an agreement with the Schools accepting 11.10 acres of land on Merriman Road as surplus. Since that meeting, the agreement has been modified to incorporate changes suggested by the Board of Supervisors and the School Board. Staff has reviewed the amended agreement and recommends it to you with the addition of a provision in the agreement which stipulates that the cost of purchasing the Woods End property and additional land for a school bus lot, if that becomes necessary, will be accomplished within the Phase I allocation for the new South County High School. This is included on the attached agreement as number (5). The School Board additions are underlined, the School Board deletions are crossed out, and the County addition is underlined and italicized. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Following this work session, staff will bring back the attached agreement to the Board of Supervisors for approval. .' .. ~~ Respectfully Sub fitted by: C~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Harrison _ _ Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara- Referred () Minnix _ _ _ To () Nickens _ _ _ THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of February, 1999, by and between the COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGIrIIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, its successors and assigns, party of the first part, hereafter referred to as "School Board," and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~tIA, a charter county of the Commonwealth of Virginia, its successors and assigns, party of the second part, hereafter referred to as "Roanoke County." WITNESSETH WHEREAS, by an Exchange Agreement, dated May 29, 1998 entered into between Charles R. Lemon and Anne L. Lemon, husband and wife, and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon, husband and wife hereafter referred to as "the Lemons," owners of two parcels of real estate fronting on Merriman Road in the County of Roanoke, the School Board, and Roanoke County, agreement was reached for a mutual exchange of adjoining parcels of real estate in order to provide to the Lemons a more suitable parcel for expansion of their existing manufacturing facility in Roanoke County in order to increase their present employment and productivity with accompanying economic benefits to the County and its citizens and to provide to Roanoke County a suitable parcel which will join two existing County park facilities so as to provide for the expansion of and complementary enhancement of existing parks and recreation facilities; and WHEREAS, the agreement by the School Board to purchase the Woods End property consisting of approximately 70 acres as the location for a new high school in Southwest Roanoke County and the agreement of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to fund the purchase of this property and to consider the necessary rezoning and permit approvals for the construction of the proposed new high school has substantially removed the likelihood of need by the School Board for additional property on Memman Road for a school bus lot. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration as described herein, the School Board hereby agrees to act by resolution in accordance with § 22.1-129A of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to declare surplus and to convey to Roanoke County all that certain lot or parcel of real estate containing approximately 11 acres, identified as all of Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel # 97.01- 2-11, as more particularly described in Attachment A hereto. In consideration of this conveyance, Roanoke County hereby covenants and agrees (1) that in the event that the School Board needs real estate on which to relocate its school bus lot currently housed at Cave Spring High School on Chaparral Drive, Roanoke County will make available .real estate comparable to its current school bus lot at no cost to the School Board,T(21 that the School Board shall have no obligations to clean-up or to ,pay for the clean-up of the property being declared surplus and being transferred to Roanoke County.; (31 that it will provide the School Board with funding to purchase the Woods End site for a new South County high school;,.(41 that it will pgv for the water and sewer connection fees for the new high school on the Woods End site; and 1'Sl provided that all costs associated with ~1, and (3) will be accomplished within the $28,231,1 S2 allocated, or the South County School in Phase I of the school construction program. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF COUNTY, VIRGINIA ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGI1~iIA By: Division Superintendent Roanoke County Schools 5937 Cove Road, NW Roanoke, VA 24019 By: County Administrator County of Roanoke, Virginia P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 FAX TO: Bob Johnson FROM: Elmer Hodge DATE: February 18, 1998 SUBJECT: February 23 Agenda draft Attached is a draft of the February 23 agenda. I will be attending a meeting in Vinton this afternoon, but I wanted you to see how I have handled the exchange of land at Merriman. Please review and give me a call in the morning with your comments. Thanks From: "Terry Harrington" < ADMOl/TLH > To: adm01/mha, adm01/pmm Date sent: Wed, 17 Feb 199913:35:43 + 0000 Subject: Re: Consent Agenda -rezonings Copies to: adm01/ech How's this language... (may be too long) "The following ordinances are being considered by the Board for First Reading. Approval of First Reading schedules a Second Reading and Public Hearing. Approval of First Reading does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, these items." From: "Mary Allen" < ADMO 1 /MHA > To: adm01 /pmm, adm01 /tlh Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:11:42 +0000 Subject: Consent Agenda -rezonings Cc: adm01/ech At the 1 /26 meeting and debriefing, there was discussion about adding a sentence to the agenda that describes what we are doing with 1st reading of rezonings -consent agenda. I think that's a good idea, especially if BLJ reads the sentence at the meetings. Any suggestions on what I could add to the agenda that would explain what we are doing so citizens don't think we are actually approving these rezonings? Mary Allen, Clerk to Board 772-2003 Mary Allen -- 1 -- Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:30:06 To: adm01/ech Subject: 1999 Board Priorities Date sent: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:26:19 I talked with Brenda and she had already checked the tape. The priorities DO NOT have to be brought back to the Board. The only issue to be resolved is the turnover issue. You are supposed to bring that back with more specificity. So, we DON'T need to add the amended priorities to the agenda unless you want to. You just need to make the changes to the staff salary/turnover one. Mary Allen -- 1 -- Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:26:19 y-~ ~ D _ ~/~8/99 9:0~~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 1999 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7 P.M. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Cail 2. Invocation: 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of February 22 - 26, 1999 as Social Services Eligibility Worker Week in Roanoke County. i D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS ~ i-l 1. Request from the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to e,1~c~n9, ~ approve amendments to the Member Use Agreement. (Diane Hyatt, Finance Director) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: adoption of these items does not imply approval of the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. 1. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct mini warehouses, located in the 7200 block of Barrens Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of to Vaughn Wilburn. 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate a used automobile dealership, located at 7650 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Hash Investments LLC. 3. Ordinance to rezone approximately 10 acres from R-2 and C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional for retail sales and obtain a Special Use Permit for fast food restaurants and drive-thrus, located in the vicinity of Brambleton Avenue (Route 221) and Electric Road (Route 419), Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Associates LLC. 4. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a high school, located on the west side of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, south of Farmington Drive, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Roanoke County School Board. 