Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/26/2000 - Regular (2). O~ ~OANp,~.~ ti •~ ~ ~ ~ reaa ?(Ja~ ~ocu~r~t - .Su~~,~ct to ~~r~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ,~~,~~~ ~~~ Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7 P.M. and Saturdays at 4 p.m. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. NOTE: At 5:00 p.m., the Board will meet wifh fhe Vinton Town Council in the fourth floor conference room. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call ALL PRESENT AT 3:00 P.M. 2. Invocation: The Rev. James W. Reynolds, Retired United Methodist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF i AGENDA ITEMS BLJ REQUESTED CLOSED SESSION 2.1-344 A (7) CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PERTAINING TO PROBABLE LITIGATION RE: VA GAS PIPELINE C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS NONE D. BRIEFINGS NONE E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for authorization to execute a contract with American Electric Power for the purchase of electricity. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) A-092600-1 HCN MOTION TO APPROVE URC 2. Request to approve the budget for the Day Reporting Program for FY 2000-2001. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) A-092600-2 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT BUDGET WITH QUARTERLY REPORTS TO BE MADE ON UTILIZATION URC F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules fhe Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. HOM MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READINGS 2ND READINGS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS -10-24-00 2 URC 1. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious assembly, located at 5471 Keller Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Church of God. 2. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas station located at 3434 Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Properties, LLC. 3. Ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-2 with conditions to C-1 with conditions to construct an office building, located in the 3000 block of Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Certified Medical Representatives Institute. 4. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a broadcast tower, located in the 8300 block of Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Aircable of Roanoke, LLC. 5. Ordinance to rezone 0.809 acre from C-2 to R-2 to construct a two family dwelling, located at 5929 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Mexicorp Inc. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance amending Ordinance 011299-6 "Roanoke Community Plan" for adoption of a new future land use map for the Hollins (Exit 146) I-81 Interchange area. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING -10-24-00 URC H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to extend the current franchise agreement with Adelphia (Salem) Cable for ninety days. (Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) 0-092600-3 JBC MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 3 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing acquisition of necessary easements to construct the Campbell Hills Water Line project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-092600-4 JBC MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Grievance Panel 2. Hanging Rock Battlefield and Rail Preservation Foundation HCN NOMINATED PETE HAISLIP TO A THREE YEAR TERM EXPIRING 10/25/2003 3. Highway and Transportation Safety Commission 4. Industrial Development Authority JPM ASKED CLERK TO DETERMINE IF J. RICHARD CRANWELL WAS INTERESTED IN SERVING ANOTHER TERM 5. League of Older Americans Advisory Board 6. Social Services Advisory Board J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-092600-5 JPM MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO URC 1. Approval of minutes for July 25, 2000, August 8, 2000 and August 4 22, 2000. 2. Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and confirmation of County appointment. R-092600-5.a 3. Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. R-092600-5.b 4. Donation of a 15 foot drainage easement from Dane C. McBride, President of the Roanoke Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Tax Map No. 46-07-01-01) in the Catawba Magisterial District. A-092600-5.c 5. Donation of a 10 foot strip of land for public right-of-way from Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb (Tax Map No. 50.01-1-16.9) in the Hollins Magisterial District. A-092600-5.d 6. Renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. A-092600-5.e 7. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Northbrooke, Section 1. A-092600-5.f 8. Confirmation of funding of seven solid waste vehicles through borrowing from the Future School Operating Reserve. A-092600-5.g 5 K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS NONE L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS THE FOLLOWING CITIZENS REQUESTED THAT THE COUNTY TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT CITIZENS AGAINST VA GAS PIPELINE TAKING OF PROPERTY FOR EASEMENTS AND ASKED HELP IN GETTING THE TWO COMPETITORS TO CO-LOCATE EASEMENTS: ~) ALLEN CHILDRESS, 6549 MASONS VALLEY LANE ~2) BRENT RILEY, 5280 WADE ROAD AND (3) CHRIS CAVENESS 5051 TWELVE O'CLOCK KNOB ROAD JPM RESPONDED THAT THIS MATTER WILL BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND PMM WILL HAVE AN UPDATE AT THE EVENING SESSION N. REPORTS BLJ MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE URC 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Accounts Paid -August 2000 6. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for two month period ended August 31, 2000 7. Update on CORTRAN contract. O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) 6 Work Session on Fire and Rescue staffing issues (Richard Burch, Fire and Rescue Chief) HELD FROM 4:15 P.M. UNTIL 5:00 P.M. CHIEF BURCH PRESENTED POWER POINT PRESENTATION ON PROPOSED F&R COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH REQUIRES: (1) FOUR COUNTY QUADRANTS TO PROVIDE 24/7 ALS COVERAGE (2) 20 ADDITIONAL PARAMEDICS/FIREFIGHTERS AND (3) FUNDING OF $907,091 WORK SESSION TO BE CONTINUED AFTER JOINT MEETING WITH VINTON P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to probable litigation Re: Va Gas Pipeline AT 4:07 P.M.. JPM MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED MEETING AFTER WORK SESSION Q. DINNER AND JOINT MEETING WITH VINTON TOWN COUNCIL (5:00 P.M., 4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) VINTON TOWN COUNCIL ROLL CALL AT 5:04 P.M. VINTON POLICE CHIEF COOLEY INTRODUCED SUBJECTS DISCUSSED (1) MCDONALD FARM (2) FIRE & RESCUE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHIEF BURCH INVITED TO ATTEND VINTON MEETING 10/2/00 TO GIVE PRESENTATION ON PROPOSED F&R PLAN VINTON TOWN COUNCIL ADJOURNED AT 6:30 P.M. CONTINUATION OF WORK SESSION ON FIRE & RESCUE STAFFING ISSUES HELD FROM 6:35 P.M. UNTIL 7:00 P.M. CONSENSUS OF BOARD TO (1) HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON 10/24/00 ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND METHODS FOR FUNDING; (2) STAFF TO MEET WITH OTHER LOCALITIES; (3) SUPPORT OVERTIME TO MEET IMMEDIATE NEEDS AT FT. LEWIS AND MT. PLEASANT; AND (4) RECRUITMENT FOR PERSONNEL TO GO FORWARD SUBJECT TO FUNDING. EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) R. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION AT 7:03 P.M.. JPM ANNOUNCED THAT CLOSED MEETING WAS NOT HELD BUT CLOSED MEETING WOULD BE HELD AFTER THE EVENING SESSION S. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing and request execution of an agreemen Roanoke County to relocate County Attorney) to approve resolution authorizing the t between Montgomery County and the boundary line. (Paul Mahoney, R-092600 -6 JBC MOTION TO ADOPT RESO URC T. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive thru, located at 4840 Hollins Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of David J. Bell. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-092600-7 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 2. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower, located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Paxson Communications. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-092600-8 JPM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 3. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a church, located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Grace Assembly of God. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-092600-9 8 JBC MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 4. Second reading of ordinance to amend Section 30-91-2 (A) 1. of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the parking and storage of recreational vehicles in front yards in residential districts, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) HCN MOVED TO ADOPT ORD -MOTION WITHDRAWN DENIED 0-092600-10 JPM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD AYES: JPM NAYS: BLJ, HOM, JBC, HCN U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS ANNIE KROCHALIS, 9428 PATTERSON DRIVE, SPOKE OF HER CONCERNS ABOUT THE LACK OF F&R STAFF AND THE F&R PLAN PRESENTED EARLIER AND ITS IMPACT ON VOLUNTEERS JPM ADVISED THAT PLAN AND FUNDING METHODS ARE BEING REVIEWED; COUNTY WILL MEET WITH CHIEFS AND LOCALITIES; AND PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD 10/24/00 AT 7 P.M. UPDATE ON VA GAS PIPELINE PROJECT PMM REVIEWED THE BOARD'S ACTIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN TAKEN SINCE MAY, 1999, TO ATTEMPT TO PREVENT IMPACT OF THIS PIPELINE ON CITIZENS, ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC FACILITIES V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Johnson: (1) Advised that although Hollins area does not have problems with Va Gas Pipeline or F&R, these are legitimate concerns and need to pull together to solve issues. ~) Advised that he recently attended grandson's soccer game at Green Hill Park and was very pleased with the park. He invited all citizens to visit the park. (3) Asked for a written report on status of renovations to Salem Office Supply Building Supervisor Church: (1) Advised that he agreed with BLJ's comments about 9 Green Hill Park and thinks it is the nicest park in the area and a showcase for the County (2) Advised that Chief Lavinder and members of the police department are to be commended for recent accreditation. (31 Advised that County should use media to get message out about crisis in F&R and County needs to do better fob at communications. (4~ Told story to illustrate that human life is his #1 priority and advised that the Board will find a way to take care of citizens' lives. Supervisor Nickens• X11 Advised that six year draft VDOT plan includes traffic light for Route 24, Mountain View and Chestnut Mountain Road, and another public hearing on roads will be held on October 5th. (2) Asked that staff pursue his suggestion of providing radar guns for citizens to enforce weeding such as Town of Blacksburg recently did. (3) Respectfully disagreed with JBC and said that County does a good iob of keeping citizens informed and suggested instead of relying on media to inform, County could place ads in papers. Supervisor McNamara• ~1) Advised that joint meeting with Vinton Town Council held earlier was very successful and they discussed McDonald Farm economic development~roject (2) Advised that County has invited elected officials and families to attend picnic on 10/7/00 at Explore Park. (3) Advised that concerning the Va Gas Pipeline project, the County is willing to keep working to find a wad/ to minimize the impact on its citizens. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION AT 8.12 P M. BOARD WENT INTO CLOSED MEETING R-092600-11 AT 8.32 P.M. JPM MOTION TO ADOPT CERT RESO URC CHAIRMAN ANNOUNCED THAT MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOS WILL BE INVITED TO ATTEND JOINT CLOSED MEETING AND THAT PMM WILL ATTEND CITIZEN MEETING ON 10/3/00 REGARDING VA GAS PIPELINE W. ADJOURNMENT JPM ADJOURNED MEETING AT 8.33 P.M. TO OCTOBER 10, 2000, 12:00 NOON FOR PURPOSE OF MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL l0 R A N ~. ~vrr aF n¢ seas xmrF F ~ p x ~ rsa ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7 P.M. and Saturdays at 4 p.m. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. NOTE: Af 5:00 p.m., the Board will meet with the Vinton Town Council in the fourth floor conference room. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: The Rev. James W. Reynolds, Retired United Methodist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1 ® Recycled Paper D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for authorization to execute a contract with American Electric Power for the purchase of electricity. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 2. Request to approve the budget for the Day Reporting Program for FY 2000-2001. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. 1. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious assembly, located at 5471 Keller Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Church of God. 2. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas station located at 3434 Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Properties, LLC. 3. Ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-2 with conditions to C-1 with conditions to construct an office building, located in the 3000 block of Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Certified Medical Representatives Institute. 4. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a broadcast tower, located in the 8300 block of Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Aircable of Roanoke, LLC. 5. Ordinance to rezone 0.809 acre from C-2 to R-2 to construct a two family dwelling, located at 5929 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Mexicorp Inc. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance amending Ordinance 011299-6 "Roanoke Community Plan" for adoption of a new future land use map for the 2 Hollins (Exit 146) I-81 Interchange area. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to extend the current franchise agreement with Adelphia (Salem) Cable for ninety days. (Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing acquisition of necessary easements to construct the Campbell Hills Water Line project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Grievance Panel 2. Hanging Rock Battlefield and Rail Preservation Foundation 3. Highway and Transportation Safety Commission 4. Industrial Development Authority 5. League of Older Americans Advisory Board 6. Social Services Advisory Board J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of minutes for July 25, 2000, August 8, 2000 and August 22, 2000. 2. Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and confirmation of County appointment. 3 3. Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4. Donation of a 15 foot drainage easement from Dane C. McBride, President of the Roanoke Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Tax Map No. 46-07-01-01) in the Catawba Magisterial District. 5. Donation of a 10 foot strip of land for public right-of-way from Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb (Tax Map No. 50.01-1-16.9) in the Hollins Magisterial District. 6. Renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. 7. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Northbrooke, Section 1. 8. Confirmation of funding of seven solid waste vehicles through borrowing from the Future School Operating Reserve. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Accounts Paid -August 2000 6. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for two month period ended August 31, 2000 4 7. Update on CORTRAN contract. O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) 1. Work Session on Fire and Rescue staffing issues (Richard Burch, Fire and Rescue Chief) P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344A Q. DINNER AND JOINT MEETING WITH VINTON TOWN COUNCIL (5:00 P.M., 4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.1 R. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION S. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing and request execution of an agreemen Roanoke County to relocate County Attorney) to approve resolution authorizing the t between Montgomery County and the boundary line. (Paul Mahoney, T. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive thru, located at 4840 Hollins Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of David J. Bell. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 2. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower, located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Paxson Communications. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 3. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a church, located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Grace Assembly of God. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 5 4. Second reading of ordinance to amend Section 30-91-2 (A) 1. of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the parking and storage of recreational vehicles in front yards in residential districts, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS W. ADJOURNMENT TO OCTOBER 10, 2000 AT 12 NOON FOR PURPOSE OF MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL 6 (~. -.. 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION 092600-1 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRICITY FROM AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER WHEREAS, Roanoke County and American Electric Power desire to enter into a two year contract commencing July 1, 2000, for the purchase of electricity for public purposes; and, WHEREAS, Roanoke County has benefitted from the professional assistance and expertise of the Virginia Municipal League and Virginia Association of Counties Steering Committee in negotiating a contract for electricity with American Electric Power for political subdivisions and public authorities in this service area; and, WHEREAS, the VML/VACo Steering Committee strongly recommends the contract negotiated, since the rates negotiated by it result in significant savings for all participating localities; and, WHEREAS, this contract establishes rates for general service, utility pumping and outdoor lighting/street lights. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1) That the two year contract commencing July 1, 2000, for the purchase of electricity from American Electric Power is hereby approved and accepted. 2) That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute this contract on behalf of the Board of Supervisors and Roanoke County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. 1 On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~ ~~~ Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 . ~ r ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIlZGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 SUBJECT: Authorization to Execute a Contract with American Electric Power for the Purchase of Electricity COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~ BACKGROUND: The VML-VACO Steering Committee was established to negotiate reduced electric service charges with American Electric Power (AEP) for the local governments. Roanoke County's current contract with AEP was approved in 1996 and expired June 30, 1999. The steering committee has held numerous meetings to discuss a new contract. After reviewing financial information, the committee felt that a rate reduction was appropriate and voted to pursue negotiations with AEP for a new contract. The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors voted at its July 27, 1999 meeting to appropriate $14,246 for our share of the cost of a utility consultant, legal fees, and other expenses associated with the negotiations. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: After more than a year of negotiations, the committee has reached an agreement with AEP for a new contract. The highlights of the new contract are as follows: (1) Contract Term: Local governments will be offered new contracts for atwo-year term beginning July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2002. (2) Rate Implementation: The new rates were implemented for the billing cycle that began July 1, 2000. AEP representatives will be meeting with each customer to review their accounts. These new rates represent a 4.41% reduction from the previous rates. ~~I (3) Spring Hollow River Pump Station: Roanoke County's situation is unique because we have an addendum to our contract. Electrical usage at the Spring Hollow River Pump Station is charged at the public authority rate at all times except for the months of December, January, and February during peak times (7:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M.) If we pump during peak periods we pay a demand charge, which is approximately $5,000 per month for each pump we operate. Staff tried unsuccessfully to have this addendum deleted. We were successful in obtaining eight (8) days during these three months to pump during peak hours at the public authority rate (4) Future Rate Increases: It is the steering committee's opinion that rates will increase beginning with the next contract. It is quite possible that we will be required to negotiate with multiple power companies beginning with the next contract as a result of deregulation. (5) Street Light Rates: Rates on the municipal street light schedule will remain the same. FISCAL IMPACT: It is anticipated that this contract will result in a net savings of $35,000 per year to Roanoke County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the County Administrator be authorized to execute the new contract with AEP. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: ~"; ~ ~,~ ,~ Y ~~ ~ /~ifal~. !fir -°~r~ Gary Robertson, P.E. ,~' ~ Elmer C. Hodge Utility Director ~' County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Church Received () Johnson _ _ _ Referred McNamara to Minnix _ Nickens ~-/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRICITY FROM AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER WHEREAS, Roanoke County and American Electric Power desire to enter into a two year contract commencing July 1, 2000, for the purchase of electricity for public purposes; and, WHEREAS, Roanoke County has benefitted from the professional assistance and expertise of the Virginia Municipal League and Virginia Association of Counties Steering Committee in negotiating a contract for electricity with American Electric Power for political subdivisions and public authorities in this service area; and, WHEREAS, the VML/VACo Steering Committee strongly recommends the contract negotiated, since the rates negotiated by it result in significant savings for all participating localities; and, WHEREAS, this contract establishes rates for general service, utility pumping and outdoor lighting/street lights. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1) That the two year contract commencing July 1, 2000, for the purchase of electricity from American Electric Power is hereby approved and accepted. 2) That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute this contract on behalf of the Board of Supervisors and Roanoke County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. G:~ATCORNEY~PMM~AGENDAW PCO.wpd 1 A-092600-2 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER "' .~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Approve the Budget for the Day Reporting Program for FY 2000-O1 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: After the closing of Youth Haven II last year, staff from the City of Roanoke and County of Roanoke met and developed a program to address the needs of youth in the Roanoke Valley. The process identified a need for a day reporting program as an alternative to youth who are eligible for secure detention. These services may be an alternative step leading to secure detention if behavior is not improved or as a step down to outreach detention type services from a secure detention environment. The program can provide assessment and diagnostic services for youth not previously seen by the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. It will endeavor to increase the youth's capabilities for personal accountability by providing treatment and services designed to increase the development of social competencies. Generally, the juvenile will participate in the program for forty (40) to one hundred twenty (120) days. A copy of the DAY REPORTING PROGRAM POLICY & PROCEDURE is attached for your review. The program is designed for a maximum capacity of 15 youths in the day program and 15 youths in the evening program. This is not a residential program and no overnight stays are permitted. Funding for the program is in the form of per diem rates of $80 per day paid by the placing locality. The County's costs are programmed as part of the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) budget. The budget f or the Day Reporting Program i s for the FY 2 0 0 0 - O l period which began August 7 and was opened to clients on August 14. The budget is $261,218 and includes the payments made by Roanoke 1 ~" County as well as other time staff positions classification plan as Youth Haven II program FISCAL IMPACT: agencies and localities. The five (5) full are recognized in the County's pay and part of the staff positions of the former and are now funded through this program. This budget utilizes funding paid through the per diem costs and part of the VJCCCA grant program. No new monies from the General Fund are required. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the budget of the Day Reporting Program for FY 2000-01 in the amount of $261,218 as outlined on the attached budget document. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, John M. Chambli s, Jr. er C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to approve Church _ x Denied ( ) budget with quarterly reports made on Johnson _ x _ Received ( ) utilization McNamara_ x _ Referred ( ) Minnix _ x _ To ( ) Nickens x cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer ~`"` .G.~ • - -- --- r- ._ -- ---- -- {~ _ _ _ _ Day Reporting Program, _ Budget _'', EYnPnses i - - 2ular Salary ___ _ Re ~ - - ~ ~ - 122,3_73 ~~ - ~ . PI art -Time FICA - --- 25,000 ~ 9,362' __ _ Retirement- ____ __ --- _ 16, 7 Deferred Comp __ 'I 500 Health Insurance 10,9_55 - - -- - Dentallnsurance __ 850 ~ +_ _ Life Insurance 979_, ~ Contracted Janitorial Services 1 ' __760 Prof. Services -Electronic Monitoring 6,000!. Re airs Office_E ul t I _ _ 300 I, ~Repairs Motor Vehicles _ _ 300_ Repairs WP Equipt __ ' _ 3001 Repairs Equipt _ __ __ ~_ _ 6001 1 Repairs Bldg and Grounds _ _ _ 1,000 Equipt !Repairs Other ~ 1,000 it . _ 'Printed Forms I---- --- ---~ ', 3501 - -~ Advertising __ -- I 200 i _ _ Electricit ~_3,000; ___ Heatin 2,000' Water 1,000 -- Postage _ 1,000 .Telephones _ 2 000 (`all Phnnac 5nn Pager Services _ _ _ _ 350 Liability Insurances _ _ _ ___ 350' Rent of Equipt 1,950 '~, i iavCi ivmCa C Dinner Meetings _ _ a,vv~ , _T _ 200 Training and Education __ _,1,700 Dues and Memberships _' _ 150 - - -- Em to ee Recognitiojns , _ 200 T Office Supplies - _ !