Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/1999 - Regularh 0 .'., U O ~--~ C~ 0 .~ CS3 U O ..:. ,mlL- ,:,~,~ ~ .f ~ ~. I e ~ • ~ . ~ U C) .~ '~ W _ 'a- .N ^ ~ p ^ O ~ , ~•b 1 ~/ W ~ ~ q _4- z ~ H Q ~_ a~ n 0 0 0 n o 0 0 0 W W v •~ U O -a• 'a- - _ (a~ p W W .4_ .4_ /~ .~y Q e ® 66 6 U a~ ..., U O U ~. .~ .'., oa W O o •~ ~ ~ v~U~3 ~"., F^ -~ ~J ~. ~ ~..- C..t _ U on 6~n ~n .v ~. 0 w ~ 0 ~~! F ~~a a a ~~ ~o c~i' ~' a ~~ ~~ ~ ~, ~. U -d ~, C7 .~ o-~~;ExraE ~~_f~~~~~:F~sa~.~~~ PROTOTYPE HIGH SCHOOL BUDGET UNITS COST/UNIT COST COST Sunre in $30,000.00 Testin $10,000.00 L al $15,000.00 Land 0 $ - $3,000,000.00 Construction cost Basic Buildi w/out extra voc.&science} 152000 $ 89.00 $13,528,000.00 700seatauditorium _____ 12500 $ 135.00 $1,687,500.00 Aux. G m 7929 $ 85.00 $673,965.00 ___ __ Concessions $0.00 Grand stands 0 $ 150.00 __ $0.00 Media furniture $100,000.00 Misc E ui ment $125,000.00 Auditorium li hti &sound $175,000.00 Sub-Total ;16,289,465.00 * Site develo ment 172429 $ 18.19 $3,136,483.51 cla track $150,000.00 Total sfte develo M cost $3,288,483.51 Total construction cost 519,575,948.51 $19,575,948.51 Architectural,En ineeri fees $16,289,465.00 $ 0.058 $944,788.97 Civil En ineeri $3,286,483.51 $ 0.058 $190,616.04 Interior deli rdt hnol y procurement $2,660,402.21 $ 0.04 $106,416.09 Full time construction man er $19,575,948.51 $ - $0.00 $1,241,821.10 Fumihare and E ui ment _ Technol 150559 $ 7.50 $1,129,192.50 Furniture $16,289,465.00 $ 0.0940 $1,531,209.71 Credit on sales tax Credit on bus rki Total $26,533,171.82 Contin enc $1,326,658.59 TOTA! ESTIMATED COST $27,859,830.41 OI N 0 w A 0 ., O~ AOAN ,~.~ _'" ~+_~ `_ c~ a~ 1838 (~.~~xx~#~ a£ ~~~z~~.C~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA OCTOBER 20, 1999 8:00 A.M. Roanoke County Administration Building Fourth Floor Training Room ~ff~~~ THIS IS AN ADJOURNED MEETING FROM OCTOBER 12, 1999 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MEETING ON PROTOTYPE SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION WITH AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT A. ROLL CALL (8:00 A.M.) B. TOUR OF WOODS END PROPERTY (8:00 A.M.) C. INTRODUCTIONS AND VIDEO PRESENTATION (9:45 A.M.) 1. Presentation by Robert "Robbie" Ferris Shuler, Ferris, Johnson & Lindstrom, Architects D. CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE 1. Woods End Special Use Permit Background Information 2. Program 3. Design and Program Compatibility 4. Schedule 5. Budgets 6. Construction E. Report on Bonded Indebtedness for Blue Ribbon Committee School Projects. F. COMMENTS 1. Board of Supervisors 2. School Board 3. Questions and Answers G. ADJOURNMENT ® Recycled Paper ,~ -~ ~ ~ ~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 1999 ORDINANCE 032399-17 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO THE ROANOKE COUNTY. SCHOOL BOARD TO CONSTRUCT A HIGH SCHOOL TO BE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF BRAMBLETON AVENUE, WEST OF PLEASANT HILL DRIVE, SOUTH OF FARMINGTON DRIVE (TAX MAP NOS. 76.20-6-16, 86.07-1-1, 86.08-4-33 ), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board has filed a petition to construct a high school to be located on the west side of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, south of Farmington Drive (Tax Map Nos. 76.20-6-16, 86.07-1-1, 86.08-4-33) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 2, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on February 23, 1999; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on March 23, 1999. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to the Roanoke County School Board to construct a high school to be located on the west side of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, south of Farmington Drive (Tax Map Nos. 76.20-6-16, 86.07-1-1, 86.08-4-33) in the Windsor Hills 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 1 ~- 1 following conditions: (1) Development of the Woods End property will be guided by the Concept Plan and Concept Diagram prepared by SFCS and dated 1/25/99. Site facilities shown on the Concept. Plan may be located and expanded within the general areas portrayed on the Concept Diagram. All proposed recreation areas shall be passive field areas with the exception of proposed track, baseball/softball field, and tennis courts. Parking may be provided for the recreation areas. The tennis courts may be relocated to any designated recreation area. ins ~ i ~.• i a a~... ..:a.. ..~...ii ~.,. ~:..,,.:a,..a a., _:a~..... .. .,a...,,.:,.... ..c (2) {3-) An area of the site as generally shown on a conceptual plan entitled Mudlick Regional Storm water Management Facility and dated March 2, 1999 shall be reserved and permanently set aside by easement for the possible development of a regional Storm water detention facility. Only passive recreational facilities, the shown access road, and a green way shall be allowed within this general area. (3) {-~-} A minimum 30 foot wide area along the entire length of Mudlick Creek from Canter Drive to Farmington Drive shall be set aside and reserved 2 ~- ~ by easement or other suitable instrument for a possible future green way on the property. The exact location of this green way area will be determined at site plan review and approval. (4) {~} If a regional Storm water detention facility is constructed on this property, construction of the facility shall incorporate the installation of a paved 10 foot wide green way trail along the entire length of the above referenced green way easement area. (5) {&~ Final site plans for the property shall show all required screening and buffering areas as required by the Roanoke County zoning ordinance. (6) {-g} A minimum of 550 parking spaces shall be provided on the site . 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 with change to Condition #1, and deletion of Conditions #2 and #7, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: Supervisor Nickens 3 ~- ~ A COPY TESTE: Chi 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 Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board 4 ~~y ,ti ti` ~ '~~.rt~i~r~ u-~"' fi,- i'~k ~i I~-°` -. ~~ ~ iv fti i ~ Y ti ~ , ~ w w.w .k~{4+u'~~.~qC ~ ~ylwdta!,~~..~~Irv. 1~ 14 ~ d / ~ TjA~r~ ~i". tfd siJ.~y' ,.~~~ .tea' C } 7' ~, .sl 'f ~ ~ ~7i -y £~~~~ ~ 'Li 'V rl~ .U't J4 1 .~ ~'~ L { ~ S ~4 4>r~.. i ~L~w .~ ~- 4' ~ 1 ~~ K ~'T3 4r ~ Y ~ ~,irJ'A' ~~ ( ~ r ~. v d •r+ pJ3'" aN~ 1.. ~ d ~ 11~ K t f yrlfi p ~ a } A r - tr .K d a`1 r.. vwu,x~"h.F r^ 1 ~ n 4~ r t 1 -,F u~ ,c?'1 t .~ / 1 , k ~:~ af, ~~ art U X r" F"~ ~ ~ ~{~ F ,~ r r ~ ,y, 9 _ ; ~. F ~ r} ?~ t ~~ -~~ r~r~~ .~, ~wS.ir r~i~r~'*~ l .~ r. r ~ ~ xra~ `.~.• ~ : .:n,~ v x1 ~ r ~r i I ~ ~:~ i -7,~4 'k I:t ~Fi Y~ kr tJd4 L~y, t.S;; m „~ ' K£~~f {'x '~ ~ ;rl _ ~, y<4~'ir 'ry l SII ~ - t~ i~~~ f. ~ u ~ ~, m .' 9.~.,~„r a ~~ 4 ~ , ~ 1i~0.~'y~ra ~ t ' i i ~ R8p ~~ P~.~ 44 r~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 5r f ! ~ _ t y W - °~ ~ :~ ~ ~ ~~ ° ~; ~ "' r 1 I ~ tixt.,~,£ :S ,, fix': ~ ~!~ ~ - 4~ '~~ e ~ ~ 1, r i -~~ ~ i:.,r rl ~ ~ r >~a' ~t-j~~ 0.~ TM ~ ~3 '4.t ,' _ 4 ~ ~ '' ~n~y~ 4 ~ ~ ~ _ .u. ter` ry s r ~ 1 r-6 ~ ~ t ~~ ~ ~, r .,i ~~. ~ 5 ~~ ,.~/ r4 Ito ~.I _ J I,c - ~ y ~1 ~~ u 1 -_`~ ! "G IA ~i. ~ , ~\111 a Y t l i ~ k 1 P ~ ~0. / ~' c'wt` :r~ ~i y~ ~~~/C.'~ 1" ~~ ,~~~ `dam ~ ~`k ~ ~ ~4,,;,*~"" h"1 T r `~ ai a!r 4aa .:~ r ~' ' is it r~ r ~r } ~.. = ~' MW y ~ "-~glrT _ ~.. l r 1 ~ ~ "' d .. n, Y. f 1 ~.' '' , d' S' ~_ ,..y ~ / . A -'1 .~' l . ~ . ~ J r ,4.r ~~ 9 Ja ~N ~9 ar '" * ~' n ' j ~ * s. s ~/ ~a e ~! ~~ 8 ~ 'w ~ ~~~ RflA1V'fl~t~' eI~U1V?'~' ~~~Ta~~'N~ ~~' ~~©r~s .E~.d 5ci~c~a~ 5a~~ C~~'r~Ut~I~ ~~`~'~1~~~~'1'~TT Sroe~.c~l Use ~er~z~ii ~- ~ ~, -~ - 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: March 23, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of 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. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend approval of the School Board's request for a special use permit. We should continue efforts to improve our plans for a primary access to the site. We should also work with the school administration to solve stormwater management issues in that area and,further downstream. ~~~ PETITIONER: ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD CASE NUMBER: 12-3/99 -~ ~ Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 2, 1999 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: March 23, 1999 A. REQUEST Petition of Roanoke County School Board 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. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Approximately fourteen citizens spoke at the hearing. Comments in favor of the request focused on the need for a new high school, the appropriateness of the Woods End site, and the need to move quickly with the school's construction. Citizens who expressed concern over the request cited issues including (1) School Board should use the Merriman site since it has already been purchased, (2) the inappropriateness of Pleasant Hill Drive being the only access and the resultant traffic and congestion impacts on the Pleasant Hill and Kingston Court property owners, (3) possible safety and security issues at the AME Church, (4) the proximity of the recreation areas (including tennis courts) to the homes on Brentwood Court and the noise, lighting and activity impacts resulting from the community's use of these facilities and (5) decreased property values as a result of the construction of the school and recreation areas and the resultant traffic impacts on Pleasant Hill. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission inquired whether or not the anticipated road improvements will require a change in the existing grade of Pleasant Hill Drive between Brambleton and Chippenham. Jack Ellinwood responded that no changes in the grade will be required. He stated that maximum grade of Pleasant Hill was 12-13 % for a short distance. Mr. Ellinwood stated that the proposed traffic signal would be approximately 800 feet from the closest existing signal. The general VDOT standard for the separation of traffic signals is 1000 feet. There was a general discussion of anticipated peak hour traffic flows. Mr. Robinson said that SW County is in need of a school and he will be supporting the request. Mr. Witt noted his concern with parking conditions that exist at Cave Spring High School and asked that conditions be considered so there is no parking in the neighborhoods. D. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1)The site will be developed in general conformance with the Concept Plan and Concept Diagram prepared by SFCS and dated 1/25/99. Site facilities shown on the Concept Plan may be located and expanded within the general areas portrayed on the Concept Diagram. All proposed recreation areas shall be passive field areas with the exception of proposed track, baseball/softball field, and tennis courts. Parking may be provided for the recreation areas. The tennis courts may be relocated to any designated recreation area. ~D-~ 2) Vehicular access to the site shall be limited to either an extension of Pleasant Hill Drive or an extension of Arthur Thurman Road to the site. Holland Road may be extended to provide for emergency service vehicles only. A gate or other means shall be provided to ensure that non-emergency traffic does not access the site from this route. The existing private drive from Farmington Drive serving the single family home on the property shall be closed to vehicular traffic, but may be used for pedestrian access to the recreation areas. 