5. Ordinance to rezone 14.7 acres from AG-1 to R-1 to construct single family detached residences, located on the west side of Wiidwood Road, north of 1-81, Catawba Magisterial District, 2 upon the petition of Wildwood Development Inc. 6. Ordinance to rezone 11.66 acres from C-2 conditional to C-2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 925 North Electric Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Pinkerton Chevrolet). 7. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hilis Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church). 8. Reconsideration of an Ordinance to rezone 11.93 acres from AG-3 to AR and obtain a Special Use Permit to allow a 9-hole golf course, located in the 2600 block of Rutrough Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Randall Wayne Brown. 9. Ordinance to rezone 456.6 acres from R-1, Residential to Planned Technology Development District, for a business and commercial park, located in the 5300 block of Glenmary Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES Q -~-o b~ --~ ~c.. l I eoJ .- Second Reading of an ordinance approving the exercise of an option to purchase agreement with Salem Office supply, Inc., for property located at 400 East Main Street, across from the Roanoke County Courthouse, in Salem, Virginia. (John Chambliss, Assistant Administrator) I. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans -Advisory Council 3 2. Commission for Senior and Physically Challenged Citizens J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of Minutes -January 23-24, 1999, January 26, 1999. 2. Request from Social Services to increase County vehicle fleet for Welfare Reform, Phase II. 3. Request to appropriate monies for Child Day Care Programs for the Department of Social Services. ~~ 4. Au orizati for Cou dmini or to enter into a rental agr t v 'th ons cti n fo roperty at the Public ce Center. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Statement of Expenditures and Revenue for the month ended January 31, 1999 4 January 31, 1999 6. Update of 1999-2000 Budget Calendar 7 Accounts Paid -January 1999 O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) ~ _ ~ 1. Joint Work Session with School Board (a) Update on Phase I construction projects (b) Review of agreement on exchange of Merriman property. 2. Work Session on potential uses for McDonald Farm 3. Work Session on the CIP P. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursua~r t to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) pending litigation with General Electric Company 2.1-344A (3) discussion of~e acquisition of real estate for public purposes, purchase of a water system; Section 2.1-344 A (7) to discuss a legal matter requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff, namely, negotiation of an agreement with the Town of Vinton; Section 2.1-344 A (5) to discuss the location of a prospective business or industry in the County; EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.j Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing to elicit citizen comment for items to be included in the budget for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. 2. Public Hearing on the "effective tax rate increase" as a result of increased assessed value of real estate. 3. Public Hearing to set the following tax rates: 5 b. To set a personal property tax rate of not more than $3.50 per $100 assessed valuation. c. To set a machinery and tools tax rate of not more than $3.00 per $100 assessed valuation. S. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES the followingquests have been reconsidered by the Planning Commission and will NOT be heard this evening: Second reading of ordinance to rezone 1166 acres from C-2 conditio nal to C -2 conditional to amend the existing condition and obtain a Special Use Permit to con struct a 160 foot cellular monopole tower, l ocated at 925 North El ectric Road, Catawba Ma isterial District. upon th e petition of Triton PCS jPinkerton Chevrolet. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church jTerrv Harrington, County Planner 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a 40 foot addition to an existing monopole tower, located at 4135 West Main Street, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Triton PCS (West Main). (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 2. Second reading of ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-1 Conditional to C-2 conditional to construct a restaurant, located on the north side of Electric Road, east of Colonnade Corporate Center II, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Blue Ridge Cafe, LC. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 3O. Second reading of ordinance declaring a 5.111 acre portion of a lot fronting on Merriman Road and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District to be surplus and accepting/rejecting an offer for the exchange of same with portions of property owned by Charles R. Lemon 8 Anne L. 6 Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) 4. Second reading of ordinance to vacate a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 20, Page 89, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park and a portion of a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Book 15, Page 110, Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park, lot 18A, (Tax Map No. 86.01-10-18) and located in Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) T. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. ADJOURNMENT ADD SENTENCE TO REZONING CONSENT AGENDA THAT THESE ITEMS ARE BEING CONSIDERED ONLY TO MOVE THEM FORWARD TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AT WHICH TIME ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. Check with Paul Mahoney and Terry for language! From: "Terry Harrington" < ADMOl/TLH > To: adm01/pmm Date sent: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 17:28:46 +0000 Subject: Cell Towers and Train Whistles Copies to: adm01/mha PMM.... hope you are feeling better..... 1. Fuzzy got a complaint about a NS train in the Starkey/Merriman crossing area that sounds its whistle every saturday and sunday AM at 6:OOam. Fuzzy wants to know what if anything we/he can do... I tried pawning this off on Arnold and Ray Lavinder... but no takers... any suggestions...? any state/local laws? any local history... did we not have a similar complaint in another part of the county several years ago.? 2. Don Witt wants t reconsider the cell tower approval motion for the 419/Luther urch site. His conscience is bothering him appare was on the prevailing side, thus he could raise the moti to reconsider on the 16th which is their next meeting. Need ~ discuss with you wisdom/strategy... and effect on BOS Packet/info. for the 2/23 meeting. I'll be in Thursday pm and will give you a call. Mary Allen -- 1 -- Thu, 11 Feb 1999 11:00:24 ,. MEMO To: Chairman and Members, Board of Supervisors ~-' From: Timothy W. Gubala, Director of Economic Development ~ ~~ Subject: Executive Summary of ZHA marketing analysis study of McDonald Farm Date: November 4, 1998 I have enclosed the Conclusions and Recommendations section from the study for your information. The study was presented at a community meeting in Vinton last week and the Roanoke Times did a story on Monday, November 2. Brenda Holton has a copy of the complete study if you wish to review it at your leisure. I understand that Vinton Town Council will officially receive the marketing study in the near future. I would like to discuss this issue with the Board at a work session in December or January. We have to consider an agreement with Vinton if we are going to participate in rezoning and jointly develop the property. Please call me if you have any questions. Melinda Cox and I are available to discuss the study with you. Thank you. c Elmer Hodge Brenda Holton (study) Th acs _s_. Gres wig Ql~. ~=~'~,a y ~ '- Gc~~_6e Q Jo~i'I `w~ Q _.... .. .._ ... -87- ~^ i ~ VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This final section of the report summarizes findings of the market analysis for land uses proposed for development on McDonald Farm, and presents recommendations for the revision of the McDonald Farm Master Plan, based on economic considerations. A. CONCLUSIONS The preceding market analysis has been intended to evaluate the feasibility of various types of development on McDonald Farm, and to assess the compatibility of feasible development types with the stated objectives of the community, Roanoke County, and the Town of Vinton. The following table illustrates the conclusions reached by this market analysis: TABLE 6.1 FEASIBILITY AND COMPATIBILITY OF PROPOSED LAND USES Land Use Feasibility Compatibility Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant - 0 Neighborhood Retail _ _ Lodging Facility _ + Business Parcels + + Retirement Housing + + Conventional Housing + _ Empty-Nester Housing + + College of Health Sciences 0 + "+" means positive evaluation, "0" means neutral evaluation, "-" means negative evaluation 98006/ mcd_conc Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development faces strong challenges to feasibility due to poor visibility and regional accessibility, low traffic volumes, a lack of synergy with other tourist destinations, and demographic weaknesses in the local ' -88- ° ~ i~ market. On the whole, this type of development receives a negative evaluation for feasibility. Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development of the scale described in the Master Plan may not attract significant new traffic to Hardy Road or add many students to the eastern Roanoke County public schools. The development described may be able to preserve some of the existing structures on the property, and likely can be designed to limit any negative aesthetic impact from the Parkway viewshed. However, Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development will not create many new well-paying jobs, nor command high prices for land, given the likely difficulties in sales performance. On the whole, Specialty Retail and Theme Restaurant development receives a neutral evaluation for compatibility. Neighborhood Retail development on McDonald Farm would also face significant challenges to feasibility, including the proximity of competitive developments, and the weak spending power support from the primary market area. Under current market conditions, Neighborhood Retail receives a negative evaluation for feasibility. However, the addition of new households and employees on or near McDonald Farm may improve the prospects for Neighborhood Retail in the future. Neighborhood Retail will not add many new students to the public school system, and may command relatively high land values if market support improves dramatically through other developments. However, Neighborhood Retail is likely to have negative impacts on the local environment, as it is dependent on high traffic volumes and bold visibility and would likely incorporate very generic commercial design. Moreover, few well-paying jobs would be created by Neighborhood Retail development. On the whole, Neighborhood Retail receives a negative evaluation for compatibility. Lodging Facility development faces strong challenges to feasibility, due to poor visibility and accessibility from both tourist and business destinations, as well as the relatively poor performance of nearby lodging facilities compared to the regional lodging market, which is showing evidence of over-development. Lodging Facility development receives a strongly negative evaluation for feasibility. A Lodging Facility would not add many students to the public school system, nor does it add many new vehicles to Hardy Road traffic. A Lodging Facility could be designed with limited aesthetic impact on the site or from the Parkway viewshed, and could create amenities and public access. However, a Lodging facility would not likely add many new well-paying jobs to the area, nor command high land prices given the ' -89- ' ~ i~ strong challenges to its operating performance. Nonetheless, Lodging Facility development receives a positive evaluation for compatibility. Business Parcel development on McDonald Farm faces the challenge of slow local and regional absorption of new developments. However, occupancy is high among office, "flex," and industrial space in Vinton and eastern Roanoke County, despite an aging inventory of buildings. Also, the demographic and employment characteristics of the local population is compatible with Business Parcel development. Finally, the locational attributes of McDonald Farm makes it a more appropriate site for Business Parcel development than for other revenue-generating uses, such as retail and lodging. Business Parcel development receives a positive evaluation for feasibility. Business Parcel development is likely to generate well-paying jobs which are compatible with the skills and education of the local labor force. Business Parcels will not add a significant number of new students to local schools. Many businesses do not generate a significant amount of additional traffic on local roads. While certain businesses and building types may present negative aesthetic impacts on the site, these can be mitigated to some extent by design guidelines. Overall, Business Parcel development receives a positive evaluation for compatibility. Retirement Housing development on McDonald Farm would benefit from an aging local and regional population, a lack of proximate competition, and the physical and locational attributes of the property. Market support for this type of development is strong. Retirement Housing receives a strong positive evaluation for feasibility. Retirement Housing development would not generate significant new traffic on Hardy Road, nor add many students to the local school system. The development's need for an attractive campus would contribute to the preservation of greenspace, amenities, and the Parkway viewshed, and public access to the site could be maintained. Some new well-paying jobs would be created by Retirement Housing, and land prices are likely to be relatively high. Retirement Housing development receives a strong positive evaluation for compatibility. Conventional Housing is the least risky type of development, in terms of feasibility. Households and housing units are growing more quickly in eastern Roanoke County than in the region generally. Nearby developments have shown indications of strong sales performance and the existence of a middle- to upper-income housing market. The site and locational attributes of McDonald Farm make it a highly attractive site for residential development. The feasibility evaluation for Conventional Housing development on McDonald Farm is strongly positive. -90- Conventional Housing does not, however, address many of the objectives of the community. New children will be added to the schools, and additional traffic will be present on Hardy Road during peak hours. No significant number of new well-paying jobs will be created. While housing development may command acceptable land prices, residences can often represent a net loss to local governments in terms of service costs. Finally, Conventional Housing developers and residents may be less inclined to preserve viewsheds and public access to McDonald Farm than in other types of development. Overall, Conventional Housing receives a negative evaluation for compatibility. Empty-nester housing, however, receives a positive evaluation for both feasibility and compatibility. The success of nearby housing developments oriented toward older households supports this feasibility conclusion. Just as importantly, empty-nester households do not generate the school burden or traffic volumes that conventional housing does, and can be designed to minimize aesthetic impact and to preserve greenspace. The College of Health Sciences is not amarket-driven development, and feasibility is not determined by traditional supply-and-demand factors. The feasibility evaluation cannot, therefore, be either positive or negative. However, the College has expressed an interest in developing its planned campus on McDonald Farm. The College of Health Sciences is likely to generate a significant amount of new traffic on Hardy Road, due to the large number of students and employees. Also, the College does not intend to purchase land for its campus, nor will it pay property taxes. However, the number of students added to local public schools is likely to be minimal. The College's need for an attractive campus would contribute to the preservation of greenspace, amenities, and the Parkway viewshed, and public access to the site could be maintained. The number of well-paying jobs provided by the College is unlikely to be matched by any other prospective tenant. The economic impact on other retail and service establishments in Vinton and eastern Roanoke County is likely to be substantial. And the College would provide a prestigious anchor for the community which could assist in the attraction of upper-income and highly educated households as well as other commercial and retail developments. The College of Health Sciences receives a positive evaluation for compatibility. B. RECOMMENDATIONS The conclusions of the preceding market analysis indicate that the original Master Plan for McDonald Farm is not likely to produce an economically successful development program. While the land uses proposed were generally consistent with '-91- ' ~ i~ the stated goals of the community, the County, and the Town of Vinton, some of those land uses will not receive sufficient market support to attract interest from profit-driven investors and developers. At the same time, some other types of development may attract interest from the development community, and still be compatible with the original objectives of the Master Plan. Based on the market analysis for alternative land uses, the following recommendations are presented: 1. Eliminate the Specialty Retail, Theme Restaurant, and Lodging Facility land uses from the McDonald Farm Master Plan, due to lack of market support. 