3) An area of the site as generally shown on a conceptual plan entitled Mudlick Regional stormwater Management Facility and dated March 2, 1999 shall be reserved and permanently set aside by easement for the possible development of a regional stormwater detention facility. Only passive recreational facilities, the shown access road, and a greenway shall be allowed within this general area. 4) A minimum 30 foot wide area along the entire length of Mudlick Creek from Canter Drive to Farmington Drive shall be set aside and reserved by easement or other suitable instrument for a possible future greenway on the property. The exact location of this greenway area will be determined at site plan review and approval. 5) If a regional stormwater detention facility is constructed on this property, construction of the facility shall incorporate the installation of a paved 10 foot wide greenway trail along the entire length of the above referenced greenway easement area. 6j Final site plans for the property shall show all required screening and buffering areas as required by the Roanoke County zoning ordinance. 7) All site lighting proposed for the property shall comply with the Roanoke County zoning ordinance and shall not exceed .5 foot candles at adjoining property lines. 8) A minimum of 550 parking spaces shall be provided on the site E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason moved to recommend approval of the petition with conditions. He stated that he hoped that the school board would also consider the installation of perimeter fencing, where needed, to solve potential security, access, and parking problems if and when the need arises. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomason, Witt, Robinson, Hooker NAYS: None ABSENT: Ross F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map. _ Staff Report _ Other 4 Terrance Har ' gton, ecretary Roanoke C my Planning Commission STAFF REPORT PART PETITION: Roanoke County School Board PREPARED BY: T. Harrington A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY s-u ~, _, FILE NO.: 12- 3/99 DATE PREPARED: 2/25/99 A new high school is proposed on a 69 + acre site in Southwest Roanoke County. Access to the proposed school is to be via Pleasant Hill Drive off of Brambleton Ave. Development of the school site will include a 155,000-180,000 square foot school building, and associated parking and recreational areas. The potential exists to include a regional stormwater detention facility on the site, as well as a vital link in the Roanoke Valley greenway system. The project conforms to the future land use guide contained in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and also conforms to many of the plans design and land use guidelines. B. DESCRIPTION This is a request of the Roanoke County School Board for a Special Use Permit to allow the construction of a new public high school in southwest county. The site selected by the School Board for the new school is known as "Woods End". The 69 + acre tract comprises three separate lots and is located generally west of Brambleton Avenue, west of Pleasant Hill Drive, and South of Farmington Drive in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. The property is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Public and private primary and secondary schools are permitted by Special Use in R- 1zoning districts. As a part of the Special Use Permit process the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors evaluate the proposed use and make findings pertaining to the conformance of the use with the Roanoke County Community Plan. In addition, the Commission and Board evaluate the proposed site design to insure the design of the site, and the subsequent operation of the proposed use, do not negatively impact surrounding or nearby property owners. The Commission may recommend, and the Board may attach, any conditions to the permit related to the use and design of the site. Site plan review and approval will be required prior to the commencement of any construction on the site. Site plan review will ensure that this project complies with S~ all county codes including zoning standards for items such as parking, lighting, )`} screening and setbacks. Because of the large scale of the proposed project, it is *'~ µ j likely that grading and erosion and sedimentation control plans will be approved, and grading will commence, prior to approval of final site development plans. The Virginia Department of Transportation will need to issue commercial entrance permits for this project prior to construction. All proposed public road and intersection improvements are subject to VDOT approval. PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS IQps~gr~phy and Drainaae The property lies within the Mudlick Creek drainage basin. The creek traverses the southern portion of the site in a southwest/northeast direction. A small farm-type pond is on the western side of the property in proximity to the creek. Elevations on the site vary by as much as 130 feet. Most of the property, including the highest elevations, is on the western side of Mudlick Creek. From the south, near Pleasant Hill Drive, the property falls approximately 50 feet to the creek bed. Mudlick Creek lies within a 100-year floodplain as designated by FEMA. The recently completed and adopted Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management Plan has designated a portion of this site, along Mudlick Creek as a desirable location for a regional stormwater management detention facility. The site is a combination of mixed woodlands and pasture-type areas. Most of the wooded areas are located along the western portion of the site and along the Mudlick Creek floodplain/stream bed that traverses the property. 2 ~,,.,:. ,,,~,} z, The site is primarily undeveloped with the exception of a single family home near the southwestern corner of the property and several small out buildings. The existing single family home is near the rear property line of homes located along Grape Tree Lane. Access andSrafficSzi~~on Current access for the single family home on the site is from a private drive off of Farmington Drive. This private drive is adjacent to the Kingston Court homes along Brentwood Court. The site borders, or is in close proximity to, other public right-of-ways, including Canter Drive, Lakeland Road, and Arthur Thurman Drive, a paper street off of Pleasant Hill Drive. Spa trQ~ n ding--N e~ghb~ Lb_2o~ The site is bordered on all sides by existing single family subdivisions. Approximately 47 single family lots/homes border the site. These lots and homes are located in the Canterbury Park, Nottingham Hills, Kingston Court, and Nichols Estates subdivisions. In addition, the site borders several homes that are along Pleasant Hill Drive. The closest commercial developments to the site are the general commercial areas along Brambleton Avenue. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ~it~L~yo ut A Concept Plan and a Concept Diagram have been submitted to show the proposed layout of the site. These plans, prepared by SFCS and dated January 25, 1999, portray the general layout of the proposed school, parking areas, and recreational areas. These plans also show one of the two possible access routes currently being discussed by the School Board. (See discussion of Traffic Circulation and Access below). The Concept Plan shows the general location of the major site facilities. This document should be evaluated in conjunction with the Concept Diagram which portrays general use areas. Approval of the SUP with these two plans, will allow the site designers to adjust final site development plans within the parameters shown on the Concept Diagram. 3 The proposed school is located in the central northwest portion of the ~ " ~ property closest to the Canterbury Park {Canter Drive) subdivision. The high school will be a single structure with an envisioned square footage in the range of 155,000-180,000 square feet. Portions of the school closest to Mudlick Creek may be up to three stories, to take advantage of the existing and proposed topography of the site. Approximately three to four homes along Canter will be in close proximity to the school building, although the conceptual plan shows the mass of the building being directed away from Canter Drive. Approximately 550 faculty, student and visitor parking spaces are shown on the western side of the property near homes located along Holland Road and Luwana Drive. Other smaller parking lots are proposed to provide bus parking, service area parking, and parking associated with the various recreational areas on the Concept Plan. The Concept Plan also shows that the existing single family home will remain on the site. At this time the School Board has no plans for the use of this structure, and has not decided whether or not to remove the structure as part of the development of the site. If the home remains, it could possibly continue to be used as a residence, could serve as a location for school related office or instructional space, or be used as a location for small scale community meetings or events. Other private or non-school use of the building would not be permitted under the sites' R-1 zoning. Significant grading of the property will be required to accommodate the school and large parking areas. Other grading will also be required to achieve proper stormwater management and to develop the multiple recreation areas and associated parking lots. Preliminary analysis shows that cut and fill of the site will be close to balanced, alleviating the need for significant additional truck traffic during construction. Grading of the site will result in a significant loss of the wooded areas. Preliminary engineering shows that grading to the property line is likely in the area of Lakeland Drive and along the upper portion of Canter Drive. The Concept Plan shows that screening will be planted in these areas to attempt to mitigate the impact of the use and grading on these two areas. The plan also shows a desire to preserve existing trees/wooded areas between the school and Canter Drive, and along Mudlick Creek in the areas around the proposed recreation areas. Grading of the property will remove the existing farm 4 s~u pond that is on the site. Although grading will likely impact some of these areas, ~ -~ the remaining trees will serve as a visual and sound buffer for the surrounding homes. The zoning ordinance requires that screening be provided between any outdoor activity or recreation area and any surrounding residential use. The high school is anticipated to generate an ADT of approximately 2000 vehicles per day. The majority of these vehicles will occur during two peak periods coinciding with the hours of the typical school day. Staff recognizes that other uses of the property for school evening events and community based recreation programs will also add to these