2. Retain the Business Parcel land use option, due to perceived opportunities in the development market and the compatibility of this land use with planning objectives. 3. Retain the option for Neighborhood Retail on the portion of McDonald Farm directly accessible from Hardy Road, to allow such development to occur if market support increases in the future. 4. Incorporate Retirement Housing into the Master Plan, due to market feasibility, positive economic impacts, and compatibility with the planning objectives. 5. Include Empty-Nester Housing development as a minor element of the Master Plan, as it is highly feasible and generally compatible with the planning objectives. 6. Consider the inclusion of the College of Health Sciences into the Master Plan, weighing the positive employment benefits and aesthetic and image considerations against the cost of not receiving direct property taxes and land sale revenues. Based on these recommendations, the following development program is recommended for McDonald Farm: Retirement Housing -- Up to 15 acres of land to be developed with independent living and assisted living units, as well as indoor and outdoor common spaces for residents. Absorption of this space will likely be incremental, with more facilities being constructed as additional units are =92- ' ~ i~ demanded in the market. It is reasonable to assume an absorption rate of five acres every three years, for a total build-out time of six years. • Business Parcels -- Up to 20 acres of land, preferably located on less visible portions of site, to be developed with design guidelines to minimize aesthetic impacts. An average absorption of three acres per year may be attainable on this land, with total build-out in not less than seven years. Neighborhood Retail -- Roughly nine acres of land to be developed for neighborhood-serving retail and services, with some design guidelines but allowances for signage and visibility. Absorption of this land will likely be possible only after other development occurs on the site, and should not be expected in the first five years of development on McDonald Farm. Empty-Nester Housing -- Up to 15 acres of land for a small residential subdivision (less than 60 units), with design guidelines to minimize aesthetic impacts. Annual absorption may be estimated at 10 units, or roughly three gross acres. Total build-out should be expected in not less than five years. • Opportunity Area -- Market analysis indicates that, in the next seven to ten years, at least 25 acres of land on McDonald Farm is not likely to be absorbed for revenue-generating development that is compatible with the master planning objectives. The College of Health Sciences, which will pay neither land costs nor property taxes, has expressed an interest in 25 acres of McDonald Farm land for a new campus, on which development could begin in roughly two years. If the dedication of land to this institutional tenant is not determined to be in the best interest of the Town of Vinton, these 25 acres should be retained for the expansion of the business parcels, retirement housing developments, or other revenue-generating uses as demanded in the long term. • Buffers, Greenways, and Circulation -- Roughly 15 acres of land specifically for wetlands and habitat preservation, pedestrian and vehicular access, and buffers to minimize impacts on existing developments nearby. Additional buffers, greenways, and circulation are also likely to be included within each of the land use areas described above (retirement housing, business parcels, neighborhood retail, empty-nester housing, and opportunity area). An illustration of one possible configuration of these land uses on the McDonald Farm site is shown on the "Site Utilization, Transportation and Utilities Map" at the end of this document. This recommended development program is responsive to economic ti93- ~ i~ forces, and should attract interest from the real estate development community. The land use elements of this development program also address the objectives of the community, the County, and the Town of Vinton. 9soo6/~,~ar;~,z i O~ POANp~~` ~, Z ~~ ~ 2 J .ate 1838 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE February 3, 1999 Roanoke Times & World News Legal Advertisement Department 201-209 Campbell Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24011 To Whom It May Concern: PENNY HODGE, CPA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Please publish the enclosed legal advertisement on February 9, 1999 and February 16, 1999. Bill the cost of the publication to: County of Roanoke ATTN: Mary Allen Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 I would like to review a draft of the advertisement before publication. My fax number is 772-2186. A copy of the ad from 1998 has been included for your information. I would like these ads to be of the same approximate size as the 1998 ad. Sincerely, ~-~~~J W. Brent Robertson Budget Manager c: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator Mary Allen, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2020 FAX (540) 772-2186 EMAIL: Imurphy@www.co.roanoke.va.us ® Recycled Paper DIANE D. HYATT, CPA DIRECTOR PUBLIC NOTICE Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, at its meeting on the 23rd day of February, 1999 at the Roanoke County Administration Center in Roanoke, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing on the following matter, to-wit: TO SET A REAL ESTATE TAX RATE OF NOT MORE THAN $1.13 PER $100 ASSESSED VALUATION IN ROANOKE COUNTY. TO SET A PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX RATE OF NOT MORE THAN $3.50 PER $100 ASSESSED VALUATION IN ROANOKE COUNTY. TO SET A MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX RATE OF NOT MORE THAN $3.00 PER $100 ASSESSED VALUATION IN ROANOKE COUNTY. Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Publish on the following dates: February 9 1999 FebruarX 16, 1999 claseifiedaduertising T~540.991-3415 D~ Feb. B, 1999 C~9~36AM ~ ooroo~oo The Roanoke Times Acct: 5407722021COUN Name: GOUNTY O'F ROANOKE LEGAL NOTICE Ph: 5x07722021 Class Rate: Disp Rate: MQtn~ ~ hzrce,, ~~~an +~ am inierealec! persona the! the ATTN.: MARY AL LEN, BOA Gredit Status: OK s°P~ry~~ ii n b 'P ago P. O. BOX 29800 hearinrat Chair 7:b0 v.m. ~- ROANOKE VA 24018-0798 l Re uest Re sian~°,nh~'t~a'oarGr~MeeUng y q p Room at tre I~anoke Oounty Paytype BL Rate LE Legals Rep: 35 estlminlnt rairan Ccntor, '~G4 Bornard Drive s.W., to aonaidor an o tilnarcn tlacbNnga 6.111 Source PH Class 10 Legals ^ TFN nen: portion of a Iot trontingan INranimrn Road (Part of raH No. 97.1-11y and a ~ Start 2/9199 Days 2 Rate Iss 2 Stop 2116/99 16aoraportcnofalotoppo• Q niEa tl,a intarnaotion of S#arlay Rued and Merrirr~n Read (Pak - o1 T~DI Map Ab. 97.40.1.11 In 0.00 Words....... 160 P~ 136.04 tr,e ~ springy piakrict to be ' rejecting aVrp lVa and 6Ge pt ing 0.00 Lines........ ~ DISOOUnt 0.00 an oriel for the e~ananPe of 0 00 DePth....... 3$.00 Commis 0.00 ~ma wRn portbnnot property ownetlbyCnarlesR.lemon~s . Columns...... 1 Net 136.04 Anne L. Lemon antl Curtly L. Lamcn & ~rotny o. Lemon 0.00 Graphic..... 0 St Tax 0.00 TaK Map Naa G7.G1.~•14 & ~7.41.~-~! 0 00 St Words. 0 Fed Tax 0.00 Giran undor my hard chin 5th days r~eruary, i9s9. Free Da 0 Y ^ Boxed Ad Total 136.04 Mary H. Alan, CMC, Clark is the board f t B d R l C Payment 0.00 oun y nar o oano ae Copy Line LEGAL NOTI GE Noti App Gr. 0.00 1474 ~~ Sort String Ba~~ 000 On Hold Product Code Tear Sheets ^ Ad Killed PO # Comments Reason for Discount Adid: 107420 Editions DC, classified advertising ooioo~oo 1R'540.9A1-3415 ~ Feb. d, 1999 ~9~31 AM L1/i The Roanoke Times ACd: 5407722021COUN Name: COUNTY OF ROANOKE Ph: 5407722021 Class Rate: Disp Rate: ATTN.: MARY ALLEN, BOA Credit Status: O P. O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE VA 24018-0798 Reply Request Paytype BL Rate LE Legals ~ Rep: 35 Souroe PH Class 10 Legals ^ TFN Start 2/9~J9 Days 2 Rate Iss 2 Stop 2116199 0.00 Words....... 0.00 Lines........ o. ao Depth....... Columns...... G. 00 Graphic..... 0.00 5t Words. Free Day 0 ^ Boxed Ad Copy Line LEGAL NOTI CE Noti Sort Strang On Hoid Product Code ^ Ad KiAed 188 Prjpe 47 Di9l~unt 47.00 Commis 1 Net 0 St Tax 0 Fed Tax Total Payment App Cr. Balance Tear Sheets PO # Comments Reason for Discount LEGAL NC~SCE Nttce ie hereby ~i,+en b al! inkn:sr~ RrJOr7 the# the Roanoke Country Beard of Bupervi~vrz xill hvkl a public nearingat their 7:W p.m. ses- alon on Trna~y, Fa Orrery 73, 1999, h the Boartl RteetlrrP Room at tre I~anoloe County Atlminlitrtran Cantor, ?Itl4 Berrord 6riw S.4Y., on trw position of Boono, Bmno and loot bvsoa#e a3G•(ooF eons. Lary xrn eaeemen#, Pla# @vvk 20, vaYa ~ (gactivn 12, Garrix~ ibmee of Can#erbury Park}, and a portion of a 20• tL Ok ~nl~r]r RYYar aaaL Rlrik, Plat Book 16, Date 110 (SEC. 16$ 26 von 9, Fkerrsing~n or CaMer• . bury Park}, CCat6d on Let 1b, Section t.Z oT CSrriaBt, canna of GinEorbury Park, and further hdi Q.~ • ahownon Lot 1H•Aon roau ~ioian pb{ of ©nbgo Flomae 168,26 of Q~nkerbury Perk, P6k Book 0.00 :1 paw 26, in the Wind~vr Hiiia Ma~eterial 6ukriot Ta„ Map !ko. 86.01.10.18. (`1.(~} A copy cf the dvcumenb 168.26 relaledto this request mar be e;3mined In the onlce of the 00 0 DeDartmen4 of Communhp . Doulopmant, ucatm at the //~'~//~'y//ry'~ Rca no ka CWrty Adminofra#10n L.W Center. ~ ~ SMan untler my nanC th<a 4th • day of February, 14DD, Ma H. Jtken, CMC, Clerk io tM Board Roanoke County Board of B VRer'rl•A r0 K tlozalaa( Editions DC, Adid: 107419E The Roar Tuesday, Febr~ Administration C (Pinkerton Chev amend the exist cellular monopole ~~~~ i. on unty ACS al to foot rict. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: February 3, 1999 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Tuesday, February 16, 1999 Direct the bill for publication to: Triton PCS Inc. (Pinkerton) c/o Mike Pace PO Box 40013 Roanoke, VA 24038-0013 (540) 983-9312 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Triton PCS (Good Shepherd Church) to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 120 foot cellular monopole tower, located at 1887 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: February 3, 1999 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Tuesday, February 16, 1999 Direct the bill for publication to: Triton PCS Inc. (Good Shepherd Church) c/o Mike Pace PO Box 40013 Roanoke, VA 24038-0013 (540) 983-9312 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Triton PCS (West Main) to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 40 foot addition to an existing monopole tower, located at 4135 West Main Street, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: February 3, 1999 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Tuesday, February 16, 1999 Direct the bill for publication to: Triton PCS Inc. (West Main) Go Mike Pace PO Box 40013 Roanoke, VA 24038-0013 (540) 983-9312 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Blue Ridge Cafe LLC to rezone 3.77 acres from C-1 conditional to C-2 conditional to construct a restaurant, located on the north side of Electric Road, east of Colonnade Corporate Center II, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: February 3, 1999 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Tuesday, February 16, 1999 Direct the bill for publication to: Blue Ridge Cafe LLG c/o David Yeaman PO Box 20739 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 389-6544 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 r ~ CORRECTED LEGAL NOTICE Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at their 7:00 p.m. session on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, in the Board Meeting Room at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive S. W. on the petition of Boone, Boone and Loeb to vacate a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement, Plat Book 20, page 89 (Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park), and a portion of a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement, Plat Book 15, page 110 (Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park), located on Lot 18, Section 12 of Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park, and further shown on Lot 18-A on resubdivision plat of Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park, Plat Book 21, page 26, in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District (Tax Map No. 86.01-10-18) A copy of the documents related to this request may be examined in the office of the Department of Community Development, located at the Roanoke County Administration Center. Given under my hand this , 4th day of February, 1999. .~ Mary H. Allen, CMC, Clerk to the Board Roanoke County Board of Supervisors PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE ROANOKE TIMES ON Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Tuesday, February 16, 1999 Direct the bill for publication to: County of Roanoke Department of Community Development P. O. Box 29800 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Roanoke, VA 24018 "~-:3 ~ ~M Mail affidavit to: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at their 7:00 p.m. session on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, in the Board Meeting Room at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive S. W. on the petition of Boone, Boone and Loeb to vacate a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 20, Page 89, Section 12, Carriage Homes of Canterbury Park and a portion of a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Book 15, Page 110, Section 9, Kensington of Canterbury Park, lot 18A, (Tax Map No. 86.01-10-18) and located in Windsor Hills Magisterial District A copy of the documents related to this request may be examined in the office of the Department of Community Development, located at the Roanoke County Administration Center. Given under my hand this , 2nd day of February, 1999. Mary H. Allen, CMC, Clerk to the Board Roanoke County Board of Supervisors PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE ROANOKE TIMES ON Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Tuesday, February 16, 1999 Direct the bill for publication to: County of Roanoke Department of Community Development P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Mail affidavit to: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 FAX TRANSMISSION COUNTY OF ROANOKE P. O. Box 29800 ROANOKE„ VA 2401 8 540-772-2003 FAx: 540-772-2 193 To: Roanoke Times Legal Notices Date: Faz #: Pages: From: Mary H. Allen Subject: Legal Notice COMMENTS: February 2, 1999 2, including this cover sheet. Attached is a legal notice to be published on Tuesday, February 9 and Tuesday February 16. If you have any questions, please let me know. RKE BOARD SUPERI~ISORS TEL~540-X72-219 Transmit Confirmation Report No . Rece i~~rer Transmitter Date Time Mode Pages Result 010 RT-LEGAL RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS Feb 02'99 1549 00'57 Norm 02 OK Feb 02'99 1549 LEGAL NOTICE Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at their 7:00 p.m. session on Tuesday, February 23, 1999, in the Board Meeting Room at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive S. W., to consider an ordinance declaring a 5.111 acre portion of a lot fronting on Merriman Road (Part of Tax Map No. 97.1-2-11) and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road (Part of Tax Map No. 97.05-1-1) in the Cave Spring District to be surplus and accepting/rejecting an offer for the exchange of same with portions of property owned by Charles R Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon (Tax Map Nos. 97.01-2-10 & 97.01-2-12). Given under my hand this 5th day of February, 1999. y"Ylaa~- -~- Mary H. Allen, CMC, Clerk to the Board Roanoke County Board of Supervisors PLEASE PUBLISH ~1 THE ROANOKE TIMES ON Tuesday, February 9, 19 Tuesday, February 16, 1 Direct the bill for publication to: County of Roanoke Department of Community Development P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Mail affidavit to: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ~a oZ s ~ q ia;o(~~ .~ ~~ February 9, 1999 The Honorable Bob L. Johnson Chairman, Board of Supervisors Roanoke County P.O. BOX 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 RE: Amendment to Members Use Agreement Dear Mr. Johnson: In 1991, the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, the Town of Vinton, and the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority ("Authority"), entered into the Members Use Agreement ("Agreement") which provided for the establishment and operation of the Valley's regional landfill facilities. In 1992, the Authority issued its original revenue bonds to finance the acquisition and construction of the Smith Gap Landfill and Tinker Creek Transfer Station. Recently, the Authority issued Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1998 and 1999 ("Refunding Bonds") totaling $20,000,000.00, in order to refund a portion of the Series 1992 Bonds. The refunding was completed in two issues to qualify as small issues, which allowed the Resource Authority to expedite the refunding and take advantage of low interest rates. The refunding will allow the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to reduce its annual debt payments by $100,.000.00. The current Agreement contains several provisions ~~vhich apply specifically to the Series 1992 bonds. The Agreement needs to be amended to provide that all of its provisions also apply to the Refunding Bonds. These provisions include the jurisdictions' agreement to deliver all acceptable waste to the regional landfill and the continuation of the jurisdictions' financial obligations under the Agreement. The amendment would not extend the amount of time that jurisdictions' obligations are effective under the Agreement. A proposed amendment, which has been adopted by the Resource Authority, is attached. In order to be effective, the amendment must be authorized by all of the jurisdictions. 