traffic volumes. Staff estimates that the R-1 zoning of the property would allow in excess of 190 dwelling units on the property. This is a very conservative estimate assuming a density of not more that four units per acre, a ten percent public road allowance, and no residential construction occurring within the approximately 15 acres of floodplain on the property. This number of units would likely generate approximately 1900 vehicles per day. Staff would expect that multiple new roads would serve the property including road connections to streets such as Canter, Farmington, Lakeland, and Holland. In evaluating this sites suitability for a high school, multiple access options were considered by the applicant The site has access potential from many points including Pleasant Hill Drive, Farmington Drive, Grape Tree Lane, Holland Road, Canter Drive and Lakeland Drive. Factors such as traffic volumes and characteristics, surrounding land uses, the design and capacity of surrounding road systems, cost of road improvements, and topography were considered in the preparation of the conceptual plans. As a result of this analysis two possible access routes are being evaluated by the applicant. Each of these routes involves the extension of new public road access to the site .Under each alternative, Pleasant Hill Drive, off of Brambleton Avenue, will be the sole vehicle access to the site for all traffic including students, faculty, and visitors. The first option being considered, and shown on the submitted plans involves an upgrade to Pleasant Hill Drive and an extension of Arthur Thurman Road into the site. Arthur Thurman Road is a paper right-of-way that presently terminates several 5 ~i hundred feet from the school property. This option will involve the acquisition of several privately owned properties, either in whole or in part. The School Board is ~ n currently discussing with the intervening property owners the acquisition of the necessary land to allow Pleasant Hill to be improved, and allow Arthur Thurman to be extended to the site and developed to state standards. The second access option being explored. also involves the upgrade and use of Pleasant Hill Drive. However, this option would extend Pleasant Hill straight into the property through a portion of the Bowman property. This option would alleviate the necessity of using Arthur Thurman Road, and would allow a straight extension to the site. As with the first option, the School Board is discussing the acquisition of the necessary property with the affected property. A traffic engineering study has been commissioned to determine the impact of the Pleasant Hill options on the surrounding street systems, and the specific improvements, if any, that will be necessary for Pleasant Hill Drive to be a safe, and efficient access to the site. Specific road improvements are likely to include (1) the construction of a right hand turn lane on to Pleasant Hill Drive from Brambleton Ave.; (2) construction of a median separated left hand turn lane from Brambleton to Pleasant Hill; (3) widening/construction of Pleasant Hill from Chippenham Drive (Kingston Ct.) to the site; (4) possible realignment of several Brambleton Ave commercial entrances with Pleasant Hill Drive, and (5) possible complete signalization of the Pleasant Hill Drive/Brambleton Ave. intersection. The Virginia Department of Transportation will have the final approval authority for any or all proposed road improvements, including the installation of a signal light at Brambleton and Pleasant Hill. The signal light will only be approved by VDOT if the volume and characteristics of the school's traffic is sufficient to meet VDOT's warrants for a light. The traffic engineering study is expected to be completed by the date of the Commission's public hearing. VDOT will thereafter evaluate the study and determine which improvements are required. The proposal for a single Pleasant Hill Drive access to Brambleton restricts high school traffic from the surrounding Canterbury Park, Nottingham Hills and Nichols Estates subdivisions, but does place considerable new traffic volumes near Kingston Court at the intersection of Chippenham Drive. Staff expects that during peak afternoon hours, residents of Pleasant Hill Drive and Kingston Court may be restricted from free-flow access to Brambleton via Pleasant Hill as a result of queued high school traffic exiting the site to Brambleton. If expected traffic volumes and characteristics do not warrant a signal light at this intersection, peak hour traffic will be further impeded resulting in significant delays at this intersection. 6 ~-1 ~"H -f VDOT determines that a traffic light is not warranted at this intersection, staff believes that the School Board and their engineers should fully explore the provision of a second access point to the site so that peak hour traffic is diffused to different locations. A second access point would also require site plan changes to accommodate on site circulation needs. Two related traffic issues involve (1) construction traffic and (2) the potential for student parking in surrounding neighborhoods. Although utility construction may involve necessary work in the Canter Drive and Holland Road areas, staff believes that most/all of the construction traffic should access the site from Pleasant Hill Drive. Again, this puts an additional short-term impact on residents near Pleasant Hill Drive, but restricts truck, construction employee, and equipment traffic from other surrounding neighborhoods. The Commission should also recognize that the construction of the school on this site may result in some student parking in adjoining neighborhoods instead of in the provided on-site parking areas. This has occurred in neighborhoods surrounding another county high school. The topography of the school site, the number of parking spaces proposed, and the location of the school on the site in relation to surrounding streets may limit this potential. 6meniti?s Multiple amenities are proposed or envisioned for the site. In addition to the five distinctive recreational areas that will be available for school or community use, the site is also a very important link in the Roanoke Valley Greenway System. Mudlick Creek was designated a major greenway artery in the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors and included as a major component in the 1998 Community Plan. The proposed conceptual site design preserves the integrity of the Mudlick Creek area, with physical improvements limited to the proposed on-site access road and necessary grading for the recreation areas. A publicly constructed greenway along Mudlick Creek would not affect the development plan and would be a very valuable community asset. Another possible greenway link is the existing Woods End driveway from Farmington Drive. Although this driveway will not be open to vehicle traffic after the construction of the school, it could serve as a useful pedestrian link between the Farmington Drive neighborhoods and the recreational areas proposed as part of the school site. 7 ~~+r The School Board has indicated an intent to only provide parking lot, roadway, and security lighting on the site. It is not the intent of the School Board to light any of the proposed recreational areas, with the exception of the tennis courts. Any lighting installed on the site will need to conform to Roanoke County zoning standards for light placement and intensity and may not exceed .5 foot candles at any property line. Utilities The Roanoke County Utility Department has advised that public water and sewer are available in sufficient capacity to serve the site. Public water is available from several areas. Public sewer traverses the site along Mudlick Creek. Other public utility providers such as AEP, Cox Cable, Bell Atlantic, and Roanoke Gas have advised the applicant that their services are located in the surrounding areas and can be extended to the site. Roanoke County Fire and Rescue has advised that the proposed use of this property as a public school will not negatively impact their ability to continue to provide services at current levels. The concept plan for the site shows a proposed emergency vehicle access road off of the end of Holland Drive. This extension of Holland will be gated or otherwise designed to ensure that only emergency vehicles in emergency situations have access to the road. LVeighkzQd~ood and Community Involvement During 1998 the School Board convened a citizens committee comprised of representatives of surrounding neighborhoods. A purpose of the committee was to keep the surrounding neighborhoods advised of progress on the project, and to solicit neighborhood feedback on design issues. Several newsletters have been sent to the surrounding neighborhoods, keeping residents apprised of design issues and the status of the project. 8 ~-~ .~#}' On February 24, a community meeting was held at Cave Spring Junior High School to present the project to the community and solicit their comments and suggestions. Eleven-hundred property owners were invited; approximately 150 residents attended the meeting. The primary issue discussed at this meeting was access. Approximately 10-15 residents expressed concern that sole access to the site was proposed to be from Pleasant Hill Drive. Concern focused on the effect that the schools access will have on the ability of Kingston Court and Pleasant Hill residents to easily access their property during peak hours of high school traffic. Residents suggested that other/additional traffic options should be explored and that additional access routes to the site should be constructed and used. Other issued raised included the following: • Proximity of the recreational areas to the homes on Brentwood Court within Kingston Court. Particular concern was expressed over the conceptual location of the tennis courts. • School lighting plans and the potential effect of that lighting on surrounding property owners • Security issues related to after-hours unauthorized use of the property. • Noise pollution in the neighborhood resulting from school use of the property and community use of the recreational areas. • Drainage and stormwater management issues. There seemed to be a consensus that a regional stormwater detention pond on the site would be a good use of the Mudlick Creek Flood Plain. • Potential for student parking in surrounding neighborhoods. The Concept Plan shows the location of a small on-site stormwater management pond. This pond is required to detain on-site runoff from the building, parking lot and other non-pervious areas on the site. The pond would be designed to accommodate the expected flows and would discharge the stormwater in a manner that protects downstream property owners. A better option for the site and one that is being currently discussed by the County and School Board is to use the undeveloped portions of the site along 9 ~j_i ~'~'~ Mudlick Creek for a regional stormwater detention facility as proposed in the Roanoke Valley Regional stormwater Management Plan. If constructed, the impoundment area would extend from the access road, west towards Canter Drive. The access road would serve as the "dam" for the pond, and thus the construction of the regional pond would have a low marginal cost if incorporated into the school construction process. During peak storm events, the impoundment would fill with water, and would help to reduce downstream flooding. During most periods, no impoundment would occur and the stream would be contained within its existing channel. The designated multi-purpose field would likely not be available for use during these peak events. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Many elements of this proposal conform to the goals, objectives and policies contained in the Community Plan. The construction of a new south county high school was a recommendation contained within the 1997 Comprehensive Facilities Study of the Roanoke County School System. The recommendations of this study were incorporated into the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. The Roanoke Valley Regional stormwater Management Plan has been incorporated by reference into the Community Plan. This study recommends that a portion of this site, be used as a regional stormwater management facility to help alleviate downstream flooding issues. Mudlick Creek has been designated as a future vital greenway link in the Conceptual Greenway Plan and the Community Plan. The future land use maps contained in the Community Plan designate this area as Neighborhood Conservation. The plan states that institutional uses are a recommended land use in neighborhood conservation areas, and that such uses, (parks, schools, libraries and churches) can play a vital role in enhancing a neighborhoods character. Recommended design guidelines for institutional uses include (1) locating such uses at the edges of neighborhoods of different densities, (2) screening and buffering incompatible uses, and (3) incorporation of greenways that connect the institutional uses to surrounding neighborhoods. 10 ~_ PART III STAFF CONCLUSIONS A. Conformance with Community Plan The submitted proposal conforms to the future land use guidelines contained in the Community Plan. Institutional uses are encouraged to locate in and near residential areas, provided the design of the proposed site takes into consideration neighborhood impact issues such as traffic, lighting, screening, noise etc. The proposed high school is a key recommendation of the school facility study, and the construction of the school will fulfill this plan recommendation. The incorporation of the regional stormwater management facility and the greenway link into the school's plan will insure that this school proposal further complies with two key recommendations of the 1998 Community Plan. B. Impact on Community The construction of a high school on this site will change the character of this area, and result in a significant change in the land use of this property. The existing zoning of this property would allow residential development in excess of 190 units, thus relative impacts of competing uses should be considered. The School Boards proposal to provide access to the site via an improved Pleasant Hill Drive and Brambleton Avenue intersection insures that school related bus, car and service traffic does affect other surrounding neighborhoods. The single access proposal will place an additional 2000 + VPD on Pleasant Hill and will during peak hours result in delays for residents who reside in the Kingston Court and Pleasant Hill areas. The installation of a signal at Brambleton will greatly reduce expected peak hour vehicle queues and will ease and improve the safety of access to Brambleton during all peak and non-peak times. Site development will result in a visual impact for surrounding property owners. Property owners on Canter will be closest to the school building, with Nottingham Hills residents being closest to the proposed parking areas. All surrounding owners will likely experience noise impacts from the school, parking and recreational areas, however, the proposed site design and screening will address noise consideration to the extent feasible. Noise and "people activity" is likely to be greatest in the Kingston Court and Pleasant Hill area due to the 11 ..,.V' ~" proposed traffic access and location of the recreational facilities. The construction of the various recreation areas and the possible construction of a regional stormwater detention facility, and a public greenway will add very valuable public facilities in the southwest county area. Multiple property owners will benefit from reduced flooding events and many will enjoy the recreational opportunities created by the school construction C. Recommendations and Conditions The staff recommends that the special use permit for this project be approved. We believe that the following conditions should be added to the permit to help to insure the compatibility of the site with the surrounding community and the eventual construction of the various public facilities envisioned for the site. The site will be developed in general conformance with the Concept Plan and Concept Diagram prepared by SFCS and dated 1 /25/99. Site facilities shown on the Concept Plan may be located and expanded within the general areas portrayed on the Concept Diagram. All proposed recreation areas shall be passive field areas with the exception of proposed track, baseball/softball field, and tennis courts. Parking may be provided for the recreation areas. The tennis courts may be relocated to any designated recreation area. 2. Vehicular access to the site shall be limited to either an extension of Pleasant Hill Drive or an extension of Arthur Thurman Road to the site. Holland Road may be extended to provide for emergency service vehicles only. A gate or other means shall be provided to ensure that non-emergency traffic does not access the site from this route. The existing private drive from Farmington Drive serving the single family home the property shall be closed to vehicular traffic, but may be used for pedestrian access to the recreation areas. 3. An area of the site as generally shown on a conceptual plan entitled Mudlick Regional stormwater Management Facility and dated March 2, 1999 shall be reserved and permanently set aside by easement for the possible development of a regional stormwater detention facility. Only passive recreational facilities, the shown access road, and a greenway shall be allowed within this general area. 12 ~•:~ 4. A minimum 30 foot wide area along the entire length of Mudlick Creek from Canter Drive to Farmington Drive shall be set aside and reserved by easement or other suitable instrument for a possible future greenway on the property. The exact location of this greenway area will be determined at site plan review and approval. 5. If a regional stormwater detention facility is constructed on this property, construction of the facility shall incorporate the installation of a paved 10 foot wide greenway trail along the entire length of the above referenced greenway easement area. 6. Final site plans for the property shall show all required screening and buffering areas as required by the Roanoke County zoning ordinance. 7. All site lighting proposed for the property shall comply with the Roanoke County zoning ordinance and shall not exceed .5 foot candles at adjoining property lines. 13 u nr__vlvnv~ COUN T Y OF ROA~VOK~ DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 520ti Bernard Br. P.0. Box 29800 Roanoke. VA 240 i 8 f 540' 772-2068 FA.X (540 } % i 2-21 OH / i Jf ~L.I N,L VJC U YY.i'~IHiV I",C For staff use only - - date .received:' ,, k w, received~b~T""' ~' ~ r „ '~ ,-, A ~. aoplica[io~fee: ~PCrB~`= date placards issusd: IoOS date: tease ~lumaer: ~ > r,,,C ~„ '~ >rY" • ~ ~ ~~ ~ r _ ~ Applicant's name: ~.~~;~,~c. '~~~nr~ .; ,•.~.~L4. ~', ,,- •,, Phone: Jr~~ ,~°?rJ~~ ~ P,ddress: ~ `~' j ~~v~ Pz,t_~,~::~J Zip Code: Owner's name: ~~"~~r~••~ ~~,r..-y .~ ~~>-~ !:~~1.ti,Ys'c_~ ~='~~vri~~r=:_ Phone: Address: ~~'4 :5 ~~-;:,~;~_.r - .~~~ - ' ~ T S-"r `r, ~ ~'~,~ r~ f,/s? , Z'p Cade: ~ 7~^ r ~+ ~ ; Location of property: ~,t,,:~-c~;-~'~ lax Map Numeer: '~~. ;;~-.~,.-;~~ ~~.~1~~_.~ ~ - . , a .~~2 ~,_j3 ~v ~'~r'W x 7 /~ ", v .,~ ~, Magisterial District: ~~y',,~ ~r,.,, ~'~ '/~7' ~ . ~: S_ J /^' ~ 's ' ; i ~~ t r d {~.' 1 / i,. . ., ir,-~.; ~ ~ : 9..~; ^~..r y . N ~ - / Community Planning Area: ,r ~?,,,, ~~ ~/~, Size of parce! (sj: 'Existing Zoning: J~-• ~ ~~;~. _~' acres Existing Land Use: ~ ~ ~ y^ J y i t ~ r'te " ~ ,c, sq.lt. it , i" r i.. ~ 'i p°: ' .,-I::' ;~~+- ~^^ - i _ .I ~' 'rte ..: ! ~ ... ~ ...Y .~..:;~,:.. , ': ......................... - Proposed Zoning: ~; ; { r"or Sia., Use Onh Proposed Land Use. ,~ . ~ ~~` ~ ~ i ~ us.. Hype: ~i 1 Does the parcel meat the minimum lot area, ~r~idth, and frontage requirements of tf~e requested district? YES NO IF N0, A. V,-^,=,1;=,~JCE (S P,E'DUIRED =iRST. _ Does the parce! meat the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YE:: i~~G IF N0, A VARIANCE 1S REQUIRED FiP,ST. If resoning request, are conditions being preffe; ed with this request? YES NG l~ii~~:~;i~:II:~!~~'`~''`''~''~'':~'ii' :``;'Ili ~~` ~ ~:i -iIi:''~ a' i>~:; IVarianca of Section(si of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in orda; to: is the application complete? Please check if encfosad. .L`,PPLICA.TiON '~i1LL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF A.Iti'"' OF THESE ITEIy1S ARE ~11SSWG OP, INCOMPLETE. ass v ws v R!5 V Consultation ~ 8 1i2" x 1 . "concept pion ~ A.ppiication fee ::.:;~ App(icaticn Metes and bounds description -<-, Proffers, if applicable ' Justification '~<' Water and sewer application Adjoining proper,y ownus l hereby certiry that l am either the owner of the ;^roperty or the owners agent or contract curchaser ono am acting with the knowleag and consent of the ow er. ~;~~,~~.~;~ -`:~ Owner's Signature: ,~~~;~,~,, ~~~, ~~ -~' ~=~ ;,~, j'` ~,.~~f~ ' for Siarf Use Only: Case Number :;:;:;~:;;i :::::::.::: ::: ::: ..~. ,,;~i::~~~::::ii :;:;::::,..:-~Iz:x~~, ..~~.,..:.~£3~..-~~,::.~~t~~f~..: ~..~r.s.:~c~fids:;~~t.:#~~..~~~%~`~:~-:.~.r~~~~`.;., ..:.;.~.:.~:.:.:..:.. _ ~.~. ~'~' „ r- ~' ~ ~ .- Applicant , 5. ~~~irs..~tf~',= , ~/.. ''~ "r..r,,^.~.' I1"~(,,.7,,.~ti 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, safet`~, and general welfare. Please ans`rver the roilo~..ing questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary, Pease explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section ~0-3} as vve!I as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification, in the zoning ordinance. ..: . . Ple3S2 explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in *,he P,oaneke Counr~ Comprehensive Plan. r'r' f- ~:;~ r~ Please describe the impact(s) cf the request on the propery itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parksrrecreation, and firerrescue. ~> _ Arcr~iterture Engineering Planning Interiors ~~~:~ Sherertz r=ranklin 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 2018 Re: The Proposed South County High School On Behalf of the Roanoke County School Board and Roanoke Counfij Schools Application for a Special Use Permit Dear Members of the Board and Planning Commission: 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 Siree± Roanoke, Virginia 24011-2003 540-344-8664 FAX 540-343-0925 eMaii sfcs,a~stcs.com y~ ~_ 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 infiormation 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 refileets 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 ail 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 '~ - i ~~1' 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 ver,~ 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 ail 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, lnc. Engineering Concepts, lnc. Cc: Mr. Martin Robison Mr. Manjit Toor Mr. Dale Leidich Dr. Deanna Gordon Mr. John Schmidt Mr. Jack Eliinwood ... January 29, 1999 ~ii~~ ®@`a/E;~®~3l~'dE''i~ 9VarratlV~ flew S~ut~ ~®~~at~ ~6c~~ S~~c~~~ ~ '~~r~~ds ~~d d9it~'Od uC$ii® n 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, utilit`j disposition, and development potential. ~49s~~ds ~~ad S~t~ The Woods End site a largely undeveloped tract of land located west of Brambleton Avenue (Route 221) and Pleasant Hill Drive, and south of rarmington Drive. The site is bounded on all sides by existing single-family residential de~reloprnents: 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 59.5 acres, having frontage on Farmington Drive, which is presently used as a residence; rental property. The main dwelling and anciilar/ 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 perrormed 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 vic~nit`j 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 difficuit`~ 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 ail overland rainfall runoff up-gradient from areas of excavation and direct surface flo~N 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 passzs 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. Tne 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 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 IMPROVEMEi~JTS 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 efricient 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. Transt~ortation 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 Weil 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 Brambieton 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 01d 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 property. An access drive will continue across Mudlick Creek and enter the school site proper. As discussed ,~ ' . _~~ ,,, in the On-Site improvement section above, the crossing of Mudlick Creek will require a multi- 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/0!d Cave Spring Road. At this location, Pleasant Hill has three Crave! 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 Hiil 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 Hii1 Drive intersection with Route 221, Brambleton Avenue has flour travel lanes {two each northbound and southbound) and a striped center turn lane. Directly east ofi 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 Hiil. 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 Hifl 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 Hili 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 Coionial Avenue accommodating required turn lanes and tapers 8. Provide complete signalization of intersection if Traffic Signal Warrant and Traffic 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 ofi the sites. Where service was not available adjacent to the properties, the providers were asked to estimate the extent of work necessary and associated l~ wC? 7 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 Utilit`,~ 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 seried by gravity sewer. Nlr. 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 availabilit~j to this site. Three-phase power is available along Brambieton 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-Sell 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. 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 preliminar,~ 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 revie~rv 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: THE PROPERTY SHOWN HEREON IS IDENTIFIED AS TAX PARCEL #75.20-6-16, 86.08-4- 33 AND 86.07-1-1 WITHIN THE L4ND RECORDS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA. 2. ALL PROPOSED HIGH SCHGOL 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 PRIVATE ROADS, PARKING, OPEN OR GREEN SPACE AND STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED 8Y 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. 80UNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY BALZER AND ASSOCIATES DATED NOVEMBER 6, 1998. l i ~~~ 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 69.61$ 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 REOUIREMENTS R-1 MINIMUM LOT AREA PLATTED LOT AREA MINIMUM FRONTAGE PLATTED FRONTAGE 7,200 S.F. 61.542 ACRES (2,680,7>0 SF) 60 FT. 460 F T . R-3 7,200 S.F. 8.076 ACRES {351,790 SFj 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 ~". 10 FT. 25 FT. 45 FT. 15 FT. PRIMARY BUILDINGS 30% TOTAL LOT AREA 35% TOTAL LOT AREA ,~ ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 10% TOTAL LOT AREA 7% TOTAL LOT AREA ~ ' LOT COVERAGE 50% TOTAL LOT AREA 60% TOTAL LOT AREA SCREENING & SUFFERING -SHALL N1EET 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 RGW 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 STUDE~'VTS x 45d STUDENTS (ESTIMATED) = 113 SPACES LOADING SPACES - 1 SPACE/100,000 S.F, OF BUILDING AREA 1175,000 S.F, BUILDING (CONCEPTUAL) 2 LOADING SPACES REQUIRED, PROVIDED: EMPLOYEEJVISITOR - 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 ~ ~ ng ~o s ~~ i ~~~ u; ~~ - ,r--- ~. -,r~ 2 ~~ - ~~'~~~ddl~~~~ V~ - ~ ~ ~_ 14 ~~... `'' ~:~=, ^ 1. ~~~, a ~~ ~ ~..- SCHOOL AN® ~ ~;ti ~: ',~ ~~ ~ MUDLIC}C CRE~iC ...P ~ ~~ Exi ~Ein'fir ~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~., - 1'~'d t t$ x Trees k` . ri Y~r >~ ~. ti...- h ~~~ i ~ t ~ a~ >~ r a ~~ a ~~scREc a 4 ~ ~; ..o - Existing Trees ~C~ t~ ~ ~t~ ~ Y ® ;t 9 ~ {}X t~1Ex+sting y~v ~ ~v1 ;-s, mss, ~~~ Trees_ RECREATION" _~ -- ~~ ~ L~ . ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ m ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ M ~ ~ ~ ~~~ o ~ ~. .+...s ~ r >..•~+ ...~ ~ ~~ ~ _..- I'" ~9 ~~ .: ,~~ Sher.rt Frnidln C[2wfonl Shaffner tnc. ~,,..~..~ ~+.~ r ~+~'~'~'~~~ g BRAIVIBLETON A --- -...-.,. ~~ry(( 70'J 9wN Jwls~m 3Ywi ~~ ~ ~ t ~n:n ,loaw.wgw Mott-mao 0 100' _~ r~ .e. k 4 "% S ~ I yy~ J </ / , /~ ..~. ~. / ,. \` / aY. ~ ~~ i ~ I , ~: ~ ~ ~ ~_ _ - '~ ~ ~`~ ';b G ~ _ ~!. ~ ~ ,.~ .Im ~I ~~ ~-~J~S~rvt~i'"" 4 -j '~ \~I"~'r., ~:P j1ull~-~~ ~ .,}. ~ ~j ~ ~ ~ .Yr. ~~,z~u4 ~ ~~~' r~'~ , ~ a ~ L `-~~- tY ~ ~ 1~-~-ne. ~ 1, ~~ ®~.~ i1 n~ ~ ~. -n• sr ~ ,~~ ~u ~~` ~ ~i ~ ~ ~~ 07!11 :'~- - c F~Ba~~~-~~ ~ ~3'~r'i~i . \~ ~l~s,~'i'~ ~ ~ v I df ~" t ~ ifi~f ~c$~"' l~j"€~'~ ~ `~ i I~ ~ I N Y'i ~.~Y y l f r ~' 4 .'. ~~ ~ J AS§ . ~ 'o'q`r"¢ rPYr ' 1+_ rorvY ~ /i/ ~ ~ ~ 1 '~ '~' -- ~ - ~hT1 ~ -~ ~~ "~~.~-~_' -~~ -."-~~"`~r - ) Tyr _H/-P.1-1U'~-- -~-~t2 X1.1 l ~~ ~ _~1 ~~.; !!/ ~( ~. _. _ _ ~.. r ( 1 ~` `~LFCCIaI~1L1 ,1 ~ 1' 11 1 ^ *„7 ~! ~{r4~v e -. ~' ~ / A L ~ h~~'•~ F/' 1 ~~~ ~~; 1 '\ 1 ~ f ~~ \\, tI11t8.1,ll~teldc,~~f~), ~, =~`' t $ ..~~ ~ '~~. ~I ~ ~`~ aF - =_„•4.`' r\ \~,~-~ -- • - a orF~i ~ `Purlit..g7 ~ ,~~~ ,., ':~~ m~. „t t . \ ~~z~ ~ I^; ~-- ~r"~ `~l. ,~,.~. ~ ~ / / ~ ~~,~. /1L-~ 1 .•~'' ~ \csa- off _._,_~,~^___,~":• Baseball "j ~ I ~?~~ ~ . ~ ~ ~~ i : ,3Y ~ y ~~- ~ -z tea.-,: `4s '~~;Y \~{ r, , ~ ~IYLCW ~,~~ I^ ~~ A. ~TgOR19 _ ~ t -L~ ~~:._ ~~•,x -'' ~}y ~~~ ~~ mrM . ~~ ! v~ ~~+*~ T~n115C~ Vr'~ 1a~z~r' .._ ..;.i~ ti„'~L,, y~ ~.I,N ~ ~ ~ ~ ul_ P,`•~,~ c~ ~ _ ., ~* ;~-~' - c `~ , ~J . I "iE' .~8 S 4 .~ ~ z ( -'. ~ `~ C ./t^~'7'A 4i . 4'S"x~ V'~` xl.4w'i`'C~~r"a~4 R~„5't• ~ A..a . ~. i. _'~I:-r, Rc7 r~ aNS~_~„ ~ - - ' ~ ~.___! i i l l.~_ { 4FNlAAL NOTPa: ..~ 1. TxaPRmaRTY 4xnwm xrnFnv is lnlmnnln AS Tn4 Pn0.(]!I. ~{ - ^ xYRli7 Arvuwoxi-Iwmlm nlG lwxo REEtixo4 ui [1~ ~ ~~/ A NNn~ CUUNtt, VIAUINIw wu Paowaeo luax!RUrtlOL oE.vLOPMexr a'ILL ne m ACLOWAIe~wrln rxs Rlruunom oP meR•i ANO Ra zol]mc olrr:n.-rroYYClAf ucvrwm.wo wlu Eaauvec. roREY'I!W .vmwMRwnL Er RoANOYYnwNrr MfnaM nra LRSUnNO.x PeRartn I. nLLM7VATf RMUS PAARINn, OPPN UA URLEN 6PAGE ANU YrrlRal YATYa MANAei418m' inCILTEI ]W\LL aP. uA WTnirvfD NY TNY OWNYR. a YpALLWOSCAPmU SxA46(lET TNl RlODUIPAIENT]UO nR! RWeYSRa WMtt YnrvmU URU[NANL'Y tiYn MIMMUM ~ All WNMRII[i10N ]MLLIXINYSYUI TU RUAWN:! (.TIUMY nNn tlxlm4 UlMRTaIYNi 01 TlnNal!)RTATIUN SIANUARU9 nNU SMCPIGTwNI • STOW WAllRYNNAOCMP.M GLCLM1AiIUNl6TeR1'Mn THE MLL WpAAY FA[]LITW YIgWrv wlLL nR'lMN'ANY TIIY iUTAL IL\Nl ]. OOIfON ANOlBOIMRNT CONTROL I'I.ANG NARMTI Vg A.VO CALCULATION WLLL tlG SUtlNriTYU WITN'I'Ntl iLNnL YI1.rvY. oeaRwax.RU ~NruiM ro 4rAre ANU RuwmfRe caxrr REOUIRYAUxn. Y. nl{MOKlSBGOMUYS SNUWx xlRElm UaEICr GUVPJ1AL Srni NwOS1. PIN.LL YS.RIL1 SMUT INCORgRATE UEfA1L6U 414Y ORAUIeRE S04YWAY ANU TUBIXLMYMIU SURVEY aY A.UllR nN0 Aa1XUlT3 MTlU NUYF.MIIaR a. iYw ENS]IANCH COxlgUMnONl Al:CC55 AOUfES.WO TRIP OpYMHw [ALCw\nnHa ARE SURRRM 0.lVIRW ANU vnUt MIOR M Tlfl 198UAK! UY PpAI. PHUUTS. TMYIK IMMITSTWY wNn rMYYI[. SIUNAL wARR.RN'r ST1~15]' wTlaY INCwcrn n nvYanawN nnn R.llNT4 m Txc vlRraxu IYPARTMIINT rNTMNIRNITATIUN. ~,. ppI pyyp~~mmGGB8°° i 1 ~Y ~~' 9hereltr FranRlm Crawford S~ariner Inc ~? 0liE ~wN JUMRrtlu'I 3UOiR iMt ROankY. VYQYlu 740114000 \ ~// ~\ _ _ -~ ~ \~ ~~ 1 I ~~ ~l 1 = .-~I k i - -^~ ' `` I_~~~\~\ 1 V~~rtY. _`~"" ~~ ~1~ J l >`, ~ i `li ~ ~~ ~; e \\,~~~ ` 221 ~v t• W 2 ~j, '' _ ,~ ~ f~~ ~. ;- ~~ ,~ ~. ': r ~ f ~ ~.~ _~ , ~ f ~ ~ __ d ,~ i ~, . ~ ~ ~~ ~~ _ `7 gym,. 6 s \,~/' (~ ~ ~ ,n ~,~`~r to '1 F u r « ~/!!!! .r.. ua a. ~ F ~ e r > a ,.n. _ - ~ x s 9 '~.d q w a t ` ter' _ li, v ~ 1 ~~ . ' r aQ w b a IL ~ y r i '.. p .' 1" ! as. ' ~jl • f t ... is , y ~ f' a ~~ \ iPx/ ~~~rr~~~ ep~rlv~~ ~.~'r~?~~T~f~'1VT a~ Ct~~~~iNI7"~ d~FV~"~-t~~'_~~1~IT ors©~ E~,d Sc;tQa~ S~ie S~e~.rxl Use ~er;~r~,tii ~S.f1i-1-1, 7v.2i3-~-~', BS.fl~-~-3~ ~~ FROM THE MINUTES OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD MEETING ~~ IN REGULAR SESSION ON MARCH 11, 1999 IN THE BOARD ROOM OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE RESOLUTION PURSUANT TO TITLE 25, TITLE 33.1 AND SECTION 22.1-127 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, 1950 (AS AMENDED), AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF A CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND FROM RICHARD L. BRYANT AND A STRIP OF LAND FROM MABEL N. BOWMAN FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL PURPOSES AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESS ROAD TO A NEW HIGH SCHOOL BY EMINENT DOMAIN BE IT RESOLVED by the County School Board of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the construction of a new high school in South County has been approved by the County School Board for the citizens of Roanoke County in connection with the report of the Blue Ribbon Committee entitled "Comprehensive Facilities Study of Roanoke County Public Schools," March 17, 1997. 2. That an option to purchase has been obtained to acquire certain real estate consisting of 69.74 acres, located at 3535 Farmington Drive for public school purposes and the construction of a new high school and related facilities (the "Project"). 