1020 Hollins Road Roanoke, Virginia 24012 (540) 857-5050 Fax (540) 857-5056 Bond Letter (cont.) 2/9/99 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please let me know if you have any comments or questions or if I may be of fiirther assistance. Sincerely, Allan C. Robinson, Jr. Chairman cc: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Members, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority John R. Hubbard, Chief Executive Officer Mark Allan Williams, General Counsel RU RESOURCE AUTHORITY Fax~1-703-857-5056 Feb 12 '99 10 12 P.03i05 T1~CRD AMENDMENT TO ,U ROANOKE VAT.T,F.Y RRSOC li~tCF .AT 1THCaRITY MEMBERS use n~F,EEMErrr THIS THQtD t~112ENDMENT TO ROANORE'SrALLF.YRF.S(~TTRCF. A1.1'1'H(_1RrTY MEMBERS USE AGREEMENT (the "Third Amendment") as nr~de as ofFebruary 1, 1999, by sad ammag the ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHOI~STY, as successor to the Roanoke County Reso~ce Authority {the "Authority"), the COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRC~l~1TA (the "County"). the CTTY OF R4ANOKE, VIItGII1IA {the "City") and the TC}WN nF 'Vll~"TtIN, VIROIl~tlA (the "'~o~~v~rz"}; e~c~ of which are ~oliti~cal eubdxvi~ion~ of the Commomwcalth of Vugmia. REG'1TALS ~~: 'EREAS, the parties hereto emtexed iota the Roanoke Valley ],2•eaui,uuC Authority Members Use Agreement dated October 23, 1991 {tbe "Members Use Agreement"), as amended by the First Amendment to Roanoke Va~ey Resource Authority Members Use Agreement, dated as of Tune 1, 1992, (the "First Amendmt!ut"), and the Second ant to Roanoke Valley Reso~ee Authority Members Use 1~reemcnt, elated as of December 2, l 996, (the "Second A,ueu~m"), ttax.-ng the Authority, the Cotu~,ty, the City anti the Town under which the Authority agreed to acquire, construct and equip a regional waste disposal system consisting of a landfill and transfer station and related st~n~rttnres and tquipmeat {the "System"), and to provide financing the~zefor in order to dispose of ail nonhazardous solid waste delivered to the Systeux by or ou bchatf ul'the County, the City and the Town (collectively, the "Cltarter Members"), and, WHEREAS, the Authority is.~ed it.~ ~33,R~O,tI(.)fl ~nlul Waste Revenue Bonds, Series 1992 (the "1992 Bonds") to fmsnca the System; and, WiiER~AS, the Authority issued xts ~ l O,UUU,WO Revenue Refunding Bond, Series 1998 amd its $10,000,444 Revenue Refuadmg Bond, Series 1999 (the "Refunding Bonds") tc- refimd pnrtinns of the 1982 Bonds and sold the Refmding Bonds to G~estar Bank (the "B"); and, WI~REAS, the Bank has requested that the AutharAy and the ~;harter Members eirter mto this Third Amendment in ardear to provide that the provisions of the Member t 75e Agreement, as 2~mended hS' the First A~a~+~*t at~d. the Second Amendment, applicable to tl~e 1992 Bands shall also be applicable to tlzc Rcfiuzdnng Donds. In consideration of the foregoing, the Authority and the Cltarter Members each agree as follows: ~~ ARTICLE I All references to Bonds and to the Series 1992 Bonds m the Members Use Agreemennt, as amended by the First Amendment and the Second At~aendment, shall be deemed to inchule the Refunded Bonds. The Members Use Agreement, the First Amendment, and the Second Anacndmcnt, t~s hereby amended, arc ratified and ccnfrrrn~d. .A.R, .T7CLE II Section 2.1 Ste' ' y of Tnv~Ji~ opr '~i~n~.~. If any clause, prov~on or section of this 'Third Amendment is held to be illegal or invalid by any cotut, the invalidity of the clfuasc, ,provision ar sectiau wdl not affect any of the rema~g caauses, provisions or sections, and this Third Aunt wilt be construed and enforced as if the ~Iega1 or invalid clause, provision or Section I~ad not been cantaiaed iri it. Suction 2.2 Cotuitert~arts. T1us T7iu'cl Auicucluu<nl array be executed is any number of counterparts, each of which, when sa executed and dcliwered, w~l be an original, and fete counterparts taltezt together w>Il conskitute one and the saxes instrument. ~:~ Section ~.~ ~rovernin~ Law. This Third Amendment will $e governed by the laws of the ~ommonweaith of Vaginia. Section 2.4 This Third Amendment mad be amended only in accordance with the provisioag of tho Mcntbcra Uec .A,gxocsncnt. FN W1'I'I~TESS WI~3EI~Ol~, the partxe3 have cau~tf this TlYllt~l A.utend~c:~tl to tic; executed as of tfie date alxyve written ATTEST: By, lts: Its- ROANOKE VALLE~C RESOURCE AUTI30RITY ley: ~.„,: -2- RU RESOURCE AUTHORITY Fax~1-703-85~-5056 L~ 14TIT~ST: A3~-- -- tt~: Ay:~ Tts: ATTEST: '~,; .. ,. . Its c:~rr~AOwN~.oar~~~.wr~ Feb 12 '99 10;13 P.05t05 ~OYJNT'Y OF ROANOKE, VIItGIN~A B~ Its: Its: -- TOWN OF VIl~T'l"JN, VlrlZGr1N,LA, $~'= - - IC~: -3~ ,..-,~:, ~> .a .. .. ,r ~~.1~M~N~E.~~,T~T O~ ~,~:R,~~.~~~ ~tttfr ~~nur~ of ~nriul ~Er~ires Resolution WlHEKEAS, Virginia's landmark welfare reform legislation has significantly impacted the services provided by local eligibility workers, calling upon them to creatively promote individual self-'su~ciency and personal responsibility; and °r~IEKF~3S, Virginia continues to experience u:p:~cedented implementaticn of complex policies and procedures relating to I~elfare Ktform in all major benefit programs; and Pow.- ~'S z~ W~HERF.AS, ~;iagin~ia's-~-~ eligibility workers have been at the forefront of public ~orts to meet that need steadily maintaining a high rate of application processing to ensure that those qualified for social services receive them; and ~--~ ~ ~~~ cu~5 WIHEAEAS, over are served monthly thrnug the Temporary Assistance _ ~~~ ~, to Needy Families, Medicaid s~-Food Stamp Is, depe dan g on t e e ication and ~"~ commitment of eligibility workers who handle their cases in an accurate and timely manner; P~~~ and WIHEKEAS, eligibility workers are continually faced with reconciling an environment of rapidly changing policies, procedures, and technological advances with quality control requirements ~~ e~ P~J ~~- ~~-. NOWT THEKEFOAE BE IT AESOLVET.~ the S ces does hereby commend all eligibility workers across the C.' '~ for a job weii done and recognizes the week of February 22 - 26, 1999, as Eligibility Worker Appreciation Week, calling upon Virginians to join in acknowledging theirpublic service and contrzbutions on this ~' day of ~ary, 1999. ~3 ~ti:. , i `~~ ~z,~ From: "Paul Mahoney" < ADMOl/PMM > To: "Mary Allen" < ADMO1/NIIIA > Date sent: Tue, 16 Feb 199911:18:08 +0000 Subject: Re: Consent Agenda - rezonings > At the 1 /26 meeting and debriefing, there was discussion about adding > a sentence to the agenda that describes what we are doing with 1st > reading of rezonings -consent agenda. I think that's a good idea, > especially if BLJ reads the sentence at the meetings. > Any suggestions on what I could add to the agenda that would explain > what we are doing so citizens don't think we are actually approving > these rezonings? Mary: Sue is in Salem/courthouse, so I cannot get the language from her, BUT, I believe that the actual language in the ordinance recites that this is for moving the process along to puiblic hearing, and does not signify approval on merits. You may want to repeat that language. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Mary Allen -- 1 -- Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:52:00 1~ [S ~ t /~ ~" Item No. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMIlVISTRATION CENTER, ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA MEETING DATE: February 9, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading of Ordinance Declaring a 5.111 Acre Portion of a Lot Fronting on Merriman Road and a 0.16 acre portion of a lot opposite the Intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District To Be Surplus and Accepting/Rejecting An Offer For The Exchange of Same With Portions of Property Owned by Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: BACKGROITND INFORMATION: Funds were included in the 1992 General Obligation Bond Referendum for purchase of property for a new South County High School. The Board of Supervisors transferred those funds to the Roanoke County School Board for the purchase of land on Merriman Road for this purpose. Additionally, the School Board planned to exchange some of that acreage with Plastics One, Inc., a company already located adjacent to the site. The intent was to use this tract, the existing Merriman Park, and the 28 acre Taylor property to build a high school and provide joint-use athletic facilities adjoining Starkey Park. This exchange was to benefit Plastics One by allowing the company to expand out of the flood plain, and benefit the County by providing recreational areas along Back Creek. Since that time, the School Board has obtained an option on the Woods End property located off Route 221, and has indicated that the property on Merriman Road will not be used for the new high school. At a recent joint meeting between the Board of Supervisors and the School Board, School Board members indicated a consensus to declare the property surplus and turn it over to the County, so long as a suitable area could be provided in the general vicinity for a school bus parking facility. It is anticipated that the School Board will take this action at the meeting on February 11, 1999. ^~/ ,. ,.~`~f (.~ dr--, ,PLC ~ ~' ~-~c ~ ~ c~v SITMIVIARY OF INFORMATION: This is a request to /accept the 11.10 acre tract of land from the School Board, and then to declare 5.1 acres of that surplus, and exchange that acreage with Plastics One fora 9 acre tract close to Back Creek and $13,115.00 as the difference between the appraised values of the exchanged properties. The transaction needs to be completed as soon as possible, because Plastics One is ready to begin construction, and the Parks and Recreation Department needs ownership to complete a grant for recreational access funding. This transaction s 1n~, 7, J~'-~I ~yvru,,~ ~-~ ~ ~i will benefit the County in several ways: o Parks and Recreation -This land exchange will provide an opportunity to build additional recreational facilities adjoining Starkey Park. There is a tremendous demand for additional facilities in Southwest County, and this will allow room for playing fields, a greenway and picnic facilities. Additionally, the Parks and Recreation Department has pre-qualified for a recreational access grant in the amount of $187,000 during the current fiscal year, but the County needs ownership of the property to make this application. This will make the Department eligible to apply for access funding for a different park in the next fiscal yeaz. o Economic Development -Plastics One plans to expand its existing facility by an additional 30,000-50,000 square feet. The estimated value of the expansion is $1 million, which will increase the County's tax revenue, and there will also be additional employment opportunities. Plastics One is very crowded in their current facility, and the owners are anxious to begin construction on the addition to alleviate those problems. 0 Spring High School lot, if it becomes necessary. Schools - In exchange for surplusing this land, the County will provide funding for the purchase of the Woods End site, and has agreed to pay the water and sewer connection fees for the new school. The Superintendent and County Administrator will determine a suitable site for a bus parking facility to replace the current Cave ATTACHMENTS: Attached are several documents pertaining to this transaction: Attachment A is a plat showing the relative shapes, sizes and locations of the parcels before the exchange. Attachment B is a plat showing the County property and the Plastics One property after the exchange. Note that the parcels have been reconfigured. Attachment C is the ordinance authorizing the exchange of land with Plastics One, Inc. Attachment D is the proposed agreement between the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Roanoke County School Board. Attachment E is the conceptual drawing of the expanded recreational facilities at Starkey Park. There will also be a staff presentation at the Board meeting on the plans to expand the Park and representatives from Plastics One will provide information on their expansion. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no immediate fiscal impact to this request. Staff will bring back specific figures for the purchase of the Woods End site and the water and sewer connection fees when the School Board makes that request. 2 . ~"~`~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the attached ordinance, which contains the following actions: 1. Authorizes the County Administrator to execute an agreement with the Superintendent of Schools accepting 11.10 acres of land on Memman Road from the Roanoke County School Board. 2. Exchanging 5.1 acres of that property with the Lemon Family, owners of Plastics One, Inc. in return for 9 acres of property and $13,115.00. Respectfully submitted, .~ Elm 'r C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved Denied Received Referred to () Motion by: (~ No Yes Abs Harrison - _ Johnson - _ _ McNamara Minnix - _. _ Nickens - _ _ ~.~ ~ ~ ttachments ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~' ~' ~ Q . o"~a~ G42~ Roanoke County Department of Community Development ATTACHMENT A ~-! Proposed Exchange of Land Between Roanoke County School Board and Plastics One No Scale Date: February 5, 1999 ~ ~~ '1 Y ~ ~ ~a~ a f ~ ~ a~~ a ~~~ ~ „ Q ~- r_ ~a yyn ~~ ~ ~r ~F - YI Wp ~ ~~-" v~d ~~ ~~~= ~v~ ar r~ '- 3~ . ~W ~ z' W~ ~ .r o u°'. d dL1 aro QE ~~ ~~, ~~ lL _~ --~~ ( d _ ~ ~ C r Q ~ ~ / '' d ~^,~~ O J ~ ~ Q ~4 41~ ~ ~~~ \ . ~' i.^ . y ~ '/ ~ \ / ~ Y. J~ . ~ ~ j ,' r Fa-- a cTi ~ ~l d J f Qq ~ ~ W add ~',•. '' ~.----- / 4.'. ~~ = J Z ~ d' ~ ~ Pt ~~ ~ i ~~: ~1~ ' i- /' ATTACHMENT B ~ ~ _ r~l '~ Q ~ ~ L 62~UU~ ; QwOV't7 3 J~ J ? J LLl Z ~ ~ ~i w~~3figu~aww~~iw g i i d .!~ I ~ III ; ~ 8 ~' il~il ~ a o `• ~ _~ ~~ \ y( ~ Y m~ a~ ~~ ~~ O ~ ~ --__ 1 dv $~J 3 ^ r+ ~.. ~ 4 pl r~j4 N~9 ~~~ `1 3 ~ ~0. aad \t \ ~. ~ .n ~ ~ ` ' / C.`.+. i~ a ~ ors •. ~, n.. ~ ~~ g~3 \. ... $,,, . ~ ~ ( L Q J '~ ~ y a a 3~~~ J a u ~ m ~ ~ a o ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~ 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ u~ ~ ~a ~ o r Pp ~ O ~ J 1 ~ ~~I~. ~,; ,' "~, <,._lu :.;~ '~Y • :::,~ ...~ \' '.s '.:1 --' '~`~= ~~ .~ /.. q~ p Q ~~ a~~~ ~ 0. ~ P ~ ~3~ ~ p~~u1 Q ~O~j d ~ ~ d~ ~ ~~~ ~a~3 c a a o n] ~ a 3 j d ~, p J W o_ r_ d r" ~ ~ J ~~ J ~ v d r LL d do 2 d ~~ a a~ g~ ~~ n ~~ ~a ~Q W~ rJ a~~3~ ~ d$~ ?d ~~ 2u1 p~ ~ as 3-~ ATTACHMENT C ~.~/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1999 ORDINANCE DECLARING A 5.111 ACRE PORTION OF A LOT FRONTING ON ME171tIMAN ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 97.1- 2-11) AND A 0.16 ACRE PORTION OF A LOT OPPOSITE THE INTERSECTION OF STARKEY ROAD AND MERRIMAN ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 97.05-1-1) IN THE CAVE SPRING DISTRICT TO BE SURPLUS AND ACCEPTING/REJECTING AN OFFER FOR THE EXCHANGE OF SAME WITH PORTIONS OF PROPERTY OWNED BY CHARLES R LEMON & ANNE L. LEMON AND CURTIS L. LEMON & DOROTHY D. LEMON (TAX MAP NOS. 97.01-2-10 & 97.41-2-12) WHEREAS, Charles R Lemon, Curtis L. Lemon and their wives are owners of two parcels of real estate in the Cave Spring Magisterial District totaling approximately 20 acres and each extending from Merriman Road to Back Creek and adjoining property of the County of Roanoke and the Roanoke County School Board; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board is owner of a parcel of real estate of approximately 11 acres situated between the above described parcels owned by the Lemon family; the Roanoke County School Board no longer foresees any potential use of this parcel for future school construction or as a schoolbus lot and is willing to declare this real estate as surplus and to deed this property to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors for use, in whole or in part, for parks, playing fields or other public purposes; and WI~REAS, the Board of Supervisors at its meeting on October 14, 1997, appropriated funds for the design of Phase 1 of the proposed South County District Park and authorized negotiations with the Lemon family for an exchange of real estate in order to assemble a parcel of approximately 16 acres along Back Creek for the South County District Park which would connect with two existing County park facilities as well as provide for a park access road from the intersection of r-- "' / Memman and Starkey Roads; and WI~REAS, the Lemon family has indicated a willingness to exchange approximately 9 acres of their two parcels closest to Back Creek for approximately 5 acres of property owned by Roanoke County adjoining Merriman Road to facilitate the expansion of their current manufacturing operations in the County and, in addition, to pay the County an additional sum of $13,115.00 as the difference between the appraised values of these exchanged properties; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 1999; and the second reading and public hearing for this ordinance will be held on February 23, 1999. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County Administrator is authorized to agree to and execute an agreement dated February _, 1999, between the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, and the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, providing the terms for the conveyance of certain surplus property from the School Board to Roanoke County and to accept on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, the conveyance from the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, of a parcel of real estate of approximately 11 acres, identified as all of Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel # 97.01-2-11, in accordance with the terms of this agreement dated February _, 1999, all of which shall be of such form as approved by the County Attorney, and to record such deed; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.10 of the Charter of Roanoke County, Ch. 617, 1986 Acts of Assembly, the subject properties, as more particularly described below, having been made available and deemed unnecessary for other public uses, are hereby declared surplus; and 2 ~` 3. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading was held on February 9, 1999; and a second reading and public hearing was held on February 23, 1999, concerning the exchange of a 5.111 acre parcel of real estate, being a portion of a lot fronting on Merriman Road (part of Tax Map No. 97.1-2-11), previously declared surplus by the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, and to be deeded to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, and a 0.16 acre portion of a Iot lying south and east of a new park access road to be constructed opposite the intersection of Starkey Road and Merriman Road (part of Tax Map No. 97.05-1-1), property of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, for two parcels of land containing 5.015 acres and 4.128 acres, respectively, owned by Charles R. Lemon and Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon (part of Tax Maps No. 97.01-2-10 and 97.01- 2-12), as shown on a plat of survey prepazed by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated February 26, 1998; and 4. That an offer in writing having been received to exchange said properties, the offer of Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon is hereby accepted/rejected and further, if accepted, the terms of the Contract of Sale and Exchange Agreement dated May 29, 1998 are hereby confirmed as the binding terms for the completion of this exchange of real estate; and 5. That as a condition of this exchange, Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curtis L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon and the County of Roanoke have agreed to execute an exchange of easements in order to provide such drainage easements and temporary construction easements as shall be necessary for drainage improvements to the properties of both parties and to provide an easement for ingress and egress over property of Roanoke County for fire protection and other public safety 3 ~~ needs of the currently existing Plastics One facility on property retained by the Lemons; and 6. Further, as a condition of this exchange, Charles R. Lemon & Anne L. Lemon and Curds L. Lemon & Dorothy D. Lemon have agreed to enter into an agreement for the sharing of cost on an equal, 50-50, basis of all reasonable drainage improvements which shall be located upon the property of Roanoke County adjacent to the remaining property of the Lemons subsequent to this exchange. Roanoke County will be responsible for maintenance of these drainage improvements and will provide reasonable opportunity for the Lemons to review the design and bid documents prior to the public procurement process. 7. That the County Administrator , or an Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the property exchange, specifically including the conveyance and acquisition of respective properties, all of which shall be of such form as approved by the County Attorney. 8. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. g:\...ljbolschoofslplastics.2or 4 ATTACHMENT D THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of February, 1999, by and between the COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~TIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, its successors and assigns, party of the first part, hereafter referred to as "School Board," and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a charter county of the Commonwealth of Virginia, its successors and assigns, party of the second part, hereafter referred to as "Roanoke County." WITNESSETH WHEREAS, by an Exchange Agreement, dated May 29, 1998, entered into between Charles R. Lemon and Anne L. Lemon, husband and wife, and Curtis L. Lemon and Dorothy D. Lemon, husband and wife hereafter referred to as "the Lemons," owners of two parcels of real estate fronting on Merriman Road in the County of Roanoke, the School Board, and Roanoke County, agreement was reached for a mutual exchange of adjoining parcels of real estate in order to provide to the Lemons a more suitable parcel for expansion of their existing manufacturing facility in Roanoke County in order to increase their present employment and productivity with accompanying economic benefits to the County and its citizens and to provide to Roanoke County a suitable parcel which will join two existing County park facilities so as to provide for the expansion of and complementary enhancement of existing parks and recreation facilities; and "`~ WHEREAS, the agreement by the School Board to purchase the Woo s End property /0 7` ''~; consisting of approximately 70 acres as the location for a new high school in Southwest Roanoke County and the agreement of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to fund the purchase of this property and to the necessary rezoning and permit approvals for the construction of the proposed new high school has substantially removed the likelihood of need by the School Board for ~ c~~ ~- ~' additional property on Merriman Road for a schoolbus lot, ysic needs of the school ~~ ~~ ~="- / NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration as described herein, the School Boazd hereby agrees to act by resolution in accordance with § 22.1-129A of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to declare surplus and to convey to Roanoke County all that certain lot or parcel of real estate containing approximately 11 acres, identified as all of Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel # 97.01-2-11, as more particularly described in Attachment A hereto. In consideration of this conveyance, Roanoke County hereby covenants and agrees that in the event that the School Board needs real estate in order to relocate the schoolbus lot currently lie (~,r~r~- 1yue.t ~ ~..~,,, s ~ ~.~- housed at Cave Spring High School on Chaparral Drive that oanoke County will make available a similar location in Southwest Roanoke County on property owned by Roanoke County or property owned by the School Board. By the execution of this agreement, both of the parties hereto agree that it is entered into, in part, in consideration of an agreement between Roanoke County and the School Board for financing of certain school improvements as provided in the Exchange Agreement of May 29, 1998, referenced above. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: By: COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA Division Superintendent Roanoke County Schools 5937 Cove Road, NW Roanoke, VA 24019 :: r~ ~" ` ~ F s ~ ~'~ ? ' "'~' i By: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGIl~TIA County Administrator County of Roanoke, Virginia P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 ',wt ~ ~' P :. r x ~ ~ ,,, ~,~ r '- ~ r 6 w ~-- / ATTACHMENT A All that certain tract or parcel of land, and all appurtenances thereunto pertaining, lying and being situated in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, conveyed to the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, by Stephen B. Bogese, II and Charles E. Bogese, Trustees under the testamentary Marital Trust contained in the Will of Stephen B. Bogese, containing 11.10 acres, (Tax Map Number 97.01-2-11), and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1464, page 723. Being the same property conveyed to Stephen B. Bogese (having since departed this life on January 17, 1982), by deed of partition dated May 4, 1977, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Deed Book 1064, page 222. ~: ATTACHMENT E. ~~, ~'~ ~` ~.