3. That the Project is necessary for the general health, safety and welfare of the public, and specifically will satisfy the needs and purposes of the public school system for the children in this portion of the County and the general public. 4. That it is necessary to acquire land for the purpose of building an access road to the Project. 5. That acquisition of land for the construction of an access road to the Project is necessary for public school purposes and the general health, safety and welfare of the public. 6. That the County School Board has chosen a route for such access road to the new school through an extension of Arthur Thurman Road. A copy of such proposed access road is shown on a map attached hereto and made a part of this resolution. 7. That construction of such access road requires the acquisition of land located at 4808 Pleasant Hill Drive, and owned by Richard L. Bryant, and a strip of property extending down Arthur Thurman Road located in the south back portion of 4811 Pleasant Hill Drive and owned by Mabel N. Bowman. 8. That in order to acquire such property, the County School Board does hereby invoke the rights, privileges and provisions as to the investing of powers in the County School Board under Section 25-46.1, et seq. ,and Section 33.1-89, et seq., of the Code of Virginia, 1950, .-~~ .r~'~' ~ (as amended), all as made and provided by law. 9. That the Superintendent of Schools is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such action by herself or through her agents as may be necessary to accomplish these acquisitions through eminent domain or otherwise, including the obtaining of necessary surveys, borings and appraisals of the subject land, the making of a bona fide offer to Richard L. Bryant and Mabel N. Bowman to acquire the necessary land, to engage in such negotiations after the making of such offers as necessary and appropriate and to take such other actions as may be necessary to acquire such property. 10. That this resolution shall be effective on the date of its adoption. Adopted on motion of Mr. Leggette and duly seconded by Mr. Irvin and on the following vote: AYES: William A. Irvin, III, Thomas A. Leggette, Michael W. Stovall, Jerry L. Canada and Marion G. Roark NAYS: None ABSENT: None TESTE: ~~~~z~c.J ~ ' uy~ ,Brenda Chastain, Clerk • ,'. M • -~ ~~~~~~ ~~~CCe ~a~~ ~~ "q~ ~~ PEA ~~~~ ~"~ ~~..~..~ y ~y a z ~~ ~`' > ~S ~> `/y~ie ~ H ~ >~ ~ 9~y 30 ~~e$o 9:- ~' ~ I ~ ~, i -mil R~ ~~~ ~ ~_~~ A qY ~ ~~Q E~ &pTC~?c ~ O~j £~I' C Q Grh .r ~ 1 , V T t~~n 8 E ~ y3 ~ fnA 00 ~> ~ 4 Z 1 Eo ~~ ~za m -_ ~( 2¢S o37~-~1 ~~ ~~~ ~~+~ Y~ ~C~ uu~ii ~~ '~~~ ~`~ 1 ~ ~~~s.~~ i~ ~ ` ~~ ' a~ ~~~I i~'~~w i3 lfyml~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ r m ~~ a ~ ~ sE~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~,; ~ ~~' ice" o < .~ 0 m ~ w ~a / P -e - ~~\ -'_'~ \ ~ a ~ _ yy P _ ` ~ ' P fi'r'' 1 : ~ ~ / ~- +~ I P -'% ~ '~ I i ~'. r ~ f y I f ~ I ~ iF~ n~ T ~t~ ~ . ~ ~~ r e~ _ .~ ~ ~~ L ( I `,~ ,r ~- ~- FTC ~ r ~ ~`\`i~\ ~./~`~t1 ~~ ~ ~~~\~ ~ ~, ~- •,__ F .,~R TM .~ ~° -_ ~ _ ''~~``a ~~: c ~ ~ ~ ~\ 1. ~ f f ~ \ 1c ".' I ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ I 11 ~ ~ ~1 ~ \ ~ ~- - ~ ~ ) ~yt .--_ I ~ ~ . ~ i ~:~.; _r ~ c `` ~ ~~11 << /`` a V".1 ~9~~ E / ~ ~ ^ ~~ ;..I'll ~% ~ \ / It i a ~ ~ _r ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ i ~ ~~~ !, .~ o~~~ ~~ '' l; r I ~. ~ ~ 'I t ~\ t ~ ~ ~~~ o ~.. ~~ ~, ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ ~. C. N T E R MEMO O F F I C E To: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County School B and From: Elmer Hodge (~~i F~~ Subject: School Construction Financing/ Date: October 18, 1999 Attached you will find updated schedules illustrating the fiscal impact of issuing School construction bonds on projected Capital Fund balances and Debt Service requirements of the County. This information is supplemented with a summary of the Blue Ribbon Committee's capital recommendations and a revised project budget for the new high school. Schedule A: Schedule A was reviewed with the Board of Supervisors and the School Board during a joint work session on July 13, 1999. This schedule represents the County's plan for funding Phase I construction utilizing existing debt drop-off and General Fund allocations; however, the scenario was based on a high school budget of $28 million and a Glenvar Middle School budget of $3.3 million. This scenario identifies $1,743,700 in FY2001-2002 that will be used to fund Phase II construction. Approximately $20 million of debt can be leveraged with annual debt service payments of $1,743,700. If the operating cost of the new high school is $1. million and the County assumes these costs, funds available for Phase II construction would be reduced to an annual amount of $243,700. Schedule B: This schedule is a revision of schedule A that illustrates the impact of increasing the high school allocation to $30 million (already approved by the Board of Supervisors) and the Glenvar allocation to $6 million based on my conversations with several School Board members. By increasing the Phase I budgets for the two projects, the $20 million of Phase II construction will have to broken down into $5 million per year bond issues spread over 4 years beginning in FY2002-2003. Therefore, if we are able to contain the cost of the high school and Glenvar at $30 million and $6 million, respectively, construction of Phase II projects will be delayed another year and "phased-in" over an additional 4 years. This chart assumes NO ADDITIONAL FUNDING OF OPERATING COSTS OR SALARIES. Schedule C: Schedule C represents a project and cost summary of the Blue Ribbon Committee's Capital Program. Attention should be focused on Phase II projects that will be deferred further into the future due to increased costs associated with Phase I implementation. Schedule D: This chart was shared with the Board of Supervisors and the School Board in a memo dated September 23, 1999 and illustrates an updated project budget for the new high school. In addition to the capital costs of $30 million associated with the construction, the ~.,. Members, Board of Supervisors Page 2 October 18, 1999 County is also assuming approximately $500,000 in costs related to storm water detention and water & sewer connections. Please note that the cost of acquiring land was included in the initial Blue Ribbon Committee's recommendation for the new high school. This information is presented to you for planning and discussion purposes so we can achieve balance in meeting the following objectives: Complete each project in a timely, quality fashion. Minimize the impact on our ability to maintain competitive salaries Provide equitable school capital improvements to all areas of the county on a "greatest need" basis. a~ b a~ U C O H H C H O t~q *+ L 0 L ,~ a 'v ~ 0 3 m LL a o U U vs O ~ t ~ ~ r L ~ ~ LL ~ O L v Schedule A ~COCD~C~C_~ t7 ~OM0000~~~MOCOD_f'70~ ~OON0o00~N ~~ t» NCCCOCOMMr-N ~I~OOCDM~OMI~oDC000NM 3 CO~O~OM~C~Dv~COpN~~tOeN-eN-I~NI~CCMOO~Md~.- N !~ ~f CO M N CO c0 CD I~ M G M Z ea~cpCGCCet~- ~NMMMNNv M~~~NNMC07~t0 m v v ~ .-..-. ~..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .-..-..-..-. ~ ~ .-..-..-..-..-..-. ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N N 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti t a d V C R R m t ~ a d d Z .~ 0 c 0 ~ •.-' 3 ~ Q c O U ~~O~COMCO~AO ~~p _M('7N0•-CO .- ~ I~ ~ ~N COOO~t~OCGCOD~~CMO~Q~~O~O~~C~7~~~~NN ~O O~~~MCp~~~O.N--~ ~~O~pOOCMDNM~~COO~CO~ .- ~ CD MOM r- N O N CO ~ f~ M O ~t '~ I~ ~}' ~ N Q1 00 N 1~ ~O ~ cD cp cD ~ ~ In In cD I~ CO O ~ ~ ~ N N M C~7 d' ~ ~ c~0 ~ CMD ~tAl~ ~~~N~O Oc^D~ ~M~in~~N OdO't^D~I~ tO ~CO')~fN7000N ~tcDaO ~~~~~~~~-~O~iCOD~ ' N M N ~! M In I~ d0 O O ~ N N N CO 00 00 CO In M N O f~ CO N O [t N cD O f~ ~ Q1 M O 1~ M O I~ r- CO ~ O ~ cG 1~ N tD t!7 1~ Cp rt ~ N O ~ OD f~ ~ et M r- ~ O I~ CO 00 ~ M O ~ N d' ~~ ~h ~~ '~ M M M M C7 M M M N N N ~ ~ V ~ O O O I~ r- In ti M O et ~t N M f~ N N ~ M In I~ I~ f~ I~ N 00~~~NOdOO~('~IACGI~NO~O~~pp~ O~OO I~ N O O o0 00 ~t 01 f~ c0 f~ r- O ~ d: N ~ O 00 ~ ~ ~ to et MON ~~ ANN McOa000CONN O ~ et N t~ ~CQ~~MO(pON~ ~~ I~OI~OONO~~ODr-~ ~ ~ ~ M In r- M In OD .- N M f~ M~ CO N M M I~ ~ 07 O Cp N N N N M M M M~ et et et CD cD CO I~ ti~~~ O O ~ 0000000000000000000000000 0 0000000000000000000000000 0 0000000000000000000000000 0 00000 0000000000000000000 0 ooooo~ooooo00000000000000 0 0000000000000000000000000 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O ~ N M tp I~ d0 O O ~ N M~ In f0 I~ O O O .- N M 0 0 0 0 0~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ .-- .- ~ ~ ~ r- r- ~ ~ N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N COOO~NM t0 I~ o000~NM~ ~COI~OOOOr-N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •- ~ ~- ~ ~- ~- ~ ~ .- ~ N N N ~~ N N N N N N NO N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~~ to ~ O t0 O O ~ O CO a0 N C10 d0 f~ I~ ~ ~ N CO O d0 C' CO ~ • V ~ ~ CO t~ d0 N h M~ l0 h (p ~ M ~ O ~ CO lQ 00 G O O N O QO O N M OD M G M fA .- 00 M O M 1~ CO N N O d0 r M !~ ~ 3 C 'a' ~ V 1~ ~ N ~ O ~ cc a0 O N cr ~ ~ ao I~ ~ O M ~ ~ ~ .~ Z R ~ O O a~ ~ I~ lp R a0 M ~A O h O ~ CO o0 .-- O1 M 0 h O (G .- r ap H M O tp O r O f~ O (O ~ lO h h O~ CO N O a0 O ~ m R CO (O CO lO V N •-- v v v v v v v M I~ O ~! O M O tG ~ ~ ~ ~ N N M U -_ ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M V' v~ V' ~ V R V' ~ V. v v v~ v v ~ b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N M - ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O Of O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ lA ~ lA ~ to ~ lA ~ lA ~ ' ++ y H C ) C') M M C') M M M M M M M M M M M M ~~~~'~~~~~v~~v~v~~ H R a - ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 ~ Sri ~ci i S i i i u u u ~c v Sri ~ci ~ci Sri ~ri ~ ui ~ ui ui " ~O h M ( ) M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M d.~ ~~~~~~~~~~ R V vv~ ~t N R - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > _ ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q1 O O O O O Of O O O O a M M M M H c h N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ R v v ~ v C ~ ~ ~ O V ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N '~ ~ C ~_ W C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V ~ ~ R V' V ~ et ~ d' V 7 ~ V' V ~f R V' V ~ t7 d ~ ~ C ~ ~~ui~~~~~~~~ui~~~~~~~~~ M M M M C'') M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M ' > ~ ' N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N Q C O N N ~p = N ~ W Q d LL ~ r ~ O rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn a ~o~t~ ~ ~vvvv~~~v~~~~vvvvv~v U > > ~ o m o~~ vv~~~~~~vv~~r~vvv~vv~r °O~~a°~~~~o~~~~~o dy ~~~~~~~ O a c~ Q C„ O N L V - U ~ L d to ~ O t0 a0 M c0 In O cC ~ ~ M M N O ~ a0 '- ~ ~ c0 1~ ~ •- .-- (O 1~ ~ aD lp (p M O) c0 M .- O O CO CO I~ d' M N O t0 lQ 00 a0 O CD CO dD .- O (O (D O a0 O O ~+ 3 X O~ ~ M O N 1~ A N N 0 0 m~ O M N O R O N M~ (O O O .- C7 E N O lO ~ N M CO In ~ ~p m ~~ O ~ 1~ h ~ CO O O) CD N M~ O a0 r r" •-- CD M O M ~ N O N CO ~ f~ M O ~' V' h ~t 1~ N O a0 N ~ CO (O Cp ~ lp In ~ h p O (O O N ~ CO r CC .-- I~ M O CO [7 M ~ ~ ~ ~ N N M M V tp In (D f~ N M ~ ip ^~~ N ~ O O tp In ~ M (O lp tp O N (O O CO O ~ (D I~ N O r N M M ~ ~ (p I~ O1 M 00 ~ I~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ O ~ M~ M CO O N V (D d0 tp I~ O N~ r CO ~ b 0~ CO ~ N ~ M ~ 1~ CO of O N N N GO GO GD (O lQ M N O L 0 -~ I~ V N Cp O I~ V' ~ O CO M O f~ M O I~ V' a0 ~ O tp N c0 ~ I~ c0 ~ M N O rn O ~ to ~ M ~ O O ~ c0 aD d u V ~- N~~ ~~~~ ~' ~M ~~~~M M N N N ~-- r ~'' (O O O O~ ~~ M O ~{ ~ N M~ N N~ M~ h I~ W~ O O O ~ N O O O r M lp tD h N O r O (O ~~ O G N O O ~ O W a0 V O I~ CO 1~ .-- O .- R N~ O Gp M~ ` M O N CO ~ lO ~ lq N N V M (C OO ~ O CO N N c0 C O ~ I~ ~ cp O O ~ p> (p O N M ~ ~- I~ O !~ a0 N O O CO dD ~ ~-- O E M ~ M to CD ~ N M 1~ M V c0 N M M 1~ ~ Q ~ N N N N M M M M Cf ~~~ Cp (p ~p ^~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R ++ 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c._ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ice-- ~ ~~~ N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N d0 ~ O ~ ~ i ~ i ~ i ~ ~ ~ i i i i i i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ ~ ~ ~ ~~- ~~ ~~~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Schedule B U r Schedule C N O O O O O N r O O O d' 0 0 0 ~ O R N O N ~ ~ O ~~ ip ~ ~ S O N d0 N N a0 OV ~ p ~~ N M O Q O tOD a~D .~- _ _ V O M O O O M (p tp l0 O O O (D M O O ~ O CO O~ ~ N O M 4) O M CO 00 (y ~ Q (O ~ N f~ M ~ cep ~ O) ~ ~ Q V ~ ~ ~ ~ cep ~ dD O O OD N ~ O ~ ~ a0 tp M 1~ N N O) - !~ c0 N t~ r ~ ~ op c0 N ~, aN- ~O N N ~ M N ~O ~p ~ ~ - _ M ~ ~- '~ V ~`' Of Q aD O O O O O .- ~- ' ~ O N M O [t O cp ap ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O Cp ~ d' ~p R ~ y H ~ ~ ~ ~ cn N ~ .N- ~ O ONi ~ t ~ GO d0 (O O a r r- ~ ~ a` ~ ~ ~ °O o •-ornov~ooo ~n ~ = O ~ O) O N CO N N aO O c0 O C O M O a) O M V O ~p V '~ m p v Of CO O I~ ~ N O M O fq O O a0 a0 O ~" ~ O N~ O a ~ ~ ~ N N .- M N ~O ~p M N O O O ~,,, e0 ~ ~ ^ ~ O N M C ~ r- ~ H N ~ M ~ ~- !!~ ~ M t j~ (gyp ~ N U L O M I~ N N ~ a N Q N N O O U U ~ ~ C C tQ cQ O O C C ~ O O m M tD N _ R (00 O C~7 ~ l j (OD ~ O O N a0O N N a00 O aOD p ~' O R a0 O O O O CD .- ~ V O M 0 0 0 O N M O C O ~ Q ~' N O N .- V O) CO O f~ .-- M V' O (D ~ ~ O O O tD ~ [r CO ` c0 ^ O O N (O N I~ a1 p p m .-- ~ p N~ O M CO c0 N Q h Q N ~O O p ~ v to M 1~ ~j ~ ~ CV .-- ~ N ~ n v t0 cD (O ~ CO N ~ r ~ ~ aOp ~ L w r- '- c- a o = ~ a - .. ~ O. C ~ O O O O O ~ 0 0 0 0 tO O N O O ~ N X 0 0 0 0 O N .- Q N Q p 0 ~ ~' ~ ~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ M O N I~ ~ p ^ ~ O (D f~ 1~ O N O lQ R O O O O V' CO U 'C N O c0 I~ M O O V' •- v O to O O N M Q O O O Q ~7 c0 cp O O °~ ~~ N N~ C cp m (D (G ap (O .- ~ cD ~ •-- O N _~ _N Q' ~ (D O r w ~ N C N <O nj .- O O `"' C O O V' ~ O~ ~ M~ O~ aND ~! M CO N W N ~. R N N .-- N N E Oj ~ ~ N ~ ~ O U O ~ p c 0 O ° x ~ ° ° ~ ° m ~ m a v ~ ~ oE.oo 'E ~ °o =~ o o° ~ m o s U m 0 0 0 ~ m U o o v Cf aEi o L m o o _~ l0 _3 U ~ L t ~ m p O L (n ~ W L U O fn L L CD m \ r m ~ ~ U fn ° O U ~ U (n ~ o ~ O fn ~. s ~ (n (n D_ ~ O~ ~0 ~~ v L~ 0 (n T lQ ~ tp C O ~ U~ p N=¢ t m m ~° m~ m o m m m o v rn U~ ~° m m Z` m co m o v o ~• D o E" c o m m m --' c E ° o c ca E c c s ~ ° c c t4 a~ m m o~ U F- m m m o o~ °o s~ m E m ~ m m m ~ c c~ ~ 3 m w E E N ~_ ~ c E E w cn ~ t N~ m E m E m w E E~ o ~°° -o Y m °~ ~- g c o m m L v~ °-' v o c m w m E c m m m E a UU_° UWw oo rno ~ww m rns= o ~ mw cW m owwv E ~ 3~ c o o ~ .` U m m~~ rn m v m m m m m W== m g U y v°~v°~ ~m° ~.n v ~Y~ o m.~v= a. = cWU o 0 0'-~ cis m m W 3 3 c 3'c m y m co~U m cr >~ d~> cgW mU» c o m r~ o C7 c '~ ~a d Z Z C7 Z m U .c 'm o f c'o a o p m~ L c m~ c c Y ~ LLi m~ c a U~¢p~~zc7U a Jc~~ma0i3C7z N b U ~~ U Schedule C ,~, U oom.-co i. M ` ° o co O o U N r c C~~i~ c oconcoo ~ ~ Cn w ~ m (O I~ [r ~j N ~ ~ ~'^aOmmm ~- m •- ~ O ~ O ~ ~O~o N O O N ~„~ ~, to ~ C1D O r .-- O V O O m .-- m 1~ 4 m (p M m I~ p ~ CD ~ (O lA O V y - N r (O l0 l0 ~ ~ ^ O ^ N y ~ y - ~ m m r~ tt ~+j j V' 1~ m m' (O m ~y ' Cp ca ai ( p e - ~ m L ~ m ~" ~ O ~ O Oy V ~ m t` CO ~ m ~ L M r o a ~ O ~, ~ N rn uS L 3 N m ~; a c a~ a=i ~ ~ o° ° ~ s aci ~ O C U ~ vii coy ° ~ c ~ ea ^ ~ o 0 0 a "' ~'° co ° ,~ `r ~ c c m - ,~ t0 O O O N m 0 ' C ~ O m (O h ~ m m y y O~ ~U I~ ~ O N r _ U U .C C O ~ U r r: N ~ ^ N rn . ~~ a ~ ~ ~ m :_ c - o ~ c • U f0 a T U C m ~ !0 7 O ~ .i 3 C C v . O m U ~ O o O_ L ~ O O m '- (p ^ R m c0 M m f~ O O) ~ m 0 0 O m N ~ ~ m ai N .-- CO lq lQ ~ O M O O m O m M t A O ~, ~ I~ m CD 1~ R M N ~ ' O U1 M fQ ~ ~6 R V ~ m m ~ m m ~ ~ O ~ lII ~ ~ y ~ m ~ ~ O C 0 ~ m tq I~ ~" ap O .-- O m O O R M `- ~ O N lq m ~: ~ N 7 N L ~ a - v ,= c .. Q ~ o 0 0 0 0 o ~ ~: = ~ o e0 ` 0 0 ~ m O m ^ O O M N c0 m v o o m 0 O V' f~ O m (O __ C - U U R N O N L O N M M f~ O a U Q O ~ V' N M I ~ m O M ~^ N ~ O ~ N w . N ~ M °~ ° ~: N M M V O m m s 3 ~ Ql ~ ~ II c0 m C 0 ~ r V ` ` 3 O ` ~ C O lI w ° U v C ~ ~ O ~ 16 l6 ~ ~ U O C ~ ~ m 3 m O ~ - ~ y _7 m O ~ U O 10 (n ~ ~ ~ R U C U ~ _n. U V` C O m~ ~ C G~ O U ~ p L C fn 10 (Lj ~ m m ~ y U y C~ y y L ~ C m C y U ~ _ C ~ m ~ m h ~` a y y ~ LL L '~ m W ~ m U • V In ~ R ~- O U v p ~ O ~ rn - C 2 = Y O O. - - ~ w`~~ N _ y O C ~ N ~ O m _ m O U m-3~ ~'cU m ,O v~o' m ~ y V ~ m ~ m m m Y J' ~ _ c~ ~ C y N ~ a ~ C ~ N ~ iU~ ~ O T C r = « 10 t 2m Q 0!2> F~- ~ Z v ~ v _ I.i 1.~. ^ M w -ti U O E d Q/ Os r c~ N d E d a+ C. N N 0 0 o ~ v 'a ~ ~ tm ~~ as ~ 'o ~a 0 c U H ~ w N~ 0 oovooooo00 o~aoo~~ooooo0 y •+ 00) vOcD0000000 ~ d O('7CpOr-N00000~ C.~ ~N~O~00000~1~ ~ ~ COC~r-cO~OC'~O o~ E m N r 00 C'7 .- r Q ~ O OO r~(")o0000 ~ ~ O~~OCOD~0000~N r+ +~+ d OC7f~O~~00~ON v ~NNO~C70~~00~ Q O In r tp ~ lA 00 C7 ~ ~ C" ) d m N ~ ~ ('7 ~ r N r O O O O O O y i D O C~ O ' ++ OC~~A000 OOOCO 'C ~ OMI~OON O~ON ~ ~ ~ ~ CO O ~ ~ ~ am' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 C ) Q m N ~ I~ N ~ ~ r R O C ~, i W G C Q E as C ~ ~ ~ V J ~ a a d c ~_ o m t0 i V d O C ~ . ~ ~ ~" C ~ 'a~~a ~L ~ Om O O O O ~ ~A c~O cvp `~ ~ v O ~ ~ N ~ ~ cC v °o°o O O ~ t~ 00000 0000 LN 00000 OOOCp tO ~ O O O N ~~ 0 0~ N ~ r- ~ ~ Ca M~ ~~ N r ~ C'7 r r N "c N Y C C Y a~3 Q °~ty- c c o Q~ c a~ ~`NC°°`~rn~rn"vrnc ac0i g y m ~' > o C°° C° lnco~~2oUN~~wm N c c W Z c y c~a i 'o ~° c JJ QNUfn~li~H>U Schedule D 0 00 O O O OI N N O M O O ~ ~ hi c O N N ch N c'o N O N N U ~ ~ H w s U ~ C O C cC O N ~ U N ~ O N ~ N ~ ~ N ~ A ~ C ~- ~ c 3 ° L 0 U N U ~ N N ~ O ~ ~ ~ >. o ° a ~ c ~ U a ~ ~ °o U m N C o ~ H 3 v o ~ ~ c ~ ~ U o~ w ~ c ~ ~~ ~ ~ C ~ O October 18, 1999 (9:30AM) NOTE TO: File FROM: SUBJECT: Brenda J. Holton OCT 20T" MEETING V 1. Faxed new agenda to HCN - Oked (Added report fro DDH) ~~~`~ ~~~~ ~" 2. Called FM and FFH - FM Yes and left message for FF C'S 3. Called Brenda Chastain -she will get packets to School Bd. Told her I hope to have by 2 or 3 p.m. this afternoon. ~.~ `~~ /4. Called Jan in Procureme~ to see if Chris could take. He is off. Need to take to HCN, FFH, FM, and Brenda Chastai~at School Adm. Need to call her when ready. ~~ ~ ~ S~ ~3 ~( ~/ 5. Talked to Arnold -about having 4 wheel drive and driving. Also about topo map. I showed him map that we have with SUP to go out with agenda and he said that that was topo map. Asked him to see if he had anything else that we could use Wed. 6. Talked to JMC - he will get real estate assessment 4 wheel drive and be ready to drive Wed. He wants agenda and will probably be at meeting. ;i 7. Talked to AMG and PMM and told them they were expected at mtg. AMG said that Joel Turner had called and was coming to meeting. 8. Got information from Melinda to type name cards for School Bd. From: "Brenda Holton" <ADM01/BJH> To: ADM01 /MHA Date sent: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:13:22 +0000 Subject: Adjourned Meeting Agenda «< Message autoforwarded from ADM01/MHA »> Below is the agenda for an adjourned Board Meeting from Oct 12 to Oct- 20 at 8 a.m. Since this is a one-page agenda, I am listing it below rather than sending you an attachment. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board is set for October 26, at 3 and 7 p.m. The agenda for that meeting will be sent on Oct 22. If you have questions or comments, please let me know. ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA OCTOBER 20, 1999 8:00 A.M. Roanoke County Administration Building Fourth Floor Training Room THIS IS AN ADJOURNED MEETING FROM OCTOBER 12, 1999 FOR THE PURPOSE O MEETING ON PROTOTYPE SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION WITH AN OUTSIDE CONSULT A. ROLL CALL (8:00 A.M.) B. TOUR OF WOODS END PROPERTY (8:00 A.M.) C. INTRODUCTIONS AND VIDEO PRESENTATION (9:45 A.M.) 1. Presentation by Robert "Robbie" Ferris Shuler, Ferris, Johnson & Lindstrom, Architects D. CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE Brenda Holton -- 1 -- Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:14:09 1. Woods End Special Use Permit Background Information 2. Program 3. Design and Program Compatibility 4. Schedule 5. Budgets 6. Construction E. Report on Bonded Indebtedness for Blue Ribbon Committee School Projects. F. COMMENTS 1. Board of Supervisors 2. School Board 3. Questions and Answers G. ADJOURNMENT Brenda Holton -- 2 -- Mon, 18 Oct 1999 16:14:09 AGENDA DISTRIBUTION --'~' ~~ ~ Members, Roanoke County School Board ~.--~' Members, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors -~ Elmer Hodge, County Administrator .~~.- ,~°'° Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent ,,-Brenda Chastain, School Board Clerk ,~, Brenda Holton, Board of Supervisors Clerk ,, Don Myers, Assistant County Administrator t John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator ,,~= Anne Marie Green, Community Relations Director Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney ~- ,• '~ 11 F r Note to: Brenda From: Mary RE: October 20 meeting on South County High School Date: October 13, 1990 c~'1 I talked with Dr. Nickens this morning: ~ I~ f He needs avan -probably the largest you can find -check Parks and Rec. It should be over here by Tuesday afternoon (10/19). Will also need a driver (John Chambliss?~? qr someone from Parks & Rec) is ld ~ 1~e.-(~ .... _. ---.~.._~ /~2) He said coffee, juice and muffins for the meeting was fine. ~ , 7,~0 ~(3) They will meet in the Training Room first at 8 a.m. and take the van to the Woods Crossing site. /(4) They wil reconvene back in the Training Room about 9:30 a.m. ~(5) He will be faxing an agenda to me/you -probably today. /(6) Check PMM - we probably have to send out agenda to our agenda mailing list (remember the new rules). ~ f ~) (~1 ~~~ ~,~ y; i may"„'" ~ `~' _, ~ ~ ~~~ w ~ ~ ~r, ~~ ~'~,+-ems G~ ; ~~~ /~ C~ ~ ~ ~~~'~ ~~ 1 ~~ ~ ~r~ ~~~~Q~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS /d ~s//fig AGENDA / ~ OCTOBER 20, 1999 8:00 A.M. Roanoke County Administration Building Fourth Floor Training Room THIS IS AN ADJOURNED MEETING FROM OCTOBER 12, 1999 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MEETING ON PROTOTYPE SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION WITH AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT A. ROLL CALL (8:00 A.M.) B. TOUR OF WOODS END PROPERTY (8:00 A.M.) C. INTRODUCTIONS AND VIDEO PRESENTATION (9:45 A.M.) 1. Presentation by Robert "Robbie" Ferris, Shuler, Ferris, Johnson & Lindstrom, Architects D. CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE 1. Program 2. Design and Program Compatibility 3. Schedule 4. Budgets 5. Construction E. COMMENTS 1. Board of Supervisors 2. School Board 3. Questions and Answers F. ADJOURNMENT TO OCTOBER 26, 1999 AT 3:00 P.M. FOR THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED BOARD MEETING OCT 15 '99 ~8~34AM COL HEALTH SCIENCES MEETING SCHEBULE OCTOBER 20,1999 ROBERT KROBBrE" FERkI3 SHULER, FERRIS, JOHNSON ~ LINDSTROM, ARCHITECTS 8:00 a.m. Tour of Woodsend Property (Meet at County Administration Building) 9:30 a.m. Introductions Video Presentation 9:45 a.m. Conceptual Perspective • Program • Design and Program Compatibility • Schedule • Budgets • Construction 11:30 a.m. Constitutiot~l Relationship School BoardBoard of Supervisors Question/Answer Session P.1 Y I From: Self <ADM01/BJH> To: ADMRCS/BCHASTAIN Subject: Re: Meeting Date sent: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 10:27:36 Yes -she is taking some time off. > From: ADMRCS/BCHASTAIN > To: "Brenda Holton" <ADM01/BJH> > Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 10:23:44 +0000 > Subject: Re: Meeting > Thanks Brenda. Is Mary on vacation? Brenda Holton -- 1 -- Fri, 15 Oct 1999 11:57:38 i From: Self <ADM01/BJH> To: ADMRCS/BCHASTAIN Subject: Re: Meeting Date sent: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 10:21:36 Brenda, Mary Allen is out this week and next so I will be handling the meeting. They did adjourn the Oct 12 meeting to Oct 20 at 8 a.m. so it is a Board Meeting. It will be in the fourth floor training room and we are working on an agenda now. They plan to meet here at 8 a.m. and then tour the Woods End site until about 9:30 and then come back to the Fourth Floor Training Room for the presentation by the NC architects. Members of the School Board were invited. Mr. Hodge talked with Dr. Gordon yesterday about having someone from school staff attend. I plan to send out the agendas as we regularly do and it will probably be Monday at least before we get it out. > From: ADMRCS/BCHASTAIN > To: ADM01/MHA > Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 10:09:57 +0000 > Subject: Meeting > «< Message autoforwarded from ADM01/MHA »> > Mary: > Did you board adjourn on Oct. 12 to Oct. 20? Is the Oct. 20 meeting > with the NC architects an actual board of supervisors meeting? > Thanks for your help. Brenda Holton -- 1 -- Fri, 15 Oct 1999 11:57:44 From: Self <ADM01/BJH> To: John Chambliss Subject: Van for Oct 20 meeting Copies to: Melinda Rector Date sent: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 16:54:44 Planning and Zoning does have a van and Audrey has resesrved it for me for Oct 20 from 8 until 12 Noon. FYI, the Planning Commission will be using it Oct 19 night to go see sites, so we can't get keys until Wed morning. Also BZA will have it Wed at 3 p.m. The keys will be on Bill Richardson's desk next to his telephone Wed morning. I'll be here early that morning too so between us, we can get the keys. Thanks for your help. Johns, I am copying Melinda in case we both get lost somewhere before Wed!!!! Brenda Holton -- 1 -- Fri, 15 Oct 1999 11:58:07 j ROANp,I.~ L i ~ ,~ ; `,~,' ,, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 C~.~-~! ` I -S ~ .~A f1' .. C..I ~~ J C~~~xxY# aor~ ~~x~~~.~e P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 October 14, 1999 BY FAX Thomas A. Leggette 10 South Jefferson St., Suite 1400 P. O. Box 14125 Roanoke, VA 24038-4125 Re: October 20, 1999 meeting Dear Tom: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS, VICE-CHAIRMAN VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FENTON F. "SPIKE" HARRISON, JR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JOSEPH MCNAMARA WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (540) 772-2005 This is a response to your letter of October 12, 1999 in which you raised the specter of litigation based upon tortious interference with a contract terminable at will. You raise this issue in regard to my invitation for all School Board members to attend a meeting on October 20, 1999 at 8:00 a.m. with the Board of Supervisors, you felt this necessary as a method of indemnifying and holding you and the School Board harmless from fulfilling your elected duties and responsibilities. As you are aware, the purpose of this meeting is to identify ways to save taxpayer dollars by living within our means, while providing a quality facility that satisfies the School Board's needs and programs for a new high school in south County. Upon advice of counsel and with the consensus of the Board of Supervisors and to the extent permitted by law, the County does indemnify and hold harmless both you, as a member of the School Board, and the School Board from any claims, liabilities, or expenses arising from any challenge to your or other School Board member's participation in this meeting based upon an allegation of tortious interference with a contract expectancy. Again I discussed your letter with Paul Mahoney, the County Attorney, and asked him to look into your concerns. He advises me that your concerns appear to be unfounded at this time. An essential element of such a claim is the use of improper means or methods to interfere with the contract expectancy. He advises me that the Supreme Court of Virginia has defined °improper" as constituting illegal actions (such as violations of statutes, regulations or recognized common law rights), or violence, threats, intimidation, bribery, unfounded litigation, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit, defamation, duress, undue influence, misuse of inside or confidential information, or breach of fiduciary duty, or the violation of established standards of a trade or profession. Further the Court has discussed the defenses to such litigation: privilege and legal justification. Paul advises me these defenses appear to be particularly relevant to this situation. Internet E-Mail Internet E-Mail ehodgeC9?www.co.roanoke.va.us ®Recycled Paper bosQwww.co.roanoke.va.us Thomas A. Leggette Page Two October 14, 1999 I am surprised that you would consider the exercise of our lawful, elected responsibility to protect the fiscal resources of our County for the welfare of our children to be tortious interference in a contract. Finally, your fears should be allayed, since school boards in the Commonwealth of Virginia generally enjoy immunity from liability for tort claims. Further I am advised that the School Board carries public officials' liability insurance in the amount of $2 Million. This insurance provides legal representation to defend such actions. Therefore, with this communication, as you indicated in your letter, I look forward to seeing you on October 20, 1999, as we attempt to solve these critical issues facing our citizens. Sincerely, I'~ Harry C. N' ke Board of Supervisors Roanoke County, Virginia c: Members, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Members, Roanoke County School Board Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney FAX MEMORANDUM TO: Billlrvin Roanoke County School Board FROM: Harry C. Nickens Roanoke County Board of Supervisors DATE: October 7, 1999 SUBJECT: See attached letter Please ensure that Mr. Irvin receives this letter as soon as possible from Dr. Nickens. Thank you for your assistance. Melinda W. Rector Office Support Specialist 772-2006 ~~ I~ 14~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~Yla.~..,1~2. October 7, 1999 Mr. William Irvin Roanoke County School Board 5937 Cove Road, NW Roanoke, VA 24019 Dear Bill: As I indicated during our conversation this morning, on October 20 between 8 a.m. and noon, we have invited Mr. Robert "Robbie" Ferris, of the architectural firm, Shuller, Ferris, Johnson, and Lindstrom of Fayetteville, North Carolina to do a presentation for the County Board of Supervisors on a prototype high school that their firm is using. Having learned from an earlier mistake of not inviting the School Board and Board of Supervisor representative(s) to travel with me to Monticello High School to view their facility, I especially want to invite all of your body to attend this session. Just as the School Board was able to save significant dollars on the construction of Bonsack Elementary, a prototype school, there very well could be similar savings at Woods End. All savings of one facility would then become available for other construction projects. The meeting on October 20 will begin with a tour of the Woods End property from 8 a.m. to 9:15 a.m. At 9:30 a.m. we will convene at the Roanoke County Administration Center for a two. hour presentation dealing with educational programming, design of facilities, scheduling, budgeting, etc. We would be delighted for any/all School Board members and staff, as you feel appropriate, to join us for both the tour and the presentation, or the presentation only as you all are familiar with the school property. Would you please invite the School Board and others and let me hear from you. Sincerely, Harry C. Nickens, Vice Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Vinton Magisterial District HCN/mwr r . . -"~.. Fax to: Dr. Nickens From: Mary Allen Date: October 4, 1999 Subj: Consultant trip to Roanoke I have made reservations for Robbie Ferris at the Hotel Roanoke for Tuesday, October 19 at the corporate rate of $124 (no government rate available) and charged the room to the County. His confirmation number is 390084 and he must cancel by 4 p.m. if he doesn't come. I have also heard from Joe McNamara and he is available on Wed. October 20. I forgot to ask one question....is the meeting here in the Board Conference Room or elsewhere. I need to know o e e Board mem ers an know. yt-i-z-c- ~o ~?-o-.~ ~ ~ ~ ~L~ Q~ y/X ~c-~ - ~ 0 ~ - / ~ a ~°-~- a _ ~ O 8~ !gam 3~~,rr~b ~Pm ~C~ cep .~A' s n ~n "v~ v~ ~ !~ ~or~ C~~. ~ ~/ 1 ~ 1 ~s ~~ ~ ~ n r~~j !-~~ IMPORTANT ~~~"'~ l ~ `~~ Time-Date ~ ~ e ~', ~ -~,2 ~~, ^ Returned your call ^ Was here to see you d ::~ ~ Post-it® telephone message pad 7662 ^ Wants to see you i To: Mary Allen From: Harry Nickens: Date: September 30, 1999 Check with Fuzzy, Spike, Joe, Elmer, and Bob, to see what there availability might be for October 20-21, either are both of those days. We are trying to get a consultant in here to work with them on the South County High School. This consultant is out-of- state, from North Carolina. I think all of the Board Members are aware of this except Joe. These are the dates that the consultants may be here. Please ask Mary Hicks to check on Elmer's schedule to possibly keep either of these days open until we set a date. I am free from 8 - 3 on the 20th and anytime of the 21St. I will be out of town Thursday and Friday of this week. You can do this next week, or maybe today. Please look at this and I will get back with you next week. Thanks, Harry C ~> h/ - ~ d ~' dGL to ~ ~~' P ,~, Ou VGt / IGL.d ~G L.L/7 ~i ~ I L. T - p~~ o ~ down a ~.~-~ - o ~f. ao hvdr, - o~t.~i p /~ FAX TO: Joe McNamara Spike Harrison FROM: Mary Allen DATE: October 1, 1999 Dr. Nickens asked me to check with you and see if your were available either Wednesday, October 20 or Thursday, October 21 to attend a meeting with an out-of-state consultant from North Carolina, to discuss the South County High School. Please let me know on Monday or Tuesday if you are available either, both or neither of the above dates. Thanks. MEMO To: Mary Allen From: Spike Harrison Date: October 4, 1999 Subject: Dr. Nickens request for October 1 will be available either the 20t" or 21St. Just let me know what time, as soon as possible.