~ 1,300 - - ISmall Equipt_._ _ ~ 400 ':Food _ Medical Supplies 9, 000 ', _ 200 ' __ _ Janitorial Su lies 300 _ _ _ ~Idg and Ma nt materials _ _ 200~I Gas and Auto Supples _ _ ', II,Subscriptions ---- --_ ~ _ _ 1,500 250 '_Books '' 200' -- iRecreation Equipt 1,500 ' Other Operating Supplies -- 100 - - -- - Machinery and Equipt Replacement 2,000 ,Unappropriated Amount 29,266, -- ___ _ enues -- ~ -------------- i _ 261,218' I ~VJCCCA allocation 178,252 !Local Match 24, 4 _ _ I,Other per diem payments __ 58,322 _ _ _ - - -- 261,218 DATMTBUD.WK4 "`~ DAY REPORTING PROGRAM TREATMENT PROGRAM GOALS - To provide classification of youth based on their level of risk to public safety. - To provide improved supervision of identified youth based on their level of risk to public safety. - To establish a program within a system of graduated sanctions that provides supervision and treatment for youth who are eligible for secure detention. (As an alternative to secure detention and outreach); within the continuum of these services; 1-step up to secure detention from outreach; 2-step down to outreach from detention. - To provide assessment and diagnostic services for youth not previously before the Court. - To increase youth's capabilities for personal accountability by providing treatment and services designed to increase the development of social competencies. DAY REPORTING PROGRAM TREATMENT PROGRAM OBJECTIVES - TO IMPROVE ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT. - TO DEVELOP SOCIAL SKILLS AND ENHANCE PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP COUNSELING. - TO PROVIDE DRUG COUNSELING AND/OR DRUG AWARENENSS IN ORDER FOR CLIENTS TO POTENTIALLY REMAIN DRUG FREE. - TO REDUCE FURTHER ADJUDICATION. - TO PROVIDE FAMILY COUNSELING AND PARENTING SKILLS TRAINING. - TO ENHANCE FAMILY COHESIVENESS AND BUILD POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS. - TO PROVIDE CAREER DEVELOPMENT. - TO RETURN CLIENTS BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AS PRODUCTIVE CITIZENS. - TO PROVIDE RESOURCES AND ASSISTANCE TO ALL CLIENTS BY CREATING A NETWORK OF COMMUNITY SUPPORT. - TO PROVIDE CLIENT ASSESSMENTS, DIAGNOSTIC AND CLASSIFICATION SERVICES WHICH WILL INCLUDE PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATIONS, WHEN DEEMED NECESSARY. - TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO SECURE AND/OR RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT IN A LESSER RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT THAT IS CONDUCIVE FOR TREATMENT AND SOCIAL MODIFICATIONS. ~,~ 6 VAC 35-150 DAY REPORTING PROGRAM POLICY & PROCEDURE PURPOSE (430) The purposes of the Day Reporting Program is to provide a structured, therapeutic alternative to juveniles who may otherwise be placed in detention. Juveniles court ordered into the program will customarily participate for forty (40) to one hundred twenty (120) days. TREATMENT OBJECTIVES (430) The Day Reporting Program Treatment Objectives are as follows: to improve academic achievement; to-develop social skills and enhance personal development through individual and group counseling; to provide drug counseling and/or drug awareness in order for clients to potentially remain drug free; to reduce further adjudication; to provide family counseling and parenting skills training; to enhance family cohesiveness and build positive relationships; to provide career development; to return clients back to the community as productive citizens; to provide resources and assistance to all clients by creating a network of community support; to provide client assessments, diagnostic and classification services which will include psychological evaluations, when deemed necessary; to provide an alternative to secure and/or residential placement in a lesser restrictive environment that is conducive for treatment and social modifications. MEASUREMENT OF PROGRESS (430) Progress in the Day Reporting Program will be measured by the following; - No further legal offenses. - Behavior Management System scores in the Acceptable or higher ranges. - Discharge occurs as planned. ADMISSION CRITERIA(430,490,590) Only juveniles ages 12 -17 years old who are currently eligible for detainment may be accepted into the Day Reporting Program. Asocial history and/or diagnostic testing is not required prior to admission. Juveniles who are covered by Section 16.1-285.1 of the Juvenile Code will not be accepted into the program. Juveniles shall not be excluded from the program nor denied access to services on the basis of race, national origin, color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY (430) The Day Reporting Program is a drug free workplace. Day Reporting Program Policy & Procedure 6 VAC 35-150 BEHAVIOR MGMT SYSTEM (430) ~ ~~ A copy of the rules of the program, expectations of participants and staff, a fist of consequences for inappropriate behavior, including the procedures for removing a juvenile from the program is provided to the juvenile and his parent/guardian upon admission. CRITERIA & PROCEDURES FOR TERMINATING SERVICES (430) A participant may be released from the Day Reporting Program for committing a Major Rule Violation or by repeated Minor Rule Violations. Explanations of these violations and potential consequences are provided to the participant and his/her parent/guardian upon admission to the program. The procedure for emergency discharge is as follows: Program Supervisor and/or his/her designee will notify, by telephone or in person, the participant, participant's parent/guardian, and probation officer/referring agent immediately after Major Rule Violation. Participant will be removed from program immediately. Procedure for Planned Discharges: Program Supervisor and/or his/her designee will notify in writing, the participant, participant's parent/guardian, and probation officer/referring agent of a tentative discharge date. This letter will be mailed a minimum of 15 business days prior to that date and include an invitation to a scheduled pre-discharge conference. The conference will occur a minimum of 5 business days prior to the discharge date. For Emergency and Planned Discharges: Within 10 days of dismissal, the parEicipant, participant's parent/guardian, and probation. officer/referring agent will be mailed a Discharge Report which summarizes the participant's treatment, progress, reasons for discharge, and recommendations for further services. EVALUATION OF PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS (430) The program collects data about the average score per client in the Behavior Management System, the number of clients who gained additional charges, and the number of clients who successfully completed the program. This data is compiled into a Quarterly Report that is provided to the Department of Juvenile Justice. NEWS MEDIA CONTACT POLICY (430) Any staff member contacted by the media will refer all inquiries and questions to the Day Reporting Program Supervisor. The Day Reporting Program Supervisor will meet with the Program Manager and any other necessary Roanoke County personnel to determine the appropriate response. CHANGE IN POLICY (430) Any changes, in the above policy will be provided to the Department~of Juvenile Justice Regional Office in writing. Page 2 of 7 6/00 Day Reporting Program ~-°~~,. Policy & Procedure 6 VAC 35-150 EMPLOYEE & VOLUNTEER BACKGROUND CHECKS (440) All employees (regular -and relief), interns, and volunteers of the Day Reporting Program must submit to a criminal record check, a driving record check and a Virginia Child Protective Services check. These checks will be completed prior to employment, beginning of an internship or volunteer work and will determine whether there are criminal acts or other_ circumstances that would. be detrimental to the safety of juveniles in the Day Reporting Program. CONTRACTED SERVICES (435) When the Day Reporting Program contracts for services with public or private providers it shall adhere to the following policy: 1. Recruitment, screening and selection of providers will be handled by the Program Supervisor and/or the Program Manager. No contracts will be given to providers that are unable or unwilling to meet #2, #3 and #4 of this section. Providers will be required to be in full compliance with the licensing board that governs them. 2. All providers shall identify the case coordinator. 3. The Program Supervisor shall monitor the delivery of services under the terms of the contract. 4. The provider will be required to develop a service plan; document receipt of the referral, services provided, and termination of services; provide the Day Reporting Program with all information specified in the contract; conduct the records check required by 6~VAC 35-150-440 on all staff who provide services to individuals under the contract; participate in DJJ required program evaluation; provide appropriate evidence of fiscal accountability and responsibility. LIMITATION OF CONTACT WITH JUVENILES (450) When there are indications than employee (regular or relief) has a physical, mental or emotional condition that might compromise the safety of youth, the Day Reporting Program Supervisor and/or Roanoke County Department of Human Resources may require the employee immediately be removed from contact with youth until the situation is resolved. When there are indications than an intern or volunteer has a physical, mental or emotional condition that might compromise the safety of youth, the Day Reporting Program Supervisor may terminate the intern/volunteer services. PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS (460) Day Reporting Program staff, interns, and volunteers will be qualified for their positions based on their position descriptions and will receive training appropriate to their duties. Any staff and/or volunteers who provide professional services shall be appropriately licensed, certified, or be supervised by an appropriately licensed or certified person as required by law. Page 3 of 7 6/00 Day Reporting Program Policy & Procedure ~,,;,,~ 6 VAC 35-150 MEDICAL NEEDS/EMERGENCIES POLICY (470, 670) Upon admission, program staff shall by notified of individual juvenile's medical needs or restrictions and given specific instructions for meeting these needs. The parent/guardian of each youth placed in the Day Reporting Program will sign a permission form that empowers the Day Reporting Program staff to secure treatment for the youth if a medical emergency arises. FINANCIAL RECORDS (480) Financial records will be maintained by the County of Roanoke Finance Department. YOUTH'S RIGHTS (490,500) Juveniles shall not be subjected to: - Deprivation of drinking water or food necessary to meet daily nutritional needs except as ordered by a licensed physician for a legitimate medical purpose and documented in the juvenile's record. - Any action which is humiliating, degrading or abusive. - Corporal punishment. - Unsanitary conditions. - Deprivation of access to toilet facilities. - Confinement in a room with the door so secured that the juvenile cannot open it. - Medical or pharmaceutical testing for experimentation or research. CASE MANAGEMENT (510,520} Each juvenile shall have a separate case record that shall be kept up to date and in a uniform manner. Each record shall always contain identifying & demographic information on the juvenile; court order, placement agreement, or service agreement; rules imposed by judge or probation officer, if applicable; and date of acceptance and discharge. Juvenile's case records shall be kept confidential in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Juvenile's case records will be kept in areas that are accessible only to authorized staff and in fire resistant locked compartments. Case records shall be kept in their entirety for a minimum of three years after the date of discharge. Permanent information such as participant's name, date & place of birth, dates of admission and discharge, reason for referral and release, names and addresses of parents and siblings, and name and address of legal guardian shall be kept on all participants even after the disposition of the participant's fire record. In the event the facility ceases operation, all records will be returned to the CSU from which the client was referred. CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT POLICY (540) Any case of suspected child abuse or neglect will be reported immediately to the Department of Social Services with jurisdiction in the area of the alleged offense as required by the Code of Virginia. Page 4 of 7 6100 Day Reporting Program . Policy & Procedure 6 VAC 35-150 INCIDENT DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING (530) When an event or incident occurs which requires reporting by the Virginia Department ~ ~'~ of Juvenile Justice or Roanoke County Government policy, the Day Reporting Program staff will document and report the event or incident on the Serious Incident Report in accordance with the County and State procedures. FACILITY & FIRE SAFETY(550,640) The Day Reporting Program premises shall comply with all applicable building, fire, sanitation, zoning and other federal, state, and local standards. It shall have liability insurance and be kept clean, in good repair and free of rubbish. The program shall maintain a written fire plan developed with the consultation and approval of the appropriate local fire authority and reviewed with the local fire authority at least annually and updated as necessary. There shall be at least one documented evacuation drill each month. Each new staff member shall be trained in fire safety and. emergency procedures before assuming supervision of juveniles. SERVICE PLANS (560) The Day Reporting Program shall: 1. Develop an individual service plan that specifies goals, objectives, and the number and nature of contacts between the juvenile and staff. 2. Provide service plan information to supervising probation or parole ofFcer, when applicable, to be included in and monitored as part of the supervision plan. 3. Document all contacts with the juvenile, the juvenile's family and others involved with the case. 4. Provide written progress reports to the referring agency at agreed upon intervals. RESPONSE TO CRISIS (570) The Day Reporting Program instructs all participants to call the program to notify of any crisis. If the Program is closed when the crisis occurs and the crisis requires notification the juvenile shall call the AOC pager number. The participant and the parent/guardian are notified of this, along with the AOC pager number, in writing upon admission. SUPERVISION (620) At all times that juveniles are on the Day Reporting Program premises, there shall be at least one qualified person actively supervising who has a current first aid and CPR certification. Day Reporting Program staff are responsible for managing juveniles' behavior, and shall not delegate. this responsibility to other juveniles except as part of an approved leadership training program under the supervision of qualified staff. SUBSTANCE ABUSE & TESTING SERVICES (610) The Day Reporting program will provide Substance Abuse & Testing Services by contract, purchase through private provider, and/or by agreement with Court Service Unit substance abuse counselors. Page 5 of 7 6/00 Day Reporting Program , Policy & Procedure 6 VAC 35-150 ( HOME SERVICES SAFETY POLICY (580) ~ °~ "~'' When making home visits with a youth and no parent/guardian is present and the counselor has reason to suspect or feels their safety is compromised, take the following precautions: - Do not enter the home. Meet with the youth' on the front steps or in the driveway. Notify the Day Reporting Program Supervisor immediately by telephone and document in the client's case record. - If the counselor feels s/he cannot be safe meeting on the front steps or in the driveway, notify the Day Reporting Program Supervisor and other arrangements will be made. Under no circumstances should a Day Reporting Program staff member enter a home that s/he feels or has reason to suspect is not safe. At any time during a home visit a counselor believes that his/her safety is compromised in any way, the counselor will immediately leave the home. If during a home visit the counselor observes domestic violence, the counselor will assess the danger to all persons and respond accordingly. Atypical and accepted response would be contacting the police. When a counselor observes a severe injury to the youth from domestic violence or any other means, the counselor will call 911. If the parents are not present, the counselor will attempt to contact them to apprise them of the situation. MEALS (630) Participants in the program's first shift will receive a morning snack between 7:30am and 8:OOam and lunch between 12noon and 1 pm. Participants in the program's second shift will receive a snack between 5:OOpm and ~5:30pm. FIRST-AID KITS (650) The Day Reporting Program shall maintain well-stocked first-aid kits in the center and vehicle(s). It shall be readily accessible for minor injuries and medical emergencies. MEDICATION DELIVERY (660) The Day Reporting Program will dispense prescription medication to participants when provided with a written agreement from parent(s)/guardian(s). Only staff who have received approved Medication Administration Training will dispense medication. Medication will only be dispensed when it is provided to the Day Reporting Program by the participants parent(s)/guardian(s), is in a prescription bottle with a label, and in the manner in which the label instructs. The date, time, dosage, and name of medication will be recorded in the daily log and in the participant's case record. This medication will be given to Day Reporting Program staff and will be held in a locked cabinet. Participants are not to be in possession of any prescribed medications and/or dispense medication to themselves or other participants. The Day Reporting Program will not dispense over-the-counter medications to any participants. Page 6 of 7 6100 • r Day Reporting Program Policy & Procedure 6 VAC 35-150 ~"'"~ TIME OUT (690) The Day Reporting Program will not utilize Time Out as a behavior management or disciplinary technique. RESTRAINT (680) The Day Reporting Program Restraint Policy is as follows: Restraint may only be used when (a) less restrictive interventions have failed (b) the juvenile's uncontrolled behavior could result in harm to self or others and (c) by staff who have received department-sanctioned training. It shall be only that which is minimally necessary to protect the juvenile or others. It shall be fully documented in the juvenile's record as to date, time, staff involved, circumstances, reasons for use of physical restraint, and extent of physical restraint used. The use of mechanical devices* and/or chemical substances to restrain a juvenile's behavior is prohibited. *This does not include electronic monitoring equipment. ELECTRONIC MONITORING (700,710,720,730,740) Juveniles who reside in their own home or a surrogate home may participate in electronic monitoring if the referring agency purchases this service for an additional fee. Electronic monitoring will be contracted through an outside provider. Electronic monitoring is not an automatic condition of probation, parole or predispositional supervision. Parent(s)/guardian(s) must give their consent, unless it is court ordered, and be fully oriented to the operation of the device and program rules prior to the juvenile being placed on electronic monitoring. The Electronic Monitoring Service Plan/Agreement shall designate the frequency, type and location of contacts the service provider will have with both the juvenile and his/her parents: How tampers and program violations will be investigated and responded to shall be explained in the Service Plan/Agreement. The Service Plan/Agreement shall also establish the maximum time the juvenile may be electronically monitored - 45 days unless a court order allows for a longer period of time. Page 7 of 7 6/00 ~'/ - .5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for Public Hearing and First Reading for Rezoning Ordinances Consent Agenda COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading of these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions, rather approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for October 24, 2000. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious assembly, located at 5471 Keller Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Church of God. 2) Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas station located at 3434 Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Properties, LLC. 3) Ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-2 with conditions to C-1 with conditions to construct an office building, located in the 3000 block of Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Certified Medical Representatives Institute. 4) Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a broadcast tower, located in the 8300 block of Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Aircable of Roanoke, LLC. ~~-"~ 5) Ordinance to rezone 0.809 acre from C-2 to R-2 to construct a two family dwelling, located at 5929 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Mexicorp, Inc. MAPS ARE ATTACHED; MORE DETAILED INFORMATION IS AVAII,ABLE IN THE CLERK' S OFFICE STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: (1) That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for October 24, 2000. (2) That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Items 1 thru 5 inclusive, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. Respectfully submitted, ~'oi Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: ACTION VOTE Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens No Yes Abs COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr. _ . ~~~~5 P.O. Eox 29800 ~ lGr. Roanoke, VA 24018 ~ J ( 540` 772-2068 FAX (54~) %72-2108 For staff use only date reyceiveyi:- aoolication fee: PCi6L%a ate: _ Proposed Zoning: AR pup ~ ~jt, ~~-(ol~ ~j~~ ~ use TtYp Use Oniy Proposed Land Use: ~~pjJ~~~~c. Religious Assembly ~~/ Does the parcel meet the minimum Ict area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO 1F N0, A VARIANCE lS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES X NO IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES N/A NO '1'X~r1i!'3xi'i~'ititt'~~''I'1"F ,~~X`T~i`•`'~'~~~~~~'~~~~.s`iiii"ss?jisE5iisi?i~';II;; iiiiiiliiyijiliiji$i~ii~iiiiii:` 1 t~ - Variance of Sections? of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in craer to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR lNCOMPLE-i E. ars v Res v ws v / Consultation 8 1(2" x l 1 " concept plan Application fee Application °'"' Metes and bounds description -< Proffers, if applicable Justification '"~~ Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that l am either the o~rvner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the o~rvrrer.1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ Owner's Signature: .. ... ......... .. ...... ,.._. y ,..~ ,._r..... r .:;'i:~i~~ri r`r-3~ir~'T~~~'it!2'7'Y'kl•i1'l•?~;lE`Ise':~~?i}~~~•~iiE~~i,~p;ii;EE~i~~~i:i`~'i~='i~:~i~i~i.d~i~ i~i~i~i Case Number The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the reed and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the folle~.ving questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance {Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the zoning ordinance. This request is for a Special Use Permit to build a new building to replace the old existing building on property. The facility will be located on 2.8 acres located on State Route 698 5471 Keffer Rd. Catawba~Magistrate District Tax Map # 7.00-1-59 known as' The Church of God Catawba. The new building will be approximately 4800 5F including basement area with a seating capacity of approxima 120 this facility will add to the community and will be attractive and harmonious with the community. Please explain how the project conforms to the genera! guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County ~~mprehensive Plan. Religious Assembly facilities are permitted by the zoning ordinance by Special Use Permit and in this case there is::an existing (church) religions assembly existing on property . Please describe the impact(s) of 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/se<<ver, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. This purposed project will have minimal impact on~adjoining properties Traffic on State Route 698 will not increase that much because of the existing (church) religious assembly Adequate on site parking is available. Storm water run off will be contained Septic system and well water will be provided. We understand that we will meet all of Roanoke County codes that pertain to our building. 1~ ;~licant The Church of God Catawba Va . .~ i '. '".. ~~ r', I . V V fi u \. ~' ..-``~ i ~ ( 1 ~ m` -{ , ~: `, ~. O s ~.,t.y= ._._ j, .~~ f ~ ~' `~ ~ ry ~.; , I { t ~. .;; ~ S ROANOKE COUNTY The Church of God DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Special Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 7.00-1-59 County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 r r ~-~, ---- ALL APPLICANTS I Check type of application filed (check all that apply) O Rezoning Special Use ~ Variance Applicants name/address w/zip , Phone •~ ~~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ -'~ ~ ~ ~ ~F~-~-~~,~ti: ~~~~ r .~ v~~ ~2.?t-~,~~-~t ~""~~'' Fax No~~4~- ~t`7 3 ~~ ~`-7 Y Owner's name/address w/zip Phone: 3~ ;^/'~ e... Fax No. Property Location ~ ~'~ ~' t"34~.~. a; ~''~' ° ' ~•~~ <` e~ Ma isterial District: ~AU~ ~*' ~''-~~' A.T R + ~ ~~>~ Se:..:.-r'~-t~ Community Planning area: ~=1-.`~'~' g'~0~~ Tax Map No.: ~3 ~ ~ `~ ~ Existing Zoning: ~~ Size of parcel(s): Acres: ~ a ~ ~ Existing Land Use: ~ ~- 1 ~~-~- ~P~3~' ±~1`ttc +~GG REZONING AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS (R/S) i~~ ~~u Proposed Zoning: ~ i-i-9.~.~T Proposed Land Use:~C~tvVEi~fz~ I~C:I~. ~~ G12E l~' ~~il.~.ti..iR.i~6`~ i ~~i~.i L CAS ~ S~gPt?tr ~Z~-i~L Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district'? Yes ~ No O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. , ~ Does the parcel meet~the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No O ~ ~ ~ VARIANCE APPLICANTS (V) Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE NQSSING OR INCOMPLETE. V Consultation 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan Application Metes and bounds description Justitication Water and sewer application I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owners agemt or consent of the owner. /-'~ / L',... Cr.,FF TTeo Only Date received: Received by: a~ o o ~ n fee: o Applicati PC/BZA ate: ` ' Placar s issued: BOS da e: ~ ~S 2~-S O ~ c7a My t Case Number ~ I I Application fee Proffers, if applicable Adjoining property owners purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and Owner's Signature ~° JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST Applicant - Springwood Properties, L.L.C., Jim Crumley -Manager/Owner Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. "Buck Mountain Mercantile" furthers the purposes of the zoning ordinance by providing uses, historic architecture, and an outdoor recreation theme that we believe mirrors the intent of the zoning ordinance. From our country store/small restaurant component to our expanded hunting/fishing/outdoor related services, the additional marketing of ourselves as a regional "destination" will surely enhance revenues for Roanoke County. We anticipate 40 employees. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The conversion of "Trebark Outfitters" to "Buck Mountain Mercantile" is a throwback to the old days of the small country general store. We believe the proposed architectural changes, the cinder block structure to the "Mercantile" look with natural siding and wrapped porches not only enhances the entrance to the historic Clearbrook district but also blends in near perfect harmony with the adjacent Blue Ridge Parkway. It is also our opinion the "Buck Mountain Mercantile", as a destination for regional outdoors people, further enhances the rural character of the district. We must also note that the rural character of the Clearbrook district is conversely a wonderful asset to the success of Buck Mountain Mercantile. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, park/recreation and fire and rescue. We obviously believe that approval of this use will enhance our property and the historic Clearbrook district. There is currently a 12 inch water line along the edge of our property which we intend to tap. The 8 inch sewer line is on the school board property. We will work diligently with the county on that short extension. The road impact will be positive in that there will be alternate and improved ingress and egress (see site plan) . We know of no other impact. ,1. 1.34 Ac. 5035 I,XLL'L L11Y1 L'1\~J1V 1`1 //,ll.f I ~ ~ -" - -' '- ~ii ~1C ~4~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ 79 "'~~. ~>) r~l rr`` 91.70 '~d~ ~, ~o~ gd 2 ~ `~ 5720 + ,~. ~ ~1C~ '~ ~ U ~' ~ „J 505! ~ Vii Q - ~ O~ o g~Sl Q~ ~''~ \ % '`.._ J ~ . - ~ 33. ~a° Ac. • ~ 1.6 Ac.(L~) ~`' 7 na.7a~ ~ 0.73 Ac.(C) - 4. ~~ ~ ,z5n -i"~ g~:~~ • ~~ ; ~~. 34. So eJ \ • ~~ - ; 5. ~ ?s 1 .9U Ac. : Zfj1 u~ i ,~ ~~ 7 . `~ 293' ~ 6 . ? .v ; `~'g \ 1 a 114 J' ~2 ~ SQ4f \ 308 0` 1111 R8 • `fS, . ~, ~_ : 5a. ; t 5/B8 ,., 11 I~~ • .a, ~ ~ 07 \` • \ \ \ • ~ ti . ~. •• \\ 4 45 Ac. ~~ '~ '~ At \ 19 / _~ ~~ ~ a • ~ ~. 9sa, ~, •, ~~ o_ a '~. ~ • ~ •~ Jy C U \ ~• ~ 7 . =~~\ , e \` ~^; RCEL LANDHOOK '-{ GAL LOT GAL BLOCK O 5230 1.1 2 as a~. ~~ ~' \ ~y ~~ \ ~ ~ ~s\ i• .,.,, ~• ~, ~~ •w' / ~,~,. 9eo.. . _\ ~«____ t ¢~ . r;~~a ~` a=~ ~. ~ ~ . 1-~, ^< ' ~ t - ,~:. ' ! i -ir7 (fir~ms~ t -1--(~- ~ ~~ , ~ ~ ___ ~~ /I` ~ a ,~ ( ~ ? , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~a~yy i T ~ ~ `1/ ~/ ~skN ~ ~~'~ t ~`~ -•/ / ~a.s may.: - ` 3 ~` / _ o ! ~~ ~ _ ~ - O ~ j ~~ r ` ~ -~ ~ - - - ~ ' -~ - - ~. ~~ I ~ ~ - _ -- -- ~ .4 ~. ~' ~ r -_ ~ .III _ ~ i , 6 ~/ ~ ~~ pp~ id ` ~ e",J !: y ~ ~ `' ~4,. r , l ~ ~ Y -. ~~ I r~ i ~ M ~ '] ~i~ i. ~ '.~ `',~ q ~ ~ ~ ':s L ~\ ~G \ n ~ ~ 33 n y~~r7F.~yQ,.~~ ~ ~~90 a o^p i W ~ ~ e ~ vp q ~~~ E;~ 4 a; :~ °s~sy L '° '~~ Wig. ~~~ ~; ~ aQa ~g ~~' ~ ~aj ~ ~aR ~ A~i }; a ~ ?t~L ~~•~ f ~~Y • /~ I ~ 4~~; ~~L~~ ~, A Z x e A ~~r:^`~ A y ,2yS ~ ~ T ; ~~ l++S ,~ H R }~~F~A 6 F~ ~r 3 Y ~C~~~ ~3~~ ~~~~R~ ~~ . ~S A~F A ~ a~ ~~- a 'r+`~,~ F t+ p1 ay~N q `~=SaS ` ~h~r` o ~ q' ~ z ~~ Y ~~ ~9e~A ~~~`~ N '~ aq;, P4 9n;.do V ~~ ~;; 9~ti •. ~~ ~ ~ ~~ Y~y ~"~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ r .~ Ss'~ :~9 iA ~n~ a ~: "_ ~ ;~ ~ { S ' - ~` -~;. ~=~-~n.x.w•.~: -_- -t--~----_ -._ BUCK MOUNTAIN MEACANTiLE [ -~`"'~~LC';NEDF'`~ 4.~C1AfES,P.C. _~E~GI~GEHS-SUkvE1'oki~'la9tiER5' '~~~ i 6 u ~ .i__ =~ ~------ arrs,wwvc« JIM CRt1MLEY PRELIMINARY PLAN ~~ ' Kn.;N01(LkIftUVIA o ) ~ -- ,~. ~, ' w. t G y Y~ __ '~ I CAYI 6Riq WfYETOML OgTIbCT XJAMUItE C01~MTV. VROIa~ , .. ~; anrcb~r rrw /-~_ .~ ,sur,~ ~ ~ ~0. ~~ . ~t~. l ROANOKE COUNTY Springwood Properties, Lle DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Special Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 88.03-2-1 ~ J County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O BoY 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540} 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 ~`" .a~ Far Staff Use Unlv Date received: Received by: e~ `~ 3 i (r .. `tom-.--.. fee: ~ ~ ~ Applicacion PC/Bdate: ~ Placards issued: BOS dace: Case dumber ~~~~~,~' f ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning ~ Special Use ~ Variance Applicants name/address wlzip Phone• (540) 989-4596 Certified Medical Representatives Institute (540) 989-4720 4950 Brambleton Ave. Fax No. Owner's nameiaddress w/zip Phone: (540) 776-0606 David Linden, Lisa J. Linden, Thomas J. Linden, Lesley W. Linden -CIO RealStar Realtors Fax No. (540)776-2848 4415 Pheasant Rid e Rd, Suite 102- Roanoke, VA 24014 Property Location r ~ ~ =-~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~l~~l_5 Magisterial District: ~-~~ ~ ' t `~`'`~ ! ~~ ~` ~'` ~ Route 419 ~ ~ ~' `` Roanoke, VA Community Planning area: ;<:~ds~~~ 1-I, ~!~ Tax Map No.: 76.16-1-39 Existing Zoning: C-2c Size of parcel(s): Acres: 3.77 Existing Land Use: REZONING A~l+'D SPECI=IL LASE PERtIfIT APPLICANTS (R/S~ _ Proposed Zoning: C-lc Proposed Land Use: Office Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes ~ No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQL~tED FIlZST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No O ~ V~RIAIVCE APPLICA_VTS (Y) , Variance of Section(s) NSA of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITENIS ARE NIISSING OR Ii iCONIPLETE. ~R-/~~V~ R V R/ V I ~'_~ I Consultation 'f 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan ~ Application fee ~ ~/~ Application ~ Metes and bounds description ~ Proffers, if applicable justification r/ Water and sewer application ~ ~ Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. Owner's Signature JUSTIFICATION FOR. REZONING OR SPECIAL USE PER.YIIT REQUEST - Applicant Certified Medical Representatives Institute ~.~ The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the besinning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The use proposed for this parcel is office. This will provide an attractiz,=e buffer between the less intensive Residential district behind the property and the roadway that it fronts on. The use is a "by-right" use in a C-1 Zone and is a recommended use in the Transition land use category. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. In the Roanoke County Comprehensive Development Plan, this parcel is designated as a transitional area. The proposed use as an office conforms with the intent of this land use designation. The Applicant has no plans to develop the parcel as a retailor or restaurant use, and, therefore, the existing buffer condition is no longer needed.' However, buffer requirements set for the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance shall be met Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. This project will bring a pos~_tive aesthetic impact to the area. The bttild.ing will be "colonial" in architectural style and will compliment the neighboring properties well. There is existing water and sewer available on Rt. 419 and on the neighboring property. Topography will prevent a large portion of the rear of the property from being developed, and, therefore, will leave a large natural buffer. T~~4 t o-a•~a~ ~ ~~ ~d r~~~~ lF_ . ~~ ~~ IJ O, J ~ 1/~ ~~ fl:'L cv v ~U? ~ d ~ QU ~ N n r 11 C ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ h ~ @>~ O _. N ,~ Z. .. ~ z ~I ~v lam- s ++' ~~. r "~ ~ ~ V,' ~ iI ~~ _. r~ ~ ' -~~ 1 y~>~ ~ / ~' °~~N~ ~ E ~~~~~v ~- ,~ Il. Z , '~~-. az•bss ti ~- eL~ o v ~ r d1=° v ~.. ~~ 3 ~ *~ .~ c ~ c y. ti`. ~1 7 ~ vy ~{ ~ !I i ~- i ,, I' ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~~ c ~ ~ a v° <'~;~ _-:~ `~_: r ~~ ss o }o. ~ i ~ / ~' 1 7042 - ~~_ S9 ~ /t / 6W 761ZZ-_/ '~ f 612 - '' f 7612 ~ ~ 38/ - 77109 ~ 7709 m 02 056.7/ / 8 /ate D='.. ~N - Ot o' D=5.3 y / / ^7~/ N ~ ~O ~; 1 _ I 42 / F/ / / ,0 0 / ^' _ 7 t ~ ` / - / y0 - m / / 1~ ~ f/ ~ 6112 = .6 - : _ u / 7&12 1 ~ - _ ~ ror - 1 ! 1 I D-7.0/r / /_ y0 - D 1 Mb a I 7019 I~ D 07.01 I~ N ~ 76 i 2 - - ~ w I N 3,66.690 ~ $o I N ~. I/ 7672 0=9. - _ I ~' .JS. D 45.2 '90 ~ t I 1 / 1 - 7s h 76tz - + 7086 ~, 761 5 I,~ - ~^~ 76112 7 1 2 - -0-at~ ~ a7 ~ =to.6 =6.4 j/ p 17. 1 ~ 77J/ ,~.• _ ? •8 - - t - 50 - ]AZ 1 jfi 6~`'1 ~. ZO~~ ~. 7612 ~ ~ ,2~~s aNl W' I 1 M1 z7JS r] loo Hillbrook Dt a~ ~~=52 ~ i 0..~ 00 ^~ - Tlr9 loo 30a~~`.gbs `g5gp 1 6 6' 17<J 100 "f.269Q • - .. 1 7767 I pp ~. 242 ,1' 76QQ1 / zp]7 5. zls! ~] zz rase ' . ~s7616 ~ 0=5.8 - 5. h 1 6 1753 '~,`•. ` ! 09 ~ s zsgzo /s - - D=5.7 ~ 9l I ]J 4. - e 40.1 ' % n_ - J3 106.76 /~ fi2.14 ]9 ] 1/ - 3. 1. r.6s ne. i ~ 6.16 J ~ t6a.12 +r.z 'oo ez n 2, w i ._. s -.. t2 ! r] 77.0 // 7J + ._.--D~6.2 z lr] 9 2973 .7aa + o+m 1 '0*9 !0 40_10 ,tiro 117800 uJ+ 1 761 _ 7616 ~ 13 O ~ v 7616 + D=9.3 85~ 0. a.o. J9 a 'z ul X0.0 64 95 s p_ i0 p'3J 9 ^' doe wshaas 6~D=8.3 ~ ~ 40.11 a ^~ yb. ..-1' '1W ^' 40.3 -~ 761 40.9 T :.aso o' °3 _ 1051 ; ~~ ~'° ~T~ui/dm9 A p2 o Deters fioni / 2963 39.1 ~ ] Bosin ~2 i 3.77 Ac. - ~ a I a 1Ca 95 ! 1 39. 40.8 - i .p United States ,,°osto/ Sernce m I I ~ „ 76116 + 63 Colonnade eerparale Cen/er J ~J D=6.D + Pho:e r 7616 y 4Q.6 /.u' Aal1 rfer ~ caonnade a.) 1 11 m ~acr r.u nc. 7616 _ ~ PoonaFe arrnopo.dc zzz.op 54 40.7 ~~ ' 40.2 p"" • Is2]o D=4,3 r.]a nc. ~ .. .. .. ]9.9] ~ 7616 40. .° ~aiz + ._..- • ....... Rt. 419. .. _ ~, 1 12 2.05 Rc. lpe9 Oa 1JT 1 ~ - as 81 195 •• ~•~ ~ iced States Posfo/ Service O .. ~ 1 1 - .~ ..• _ m 6t6~ 7616 1 2i0 ~ p ~•~~ $ _+ ,.: 48 49 7616 0 ~ 7616 ~ Mre 1 ~ 40.4 ~S 76161 Detention + ~ =5.2 Joso p=? 50 ~ 10 676 ~ 53 \ - _ p=? ~ 51 t D= +~•• / 62 N Basin ,~1 ~ _- Jaso p-o 5~ 7526 zw D=7.7 ° , 6 ~ 'S ~- _ 001 D=? ''~~•.~~\ h sB r6J 1 T S o ~ ~ Ot.~Ztg1 7~ J/J! •.. 'ZW ~ \2 76 i 6 m 1l1 0Y pa1 RUBS ~••. Sa'6 °' ~ 61 Z ~,.~ J 1Z°alZlyty' ~m •.~'\ ]? eo9s I D=7.1 Z _^ , 61 ! •.•.,' ,w .76016 40.5 ('O 966 1>~ - • + Dr 9 CJ rvc~ ss//tz]en = ` 2z ~ 2.s8z ae. 76116 ~.~••\ 1.09 x. N i ~s 18. ° 1 p 56 0 .~••, r~~ ~ ~ i '6 ~q JoAS 10611 ~ ~ ® - JzoJ Roonoke County Librory 7556 ~- g5 sOA •••. m 76116 i Sae C01 721181 „^ J°60 y 19. Moira Broneh 0=6.0 m' + 1yi (2p yy o.'°. ~~ R. C. B. S. eedw Pome ~•• 6C + 2e~rC (71 , J 210. s5 JX17p ApoifmsnH ~ ••. D-9.7 ~ } - J ~5. 6S Jl37 A// Add~eaeer 1 J ••• ~ JJ 1 1 ,- (APr et-69/ wi ae..y can, 756 SSQ .• °s S, ~ 76 i 6 ` 1 9i t 7616 ^ 7611 17. , ~ \ ~•. ~ D=9.2 For 7616 Jiro ~4 + est ~ 72 ~ ~ Norman y 1 X97 7a 145 e s °p=? 129.51 n 7 {~ JISI \ ~ ~ M .~ 75 0=0 6s se ]9.]6 J~ D= 5 c (Apr /-s) 1 .• ~ `c p=o 114 ~~~ 6S" d 20 sa 165 `° a 7616 ~ 0 ~~ I]] e0 I - 21: °. 16. ~ pvr 7-9/ 58 °s + `~ 9.i 7616 ° °7 J/ss p=? `~~9 e 7 73 _ 22. Jzrl s nTa (AVr m-lsl ~ \S • °s `e. 1 25.1 d,-, D=? % 23. ° ' 11y7 ^ ~ 'r ~ O I ~ I(i ~~J!!d dB 24. JT79 7B ~•' j-~ - 76 a ~W ~ 5 26.3] °J, 15. J J155 CetlNeterecnl ~ •'~ `~ ~ 3713 y ~ R/ J776 (APT /a-T I/ \+ \ 6•,~ 697 ~` I20.Cp.~ 25. 606` Rg5m91~ ~ _34J777 w N O (API 667df y_ I ;) N ``\- JSJS 617 .u/11 O'\ ` JISI I°~C + a 25.2 ' \~ / 1` ~~ Jnn 761 6 ° p°A£ 14. ~ Jlsd (APr zz-T7I \ r - 7,5 ~ `. ,~ 65 ~ J7JI (AP7 79-90/ _ t $ ~ mg 25.3z7eo.] e° ~~^JIZe O JQ.~ , 36 J7 611 0~ ,r ~ n.9 4c. ~ 1 1 Is].~e a+-z ~ ~ t 9~\ ~ 7713 I~ /n r]o.po 7 t6 a ~ ,7 =~ 13. ' s 72 ~ 36].3 - rA `/T 6 32. 565 1~P , J2J9 .. .:7e7 ..... N .}/.Sa + n w ~ ~ p R n= v ' x~ ~~ ~ - - / ~ -, -~ f- -- -~ ~ - ~ r ~i2 I 16 ~~ y ,~ `F 8 10 i s ~ s\ ~~, , ~~~~ '~. i - ~~ _ ~A ~!~ i' , i / ~ So a 6.I six \ ~~ ~ ~ `~_ ~ ~ ~ /i52 ! ' ~ ~ 1~ i ~ ,~7~~-/ jam- ~ ~j ~~~ \ r ~ •, ~- / ~ ~ -~ ~' i~~ ._ _.. - ^~1..~ _ ---- .. - _ti ~ z --~ - ~ , ~ 7-22 \ ,, a ~---_ ~ _ .~ Q ._ -~ _ ~ ~ -- ~ - - ~~~ ;. ~. ~1~~ j - _ -- I ~ ~ I `~~,\~~ \ I"=~,`~; ~_+ ,, - ~"''`\ \\ Nprmandy knoll "~-- ~~ ~ ~ ~ i j ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ Meter i V~, ~,~ ~ , ,\ ~ ~ '~~ _. ~~~ Ce ar Qom Jj1I C , `. ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ , ., ~- "-_-, ~' \ \ i I I Lam' ~' ~\~\ I .~ ` ~ ~ , ~~I II ~ ~~ C~ ~ { ~ \ CRESTW000 PARK ` i ,~', F~~ i i1 ~ I i~\ ~ ;~-- 35 GPM 24,670 GSR I ~~~ ;~ _ , ~ ~~~ '-~ ABANDO ED ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ T. _ \ ~ \ ,hrn+~cr o ~' ROANOKE COUNTY Certified Medical Representatities DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Existing zoning C-2c COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT To Proposed Zoning C-1 c Tax Map No. 76.16-1-39 ~ J - Covrty ot'Roanoke • Community Deveioprnent Planning ~t Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roartoke, tilts 24018-Q79~ ts~o) ~~Z-2o~a FAx (sao) 7~z-2los Check type of application filed (check all that apply) ^ Rezaning ~ Special Use Applicants name/address w/zip AIRCABL~ C~' RQANQI~ , LIC 2018 ELEL'i'RIC 1~QAD, _R'~_ , SUITE 202 pwner-~s narnnladdress vvlzip TR115T~5 CAF' EVAIQGEL FOUFLSQUARE CJ3L7Ft~`i 61z ~3LI,IZT AVENt.3E , SE Properly Locatio~a , p,cpr t~Fauntaln Tract A, Statx3ivisian for Etraru3el Foursquare Tax flap No.: Q93.00-01-47.00 ~•-~~I mac.,-~s...~...~ ~. Size of paroel(s): Acres: ~1) Par Staff L?se rJ~_ oar t~~~;,~a `~; ' ? ~.; application fec: ~~: . P}acards issued: ~.~~~ ~lzs~~~ (;aat Numbcr i:J 1ariance 11 Reeeivcd 5y; t `~'3"' PCIt'~A+ daroc~ Gar ~ ~~"~ Et3S date: !~ 11f f Phone: (540) 3sa~582~1~~) (tire9ory Fax ldo. (540) 380-5841 Phone 5401 982-3594 Fax No. tYiagisteriai District: Windsor Hi11s Cotnmuuity Planning area: )ant :'~~t=i=1 Existing Zoning: AG3 Existing Land Use: Vacant Lard Proposed Zonittg: Special Use Permit to a114w a $roadcast ~bwer on Proposed Laud Use: a Parcel zoned AG3 Does the parcel meet the rninunurn lot area, width, and frontage requirt:menta of the requested district? Yes ~ No 0 11N' N®, A VARIANCE IS ,REQtdIItED ~.RST• No ^ Does the parcel meet the m++++*ntxm criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ IF NU, A VARIANCE IS REQUIREll FIRST No ^ If rezoning request, are conditions being proffcrcd with this request? Yes 0 YII 1 Variance of Section(s) of the Roauoice County Zonuag Ordinance in order to: ~-- ~/ Is the application completc'1 Please check if enclosed. APPLICA'I'1©N W9Z.L N®~' Bk; ACCE3''I'E~ IP' ANY OF'I'IiESE ~itil5 ARE MISSi3~IG OR uyCDMPLE'I'E. ~g V RJS V R/S V Consultation $ 1 t2" x l l" concept plan Application fee Application Metes and bounds description PrtslTer, if appticabltr Justification Water and sewer applicstiort Adjoining property owners i herzby certify chat 1 ~~ tither the owner of thr property or the owre:~s age r contract Fut'chaser and am acting With. the knowledge and consent of the owner. ~5 S QF' EVAN' CfiIZE~H ~V :~' ~ ~ Cwnct~, $Ignature ~-~_ ,~ Applicant AirCable of Roanoke, LLC The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant met writh County planning staff pursuant to the requirements of Section 30-87.2 (broadcasting tower). Even though-that ordinance is geared toward cellular towers, the Applicant, which is a broadcaster seeking to add a tower to Poor T~untain upon which many towers are currently located, followed the requirements of the ordinance. As set forth in the letter from AirCable which accompanies this applicati~ all other options for co-location were reviewed including discussions with Paxson Communications from whose tower the Applicant currently transmits. The need of this Applicant for a top mounted antenna in close proximity to its existing top-mounted antenna on Poor ~t~untain makes building a new tower on its selected site its only alternative. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. This site is located in the Bent "ROUntain Planning District and is designated as Rura_ Preserve in the 19Q8 Community Plan.. The Rural Preserve category designates a variety of land use types in areas where limited development activity has historically occurred. Because of its unique features, Poor D^.ountain has been the location of choice for broadcasters and, consequently, has many towers along its ridgeline. This, notwithstanding the 1998 Community Plan which discourages the placement of communication structures on ridgelines. The Community Plan, however, recognizes that a balance must be maintained between economic grov:Tth and prosperity and ridgeline preservation. By fitting into an area where to~ti~ers already exist, this Applicant brings quality services to residents with a minimum additional ridgeline impact. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fue and rescue. There is no adverse impact anticipated as a result of this development. J _ ~~ ~ _~' ~~ ~ ''!lam' ~/ L 2 _ 2 R4.F . JA~d~~ L ~voL rZ . E r aL TAX *93,UC'}-OI --I4 rd IS°_'.9'UU~E U--- vm X n u - Z c, n n. -..~ ~`. O y ~, ~~ C» Ln a ti N ~, t (~ I -o ~ . CJ i ~ ~ I -~ ~~ r Lr7 ~- ~ U ~ r ~~[~~ p ~ ~ N`n ~ S~ Ii cn c~~~ ~ ti, Ci r f v~~rn ` ~G ,.. ~- ~/ 33. Glv, -----_ ~ ;~ ~ cJ s!- ~ _ ~ ~~,o i~ -o~ '~', rn m v s ~ ,~_~ ,~ !I \\ p ~ ~ f 1 ~ " "' I n ~~ ~ I 5 IS°UO'OU"W 167.97' HU~lE'r'SUCKLE Rc)nD (S . R 9 I t~ ) SEE D8.382. PG.2~+8 /"` ~.' ~~ ~, v~ '~'- LP ,~ '- C~ n C. C? %1~ CF~dTR4L SURVEYING PRt]PUSED TC1"~ER SITE n 14!",RAFA Litho SURVEYIN[i PLQIi171fJfj ON HONEYSUCKLE' ROAD ' JOMIi E Rn!ASEY.CI_S !5cn19».o0.7 !9o coxcnocr on. ROANOKE COUNTY . V I RG f r! I .~ ~. BLVE RIUGE. vn, 34ryoa • 'JOB MO.~OU102 p4TE: 05/25/00 SCAI_~: I' qq ROANOKE COUNTY AireabZe of Roanoke, Llc DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Special Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 93.00-1-47 County of Roanoke Community Development ' Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P o Bax 298oa Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 L'.... Ct.,fFTToa (lnltr Dace received: Receive d by: a ~ ~~ d ~~~1 ~~~ Application fee: PC/BZA date: ''u~ =~ S Placards issued BOS date: r-a, ; ` ~„~l Case Numoer ,_ dET 4APTT('d;VT4 Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning ~ Special Use O Variance ~~ ~ _ ~'`~ ~ ~ Applicants name/address ~v/zip ~ ~ Phone• G.~c~lc• ~~' ~I~ m`' Fax No. ~ Owner's nameladdress w/zip Phone: ~~ ~ Fax No. Pro erty Location L~ Z ~I ~C ~ ri t 1 5 Magisterial District: L ~ ~ 8 ~'1 ~ ~ i ~ ;~. . ~ ~u~..r~t: ~"'~- lr,t~~ Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: ~ L, ~~ . ^ ~ ~' ~ _ ~ ~ Existing Zoning: -, Size of parcels}: Acres: ~`' ~ ~t~ ~ Existing Land Use: ~ "'~"~~ REZ~.VING A~~D SPECI.-1L USE FER~ti7IT .=IPPLIC:1~'VTS (R'S) Proposed Zoning: ~'~ ~~ `~~~"~'`~ j Proposed Land Use: ~z ~ ;c~.-, };~, Does parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No ~ V.9RI~NCE APPLICr1tVTS (V) Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WII.,L NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/ V R V R/ V yr.~~ ( ~~:.~ Consultation .--»~--. 8 112" x 11" concept plan ~ Application fee ~ ~ ,-' Application Metes and bounds description . Proffers, if applicable ° Justification Water and sewer application ' Adjoining property owners .,- ereby certify that I am either the owner of the propert ~ ~ agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. Owner's Signature JUS`I'ii~ICATION FOR REZOlVI~(G OR SPELL-~L USE- PERMI'Y' REQL~ST Applicant ~~ ~ C ~~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~~w~ t f~ ~-~ l,~ ~ ';? ~; ~I°' The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. D~ i r. ~ ~r? ~~,,. ~S tC,. ~ J .. J~ ~vi~%i ~ L' 1 i `-"Y_ p' '~+, ~.+ f l~+t ~j ~ ~ / f J / 1~~~~. ~~.~1~~~~ tr s Please explain haw the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. _ " /~ '' ? P +~ Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. r ~~~ ~ t'n ~~ ~ ~~r~' ~Z ~ ~ ~` 0' 40' 80' 120' ~ . # 623 ~ SSG • R ~1 P ~~ RO ~O 5 245573' 9' 3p ~ ~ f ~ ~O~ ~ i 9' 06' s '~4•, \N `, ~ ~ 1 5046..7 SQ. F~.~\ . 1 ~~0.345 ACRES, ~ n 0 ~ ~ `/ N ~ ~'~ ~ ~D ~ ~ '~ m r -o ~ Z ~ 1/ -~N<_E ~ ~ wmm o. Z'~ 'n-`~ ED NEW E ~ S 17'30'00 J ~ A p ° °'~~-. ~ a ~ ~ sy POS PROPERTY LINE 15 .19 1 1`: w ~ rn ~ v o ?•~ „ \ ~9 o~ ~ y TAX N0. 3.06-09-03 ~ w ° o, AN ~ 35074.2 SQ. FT. 0 0.805 ACRES ~ ern. ~ l ~ v~ m ~ ~ W • ~,~\S~ ~aG W ~p~0 ~ LJ U` fs0 ~ , ~ ~y1 ~g29 1' N ,o ~ ~ yo ~, ,~3 a ~ a~~ °~~ ~ 20027.5 SQ. FT. G+ 0.460 ACRES N 121.83' s3o.o' +/- To R/w N 09.50'00" W OF FLORIST ROAD WILLIAMRSON ROAD LEGAL REFERENCE: ~ • ~ ' ` ~ ' ~~ D.B. 1620, PG. 1554 zoNED c-2 RAW VARIES TAX NO. 38.06-09-03 ~~ PLAT FROM RECORDS MADE FOR MEXI CORP_ SHOWING A PROPOSED NEW LINE ON 0.805 ACRE PARCEL ALSO SHOWING PROPOSED LOT "A"(0.345 ACRES) AND PROPOSED LOT "B"(0.450 ACRES) SITUATE ON WILLIAMSON ROAD AND FLORIST ROAD ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA SCALE' i" =40' AUGUST 25, 2000 BY: ,LACK G. BESS, LAND SURVEYING 5422 STARKEY ROAD MEXICORP ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 240 i 4 0' 40' 80' 120' ~ 623 ~ R . ~ ~ SEC ' rr U A ~~ O~O s 2~551~ R "' q'1 S ~ \ i E ° '~ ~~ ~ ~' 29 ~ ~' ~ ~~ A S R ~ - ; \ 013 P~ ~~ :c >c~>~10 17w(^ e o~ Fl~ .< .7 SQ. 15046 .- 1 < . ~~0.345 ACRES ?, ~~ ~9~~ ~ N p~ ~ r p -~ u m i= - A oyo a, Sr~~°„ a Z u" '~ ~1/'~Cvl ~ o µo° oiv .~ ~ w ~ c~C'<~ E S 17,3p'pp o~• m.~ c` rn\ PROPD p PROPE a ~`? STY LNE N R 181.19' W c~ s Pv o „ °~~~ ~ ` o Z \ N O TAX N0. 38.06_-09-03 ~ °o, Iw AN Z 35074.2 S0. FT. ~ o, 0.805 ACRES ~, ~n ~ a, 9~`m'.cP Wig Ex\StL~G W ~yo ca o "° ~'~ Pp 02 a tJ' ~~ X929 ~ ~ ~' ~ l ~ ~ n'o Za ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~'°c a ~^ ~ ~~ N 20027.5 SQ. FT. ~, w 0.460 ACRES N 121.83' 530.0' +/- TO R/W N 09'50'00" W OF FLORIST ROAD ROAD WILLIAMSON ( v • ~ ' R ~ ~ ~ LEGAL REFERENCE: D.B. 1620, PG. 1854 ZONED C-2 1 RAW VARIES TAX N0. 38.06-09-03 PLAT FROM RECORDS MADE FOR MEXICORI' SHOWING A PROPOSED NEW 1,INE ON 0.805 ACRE PARCEL ALSO SHOWING PROPOSED LOT "A"(0.345 ACRES) AND FROPOSED LOT "B"(0.4fi0 ACRES) SITUATE ON WILLIAMSON ROAD AND FLORIST ROAD ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA SCALE i"=40' AUGUST 25,L000 BY: 1ACK G. BESS, LAND SURVEYING 5422 STARKEY ROAD MEXICORP ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24014 • t~U `~ NORTH o~ ~ ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY Mexicorp Inc/Cesar Dominguez DEPARTMENT OF Rezoning fom Existing Zoning C-2 To COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Zoning R-2 Residential Tax Map No. 38.Ofi-9-3 1 ACTION N0. ITEM NO. `°` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading - Amendment to the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan to adopt a revised future land use map and text amendments for the Exit 146 interchange area. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This is an important interchange and area for potential growth and development. It is one of the prime locations for non-residential development that will help us to balance the tax base. It is also an area of great beauty and the guidelines are intended to promote development without being unduly restrictive. I want to be sure that we truly achieve these directives and would like to schedule a work session on October 10 so that we may develop the best guidelines possible. Please provide us with your suggestions and questions on the attached document. BACKGROUND: As a result of increasing traffic along the Interstate 81 corridor, the Virginia Department of Transportation has proposed improving the interstate to provide increased carrying capacity and to address safety concerns. These proposed improvements include the re-design of Exit 146 at Plantation Road. In response to these proposed improvements, the Board of Supervisors asked staff to analyze the potential land use impacts and opportunities that the road improvements might provide. An additional objective of the project study was to determine suitable land uses within these interchange areas that could promote economic opportunities while limiting haphazard development. Over the last year, staff has held two community meetings in this project area. The proposed Community Plan revisions reflect citizen input from these meetings, staff analysis of current and anticipated conditions and Planning Commission review. The most significant land use change being recommended is in the Indian Road area in the southwest corner of the project area. This is a residential area, zoned R-1 and currently designated as Neighborhood Conservation. The Planning Commission has recommended changing this designation to Principal Industrial to reflect the prevalent surrounding industrial development. -l 2 The proposed ordinance is attached as well as a project area map and text amendments. SUMMARY Planning Commission public hearing was held on September 5, 2000. Approximately five residents of the Indian Road community expressed their concern about the proposed map revisions. In response to these concerns each property owner on Indian Road has been mailed a color map of the proposed land use map changes and notification of the proposed schedule for second reading and public hearing. The Planning Commission unanimously recommends these revisions to the Board of Supervisors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends as follows: Hold first reading on September 26, 2000 and schedule second reading and public hearing for October 24, 2000. Respectfully Submitted, Approved, --~~c ;~ Jan t Scheid, Senior Planner Elmer C. odg Department of Community Development County Administrator Action Approved ( ) Motion by Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens Vote No Yes Abs -I HOLLINS/EXIT 146 INTERCHANGE DISTRICT PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Hollins Area Interchange District, shown on the attached land use map, is located at Plantation Road (Rt. 115). The District is bounded on the south by Williamson Road, on the east by the Roanoke/Botetourt County boundary, on the north by the ridgeline of Green Ridge and extends west almost to Enon Drive. In general, the topography within the project area is well suited for new development. North of the interchange the forested slopes of Green Ridge and Tinker Mountain have seen light development. In the northeast corner of the District is a vacant 85 acre tract of industrial zoned land owned by Hollins University. This property splits the Roanoke/Botetourt County line. Currently, the area north of the I-81 interchange is primarily comprised of open land, church property and residences. An easement for a high voltage power line serves as the northern boundary for this portion of the project area. The City of Roanoke's water treatment facility is located at the current terminus of Plantation Road and influences the design and location of the new interchange. The area east of Plantation Road is comprised of a wide mix of land uses. The area along Friendship Lane and Hollins University are characterized by open land and light residential and institutional development. Closer to Williamson Road, the amount of development intensifies and is comprised of industrial and commercial properties with scattered single and multi-family residential. ITT Industries and Hollins University are the largest property owners in this area and have a significant impact on the visual and developmental characteristics of the study area. Approximately 35% of the Interchange District is comprised of land owned by Hollins University. West of Plantation Road there is again a wide mix of land uses. The area near the I-81 interchange is comprised of single family residential, open farm land and highway oriented commercial uses such as gas stations, motels and restaurants. A large, undeveloped parcel is located between Plantation Road and Enon Drive and is zoned commercial. There is a proffered condition on the property specifying that commercial access to the property can only be from Plantation Road. Closer to Williamson Road the industrial and commercial development intensifies. ITT and Double Envelope are significant property owners in this area. There is also an established single family residential neighborhood located on Indian Road. This neighborhood is surrounded on three sides by commercial and industrial properties. ACCESS With the relocation of the interchange there will be some notable impacts on access and traffic flow within the project area. Plantation Road will no longer cross I-81 at its ~ -/ current location but curve towards the northeast to meet the new interchange. Current VDOT plans call for the termination of the existing Plantation Road just south of the existing overpass bridge. This will allow access to the existing businesses in that area to remain. GREENWAY ACCESS Greenways are an important amenity in the Roanoke Valley and are especially successful when located near centers of employment such as the industries and businesses located in the Hollins community. Current plans call for a greenway to run through the Hollins University campus and connect with the trail system at Carvins Cove via an existing tunnel under I-81. As properties are developed and roads improved within the project area, efforts should be taken to create pedestrian/bicycle links from the businesses to the major greenway trail. Trail extensions from Walrond Drive, Friendship Lane and Lila Drive could serve as collector spurs that would provide access to the Hollins campus. OBJECTIVES OF THE HOLLINS/I-81 INTERCHANGE DISTRICT Due to the location factors cited above, the availability of public water and sewer facilities and the existence of significant tracts of undeveloped land, this is an area with opportunity for substantial growth. It is an objective of Roanoke County to direct and manage this growth in a way that provides suitable locations for new businesses, provides opportunities for commercial and industrial development and protects existing residential property values and quality of life in the area. In addition, the Interstate 81 corridor provides gateways into the Roanoke County community and this interchange is one of the front doors. It is desirable to have this gateway express the community's pride, our strong economic health ,our good public image and our concern for the natural beauty of this area. The County would like to ensure that this interchange area develops in a manner that is attractive and provides the appropriate setting for science and high technology businesses, research and development firms, office and commercial uses that support these facilities and tourist and traveler facilities and services. STUDY OBJECTIVES As a result of the increasing traffic along the Interstate 81 corridor, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has proposed improving the interstate to provide increased carrying capacity and address safety concerns. One of these proposed 2 improvements calls for the enlargement and relocation of the Hollins interchange, Exit 146. This interchange study has been conducted to analyze the potential impacts and opportunities that the road improvements provide on the current land uses. An additional objective of the project is to determine suitable land uses within the project area which can promote economic opportunities for the area while limiting the haphazard development of land in ways that are not consistent with the overall objectives of the interchange district as cited above. In addition, the study seeks to determine road improvements required to access properties within the project area. The current uses within the project area range from agricultural to residential to industrial. The impact of the interstate is quite evident in the area's transition from an agricultural/residential community to an industrial/commercial node. It is common in this community to see homes or pasture land adjacent to an industrial center. As this transition continues to progress with the widening of I-81 and the re-design of the interchange, it is important that the County Land Use Maps and Community Plan provide current property owners, and particularly residential owners, with the ability to adapt to changing uses and property values. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES The following Design and Land Use Guidelines are recommended to ensure that the development of the Hollins/I-81 Interchange District conforms with the overall objectives of the District as stated above. Plantation Road will continue to serve as an important gateway into Roanoke County and it is extremely important that the improvements made to the area reflect the project's proximity to Tinker Mountain, Green Ridge, Hollins University and the adjacent residential developments. These recommendations will be implemented in all or some of the following ways: (1) as guidelines in the review of rezonings and special use permits; (2) as requirements of an interchange overlay district incorporated into the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance; or (3) as guidelines used in evaluating public/private partnerships to advance economic development projects. Streetscape Improvements 1. This interchange area is a gateway into the Roanoke County community. Landscaped medians and right-of-ways, where appropriate and visual, are encouraged to be incorporated into road improvement projects. .~ ~` / 2. The coordinated use of shared entrances and parking lots is encouraged. This will create a safer vehicular environment along Plantation Road by reducing the number of entrances on the roadway. Signaae 1. The County should work with property owners to ensure that signage conforms to the Hollins Village Design Guidelines for suitable sign types, materials and colors to aid businesses in the design and construction of their signage. A financial incentive program is in place in this community to encourage owners of existing business signs to renovate their signage to meet these recommended guidelines. 2. Monument style signs are encouraged throughout the interchange area. In areas designated Transition, monument signs, whether for multiple or single business, should not exceed 7 feet in height and 10 feet in width. In areas designated Core or Principal Industrial, monument signs, whether for multiple or single business, should not exceed 15 feet in height and 10 feet in width. In all areas, monument signs should not be back lit but may have ground illumination. There should be a limit of one monument sign per parcel. 3. In situations where monument style signs are not used, then the sign regulations contained in the Office District (C-1) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-93-13(D) should apply. 4. No new off-premises advertising should be allowed in the interchange district. Architectural Guidelines 1. Exterior building materials are encouraged to be of high quality, attractive in appearance, durable and easily maintained for the life of the structure. Brick, stone or masonry construction is preferred for all structures but particularly for those buildings fronting or visible from the public street. Metal exterior construction materials should only be used on the sides of buildings not visible from the public street. 3. For properties zoned commercial, roof pitches of no less than a 4/12 pitch are encouraged on both primary structures and accessory structures. Flat roofs are not encouraged on commercial properties. Roof materials should be nonreflective. 4. Architectural design should be sensitive to form, texture, color and massing of buildings, with particular emphasis paid to articulating entrances and to minimizing bulk. 5. Bright primary colors for exterior materials, including trim, are discouraged. 4 ~., "-~-~ _` Land Use Guidelines It is the intention of Roanoke County to encourage the development and re- development of this interchange district in an orderly manner that is consistent with the stated objectives. This will ensure development that protects the environment and aesthetics of the area while protecting against development that is likely to cause or create a hazard or nuisance to adjacent properties. 2. The development and re-development of property within this interchange district should only be conducted when proper and safe vehicular access is provided taking into consideration sight distance, turning movements, acceleration and deceleration lanes and speed of traffic. 3. It is the intention of Roanoke County to provide technical and/or financial incentives to property owners within this Interchange District, through public/private partnerships where appropriate, to encourage the development and re-development of property within the guidelines stated herein. 4. It is the objective of Roanoke County to encourage the development and re- development of those properties that are best situated for industrial and commercial development based on location, road access, topography and other physical attributes. In addition, it is the objective of Roanoke County to preserve and protect, where appropriate, existing residential properties and those properties best suited for no development or for very low intensity development due to their special natural features. 5 G-/ A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 011299-6, "ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN" -ADOPTION OF A NEW FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THE HOLLINS (EXIT 146) I-81 INTERCHANGE AREA, AND THE INCORPORATION OF DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR THIS AREA WHEREAS, by Ordinance 011299-6 the Board of Supervisors adopted the "Community Plan for Roanoke County, Virginia;" and WHEREAS, as a result of increased traffic along the Interstate 81 corridor, the Virginia Department of Transportation has proposed improving the interstate to provide increased carrying capacity and to address safety concerns; and WHEREAS, these proposed improvements include the redesign of Exit 146 at Hollins; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has prepared amendments to the Community Plan for Roanoke County for the Hollins area; and WHEREAS, a Planning Commission Public Hearing on the proposed amendments was held after advertisement and notice as required by 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 26, 2000, and the second reading and public hearing was held on October 24, 2000. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Ordinance 011299-6 adopting the "Roanoke County Community Plan" dated September 30, 1998, is hereby amended to include the following: (A) The adoption of the Land Use and Economic Opportunity Area map revisions as shown on a map prepared by Whitesell Orisson, Inc., dated 09/09/00 and entitled "I- 81 Interchange Study HOLLINS AREA PROPOSED LAND USE," said map is attached hereto as Attachment A. (B) The adoption of text amendments entitled "HOLLINS/EXIT 146 INTERCHANGE DISTRICT" attached hereto as Attachment B. That the effective date of this Ordinance is October 24, 2000. G: WTTORNEY\PMM\AGENDA\COT~IIvIPLAN-HOLLINS.wpd ' IE L~6END: . . • `~ ~ ee .Nsrs ' . ~servabion )r'Iwod~ wYwv ~ ae s>dany Mldwlklal Cy'orlfh .~ and d~rWges. ' rormwfcbl atop ' f 111tN"1 MVA~OPIIIO(It . .. ~ / i ~O OUbUf~7Gh GMRM'! ,. 91IbIlE O'O ~X'OD011t % ' ~ i ' ra,~trw and . ~~ an present •. ... .\ v ;:~. ~~, .:.' . ~ .~ 'U~,; ~ / / a o B ~ X00 ~ HOLLINS ARL•A e x~ r .300'-0^ S yy ., >o .~.. / V ~ .' \ ~ Cow ~. ( . . \ . O 1' ' O ' ' ~ Q~ ~ ~~\ ~. ~ fe ~~ r ~ ~ <i ~ 1 ~X JCti ~~ ~~ ~ ~ .. /. ~Ra ~ 0 )'ISO' O SOO' 600' 2APNI- G 5GgLE G~-/ ~ , V s ~ ~ Q - ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ z . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ (n " c t ~ z A ~ • ~ _ - ~ ~ = W t~ ~ ~ O ~ o a us O~AD.00 611e I' ~ l00-0 ~~~ ~ arry: eav s.w~ i a'.aeo ~ os.zsao I _ L~I~ ~~_CP_ l~.. ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE 092600-3 EXTENDING THE FRANCHISE OF BLACKSBURG/SALEM CABLEVISION ,INC. D/B/A SALEM CABLE TV TO OPERATE A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM IN ROANOKE COUNTY FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS WHEREAS, Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, d/b/a Salem Cable TV, a wholly owned subsidiary of Adelphia Communications Corporation, currently holds a franchise granted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to operate a cable television system within portions of Roanoke Countywhich franchise expired on October4, 1999, and was extended for a period of ninety (90) days by action of the Board of Supervisors on September 28, 1999, and for additional ninety (90) day periods by action of the Board on January 11, 2000, March 28, 2000, and June 27, 2000; and WHEREAS, negotiations are currently under way between Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, and the County of Roanoke for the renewal of this franchise agreement, which negotiations may not be concluded sufficiently prior to such date to permit adoption of a new franchise agreement by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke prior to the expiration of the current franchise agreement on or about October 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, is prohibited by federal law from operating a cable television system within any jurisdiction without a franchise agreement or extension as defined by federal law; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 12, 2000, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on September 26, 2000. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That in order to permit Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, to continue to operate a cable television franchise within the territorial limits of Roanoke County, Virginia, after October 1, 2000, and to prevent any interruption of cable television services to customers of Salem Cable TV, the franchise of Blacksburg/ Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, for the operation of a cable television system within Roanoke County, Virginia, is hereby extended for a period of ninety (90) days beginning at 12:00, midnight, on October 1, 2000, under the same terms and conditions as contained in the existing franchise agreement originally granted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to Booth American Company, d/b/a Salem Cable TV, in October, 1994, and subsequently transferred to Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, as of April, 1997. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney 2 Item No. ~ ~ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance Extending the Current Franchise Agreement with Adelphia (Salem) Cable for Ninety Days COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: O ~~'~' BACKGROUND: In 1994, the County entered into an extension of its franchise agreement with Salem Cable, owned by Booth American Company, in order to make the term of this franchise coincide with Salem Cable's franchise with the City of Salem. The franchise agreements both terminated simultaneously in October, 1999, allowing Roanoke County and Salem City to negotiate new agreements which would be substantially similar. On September 28, 1999, the Board of Supervisors appointed a negotiating team to work with the County Attorney's office and the City of Salem in reaching a new franchise agreement. This negotiating team has met to discuss those issues which should be addressed in the new franchise agreement and ordinance. The City of Salem has recently reached a final agreement with Adelphia and formally granted them a franchise renewal. The county's representatives are now involved in final negotiations with Adelphia to renew its franchise under similar terms. Therefore, since the current franchise agreement, with the previous ninety day extensions granted on January 11, 2000, March 28, 2000 and June 27, 2000, is set to expire on October 1, 2000, an extension must be approved so that negotiations can be successfully completed. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The cable franchise in the Glenvar and Masons Cove area of Roanoke County was originally held by Salem Cable, which was owned by Booth Communications. Booth was purchased by the Adelphia system in April, 1997, and at that time this Board approved a transfer of the franchise to Adelphia, operating as Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision. The Board of Supervisors has appointed a cable television committee to deal with franchise issues with Adelphia. The committee consists of a representative from the Roanoke Valley Cable Television Committee (Dr. Harry Nickens), the supervisor from the Catawba district (Butch Church), a representative from the school system (Dr. Jane James), the staff person previously overseeing the cable television operations (Anne Marie Green) and a citizen representative (James Dickey). During the negotiations for the extension of the franchise in 1994, Booth provided a capital grant of $40,000 to the County, free basic cable service to government and school facilities, and an interconnect with the Cox system to allow RVTV to cablecast on Channel 3 in the Booth system. Both Booth and Adelphia have provided a high quality of service to Roanoke County residents, and staffhas received very few complaints about the cable provider. The cost to residents is comparable ~ ~- / to that of Cox customers, and the channel selection is almost identical. Adelphia is currently working on expanding its service into the field of Internet service, which should be available to its customers in the near future. The franchise agreements in both localities were to expire on October 4, 1999, and were extended for ninety days until January 2, 2000, and again for additional ninety day periods until October 1, 2000. In addition to the preliminary staff discussions between the local governments and with Adelphia, there has been one meeting of the negotiating committee with the local general manager of Adelphia, Mr. Carruth and a recent meeting with the county's cable television consultant, Douglas Harold, to further develop the county's negotiating position. At this time, the City of Salem has reached final agreement with Adelphia on the terms of their franchise renewal and has granted a franchise renewal to Adelphia. At the same time Roanoke County, in cooperation with Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton, is involved in negotiations with Cox Communications for an extension of their franchise in the Roanoke Valley. Common issues regarding both the language of the franchise ordinance and the terms ofthe franchise agreement are expected to arise in these negotiations. Based upon the recommendations made by Mr. Harold following the City of Salem negotiations, it is anticipate that Roanoke County and Adelphia can soon reach agreement on the terms of a new franchise ordinance and agreement. An ordinance approving the extension of the franchise agreement is attached to this Board Report. FISCAL IMPACT: None anticipated at this time. The County may receive a capital grant from Adelphia, which will provide funding for cable or Internet related equipment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached ordinance, extending the current franchise agreement by ninety days. Assistant County Attorney ACTION Approved Denied Received Referred to ()Motion by: O Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens No Yes Abs 2 Respectfully submitted, ~-) AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE FRANCHISE OF BLACKSBURG/SALEM CABLEVISION ,INC. D/B/A SALEM CABLE TV TO OPERATE A CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM IN ROANOKE COUNTY FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS WHEREAS, Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, d/b/a Salem Cable TV, a wholly owned subsidiary of Adelphia Communications Corporation, currently holds a franchise granted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to operate a cable television system within portions of Roanoke County which franchise expired on October 4, 1999, and was extended for a period of ninety (90) days by action of the Board of Supervisors on September 28, 1999, and for additional ninety (90) day periods by action of the Board on January 11, 2000, March 28, 2000, and June 27, 2000; and WHEREAS, negotiations are currently under way between Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, and the County of Roanoke for the renewal of this franchise agreement, which negotiations may not be concluded sufficiently prior to such date to permit adoption of a new franchise agreement by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke prior to the expiration of the current franchise agreement on or about October 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, is prohibited by federal law from operating a cable television system within any jurisdiction without a franchise agreement or extension as defined by federal law; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 12, 2000, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on September 26, 2000. ~-/ - ~ BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That in order to permit Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, to continue to operate a cable television franchise within the territorial limits of Roanoke County, Virginia, after October 1, 2000, and to prevent any interruption of cable television services to customers of Salem Cable TV, the franchise of Blacksburg/ Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, for the operation of a cable television system within Roanoke County, Virginia, is hereby extended for a period of ninety (90) days beginning at 12:00, midnight, on October 1, 2000, under the same terms and conditions as contained in the existing franchise agreement originally granted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to Booth American Company, d/b/a Salem Cable TV, in October, 1994, and subsequently transferred to Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc., d/b/a Salem Cable TV, as of April, 1997. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. G:\ATTORNfiY\JBO\CABLfiTV\Salemadelpha.renew\SALEMEXT.Sept2000wpd.wpd 2 k 1" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE 092600-4 FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE NECESSARY WATER LINE EASEMENTS AND PROPERTY TO CONSTRUCT THE CAMPBELL HILLS WATER LINE WHEREAS, location plans for the Campbell Hills Water Line Project have been completed and the project will require acquisition of water line easements across certain properties; and WHEREAS, said easements are to be acquired to facilitate any future construction of the Campbell Hills Water Line; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition of real estate be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 12, 2000; and the second reading was held on September 26, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary water line easements for the Campbell Hills Water Line Project is hereby authorized across the following properties, referenced by tax map number, from the following property owners, their successors or assigns: TAX MAP NO. PROPERTY OWNER AMOUNT 72.02-1-8.1 Marshall, B. R. and Linda R. $ 600.29 72.02-1-8.2 Marshall, B. R. and Linda R. $ 50.00 72.02-1-8.4 Marshall, Anthony T. and Sharon $ 563.33 72.02-1-16 Thomas, Inc. $1788.23 72.02-1-45 Thomas, Inc. $ 18.89 1 2. That the consideration for each easement acquisition shall not exceed a value equal to 40% of the current tax assessment for the property to be acquired plus the cost of actual damages, if any; and 3. That the consideration for each easement shall be paid from the Campbell Hills Water Line Account; and 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish these acquisitions, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~~~~~, Brenda J. Hol on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer 2 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER N` ~ .~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance -Authorization to Acquire Necessary Easements to Construct the Campbell Hills Water Line Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors has approved the Campbell Hills Water Line Project under the Capital Improvement Program for the current year. This project will provide Spring Hollow Water to the Campbell Hills subdivision, which is adjacent to the water treatment facility. Potable water is currently provided by ground water wells that have poor quality because of hardness. Construction of this water line will allow these wells to be abandoned, thereby, reducing maintenance requirements for the water system. This project is expected to begin in October 2000 and be completed by February 2001. The first reading was held on September 12, 2000. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Campbell Hills Water Line Project will require acquisition of five (5) separate easements from three property owners. Preliminary negotiations have begun with the affected property owners. Offers have been made based upon 40% of the assessed land value plus cost of expected damage caused by the work. These offers are consistent with the County's past policy for acquiring easements. The following is a list of properties involved and estimated easement amount: TAX MAP NO. PROPERTY OWNERS AMOUNT 72.02-01-08.1 Marshall, B. R. and Linda R. $ 600.29 72.02-01-08.2 Marshall, B. R. and Linda R. $ 50.00 72.02-01-08.4 Marshall, Anthony T. and Sharon H. $ 563.33 72.02-01-16 Thomas, Inc. $1,788.23 72.02-01-45 Thomas, Inc. $ 18.89 FISCAL IMPACT: l ~ "' .~ The cost of easement acquisition is included as part of the overall project budget of $164,000. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the acquisition of easements following the second reading on September 26, 2000. APPROVED: ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs `.~~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMII~TISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE NECESSARY WATER LINE EASEMENTS AND PROPERTY TO CONSTRUCT THE CAMPBELL HILLS WATER LINE WHEREAS, location plans for the Campbell Hills Water Line Project have been completed and the project will require acquisition of water line easements across certain properties; and WHEREAS, said easements are to be acquired to facilitate any future construction of the Campbell Hills Water Line; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition of real estate be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 12, 2000; and the second reading was held on September 26, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary water line easements for the Campbell Hills Water Line Project is hereby authorized across the following properties, referenced by tax map number, from the following property owners, their successors or assigns: TAX MAP NO. PROPERTY OWNER AMOUNT 72.02-1-8.1 Marshall, B. R. and Linda R. $ 600.29 72.02-1-8.2 Marshall, B. R. and Linda R. $ 50.00 72.02-1-8.4 Marshall, Anthony T. and Sharon $ 563.33 72.02-1-16 Thomas, Inc. $1788.23 72.02-1-45 Thomas, Inc. $ 18.89 2. That the consideration for each easement acquisition shall not exceed a value equal to 40% of the current tax assessment for the property to be acquired plus the cost of actual damages, G:\COMMON\September\campbelLwater.line.ests.wpd if any; and ~-/-:~ 3. That the consideration for each easement shall be paid from the Campbell Hills Water Line Account; and 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish these acquisitions, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER -~-~- I " ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 SUBJECT: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. GRIEVANCE PANEL The three year terms of Henry H. Wise, Alternate; King Harvey, Alternate; and Karen Ewell, Alternate, will expire October 28, 2000. 2. HANGING ROCK BATTLEFIELD AND RAIL PRESERVATION FOUNDATION The three year term of Pete Haislip, Director of Parks & Recreation & Tourism, will expire October 25, 2000. Mr. Haislip was appointed to complete the unexpired term of Timothy Gubala on January 25, 2000. 3. HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMMISSION The four year terms of Jay E. Gaylor, Legal Representative, and James M. Martin, Senior Representative, expired June 30, 1999. Mr. Martin has notified the Clerk's Office that he does not wish to serve another term. The four year terms of Thomas A. Abbott, Citizen at Large; Gordon E. Saul, Neighborhood; and Hank Gregory, Citizen at Large, Jr., expired June 30, 2000. Mr. Gregory has served two successive terms and is NOT eligible to serve another term. The one year term for a youth representative who must be attending a Roanoke County high school is vacant. 1 ~~ 4. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Mr. J. Carson Quarles, a member of the IDA since 1986, and who lives in the Hollins Magisterial District, has notified the Board that he is resigning from the Authority as of June 30, 2000. The IDA appointments are not required to be made by magisterial district, but traditionally, each magisterial district is usually represented. The four year term of J. Richard Cranwell, who lives in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, will expire September 26, 2000. 5. LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS -ADVISORY BOARD The three-year term of Elizabeth Bogle expired March 31, 2000. The Advisory Board member is appointed by the League of Older Americans but must be ratified by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. 6. SOCIAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD The four-year term of Robert H. Lewis, Vinton Magisterial District, expired August 1, 2000. Mr. Lewis has served two consecutive terms and is not eligible for reappointment. SUBMITTED BY: `rna-t-y-,~. C~.c.e.~.~- Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: 2 VOTE No. Yes Abs Church Johnson _ _ _ McNamara- Minnix Nickens ~~-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION 092600-5 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September 26, 2000, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Item 1 through 8, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes for July 25, 2000, August 8, 2000 and August 22, 2000. 2. Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and confirmation of County appointment. 3. Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4. Donation of a 15 foot drainage easement from Dane C. McBride, President of the Roanoke Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Tax Map No. 46-07-01-01) in the Catawba Magisterial District. 5. Donation of a 10 foot strip of land for public right-of-way from Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb (Tax Map No. 50.01-1- 16.9) in the Hollins Magisterial District. 6. Renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. 7. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Northbrooke, Section 1. 8. Confirmation of funding of seven solid waste vehicles through borrowing from the Future School Operating Reserve. 1 ~..~ July 25, 2000 447 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 July 25, 2000 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of July, 2000. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph McNamara, Vice Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix (Arrived 3:30 p.m.), Supervisors Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Bob L. Johnson, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Jill B. Barr, Community Relations Director IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by F. Douglas Sweetenberg, Sheriffs Office. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of Kenneth E Boone, Utility Department. July 25, 2000 449 Girls High Jump Group AA State Championship. R-072500-2 Chairman McNamara and Supervisor Nickens presented the resolution to Ms. Clem. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix RESOLUTION 072500-2 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO JESSICA CLEM FOR WINNING THE GIRLS HIGH JUMP GROUP AA STATE CHAMPIONSHIP WHEREAS, team sports are an important part of the curriculum at schools in Roanoke County, teaching cooperation, sportsmanship and athletic skill; and WHEREAS, Jessica Clem, who graduated from William Byrd High School in June, 2000, had an outstanding season in track and field, culminating in a state championship with a high jump of 5 feet, 4 inches; and WHEREAS, Jessica set the school's record for the girls high jump at 5 feet, 6 inches; and WHEREAS, Jessica won the high jump in the Blue Ridge District track and field meet with a leap of 5 feet, 2 inches; and also won the high jump in the Regional track and field meet; and WHEREAS, Jessica competed in the state high jump for the fourth straight year and placed eighth as a freshman, fifth as a sophomore, third last year; and won the championship this year; and WHEREAS, Jessica was selected by The Roanoke Times to the second team All- Timesland sports team for track and field; and WHEREAS, Jessica demonstrated outstanding athletic ability and good sportsmanship throughout her high school career; and will be continuing her education at Virginia Tech in the fall. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby extend its sincere congratulations to JESSICA CLEM for winning the girls high jump Group AA State Championship; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends its best wishes to Jessica Clem in all of her future endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix July 25, 2000 451 2. Request to accept grant funding for four School Resource Officers for Roanoke County middle schools and increase full- time personnel and vehicle count. (John Chambliss) A-072500-4 Mr. Chambliss advised that the County has received a grant to fund four School Resources Officers at the middle schools, which will result in a School Resource Officer being located at each of the high schools and middle schools in the County with the exception of Glenvar which will share an officer between the high school and middle school. In order to accept this grant, the County will need to increase the number of police officers by four and the vehicle count by four. The police department will utilize vehicles that were previously to be surplused and will not spend any additional funds. The grant will require a local match of $71,352. Staff recommended that the Board accept the grant and wait until mid-year to see how much money is actually needed because it will take time to select and train the officers. Supervisor Johnson suggested that Chairman McNamara send a letter of thanks to Delegate Morgan for his help in obtaining the grants. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the funding and personnel and vehicle increase. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Church moved to approve the first reading with the Magisterial July 25, 2000 453 on her side of the creek, and asked that we convey a small parcel of property to her father, David Kidd, so he could own the access to his property. Staff recommended the following actions: (1) A boundary adjustment/land exchange be executed between the Craighead family and Roanoke County, giving Roanoke County ownership of the entire creek bed adjacent to the park, in exchange for land Roanoke County owns, across Back Creek from the Merriman Soccer Complex, which adjoins her property; (2) That Roanoke County purchase for the Craigheads, 150 fence posts and 1200 feet of fencing which they will install on her side of the creek at a cost of $3,000 which will come from park maintenance funds; (3) That Roanoke County will convey a parcel of property to Mr. David Kidd, that he currently uses by county easement, to access his property adjacent to Starkey Park. Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for August 8, 2000. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 2. First reading of ordinance rescinding ordinance 061300-8 authorizing the grant of an easement to James Leslie Dugger and Melvie Harkleroad Dugaer, and authorizing the vacation of said easement, and authorizing the grant of a new easement to the buggers, and providing for an emergency. (Paul Mahoney. County Attorney) 0-072500-5 Mr. Mahoney reported that on June 13, the Board granted the request of James Leslie Dugger and Melvie Harkleroad Dugger for a driveway easement 12 feet July 25, 2000 455 WHEREAS, in order to correct the grant of this easement, the driveway easement granted by deed of record in Deed Book 1662 at page 668 must be vacated and a new easement granted; and WHEREAS, in order to accommodate a real estate closing scheduled for the buggers this matter is being brought to the Board as an emergency, waiving the second reading of this ordinance; and NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors as follows: 1. That Ordinance 061300-8 authorizing the granting of an easement to James Leslie bugger and Melvie Harkleroad Dugger in connection with their use of a portion of County Tank Lot No. 3 located at 5417 Scout Circle (Route 1240) in Cherokee Hills be, and hereby is, rescinded; and that the deed of easement granting said driveway easement as recorded at Deed Book 1662 page 668 be vacated; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the new subject easement (16.5 feet wide by 50 feet long) does not conflict with other public uses and is hereby declared to be surplus; and 3. That conveyance to James Leslie Dugger and Melvie Harkleroad Dugger of a driveway easement 16.5 feet wide and 50 feet long upon, over, and across a portion of County Tank & Well Lot No. 3 located at 5417 Scout Circle as shown on a "Physical Improvement Survey for Jimmie Roger Cooper and Carol Lou Cooper, 5409 Scout Circle, Lot 2, Block 9, Section 1, Cherokee Hills, Roanoke County, Virginia, dated June 29, 2000, revised July 21, 2000" by Balzer & Associates, Inc. (attached) is hereby authorized. 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as may be necessary to accomplish the vacation of the easement granted in Deed Book 1662 at page 668 and the granting of a new easement, all of which shall be form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Church to approve the first reading and waive the second reading and amended by Supervisor Nickens that the County will receive due value associated with the costs incurred to handle this transaction twice, and adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: Supervisor Johnson IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing creation of and financing fora Local Public Works Improvement Project - South Drive Water Project. (Gary Robertson. Utility Director) 0-072500-6 There was no discussion and no citizens present to speak. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by July 25, 2000 457 properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (a) The total amount per property owner/residential connection may be financed for 10 years at an interest rate of 8% per annum. (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require to secure this installment debt. (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. (d) Property owners who wish to participate after the October 25, 2000 deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $7,196 ($3,755 construction costs plus 20% plus $30 x length of road frontage in excess of 250 feet) plus the off-site facility fee in effect at that time (currently $2,690). 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the three (3) anticipated in this ordinance, who elect to participate shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Water Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid; any further payment of construction costs shall be returned to the Water Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing creation of and financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project - Chesterfield Court Sewer Project. jGary Robertson, Utility Director 0-072500-7 There was no discussion and no citizens present to speak. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara July 25, 2000 459 (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. (d) Property owners who wish to participate after the October 25, 2000 deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $6,360 ($4,050 construction costs plus 20% plus $30 x length of road frontage in excess of 250 feet) plus the off-site facility fee in effect at that time (currently $1,500). 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the seventeen (17) anticipated in this ordinance, who elect to participate shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Sewer Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid; any further payment of construction costs shall be returned to the Sewer Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adapt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Highway and Transportation Safety Commission Supervisor McNamara asked Clerk Mary Allen to contact Hank Gregory and add his appointment to August 8, 2000 consent agenda if he agrees to serve. 2. Social Services Advisory Board Supervisor McNamara asked Clerk Mary Allen to contact Ray Denny and add his appointment to August 8, 2000 consent agenda if he agrees to serve. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-072500-8 July 25, 2000 461 Saturday with Delegate Woodrum and Senator Edwards on VDOT plans for Colonial Avenue. Supervisor Johnson asked that information on the work session be sent withe the August 8, 2000 agenda packet. Supervisor McNamara asked about the status of the study of parking of recreational vehicles on corner lots. Mr. Hodge advised they will include an update on this issue at the August 8 meeting. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Minnix moved to receive and file the following reports after discussion of Item 8. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Statement of Treasurer's Accountability per investments and portfolio policy as of June 30, 2000 6. Statement of estimated revenues and expenditures for the period ended May 31, 2000 7. Statement of estimated revenues and expenditures for the period ended June 30, 2000 8. Notice of reimbursement of expenses for the February 29, 2000 Republican Presidential Primary Election. July 25, 2000 463 AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 072500-9 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the Certification Resolution; IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a .religious assembly and day care facility, located between the 5400 block of Franklin Road and east of Indian Grave Road Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Evangel Foursquare Church. (Terry Harrington, County Planned (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 27, 2000) 0-072500-10 Mr. Harrington reported that on June 27, the Board of Supervisors continued the public hearing on this request until July 25 and requested that the staff July 25, 2000 465 LOCATED ON INDIAN GRAVE ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 98.02-2-16), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Evangel Foursquare Trustees have filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a facility for religious assembly and a day care center to be located on Indian Grave Road (Tax Map No. 98.02-2-16) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 6, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on May 23, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on June 27, 2000, and continued to July 25, 2000 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 Evangel Foursquare Trustees to construct a facility for religious assembly and a day care center to be located on Indian Grave Road (Tax Map No. 98.02-2-16) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (a) The site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan prepared by LMW Engineering & Surveying, dated April 28, 2000., with the exce tion that access to the site may be provided from the lower point of access to Indian. (b) (c) (d) (e) Grave Road. If final engineering of the site requires extra grading beyond the immediate area for the church, it shall be necessary for the applicant to reapply for a special use permit. The buildings shall be constructed in substantial conformity with the building elevations prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, dated October 20, 1999. The exterior of the buildings and equipment shall be constructed with non-reflective materials and brown and gray colors to reduce the visibility potential from the Parkway and surrounding views. As the site is graded and/or developed, no trees on the site may be removed except for the trees in the immediate path of the driveway to the site from Indian Grave Road, the area for the storm water management facility, the area for the church facilities, day care facilities and parking, playground area and area for the septic drain fields, as shown on the concept plan prepared by LMW Engineering & Surveying dated April 28, 2000. The church shall undertake all transportation and road improvements alon Indian Grave Road between Route 220 mqn. a and safe access to the site is provided. These road July 25, 2000 467 provide for their review a copy of -the resolution that established the policy that a petitioner may request a continuance of a public hearing from the staff. Two citizens spoke in opposition to the crematorium. They were: 1 Mike Weidman, 8858 Starlight Lane, Roanoke,. who was opposed to the request because of increased traffic on Starlight Lane, the possible odor and emissions coming from the crematorium, and the possibility of decreased property values. 2 Martin McGhee 8810 Starlight Lane, Roanoke, was opposed because his children were allergic to cats and dogs and he felt the crematorium would decrease his property value. Supervisor Nickens asked that staff bring back information on (1) who regulates pet crematoriums; (2) a report from the appropriate experts on emissions and odor from the crematorium -and possible allergic reactions; and (3) any other health issues related to such a facility. 3. Second reading of ordinance to vacate a 12 foot wide public utility easement located on Roanoke County Tax Parcel #7114-1-40, 2231 Beavers Lane, in the Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jeffrey and Stephanie Jones. Terry Harrington, County Planner) 0-072500-11 Mr. Harrington reported that prior to closing of their property, the petitioners learned that a portion of their home lies within an unused 12 foot x 150 foot Public Utility Easement and they are requesting that the easement be vacated. There was no discussion and no citizens to speak. July 25, 2000 469 the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 9, page 90, and being further shown on re-subdivision plat dated December 10, 1979, recorded in Deed Book 1137, page 244, in the Vinton Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication costs, survey costs and recordation of documents, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioners, Jeffrey Shannon Jones and Stephanie Lynne Jones, or their successors or assigns; and, 3. That the County Administrator or an Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS X11 Susan Corrigan and Richard White, 4308 Kings Court Drive, spoke regarding a letter they received concerning the proposed Virginia Gas Pipeline and Virginia Gas Pipeline's right to enter their property and "take" an easement when they already have a 50 foot easement on their property. They felt that the letter was vague and they were told they had no recourse. Mr. Hodge advised that Virginia Gas is regulated by the State Corporation Commission. They requested support from the Board two years ago and the County responded with a letter last year outlining their concerns with the location of the pipeline. Supervisor Minnix suggested contacting the state legislators for their assistance. Supervisor Nickens suggested that staff, the State Corporation Commission, and Virginia Gas Pipeline meet with the Board of Supervisors to discuss these issues. July 25, 2000 471 it made no sense for Roanoke City to build fire stations and Roanoke County to build fire stations that are located close to each other, and suggested that the fire chiefs from the four local governments meet to resolve the problem of overlapping fire and rescue stations. Supervisor Church: He concurred with Supervisor Minnix's comments on fire and rescue stations and suggested a Fire Chiefs' Steering Committee. (2) He also thanked Salem City Council for hosting the joint meeting and announced that there will be another meeting in January, 2001. (3) He advised that he received complaints about the County not funding the Salem-Roanoke Country Food Pantry and explained that according to the United Way funding allocation process that we used this year, the Food Pantry is not registered with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs; they did not provide the United Way Committee with a Form 990 tax return for non-profit agencies; and they did not have an audit available for the United Way. If the guidelines had been followed, the Food Pantry might have received funding. (4) He also received complaints about cars for sale and that some of them have no decals or state tags. Supervisor Nickens: (1) He advised that the County needs to ticket anyone whose vehicle is without proper tags and decals. (2) He reported that after 13 accidents east of the Town of Vinton on Hardy Road and west of the Bedford County line, the citizens requested a traffic study to consider lowering the speed from 45 to 35. VDOT advised that the 85 percentile speed was 48 mph and did not justify lowering the speed. (3) He asked for a report on an accident between Joy Davis and a County refuse truck. Mr. Mahoney responded that he spoke with Ms. Davis and will report to Supervisor Nickens. August 8, 2000 473 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 August 8, 2000 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of August, 2000. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph McNamara, Vice Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Supervisors Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Bob L. Johnson, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board; Dan R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Jill B. Barr, Community Relations Director IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD T0, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Chambliss requested that Item F-3 (acquisition of property from the Guthries for South County Park) be discussed in Closed Meeting under Section 2.1-344 August 8, 2000 475 The main purpose of the event is to provide businesses with a venue where they can showcase their high-tech products and services of today and offer previews of future products. Ms. Pitts advised that the steering committee has been working for over one year to produce this event and introduced the members who were present. She announced that the following companies have joined us in sponsoring Expo: Newschannel 10, Virginia Tech Ware Engineering Lab, American Electric Power, Hotel Roanoke & Conference Center, Roanoke City, and SunCom. To date, the County has sold 44 booths and will fill the 8,000 sq. ft. annex with 13 engineering projects from the Virginia Tech Ware Lab. US Congressmen Rick Boucher and Bob Goodlatte will co-host the E-View Reception on October 27, 2000. The Master of Ceremonies for the evening will be William Stephenson, Dean of Virginia Tech's College of Engineering. IN RE: FIRST READINGS OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing quitclaim and release of a drainage easement recorded in Deed Book 1116, Page 449 and Plat Book 9, Page 158 and to quitclaim and release a 20-foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 1060, Page 824 within the boundaries of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive of Nottingham Park and located in Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director Mr. Covey explained that this was a housekeeping measure. In order for a portion of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive to be accepted into the secondary road system, VDOT requires that the right-of--way be free and clear of any third party rights or encumbrances. The quitclaim and release of the sanitary sewer easement and August 8, 2000 477 governments. Acceptance of the donation was discussed at the joint meeting with the Salem City Council on July 24, and staff was directed to bring back an ordinance for first and second reading in August. The City of Salem will accept the trail at their August 14 meeting. Staff recommended adoption of the ordinance after second reading. Dave Robbins, President of the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railroad and Reservation Foundation, was present and advised that the trail is well used and that he hoped to get the area civic leagues involved in helping with the maintenance. He explained that a house sits on the Brubaker property which was built in the 1840's and he would like to work with the state to establish a regional visitors' center there. Supervisor Church expressed his strong support for this action and moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for August 22, 2000. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 3. First reading of ordinance authorizing the purchase of proximately 2.8 acres from Barbara and Billy Guthrie for the new South County Park. (Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism) This first reading was discussed in Closed Meeting and no action was taken. IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing a boundary adjustment and land exchange with Mariorie and Jeffrey August 8, 2000 479 No. 97.01-2-7, adjacent to Starkey Park on Crystal Creek Drive owned by the Board of Supervisors, which is designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 97.05-1-25; and, WHEREAS, the Kidds currently access their property through the northwesterly corner of the Starkey Park property pursuant to a deed of easement dated October 21, 1996, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1532, page 1410; and, WHEREAS, due to potential management and operational problems, concerns raised by the Craigheads related to the boundaries and public access to Back Creek, with attendant liability, vandalism, and trespass issues, and the need to provide for adequate drainage on the Craighead property as a result of park development, staff has negotiated an agreement with the Craigheads and Kidds for the exchange of real estate and the provision of fencing materials to address the various concerns and issues; and, WHEREAS, the proposed agreement will serve the interests of the public, and the property to be acquired by the County constitutes a fair consideration for the parcels to be conveyed and the fencing materials to be provided; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning this acquisition and conveyance of real estate was held on July 25, 2000, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on August 8, 2000. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.10 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by exchange for alternative public property. 2. That acquisition and acceptance of a parcel of real estate, consisting of 0.948 acre, including Back Creek, along the western boundary of the property of the Board of Supervisors designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map #97.01-2-11, said parcel being hatched and shown on the attached copy (marked Exhibit A) of a preliminary plat dated July 12, 2000, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., from Marjorie Kidd Craighead and Jeffrey Alan Craighead is hereby authorized and approved. 3. That as consideration for the above-described acquisition, conveyance to Marjorie Kidd Craighead and Jeffrey Alan Craighead of a parcel of real estate, consisting of 0.574 acre, and being a portion in the northwestern corner of the property of the Board of Supervisors designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map #97.01-2-13, said parcel being cross-hatched and shown on the attached copy (marked Exhibit A) of a preliminary plat dated July 12, 2000, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., is hereby authorized and approved, subject to the following conditions: a. That a "New Variable Width Waterline & Sanitary Sewer Easement" be reserved and retained as shown in the detail on the above- referenced plat. b. That the 0.574 parcel to be conveyed shall be added and combined with the tract of land owned by the Craigheads, designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 97.01-2-17.1. c. That the conveyance is to be subject to all recorded conditions, reservations, easements and restrictions affecting title to the property. 4. That as additional consideration for the acquisition, the provision of August 8, 2000 481 FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for August 8, 2000, designated as Item I -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Item 1, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Social Services Advisory Board. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS Supervisor Nickens requested that a work session be held on the upgrade on the sewage treatment plant. Mr. Mahoney advised that he will report on this subject at the August 22 meeting in Closed Meeting because of probable litigation. IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS The following citizens spoke concerning the Virginia Gas Pipeline easement: 1 Chris Caveness, 5051 Twelve O'Clock Knob Road, Roanoke, expressed support for requesting that Virginia Gas Pipeline co-locate with an existing easement of Duke Power. He felt that they should use an existing corridor instead of a new easement. 2. Danielle Huffman 4412 Kings Court Drive Roanoke, advised that she already has an easement in her backyard from Duke Power and does not understand why August 8, 2000 483 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Report of corner lot setbacks• parking of recreational vehicles in front yards This item was moved to work session. 6. Report on Virginia Gas Pipeline project This item was moved to work session. IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Johnson: In a followup to Ms. Hughes comments, he advised the following: (1) That the County prides itself on having a plan. Botetourt County was going to participate in a joint school and decided instead to build their own school. Bonsack Elementary School was designed to meet Roanoke County needs and is not crowded. (2) If apartments are built in the community, they will be empty nester apartments. (3) According to the enrollment projections, the County schools are appropriately sized for the enrollment for the next five years. (4) The Blue Ribbon Committee construction plans shows that the County has planned in a responsible fashion. Supervisor Church: (1) He reported that he had talked with Arnold Covey and he assured the North Spring Drive residents that they will be getting help soon. The fencing will take place on Friday and landscaping will follow. (2) He announced that Old Salem Days will take place September 9 and involves the entire Roanoke Valley. Supervisor Nickens: (1) He advised that the Gladetown Cemetery Committee is asking for the County's assistance in trying to resolve ownership of the cemetery in their community, and that he will work with Mr. Mahoney and his staff to August 8, 2000 485 Virginia Gas Pipeline and representatives of John Lambert and Associates who will provide public relations. He was informed that construction in Roanoke County is scheduled for spring of 2001, and they are in the process of acquiring easements. There was discussion about co-locating the pipeline in the existing Duke Power easement; what the Board's options were in assisting the residents; and methods of slowing down the process. It was the consensus of the Board to ask Congressman Boucher to meet with the two gas companies to discuss co-location and that Mr. Mahoney will investigate ways to slow down the process of eminent domain proceedings. 2. Joint work session with the Planning Commission to discuss recommended revisions to the land use map and design guidelines for the Colonial Avenue Corridor. The work session was held from 4:50 p.m. until to 5:55 p.m. and was presented by Community Development Planner Tim Beard. Planning Commission members Kyle Robinson and AI Thomason were also present. Mr. Beard reported that the staff undertook a study of the Colonial Avenue Corridor at the request of the Board of Supervisors because of the increased traffic on Colonial Avenue and rezoning and Special Use Permit requests for property that was originally zoned residential. The Colonial Avenue Corridor Study was completed in December 1999 and was presented to the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission requested that staff develop proposed design guidelines for development and redevelopment of the area which has now been completed. The Board discussed ways to slow down development and allow the area to remain residential. Supervisor Minnix announced he had met with a group of Colonial Avenue residents and their concern is that the area is in transition which will result in August 8, 2000 487 that on corner lots, both sides facing the street are considered "front yards" and unavailable for the storage of recreation vehicles. Less than ten violations per year involved vehicles on corner lots. The Planning Commission discussed this issue and felt that the current ordinance was the most equitable. Mr. Harrington advised that if the Board directs that the ordinance be changed, the Commission will set a public hearing to amend the zoning ordinance. Supervisor McNamara explained that when the Board tried to resolve the problem for some residents several years ago, they created a problem for others. He requested that an amendment be considered. Staff was directed to bring to the Planning Commission the changes to the zoning ordinance concerning parking recreational vehicles on certain corner lots and bring the amendments back to the Board at the September 26 meeting. 4. Progress report on Center for Research and Technology (CRT) The work session was held from 6:20 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. A power point presentation was made by Economic Development Director David Porter and Economic Development Specialist Melinda Cox. They reported that there is a 24 inch waterline on Glenmary Drive; the entrance road is being graded; pavement and guardrails are being installed; and an interim entrance sign with limited landscaping will be installed by September 30. They presented the development plans for the Phase I road system in four stages. Mr. Porter announced that a Kickoff event is scheduled for October 12, 2000 featuring Mark Kilduff, Executive Director of the Virginia Economic Development Partnership. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Porter advised they had heard from six prospects in the last 30 days; and that there is $5 to $6 million invested in the August 8, 2000 489 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the Certification Resolution; and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix IN RE: NEW BUSINESS Resolution requesting the Virginia Gas P~eline Company, East Tennessee Natural Gas Company and the Duke Energy Corporation to construct a natural gas pipeline on a corridor already in existence and operation in Roanoke County. R-080800-4 Supervisor McNamara moved to adopt the resolution deleting the first paragraph on Page 3. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix RESOLUTION 080800-4 MEMORIALIZING THE VIRGINIA GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, EAST TENNESSEE NATURAL GAS COMPANY AND THE DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION TO CONSTRUCT A NATURAL GAS PIPELINE ON A CORRIDOR ALREADY IN EXISTENCE AND OPERATION IN ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, we, the members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, petition the executive officers and shareholders of the Virginia Gas Pipeline Company and Duke Energy Corporation as follows: WHEREAS, Virginia Gas Pipeline Company is in the possession of certain easements that traverse the peaks and ridges of rural undeveloped southwest Roanoke County, including the Blue Ridge Parkway and Poor Mountain region as well as other August 8, 2000 491 Corporation, the Virginia State Corporation Commission, and the Virginia General Assembly delegates and senators representing Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution as amended, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix IN RE: ADJOURNMENT At 7:52 p.m. Chairman McNamara adjourned the meeting. Submitted by, Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board Approved by, Joseph McNamara Chairman August 22, 2000 493 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 August 22, 2000 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of August, 2000. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph McNamara, Vice Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Supervisors Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Bob L. Johnson, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Jill B. Barr, Community Relations Director IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES Chairman McNamara announced that Deputy Sheriff F. Douglas Sweetenberg died yesterday and expressed condolences to his family. The invocation was given by John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF August 22, 2000 495 members of the accreditation committee, and inmates for their assistance during this process. He introduced and expressed appreciation to Divisional Commanders, Captain Barry Tayloe, Captain Charles Hart and Lisa Park, accreditation manager, and advised that the late Doug Sweetenberg had been a member of the committee. IN RE: BRIEFING 1. Briefing on 2.00 p m Stormwater Management Facility Presentation. Chairman McNamara advised that members of the Board and School Board attended a ceremony earlier at the site of the new South County High School for the presentation of a grant for the Regional Stormwater Facility. He advised that John Paul Woodley, Virginia Secretary of Natural Resources and David Brickley, Director, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, also attended the presentation and had been asked to brief the Board. Mr. Hodge advised that the County was presented with a $230,000 check by Secretary Woodley and Director Brickley for a grant for the South County High School Regional Stormwater Facility. This grant provides the opportunity to go beyond a simple detention stormwater pond and mitigate the stormwater problems that have existed in the area for many years, and is being done in partnership with the State and Roanoke County Schools. He expressed appreciation to Delegate Morgan Griffith, who also attended the ceremony, and the Board of Supervisors for their support for the regional facility, and introduced Secretary Woodley and Director Brickley Secretary Woodley advised that he was pleased, on behalf of Governor Gilmore, to present a ceremonial check for $230,000 to the County from the Virginia Quality Water Improvement Fund for the regional facility. This is the kind of project that . August 22, 2000 497 2000 Commonwealth Games was just under $8 million. He advised that the Games had live television coverage of the opening ceremonies at the Roanoke Civic Center. He presented a plaque to the County which was accepted by Mr. Hodge, and another plaque to the Parks, Recreation& Tourism Department which was accepted by Director Pete Haislip. Supervisor Johnson asked about the future of the Games and expressed his opinion that with such an economic impact, they should remain in the Roanoke Valley. Mr. Lampman advised that funding for 2001 was cut from $100,000 to $25,000 and there are no funds in the State's budget for 2002, but they are making an effort to involve more of the Valley's corporations and businesses to retain the Games in the future. IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first readings and set the second readings and public hearings for September 26, 2000. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 1. 2. 3. First readirn construct a t r August 22, 2000 499 Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for September 12, 2000. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing the acceptance of the donation of the Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail from the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railroad Preservation Foundation. fete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism 0-082200-1 Mr. Haislip advised that the only changes since the first reading have been to make the descriptions of the parcels of land in the ordinance more specific. Supervisor McNamara advised that this is a cooperative effort between the County and City of Salem, and moved second reading of the ordinance. Supervisor McNamara withdrew his motion for purpose of a motion from Supervisor Church. There was no discussion and no citizens requested to speak on this item. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None ORDINANCE 082200-1 AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE DONATION OF THE HANGING ROCK BATTLEFIELD TRAIL AND PARK AREAS FROM THE HANGING ROCK BATTLEFIELD AND RAILROAD PRESERVATION FOUNDATION August 22, 2000 501 c. Those certain parcels of land, lying on the northerly side of Virginia State Route 419 (Electric Road), designated as Lot 1 and Lot 2 on the plat of subdivision for the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 21, page 29, designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 36.10-1-9 and Tax Map No. 36.10-1-10.1, respectively, and being the same property conveyed to the Foundation from Margaret Richardson Hinchee Revocable Trust, et als, by deed date June 24, 1998, or record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1583, page 705; SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: (i) LESS AND EXCEPT Lot 2 as shown on the above- described plat recorded in Plat Book 21, page 29, designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 36.10-1-10.1, conveyed by the Foundation to Fincastle Rifles Camp No. 1326 Sons of Confederate Veterans by deed dated October 25, 1999, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1654, page 1201. (ii) That certain permanent sight distance easement dedicated to the public by the Foundation by instrument dated March 11, 1999, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1618, page 459. d. That perpetual RIGHT and EASEMENT fora "NEW PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL AND GREENWAY" across the parcel of land belonging to the Margaret Richardson Hinchee Revocable Trust, et als, designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 36.10-1-17, extending between the right-of-way for State Route 419 (Electric Road) and the Foundation property (Tax Map No. 36.10-1-16), shown on plat dated January 28, 1998, prepared by Mattern and Craig, Inc., recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1583, page 1515; and being the same right and easement conveyed to the Foundation from the Margaret Richardson Hinchee Revocable Trust, et als, by deed of easement dated June 24, 1998, recorded and re-recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1583, page 709, and Deed Book 1585, page 1506, respectively. e. That perpetual RIGHT and EASEMENT, ten feet (10') in Width, fora "NEW PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL AND GREENWAY" aCCOSS the parcel of land belonging to the Margaret Richardson Hinchee Revocable Trust, et als, designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 36.10-1-15, extending between the right-of-way for State Route 419 (Electric Road) and the Foundation property (Tax Map No. 36.10-1-16) leading to Buzzard's Roost, shown on plat dated June 2, 1998, prepared by Mattern and Craig, Inc., recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1585, page 1526; and being the same right and easement conveyed to the Foundation from the Margaret Richardson Hinchee Revocable Trust, et als, by deed of easement dated June 24, 1998, recorded and re-recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1583, August 22, 2000 503 5. Request for acceptance of Garman Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 6. Request for acceptance of Spring Meadow Drive, Spring Meadow Court and a portion of Cynthia Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 7. Donation of a waterline easement in Waterford, Section 6, on property of ARS Properties, L.C. 8. Request from Schools for acceptance of $111,508 Preschool Initiative Grant for the 2000-01 school year. 9. Donation of a drainage easement on Lots 13, 14, 15, and 16 in Orchard Park Subdivision, revised Section 3. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 082200-2.d REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF GARMAN ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(a), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the street meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, WHEREAS, developers of new streets are required to provide a surety that enables recovery of repair costs associated with potential faulty materials or workmanship, this Board warrants that it will reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation all costs incurred in the repair of faults due to faulty materials or workmanship in the subject street, but not more than $3,750.00, for a period of one year from the date of this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and August 22, 2000 505 AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Statement of Treasurer's Accountability per investments and portfolio policy as of July 31, 2000 6. Accounts Paid -July 2000 7. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for one month period ended July 31, 2000 IN RE: PRESENTATION BY SCHOOL BOARD CHAIR Chairman McNamara advised that School Board Chair Jerry Canada had asked to speak before the work session. Chairman Canada, together with School Board members Bill Irvin, Marion Roark, and Michael Stovall, thanked the Board for their assistance to the Schools on a yearly basis. He recognized that the Board provided over $51 million towards education and $26.5 million of that was over and above the Standards of Quality requirements, and he described what this amount will fund. IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work Session with Schools to discuss school capital construction and stormwater management. The work session was held from 3:50 p.m. until 5:08 p.m. At 3:50 p.m. August 22, 2000 507 allow these customers to receive their electricity from a new provider but AEP will continue to deliver the power to homes and businesses. The program is voluntary and customers may be contacted directly by companies interested in competing for their electricity business. The transition to full choice for all customers in Virginia will begin January 1, 2002. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 3:40 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to go into Closed Meeting after the work session pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344A (7) pending litigation with Rising Star Camp; Section 2.1-344 A (7) probable litigation concerning Sewage Treatment Plant; and Section 2.1-344 A (5) discussion of economic development prospect; and Section 2.1-344 A (1) to discuss consideration and evaluation of the performance of specific County personnel. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-082200-3 At 7:02 p.m., Supervisor advised that the Closed Meeting was held from 5:45 p.m. until 7:00 p.m., and moved to return to open session and to adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 082200-3 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS I ~ August 22, 2000 50(~ Commission held a public hearing on July 5 and a number of citizens spoke expressing concerns regarding air pollution, water pollution, and visual aspects of the proposed use. At the meeting, some of the commissioners agreed that air quality and odor were potential concerns, and the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. However, the Commission requested that if the Board did approve the permit, they place the following six conditions on the permit: (1) This business and/or facility shall only serve as a pet crematorium for animals. The burial of animals or the operation of a mausoleum on this property shall be prohibited. (2) The Special Use Permit shall be valid for the development of the site and the operation of the pet crematorium with the approval of all required permits by the Department of Environmental Quality. (3) The building shall be constructed in substantial conformance to the building plan identified as Plan 9937 as shown in the April 2000 Best Selling Home Plans publication. (4) The site shall be developed in substantial conformity to the Aspen Grove Pet Mortuary plan prepared by Lumsden Assoc., dated May 19, 2000. (5) Deliveries and pick up of animals will be made by crematorium management and staff only. (6) No storage of animals outside of building. Ms. P. D. Jackson, one of the petitioners, addressed the Board, and gave details about the operation of the project and the proposed Crawford incinerator unit that she plans to use. She addressed the concerns of the citizens as expressed at the public hearing by the Planning Commission and at the community meeting, and advised that Steve Dietrich, Air Permit Manager for the Roanoke Office, State Department of Environmental Quality, attended the community meeting; and stated that there is no smoke or odor if the incinerator unit is operating properly. She advised that she had to apply for the special use permit under the provisions for a pet cemetery which includes crematoriums but she does not intend to have a pet cemetery on the property. She August 22, 2000 511 explained that a kennel can be placed in the AG-3 zoning by right but to locate a crematorium on AG-3, a special use permit must be requested under the cemetery classification. In response to Supervisor McNamara's inquiry, Ms. Jackson reported that the pet crematorium is located at least two football fields from the Aspen Kennel and could not be located there due to the lack of space and citizen opposition. Supervisor Nickens advised that he felt the petitioner had an outstanding presentation but he did not think a residential neighborhood was a suitable place for the crematorium. Supervisors Church, Minnix, Johnson, and McNamara also agreed that this was the wrong place, and Supervisor Minnix suggested that the staff in the Economic Development Department might help the petitioner find a more suitable place. Supervisor Minnix moved to deny the special use permit. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None DENIAL OF ORDINANCE 082200-4 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO P. D. MASON and DONNA MASON FOR A PET CREMATORIUM TO BE LOCATED AT THE 8800 BLOCK OF STARLIGHT LANE (TAX MAP NO. 114.00-2-6), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, P. D. Mason and Donna Mason have filed a petition for a special use permit for a pet crematorium to be located at the 8800 block of Starlight Lane (Tax Map No. 114.00-2-6) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on June 27, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was continued from July 25, 2000 to August 22, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: On motion of Supervisor Minnix to DENY the Special Use Permit ,and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None August 22, 2000 513 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Clayton Homes to operate a manufactured home sales lot to be located at 2810 Peters Creek Road (Tax Map No. 37.17-1-2) in the Catawba Magisterial District is substan- tially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The site shall be deve{oped in general conformity with the Clayton Homes preliminary plan prepared by Lumsden Associates, dated May 16, 2000, with the exception that manufactured homes may be stored on the existing concrete pad located at the upper portion of the site. (2) The use of flags pennants and similar signs shall be prohibited with the proposed use. (3) The off-premises sign on the property, with the wooden posts, currently advertising Saturn, shall be converted to an on-premises sign and meet all of the C-2 sign requirements for the proposed use, or the sign shall be removed from the property completely before a temporary certificate of occupancy is issued. (4) The historical integrity of the 19`h Century Valley Railroad arch on the property shall be preserved. Clayton Homes shall preserve the integrity and setting of the arch as part of its site planning and construction 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 Church to adopt the ordinance amended by Supervisor Johnson to add Condition #4, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 3. Second reading of ordinance authorizing quitclaim and release of a drainage easement recorded in Deed Book 1116, Pacte 449 and Plat Book 9 Page 158, and to quitclaim and release a 20- foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 1060, Page 824 within the boundaries of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive of Nottingham Park and located in Windsor Hills Maaisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director August 22, 2000 515 -- reading was held on August 22, 2000; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be released are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia for acceptance of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive into the state secondary road system by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 3. That quit-claim and release to the Commonwealth of Virginia of the portion of the 10' drainage easement recorded in Deed Book 1116, page 449 and further shown on the above-described plats recorded in Plat Book 9, page 158, and Plat Book 17 page 124, and the portion of the 20' sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 1060, page 824 and further shown on the above described plat recorded in Plat Book 17, page 124, within the boundaries of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive as shown on Exhibit A, is hereby authorized subject to the following conditions: a. VDOT issuance of a permit for any and all private utilities, drainage lines or pipes, and sanitary sewer lines or pipes and any related appurtenances or facilities. b. The facilities located within the 50-foot right-of-way, under the intersection of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive, Nottingham Park, shown on Plat Book 9, page 158 and Plat Book 17, page 124, may continue to occupy the street or highway in the existing condition and location. c. The release would be for so long as the subject section of Cynthia Drive and Spring Meadow Drive is used as part of the public street or highway system. 4. That the subject easement is not vacated hereby and shall revert to the County in the event of abandonment of the street or highway. 5. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS James Garris, 3108 D. Honeywood Lane, advised that the recent litigation by the County against the Rising Star Sports Camp has seriously impaired the camp and its activities. He advised that many residents approve of this facility, that it is - ~ August 22, 2000 517 Supervisor Nickens: (1) He asked that the Planning staff look at the population demographics as they relates to the school age population so that the County can project and predict where growth is going before revising where the next construction activity is going to take place within the school system. Supervisor McNamara: He reported on several area of regional cooperation. (1) He advised that the County accepted a $230,000 check today for a joint stormwater project with the State and Schools. (2) He advised that the County accepted ownership of a joint greenway with City of Salem and County. (3) He advised that he attended meetings this morning about shared arrangements and services with Roanoke City. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 8:55 p.m., Chairman McNamara advised that the Closed Meeting pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344A (5) discussion of economic development prospect; and Section 2.1-344 A (1) to discuss consideration and evaluation of the performance of specific County personnel was being continued with no action anticipated. Mr. Mahoney advised that since this was a continuation, no vote was necessary. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-082200-7 At 9:48 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to return to open session and adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None __, G°~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION 092600-5.a RECONSTITUTING THE REGIONAL COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD FOR THE COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROGRAM AND CONFIRMATION OF COUNTY APPOINTEE RESOLUTION of the Board of Supervisors for the County of Roanoke, establishing, by joint action of the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem, the membership of the Court-Community Corrections Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to serve the region composed of those Counties and Cities. WHEREAS, Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem have established and operate the Court-Community Corrections Program, a local pretrial services and community-based probation program established and operated pursuant to the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 5 of Title 53.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Comprehensive Community-Corrections Act for Local- Responsible Offenders (Virginia Code § 53.1-180 et seq.) and the Virginia Pretrial Services Act (Virginia Code §19.2-152.2 et seq.) require the establishment and appointment of a Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program; and 1 WHEREAS, a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court- Community Corrections Program previously has been established in accordance with law, and this Board of Supervisors now, and in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which participate in this multijurisdictional program, deems it appropriate to reconstitute the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program, pursuant to the authority granted to local governing bodies under Virginia Code §15.2-1411 and in consideration of the changes in the Code of Virginia since the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board's establishment; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted to this Board by Virginia Code §§15.2-1411, 19.2-152.5, 53.1-183 and the organic law of the Commonwealth, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program is established. 2. The Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem are the jurisdictions which participate in the Court-Community Corrections Program. Each of these jurisdictions shall be represented on the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board. The Regional Community Criminal Justice Board shall consist of 25 persons, a number established by this resolution and by similar resolutions of the governing bodies of each of the other participating jurisdictions. The composition of the Regional Community Justice Board shall at all times comply with all applicable statutes and regulations. Each participating city or county shall have an equal 2 number of appointments. 3. In conjunction with resolutions of appointment adopted or to be adopted by the governing bodies of all participating jurisdictions, this Board of Supervisors appoints the following persons to the Regional Criminal Justice Board for the terms of years set forth below. Each appointment shall be effective as of July 1, 2000. Because §53.1-183 mandates that the Board's membership include persons who hold certain positions, this resolution sets out, beside the name of each person hereby appointed, a descriptive title for that person's position or occupation. Name and Title Term John M. Chambliss, Jr. 3 Years Assistant Administrator County of Roanoke Honorable George E. Honts, III 1 Year Judge, Circuit Court Twenty-fifth Judicial Circuit Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr. 2 Years Judge, General District Court Twenty-third Judicial District Honorable John B. Ferguson 3 Years Judge, Juvenile @ Domestic Relations Court Twenty-third Judicial District James C. "Chris" Alderson, Esquire 3 Years Commonwealth Attorney Alleghany County/City of Covington Sheriff George McMillan 2 Years Roanoke City Sheriff's Office 3 Sheriff Gerald Holt Roanoke County Sheriff's Office Sheriff Ronnie Sprinkle Botetourt County Sheriff's Office Sheriff C. E. "Butch" Simpson Alleghany County Sheriff's Office Mr. John Higgins Acting Superintendent Rockbridge Regional Jail William H. Cleaveland, Esquire Attorney-at-Law Roanoke, Virginia Mr. Ray Burton Fitzgerald Chief Magistrate Twenty-fifth Judicial District Dr. David Smith Superintendent Bath County Public Schools Ms. Gail Burrus Director, Counseling Services Blue Ridge Community Services Board Roanoke, Virginia 1 Year 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 3 Years 2 Years 1 Year 2 Years 4. This Board, in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which have established the Court-Community Corrections Program, hereby reappoints the City of Salem as the fiscal agent for the program. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution and appoint John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant Administrator, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None 4 A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant Administrator Y ~ . w ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ..~~- -~° AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and appointment of John M. Chambliss, Jr. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: D~~~~,~w~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Mr. Jim Phipps has advised that the General Assembly made changes to the Code of Virginia concerning the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board (RCCJB) which was established in 1995, and is requesting that the Board adopt a resolution to reconstitute the Board and appoint another member from Roanoke County. Attached is the memorandum from Mr. Phipps. The required membership has changed and in addition to the current appointees, each locality is required to appoint "... a member from each governing body or a city or county manager, county administrator or executive, or assistant or deputy appointed by the governing body..." Sheriff Gerald Holt is currently serving a one year term as a member of this Board, and Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss has indicated that he would be willing to serve the new three year term. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the resolution reconstituting the RCCJB and recommends the three year appointment of John M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ,: Q ~~r l ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church _ _ Denied () Johnson _ _ _ Received () McNamara- _ Referred () Minnix _ To () Nickens a 4 COURT-COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS 516 East Main Street Salem, Vugiinia 24153 Phone: (540} 387-5230 FAX: (540) 387-5570 1NT: ADVISORY TO: County A 'strators City ers FROM: J' Phipps DATE: S ptember 2, 20 0 SUBJ: Res[ion mmnnity Criminal Justice Board - Joint Resolution Your assistance is requested to adopt the attached resolution, replacing the resolution previously adopted in 1995. As you may recall the General Assembly amended §53.1-183 of the Code of Virginia, changing the required membership. The code section now requires that each locality appoint, in addition to current appointees " a member from each cloverrunq bode or a cite or countU manager. countu administrator or executive,_or assistant or detrutu appointed b~u the governingl bode...' In order to comply with the new legislation the attached resolution has been prepared, listing the current appointees by name and title and leaving a space for the•,.~dditiona.l name of the specific appointee from your governing body. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me (540-387-5231) I will be happy to meet with you at your convenience. Also, I would be glad to forward this resolution to your office on a diskette. I leave you with the best of my regazds. Enclosures: Resolution Legislation (§ 53.1-183) L•~gislative Information System § 53.1-183. Community criminal justice boards. Page 1 of 1 Each county or city or combination thereof developing and establishing a local pretrial services or a community-based probation program pursuant to the provisions of this article shall establish a community criminal justice board. Each county and city participating in a local pretrial or community- based probation program shall be represented on the community criminal justice board. In the event that one county or city appropriates funds to the program as part of a multijurisdictional effort, any other participating county or city shall be considered to be participating in a program if such locality appropriates funds to the program. Appointments to the board shall be made by each local governing body. In cases of multijurisdictional participation, unless otherwise agreed upon, each participating city or county shall have an equal number of appointments. Boards shall be composed of the number of members established by resolution or ordinance of each participating jurisdiction. Each board shall include, at a minimum, the following mandatory members: a member from each governing body or a city or county manager, county administrator or executive, or assistant or deputy appointed by the governing body: a judge of the general district court; a circuit court judge; a juvenile and domestic relations district court judge; a chief magistrate; one chief of police or the sheriff in a jurisdiction not served by a police department to represent law enforcement; an attorney for the Commonwealth; a public defender, and/or an attorney who is experienced in the defense of criminal matters; a sheriff or the regional jail administrator responsible for jails serving those jurisdictions involved in the local pretrial services and community-based probation program; a local educator; and a community services board administrator. Go to( )or( )or( )or( http://leg 1. state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+53.1-183 08/31/2000 ', .c~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION RECONSTITUTING THE REGIONAL COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD FOR THE COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROGRAM AND CONFIRMATION OF COUNTY APPOINTEE A RESOLUTION of the Board of Supervisors for the County of Roanoke, establishing, by joint action of the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem, the membership of the Court-Community Corrections Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to serve the region composed of those Counties and Cities. WHEREAS, Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem have established and operate the Court-Community Corrections Program, a local pretrial services and community-based probation program established and operated pursuant to the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 5 of Title 53.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Comprehensive Community-Corrections Act for Local- Responsible Offenders (Virginia Code § 53.1-180 et seq.) and the Virginia Pretrial Services Act (Virginia Code §19.2-152.2 et seq.) require the establishment and appointment of a Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program; and 1 ~~~ WHEREAS, a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court- Community Corrections Program previously has been established in accordance with law, and this Board of Supervisors now, and in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which participate in this multijurisdictional program, deems it appropriate to reconstitute the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program, pursuant to the authority granted to local governing bodies under Virginia Code §15.2-1411 and in consideration of the changes in the Code of Virginia since the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board's establishment; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted to this Board by Virginia Code §§15.2-1411, 19.2-152.5, 53.1-183 and the organic law of the Commonwealth, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program is established. 2. The Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem are the jurisdictions which participate in the Court-Community Corrections Program. Each of these jurisdictions shall be represented on the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board. The Regional Community Criminal Justice Board shall consist of 25 persons, a number established by this resolution and by similar resolutions of the governing bodies of each of the other participating jurisdictions. The composition of the Regional Community Justice Board shall at all times comply with all applicable statutes and regulations. Each participating city or county shall have an equal 2 ,, ~•° .~ number of appointments. 3. In conjunction with resolutions of appointment adopted or to be adopted by the governing bodies of all participating jurisdictions, this Board of Supervisors appoints the following persons to the Regional Criminal Justice Board for the terms of years set forth below. Each appointment shall be effective as of July 1, 2000. Because §53.1-183 mandates that the Board's membership include persons who hold certain positions, this resolution sets out, beside the name of each person hereby appointed, a descriptive title for that person's position or occupation. Name and Title Term 3 Years Honorable George E. Honts, III 1 Year Judge, Circuit Court Twenty-fifth Judicial Circuit Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr. 2 Years Judge, General District Court Twenty-third Judicial District Honorable John B. Ferguson 3 Years Judge, Juvenile @ Domestic Relations Court Twenty-third Judicial District James C. "Chris" Alderson, Esquire 3 Years Commonwealth Attorney Alleghany County/City of Covington Sheriff George McMillan 2 Years Roanoke City Sheriff's Office Sheriff Gerald Holt 1 Year Roanoke County Sheriff's Office 3 Sheriff Ronnie Sprinkle Botetourt County Sheriff's Office Sheriff C. E. "Butch" Simpson Alleghany County Sheriff's Office Mr. John Higgins Acting Superintendent Rockbridge Regional Jail William H. Cleaveland, Esquire Attorney-at-Law Roanoke, Virginia Mr. Ray Burton Fitzgerald Chief Magistrate Twenty-fifth Judicial District Dr. David Smith Superintendent Bath County Public Schools Ms. Gail Burrus Director, Counseling Services Blue Ridge Community Services Board Roanoke, Virginia 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 3 Years 2 Years 1 Year 2 Years 4. This Board, in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which have established the Court-Community Corrections Program, hereby reappoints the City of Salem as the fiscal agent for the program. 4 ,i ~i _..~' THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2000, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 092600-5.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF NORTHWALK DRIVE AND THE REMAINING PORTION OF PETTIT AVENUE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(a), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineerforthe Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right- of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor McNamara Seconded By: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Johnson. Minnix. Church, Nickens, McNamara Nays: None Absent: None A Copy Teste: Brenda J. Ho ton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Department of Transportation v 9 tt( NA • ~, ~fN RO,~p ~ ~ o W y oe ~r g' 0 ~ ti'2' TOterSEND AD =~ . V.I CINI ~'~ .tY1AP~ '~ 1N ~R TIC ~DANQKE' COZT11F7'~' NORTHBROOKE, SECTION 1 .D~'P``3~R3'Adr.E11TT ~~ Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining C0~.3~UNITY D~V.E.LO~M~'Nfi portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department o.f Transportation Secondary System.' - L ~w row~,sNn'nr<o.~n ~~ /w~'~e/ `` ~_ ~ q ( / \~\ / i` \ \ 29 / ~.~ / /~ \ \ /~ ~~ `` . i ~ \ /' ~6 ~~ / ~ \ '3i ```~'~ S~ ~ P ~ M~nriwykr`` \ Iq ~ 1 !. !~ . i I ~ fiyS~~~cnt zs ti • r -:n~ s ~ .. . ~ 1 ~ / ~ 1 nr ~ . Nz~ra~ Watcrcouiye ~ !S'D.L'.-.y ~~ . 20'S.S. E. - ~. i 1 ~ r~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY i ~ alercoi~c j// / _ DESCRIl'TION: 1 • Northwalk Drive -from the intersection with Pettit Avenue east to its cul-de-sac and from the intersection with Pettit Avenue west to its cul-de-sac. 2. Pettit Avenue -from the intersection with Townsend Road to the intersection with Northwalk Drive. LENGTH: (1) 0.15 MILES (2) 0.07 MILES RIGHT OF WAY: (1) 40 FEET (2) 40 FEET PAVEMENT WIDTH: (1) 28 FEET (2) 28 FEET SERVICE: (1) 12 HOMES (2) ------- ~ i ZD'S.S.E.--+~~~~ T9 a C m L U 3 2 m a ~g 0 { r ~/} ~ 1 G i., V , i C e O p U .~,,, d ~ _ m ~ L E (") O of E. d N O 2 c >. m N S •-- Q {1') 1 O 1L Z ~_ F.._, 0 Q c `o a C~ O v 0 L C O '~ d O m R Z .~ r, >_ N G~ n O C c V'; y C Cn 2 V O ni ~: ~ ~ m ~ ~' N. ,~ ~ ~. _~ C U ~ O m 0 r z a n a '~- ~ L1 ~ ~ Vu c~ ' N ~ J ; ~~~ j ~ ~1' O m m ~ m m s ~ m ~ ~ ° iL f a Lv '~~ ~ i a n . i c . c ~ N ~ p ° a i ~~ .. %~_ o .. c c L ~(' 1~ ~ ~ „1 jy~/- K ` ~ ~' o m p y C ~ O is t },,, C O t ~ ~ ~ ~ n L 6 °< ® .... 4 -J l1.' Q ~ ~ ~ N z r y V ~ m m _ a ~ m p° ~ ` m p°° . o ~ ~i a p ~ a D ~ c p m a ~ ~ 1 b b a ~ a ~ ~ c a `~ a ~ c ~ m a ~ o ~ ~ `a FF a c ~ m o a c b ~ e a 'c i ci ~ ti ~ a c~ r d ~i ~ a u. r- y u: r a S r ~ s L J ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ L H m ~ Z r ~ + ~ - ~ c (" F- i.--F 1 ~' ~ ~ ^ a 2 ~'" m O L a a 4 UC 6 Z w ~ a U ~ `o < ra ~ a O 2 0 U Q W '~ U c u ~"1 a '~ \ Y L H c ,.. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ "" ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~,,,~ a~~~ Charles R. Simpson, Incorporated, the developer of Northbrooke, Section 1, requests the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation to accept 0.15 miles of Northwalk Drive, from the intersection of Pettit Avenue east to its cul-de-sac, and from the intersection of Pettit Drive west to its cul-de-sac, and 0.07 miles of Pettit Avenue, from the intersection of Townsend Road to the intersection of Northwalk Drive. The staff has inspected this road along with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation and finds the road is acceptable. No county funding is required. The staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to VDOT requesting that they accept Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Secondary Road System. 1 -~- .. SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey, irector Department of Community Development Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs 2 ,~~.` THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2000, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF NORTHWALK DRIVE AND THE REMAINING PORTION OF PETTIT AVENUE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(a), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street ~uirements. and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right- of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved by: Seconded by: _ Yeas: Nays: A Copy Teste: Mary Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors pc: Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation File ~`"'~" NC.~' ~H - ~ t / ~~ ~ ~ ~ L ~w e -_ TOW'n'sBn'nRO.~n _/~ /~~ -- -- _~ -- - ~ ~ C , ,, /. / - `\. z, , / .~ /! 1 18 ~ - 22 t _ -f' Y> >W 1 ~ StO~+~w. ~ / ~ r ~ I [. 1`. / 1 (fasesentcht 1> ~.--• 1 i --~.. -- -•~f; NORTIiN~ALgDRIVL - 1 r ~:~ ~ _. ~ Rod ~ / / 15 Tom; _.. ..__ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~\ 5 J'``am 14 ~` ~~. ~ ""~n~ "~i. ''~I~~.t[ '~ ---"'7 " ~ / / IO ~~ ~ ~ ` 1 ~-NaNral Walcrc°wxr 9 8 15'D.t..~~~ /. 'rl S.S,g ~"r ___ _- _. it / ^ rV - hahtrai W,~lcrco ~/ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY ! '~~-~ -I~_. DESCRIPTION: 1 • Northwalk Drive -from the intersection with Pettit Avenue east to its cul-de-sac and from the intersection with Pettit Avenue west to its cul-de-sac. 2• Pettit Avenue -from the intersection with Townsend Road to the intersection with Northwalk Drive. LENGTH: RIGHT OF WAY: PAVEMENT WIDTH: SERVICE: (1) O.15IvIII.,ES (1) 40 FEET (1) 28 FEET (1) 12 HOMES (Z) 0.07 MILES (2) 40 FEET (2) 28 FEET R DANOKE CO UNT'O' ~EPART~fENT OF' C03I~IUNIT'Y I~~'VE.Lfl~'M~`NT NORTHBROOKE, SECTION 1 Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining ' portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System.. V.~C~NI ~'Y ~IAF'~ 1 c 1 `o U m E r U }1 Q m Q ~g 0 _~~ ''~ V! I L C G O p U ~_ d ~ _ m 2 ~ O y m t{ O N 1~~ o L; Q ~ 'c3 ~ d N O ~ e O ~ Y~'~ 4. a ~ ~ `o a ~~ p ~ o ~ ~ .~e ~ L ~ O ~ O L ~ R Q < Z .~ ~_ ~~ N n D C, -~ } ~NN. ~ 1~ ` C~ _ G V W rQ nl ~c ~ \ ~ ~ <U ~ O _ D ~ m S ~ F - 2 d U s a l~ ~ o Q ° ~~ ,, ~ ~ N r~ ~ ,, , ~ ' ` m m d U1 , I m ~ a m a d a y ti d a n. < c L- > N p - _> l~v ~,~ o 1 ~ ~ ) ~ .. ~ m E 3s I `, c~ ~ ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ m ° r ~ _ ~-- ~. < ~ ~_ U' 4 ~ ~:, ~ N LL; a m m o ~~ v 0 , w p° m a 0 c ~ "' o ~ Q a - ~ EE b ~ 2s ~ e ` ~ I `- ° ~ ¢ o F d o ~ m ~ a ~ i e 2s ~ ~ a a FF a i o b ~ ~ o a FF b S p r ~ ~ `a a - - ~% r~ d ti r - a S r ~ ~ r ~ r . ``\ ` 1~^ m ~ ~ i 2 Q ~~ ~ Z ~ N s P 7 i ~"` "_" m a a m a c ~- E Z w < a *' `o r- Q a z (~ o ` LL ~. U ~ A w U C r Y 1 G A-092600-5 . c ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ..S = AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: DONATION OF 15' DRAINAGE EASEMENT FROM DANE C. MCBRIDE, PRESIDENT OF THE ROANOKE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS (TAX MAP NO. 46.07-01-01) IN THE CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This consent agenda item involves acceptance of the following easement conveyed to the Board of Supervisors for storm drainage purposes in the Catawba Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke: a) Donation of 15' drainage easement from Dane C. McBride, President of the Roanoke Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (tax Map No. 46.07-01- 01) as shown on the map attached hereto (Exhibit "A"). The County's engineering staff has reviewed and approved this location and dimension of this easement. Staff recommends acceptance of this easement. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Tls' Arnol Covey, Director Elmer C. Hodge Department of Community Development County Administrator 1 ~I ~~ ACTION Approved (x) Motion by: Joseph McNamara to approve Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( 1 cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ x Johnson _ x _ McNamara_ x _ Minnix _ x _ Nickens x 2 sy Prepared by Martin, Hopkins & Lemon P. O. Box 13366 Roanoke, Virginia 24033 Exemption Claimed: Grantee is exempted from recordation taxes and fees pursuant to ~ 58.1-811A(3), Code of Virginia. Tax Map No.: 46.07-01-01 Property Owners: Dane C. McBride, as President of the Roanoke, Virginia Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and his duly appointed succes~isors in office THIS QUITCLAIM DEED, made this .1 ~~ r~ day of hi'7-~-~i t,i: S' ~ , 2 0 0 0 , by and between DANE C . MCBRIDE, as President of the Roanoke, Virginia Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and his duly appointed successors in office ("Grantor") and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ("Grantee"). W I T N E S S E T H FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00), paid in hand at and with the execution and delivery of this Quitclaim Deed, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt, adequacy and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby quitclaim, release and convey unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, the following described property right, to-wit: Martin, Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. roximatel A perpetual RIGHT and EASEMENT, app Y fifteen (15) feet in width, to construct, operate, maintain, inspect and repair or replace a drainage system and related improvements including slope(s), if applicable, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto from a public road, upon, over, under, and across a tract or parcel of land belonging to the Grantor, acquired in two deeds as follows: 1) dated March 5, 1970 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke CourLty, Virginia, in Deed Book 891, page 347, and; 2) dated March 5, 1970, and recorded in the ~7- ~ aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 891, page 349, and designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 46.07-O1-Ol (the "Property") The location of said easement is more particularly described on the plat attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and by this reference made a part hereof (the "Plat") . Nothing herein shall be deemed to be a quitclaim of the fee simple interest in the property subject to the easement but only of the easement interest itself. The Grantee agrees to restore and repair any actual damage to Grantor's Property which may be directly caused by the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of said project except as hereinafter provided. The Grantor agrees that the Grantee will not be expected to restore the Property to the identical original condition, but rather as near thereto as is practicable, and that the Grantor will cooperate with the Grantee in effectuating such restoration. It is expressly agreed between the parties hereto that the Grantee and its agents shall have the right to inspect the easement herein granted and to cut, clear, and remove all undergrowth, obstructions, or improvements lying within, upon, or adjacent to said easement, that in any way endanger or interfere with the proper use of the same. The Grantor covenants that no building or structure shall be erected upon or within the easement herein granted or placed in such location as to render said easement inaccessible. In the event that this covenant is violated, the Grantee shall not be Martin, II Hopkins & 2 Lemon, P.C. .~ L~ obligated to repair, replace, or otherwise be responsible for such improvements if damaged or removed. The Grantor acknowledges that the plans for the aforesaid project as they affect the Property have been fully explained to Grantor or Grantor's authorized representative. The fixtures, facilities, lines, utilities, and any other improvements placed upon, under, or across the Property by the Grantee shall remain the property of the Grantee. The easement herein granted is in addition to, and not in lieu of, any easement or right-of-way now in existence or which may be acquired in the future. The grant and provision of this Quitclaim Deed shall constitute a covenant running with the land for the benefit of the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. To have and to hold unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance by said Board of Supervisors of the real estate conveyed herein pursuant to Ordinance No. adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on the day of WITNESS the following signatures and seals: GRANTOR: ~~ L- , :'~~,~,,,.~.~.T . - `~'j~L-~-~_~{ SEAL, ) ~~ ~~ DYE C. MCBRIDE, as President of the Roanoke, Virginia Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Martin, II Hopkins & 3 Lemon, P.C. STATE COUNTY to-wit: The foregoing ins ument was acknowledged before me this n ~~~ day of ~. ~-~~ by ~ - , _._ DANE C. MCBRIDE, as Presid t of the Roanoke, Virginia Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. .i° Notary ublic My commission expires: ~~' ~~' ~~ ~d - Approved as to form: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA --~~ ~ ~"''~ By • ( SEAL ) Martin, Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. Elmer C. Hodge STATE OF VIRGINIA, COUNTY/CITY OF ROANOKE, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ~ by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My commission expires: Martin, II Hopkins & 4 Lemon, P.C. METES. AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMP. C~SITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT a ~ ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. O Property of: ~/~ LEWIS M. & PRISCILLA R, -- HOLLAND Tax # 36.19-02- Property of~ `,~~ _, J^HN R. JR. & JULIETTE H. BELL Tax # 36.19-02-32. Property of: N^RTH R^AN^KE DEVEL^PMENT C^RP. TAX # 36.19-O1-38 ~ ~~~ "? Property of: SHEILA J, PR^FFIT Tax # 36.19-02-33 ~`~~'~ `~ Property of: GE^RGE N. & KAREN L. NEW 15' Q ARTHUR DRAINAGE EASEMENT ® TAX # 36.19-02-34 BOUNDED BY CORNERS t ~`r 1 THRU 4 TO 1 Property of: AREA = 3668 SQ. FT. DEB^RAH A. STUART 2a TAX # 36.19-02-35 ~ ip. GC,' F~ Property of: ~-~ Q , TH^MAS D. & BEVERLY JEA ~ ~" Property of: ~ POTTER Tax # 36.19-02-36 CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST a OF LATTER DAY SAINTS ~- E-'' ~ '? ~ Tax Map No, 46.07-O1-01 W a W x H O ~~~~~ ys A TAX MAP N0. __ 46_07_ 1 _ 1 ~~'. NEW 15' DRAINAGE EASEMENT 1-2 N42°28'05"E 16.07' 2-3 S26°18'21"E 254.08' 3-4 S73°50'56"W 15.26' 4-1 N26°18'21 "W 240.28' AREA = 3668 SQ. FT. SCALE: __1"=100'___ PLAT SHO TYING NEW 15' DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY 'r~ ~' CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS PREPARED BY.• ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 05= 16=00 ~S ACTION NO. ITEM NO. A-092600-5.d ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: DONATION OF A 10 FT. STRIP OF LAND, FOR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY, FROM IRA GARLAND BOWER, WANDA RUTH HUFF, AND CHARLOTTE ANNE BIBB (TAX MAP NO. 50.01-1-16.9) TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This consent agenda item involves conveyance of a 10 ft. strip of land to the Board of Supervisors for public right-of--way in the Hollins Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke: a) Conveyance of a 10 ft. strip of land for public right-of-way from Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb (tax Map No. 50.01-1- 16.9) as shown on the map attached hereto (Exhibit "A"). The County's engineering staff has reviewed and approved this location and dimension of this right-of-way. Staff recommends acceptance of this right-of-way. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: /~6GCn ~. .T~r Arnold ovey, Director Elmer C. Hodge Department of Community Development County Administrator 1 ~-° Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Motion by: Joseph McNamara to approve Church - x Johnson - x McNamara- x Minnix _ x _ Nickens x cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility 2 ~~ Martin, Hopkins & Leman, P.C. ~, Exemption Claimed: Grantee is exempted from recordation taxes and fees pursuant to § 58.1-811A(3), Code of Virginia. Prepared by Martin, Hopkins & Lemon P. O. Box 13366 Roanoke, Virginia 24033 Tax Map No.: Unknown Property Owners: Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb, devisees of Ruth Fralin Bower THIS QUITCLAIM DEED, made this 18th day of September 2 0 0 0 , by and between IRA GAFtT,AND BOWER, WANDA RUTH HUFF and CHARLOTTE ANNE BIBB ("Grantor," or collectively if more than one, "Grantor") and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ("Grantee"). W I T N E S S E T H THAT, FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the benefits accruing or to accrue to the said Grantor by reason of the location and construction, or other improvement of Autumn Drive, along, through, or over the lands of the Grantor, and for the further consideration of One Dollar ($1.00) cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration paid by Grantee to Grantor, the receipt, adequacy and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor does hereby quitclaim, release, and convey unto the said Grantee all right, title and interest they may possess in and to the following described real estate lying in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, for the 1 ....J location and construction or other improvement of a road right- of-way: That ten foot wide, more or less, strip of land shown on the plat attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and by this reference made a part hereof, (the "Property"); and BEING a portion of the property devised to Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb by Last Will and Test-ament of Ruth Fralin Bower, who died on September 18, 1995, and whose will was probated on September 28, 1995 in the aforesaid Clerk's office in Will Book 51, page 221. Also granted herein is the temporary right and easement to use such additional areas as located and staked on the ground for cut and/or fill slopes as being required for the proper execution of the work. Said temporary easement will terminate at such time as the construction or improvement of the aforesaid route is completed. And further granted herein is the right and easement to construct, improve and maintain any drain ditches or other drainage facilities that may be needed for the proper and adequate drainage of said route. Grantor, for the consideration stated above, also covenant and agree, upon demand of any public utility company or corporation having its facilities in, over or across the lands herein conveyed, that the Grantor will give, grant and convey unto such public utility company or corporation an easement in, over and across the lands of the Grantor lying adjacent to the lands herein conveyed for the relocation, construction, operation and maintenance of said facilities. Martin, II Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. 2 The Grantor by execution of this instrument acknowledges that the plans for the aforesaid road right-of-way as it affects their property have been fully explained to them or their authorized representative. The Grantor covenants and agrees for themselves, and for their heirs, successors, successors in title, executors, legal representatives and assigns ¢that the consideration aforementioned shall be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation and damages by reason of the location, construction, reconstruction, operation or maintenance of said road right-of-way, including such drainage facilities as may be necessary. This conveyance is made expressly subject to all recorded conditions, reservations, easements and restrictions affecting title to the property herein conveyed. The road right-of-way herein granted is in addition to, and not in lieu of, any easement or right-of-way now in existence or which may be acquired in the future. To have and to hold unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance by said Board of Supervisors of the real estate conveyed herein pursuant to Ordinance No. Martin, II Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. 3 ~.,/ - adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on the day of '~e~'r~'.~~'~~~-~"'~'-v (SEAL ) ~~RA GAR}LAN OWER Q~~ ~'i"~°i ~ (SEAL) WANDA RUTH HUF/F~ " ~J ~~~ ~~y~ ... ,~iL (SEAL ) CHARLOTTE-ANNE BIBB Martin, II Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. 4 STATE OF COUNTY/CITY ~~,~,~ Notary Publ~ c The foregoing i. strument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of ~ -r-.~-~..'L' ~~~~ by Ira Garland Bower. My commission expires STATE OF 'L' ~-'~ COUNTY/CITY OF ~~ ~~~~~ ~ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ ~ day of ~~ ~, ;r~t~/1,-~ -v ~ U~~ f~ by Wanda Ruth Huff. My commission expires: STATE OF `td~'~'~ COUNTY/CITY OF ~~~~ Notary Pub1Yc to-wit: to-wit: to-wit: The foregoing ,'ns rument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of -~ ~ ~~ by Charlotte Anne Bibb. ~ ~- Notary Public My commission expires : ~' ~~~' /~ ~ Martin, II Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. 5 ~- Approved as to form: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ~,..~~ ~.,~-~x~^--ti gy ; ( SEAL ) Martin, Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. Elmer C. Hodge STATE OF VIRGINIA, COUNTY/CITY OF ROANOKE, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My commission expires: Martin, II Hopkins & Lemon, P.C. 6 .~i C~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~b~ Cb ~~ b ~y ~~ ~~ ~~ ro~m~~ ~ ~~ ~~a~ ~~~~~~ ~~s~~~ ~~g" ti ~~ ~~°$~ ~~ ~g ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~g ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~y ~~ ~~,yy A~m a~ ~, i ~~ ~ n ~t~~a s~! vQ~~' ~p9 y G t G ~ c ti c M ti ~ ~ ~ S i 8 ~ ~. C ti Z O ~ ~ ~ ~ ti O 0 a 2 0 `81 ~o \\ `3a ~1 ~ o\ Na ~~YI~IQ yVA~~ po ~ cS "1 P 6 Q w,~ ~ ~ ~ I , ~- N.l3'/7001~ 19QA0' NJ3/7L10'~ 78Q019' Z ~ tiC 'So ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~~ , ~~ ~ s~ ~# , ~ ~ 8 ( v 8 O a O Ana ~~ ~I pi ~ ((++~~ A ~^ ~ ~ ~A~ ~ O c ~ O ~^ t ~n ~ w~ ~ 2 N33'17'00'E ~ 190.00' ~1 ~ i ~ I a~ 8 O ~ ~ ~ n4~ ti ~ kw y ~~ b ~ ~~~ ~ ~s ~~ ~~ 1 ~~ C ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~s N ~~,,5 A,~1 ~" ~ pl (~"" 9d Y l ~o ~~~~~~r• ~,5 ~~ ~° i N~ /o N: / /~ ~O N~ ~~ _- ~o _ - jppJp~ (XMY4y p+y' I `O~ gN ~ s 1 a 'r'- ------ Io ~a ~° b ~~ =, / ~ / ~o 0 A-092600-5.e ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~tIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMII~TISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Request for renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: When the position of Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator was initially established in 1996, it was housed at the office of the Fifth Planning District Commission (now the Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission). In June of 1997 Roanoke County offered to house the Greenway Coordinator at RCAC. The Greenway Commission accepted this offer, and the geenway office moved to the County in October 1997 under a 3-year agreement. According to the agreement, which expires October 1, 2000, the County serves as fiscal agent and provides an office space, computer, desk, and telephone instrument. The Greenway Commission pays all direct bills for additional furniture, copying, telephone service, supplies, and mail. The Greenway Commission would like to renew this agreement and continue housing the Greenway Coordinator at RCAC. FISCAL IMPACT All direct bills, salaries, and fringe benefits are paid under the Greenway Commission budget. The County absorbs the marginal cost of the office space, utilities, janitorial service, and fiscal reports. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the office space agreement be renewed for three years. Respectfully Submitted, i, ~~ Liz elc er Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator Approved, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator __.-- J-~ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Joseph McNamara to approve Church - x - Denied () Johnson _ x - McNamara- x _ Received () Minnix _ x Referred () Nickens x To () - - cc: File Liz Belcher, Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney ~~ THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this lg` day of October, ~'~f:, by and between the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, (hereinafter referred to as "County") and the ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMMISSION (hereinafter referred to as "Commission") WITNESSETH That for and in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. County agrees to serve as fiscal agent for the Commission, to receive and expend funds, and to keep appropriate records. The County shall not be responsible for __ .. ................... the preparation of a~tditr, grant applications or ~~rt on behalf of the Commission. 2. County agrees to provide payroll and other employee services and benefits for the Commission eeardmRtor staff consistent with County policies applicable to County employees, except the provisions of the grievance procedure shall not be available to the members and employees of the Commission. 3. County agrees to provide procurement services for the Commission consistent with County code and policies. 4. County agrees to provide a minimal level of clerical staff support, as available, for the Commission, recognizing that volunteers will be used when possible. 5. County agrees to allow the Commission to use property owned by Countyy ............................................................. ~nclut~tng approximately:: 200 square feet of office space located at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drivel far-oflC~ce-slrnce in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this agreement. Commission is authorized to use the off-street parking spaces adjacent to the structure. 6. County agrees to provide basic office furniture, a computer, and a telephone instrument. 7. The term of this agreement shall be three years, said term to commence October 1 2OOOi~~ and to continue until September 30 ~Otl3~@6A. This agreement may be canceled or terminated by either party upon two (2) month's notice in writing or any date that may be mutually agreed upon. 8. County will maintain the property described in paragraph 5, above, and provide janitorial services similar to the quality and level of services provided to other, similar County facilities. 9. Commission has examined and knows the condition of the premises and has received same in good order and repair, and that no representation as to the condition or repair thereof has been made by the County prior to or at the execution of this agreement that are not expressed herein. The premises shall be returned to County at the expiration of this agreement in such good condition and state of repair, ordir~er wear and tear allowed for. Commission shall be responsible for the safety and security of the leased premises. In an emergency it shall be the responsibility of the Commission to notify either the Roanoke County Police Department or the Roanoke County Department of General Services, as appropriate. 10. During the term of this agreement, County will provide and pay for all utilities (water, sewer, electric, and solid waste services) which maybe necessary to the _r--~ / .~ -'~ Commission for the reasonable and proper use and enjoyment of the premises by the Commission. In addition, the County shall allow the Commission to use conference rooms and meeting facilities and storage space for equipment and files on the premises on a space available basis. Commission may use County office equipment, such as copiers, fax machines, telephones and other office support equipment, if temporarily available and not required for any governmental purposes. The availability of conference rooms, meeting facilities or office equipment is solely within the discretion of the County. Commission shall be responsible for its postage, office supplies, copier charges, Internet access charges, and the total cost of its telephone billings and charges. 1 1. This agreement represents the entire understanding between the parties and may not be modified or changed except by written instrument executed by the parties. 12. This agreement shall not be assigned by the Commission without the express, written approval of the County. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: BY By ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMI~RSSION ..................................... ..................................... ~<'~c ~I~tl/~~-B~cldy Chairmxrt BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~'~ Approved as to form: Paul Mahoney Roanoke County Attorney State of Virginia County of Roanoke, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2~~0~'~ by I,u~ R ll~#t Chairman on behalf of the ........... Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. Notary Public My commission expires: State of Virginia, County of Roanoke, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , ~,Qa'Q:-1.9~~, by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. Notary Public My commission expires: Approved by Ordinance 9~=9 on 6ctobzr-l-~ t9~~ 4 A-092600-5.f ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~"' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Water and Sewer Facilities Serving Northbrooke, Section 1 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of Northbrooke, Section 1, Charles R. Simpson, Inc., have requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sanitary sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Lumsden Associates entitled Northbrooke, Section 1, which are on file in the Community Development Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $39,280.00 and $47,090.00 respectively. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Northbrooke, Section 1 subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. `--r° ! SUBNIITTED BX: APPROVED: ~~, ~~ Gary Roberson, P.E. Elmer C. Hodge Utility Director County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Joseph McNamara to approve Church _ x _ Denied () Johnson _ x Received () McNamara- x Referred () Minnix _ x To () Nickens _ x cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development COPY :T- ~ THIS CHATTEL DEED, made this 9th day of August , 2000, by and between: Charles R. Simpson, Inc. , a Virginia corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "Developer," party of the first part; and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, its successors or assigns, hereinafter referred to as the "Board," party of the second part. WITNESSETH: THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Developer does hereby GRANT, CONVEY, ASSIGN AND TRANSFER, with the covenants of GENERAL WARRANTY OF TITLE, in fee simple unto the Board all water and/or sewer lines, valves, fittings, laterals, connections, storage facilities, sources of water supply, pumps, manholes and any and all other equipment and appurtenances thereunto belonging, in and to the water and/or sewer systems in the streets, avenues, .public utility, easement areas, water and sewer easement areas that have been or may hereafter be installed by the Developer, along with the right to perpetually use and occupy the easements in which the same may be located, all of which is more particularly shown, described and designated as follows, to wit: As shown on the plan entitled Northbrooke Section 1 ,made by Lumsden Associates and on file in the Roanoke County Department of Community Development. The Developer does hereby covenant and warrant that it will be responsible for the proper installation and construction of the said water and/or sewer systems including repair of surface areas affected by settlement of utility trenches for a period of one (1) year after date of acceptance by the Board and will perform any necessary repairs at its cost. 1 S 7 Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance of this conveyance pursuant to Resolution No. adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on the day of 20 2 .. ~~ WITNESS THE FOLLOWING signatures and seals: Developer: Address: By: As: State of: Virginia CountylC~f of: Roanoke , to wit: The forego/ing instrument was acknowledjge~d before me this: / `t'~ ,day of ~ L(.31- 20 ~, By: Charles R. Simpson Its President Duly authorized officer (typed name) Title on behalf of: Charles R. Simpson, Inc. C~Oq~-- Notary Public My Commission expires: ~( ,3 ~ OZ 3 Charles R. Simpson, Inc. i~r ~`~ i ~ SEE ~: fi77o~-~'-\ !, ~;;' •./,,«.,F ., Q~/ ~ SHEET 2 / ;,,. ! ~ %!~Ga vs,.r~ ~"o- rne: ]1-.~j/J~ "eml ~r _. ~~f 7r,~~ Ji I ` '~°°"n. v_._,,,.~~,-..,.1~~er'3T" aA e~ ac'~`~aa'~¢..~_,_f ~ a 1 i, a''~+~a ,~ _ _ b pG' v' T ~: k [7 7 i ~~~; _ ~~ I .._ _ .r ~ se~fu}''T5 _ ^~ 1 _~ `___-_ t •ES Are ~ S r-w.._ ^"-:~ 77 LI FI44t R kCJt~/ki ^ ~ ~ • f n G0 '~ T'SjXtl?d. f'1 ^~~5 RCMA'~M1i Ok7lOA'? FFOPER V'" ?~ 7AM /6 17 Q E e0 j uy ~ ~7C -.;l /, / ~ F f ~ - yi` ~ / 141GUAEl ~.1.'::'LrY T ~Nh.~E AJ '°l. GHAR[E5 _ 6 }". s; vn :.~ I / /(' 'r GG.. MAAi 'dW~3EN7 ~ • ~p ll a. A. 57.Mp5Dli//I/L '' ~ 3'1r ~T J/ 1 ~ l i ( 4~rA~~ _y~:. `c ~atla .n pal ~ a !?7? " C > ~ iY' 9 ')7r~ 9'i 75pI'l F.17 l:v. ^' O tI f4~WIS 10 }. E 1 •, ~I 'l ~ 1 1 °j o SANITARY SEWER I,~P~~ ~ 26 f.4 '~ •: ~ ,' 8" WATER .q4'T r~=tea &5a ,v t/7~Si!AN ~. a.. rtJ J !~I b r F t ,~.E oo-bFQ ~.. _'r-r~ _ -......__.....,.. , _. _~ E ENT ~ /"' Y- _ 95h107 DT e.~1NA~,,,.ll"„^~`•--111i II ~~ a 1... KI.4`p N~Il+F.e. 7~}.y_ ~ vl ~~~ V __ ._ _T ~ 7 ~7! I t ~ i ~~4./:."f• PD.Yyr 7 /~. n j 21~ N~IrS f•r P..~.L ~ GO _ .jr •'~' 1 A.OU4. ~ ~ tt "I D4 ` i I }.pp ~ I f f 7~ 't/6• ~ ~ ~ `I . _ - ~ R' 'baYN /~~. I.,: o E '~ I r arrf 4' ~~ ~ Dn l ~ ~~S..o- / ..a[ C H t in'. i I LL: YO. }~ 51IN5 31~: LN . 510y+.: I ~I. P.Gf{ IY IrtW~ ...III ! f ~ ~~ I 75 i ~.I I I ~ ~_I~ ' T p~ ~ ~ D b M4. ~ ~~ FcMf1TJ-t I'(`! Z ~7 'In F L°p' 'i .a~.~ ~ a _ I -~! ~_ ~ (w ~Fti`y,}9oi_ry•1J, ~i_`4-II .~'P '?~ ` 2. •'u 9`t 7~CG 18~frf8 ,..n.u~: I'+ 46 1111 V~WFI +f I j 3 '~1 WF~'p 7~~``i.. •`'` .IAA„l9 C.' L" i i b•7s, frvr 11 11 I~( - ''~ I r,~ \. C•,A ~s "; 8 WATER ~ . L_ e:. ~ . ~, ! rs An.?!{~~_~ ~' } ,~,~~ ~ ~ ; ` ~ ~ ~~ ~ 8 WATER ,~- > > ~ I .. *_ w.I ! '`^^_ ir' Vin. - ,_ 1 ~ I 9~ \ F ~^~ ~ !' a 4 Hf0 N L'"~N ~ ~ 1. ~~! p I -i- ~ - L _. _ •. ': \ f~ ~ 0 4 f E 4TA. ( ~ i j. I Y4 'i~C' Ph 85.0' b. _ ~ I ^~ I ` 7 tn... I ~ ~ ` ^ i i ,S a 9/ 1A /7 y~ '/ ~-r ~ _ I Lb~IP dWl~ I /4) ~ I __ _ .. .a .-:'~'+x>in f. C \` 0. '<AF y /1 A ~ ~~ pir,=E ~~. ~, '~ 3t~• I) '~6tO > As} i~__ -~~~~ ~ROO~E Y_ ~,`' ~ 619 +u.~ e _ -` ~ b~! l r `T"'LJE SN4Ir~ 5 t ~. I IV~!8~~ `~. f.` E" ~ pR r} J I f.0 ~ e Z '\. ;y ~ G36 LrQ I 1 a Ii F ~ `d9 9 'I I17 q!y£y~. - ~~` ~. / 7SD ~'. ` 5'; -~i__ `^ ~ B'r O't~?:•410}~i I "^'.-. - °.::__ _ 4~i x.1.4 rt _~ W2 JaF W F~ II ` IF __. / EB~~M1ib D4 w,ur... ~ 8 D P 4E5 __ Or ?f L }J.'.. c~ .~~/~ + tI 0•n' _ tir~ ..I c~ i US~d uPw L.•f:. Srv:rY l.. ~~ ! ~ I?."a b7 M/M 0U1./T''LrNf~ \ \ IAb}to t{~u -/F c+ "~ !, ~ B6 ace, ~.", O11 ^ ~~ ~ --?!pTr -..,16. _ -______ Ty1 ,. ~\/ ~ cw-_ 7LL=- ~ =C--~7 Y~I eh i2 P".,A O SA.IVIT(yj\ SEWER I GQ~7 AS atLF S. rp~ Ml,rwG="'~' y, T. `> (,, 1. ~kA NAS cAif EM ~ 5~d /~~ a~R~A. r1e?'U J' ~.~.,: i ~-70 !L PE nVEC _ =_ I ~' .4\. :8 ~ OI. Fa,Hy _ ~.- ~fl_4 t8'.'}{. e. p, i L. Z8'.};/A. n;' I 11,8!' 75. YIF7. ~ } L'!: (•.4/se, L.0 ~ f0 1 ;I 9 ~ ~ \. 1~ /u~ qr,j "" ~•9i -.rl~ ~ \Y 14 -.."' J ~ ~? J 1 II_6 N ryi IB J 9 r..7 f Lc~ I I e.n Of ~~ iN• ~45 '2:,=. ~ __ __ "~ -...."! ~`__.._. 13 I ~' ~.,...~.,,.w,,.~,.. ~ I w/J~ ~ •sc. LC te'~ 2 eur ~i Nd ~ j r, }P,e:.,, QTOD.M WATT: AtP `i ~ KI ,' I N4IV"EMENI Ak<q Ig />3f/PT(~•E~/Py Nq~h vOFIE `(, !` /~/0:'f".•TUV.y=j usda nr' I/ ~4 ~~`~bEp SfMF~ flEkY-UW~ '\ '9' C:ewNaFJ,nN re ...n.N , FROM r bl1AyL b. :bh,,'}O CV.' 7 ~ / d w~x.?Z' XE !.'/f RAC uy II / F, ~ e.. ,`1/~ry A 77, if' 1 CQ~ it SHEET 1 ; _ s!' ~,y '.' ~_ ~- ROANOKE COUNTY ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER - UTILITY DEPARTMENT FACILITIES SERVING NORTHBROOKE, SECTION 1 '. ROANOKE COUNTY ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER UTILITY DEPARTMENT FACILITIES SERVING NORTHBROOKE, SECTION 1 ..J -. E+ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION 092600-5.g AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF $736,680 FROM THE FUTURE SCHOOL OPERATING RESERVE BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of Roanoke County, Virginia, (the "County") has determined that it is necessary and expedient to borrow not to exceed $736,680 from the Future School Operating Reserve of the County to finance certain solid waste vehicles. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY ,VIRGINIA: I. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to loan monies available in the Future School Operating Reserve to purchase solid waste vehicles (the "Loan"). The Loan shall be made on the terms set forth in this resolution. The Future School Operating Reserve shall lend an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $736,680. There will not be an interest charge for this loan. 2. The General Services Department will repay the Future School Operating Reserve with two annual payments this first in July 2001, and the second in July 2002. 3. The General Services Department may prepay the Loan at any time without penalty. 4. If the funds from the School Operating Reserve are needed before the loan is repaid, a request can be made to the Board of Supervisors to accommodate if possible. 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, CMC ' Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Penny Hodge, Schools Director of Budget Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ -8 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Funding of Seven Solid Waste Vehicles through Borrowing from the Future School Operating Reserve COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~~ BACKGROUND: This request for funding of seven solid waste trucks in the amount of $736,680 was brought to the Board at the last meeting. The Board authorized staff to proceed with the purchase but asked that we communicate with the School Superintendent and School Board to be sure they concur with the use of these reserved funds. This has now been done and we are requesting confirmation of the use of these funds. Attached is a resolution explaining the transaction, which has been reviewed and agreed to by the Chairman of the School Board and the Superintendent. This action leaves the Reserve Account at the $1,210,000 level, with $736,680 showing as a Receivable from General Services. By using this method of financing, the County saves $25,000 in net interest expense that would have been paid to an outside vendor. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: During the FY00/O1 budget process, the Board of Supervisors approved the purchase of six new automated garbage trucks and one new rearloader. Because funds were not available to purchase the required trucks at one time, the Board agreed to lease purchase them, and make the payments from the maintenance savings on the trucks. During the 2000-01 budget process, the Board asked staff to explore ways to borrow the funds internally, rather than paying the interest expense to an outside vendor. The use of the Future School Operating Reserve is safe for the County and for the Schools, and allows the County to save $25,000 in net interest expense. On September 12, 2000 the Board approved the award of these trucks to McNeilus Companies, for a total cost not to exceed $986,680. The General Services budget currently has $250,000 to be used as a down payment on these vehicles, leaving a balance due of $736,680. This contract hast now been awarded to McNeilus Companies. At the last Board meeting, staff recommendation was to borrow funds from the Future School Operating Reserve and repay these funds over the next three years. The Finance staff of the County and the Schools had discussed the issue. The Board directed staff to verify that the School Board and the School Superintendent were comfortable with this arrangement. M:\FINANCE\COMMON\Boazd-Reports\2000\9-26-OO.wpd ~. We have now discussed this borrowing from the Future School Operating Reserve with the Jerry Canada, Bill Irvin and Linda Weber. They do not think that this is a matter that concerns the schools. They think that the money is currently in the care of the County and are comfortable as long as the funds are available when needed. Our original proposal included repayment over the next three years. We can make the repayment over the next two years. The first payment will be in July 2001, and the second payment will be in July 2002. With this revision, all funds will be repaid to the fund by the time the new schools are opened. The Future School Operating Reserve was created during the 2000-01 budget process, when the Board of Supervisors set aside $1,500,000 as a means of designating new revenues for the future operating costs associated with opening the new high school and the renovated middle school in 2002-03. The Board will deposit an additional $1,500,000 into this reserve in 2001-02. Beginning in 2002-03, the school operating transfer will increase by $1,500,000 to fund the additional operating expenses of operating the new schools. Because we have been setting aside the monies in a reserve account, it will not require new revenues that year to increase the school budget by $1.5 million. Until the schools are open in 2002-03, the funds will not be needed for operating costs. Therefore the funds in the reserve account are available for debt reduction or other non-recurring uses. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are currently in the General Services budget for the $250,000 down payment. Two annual payments will be included in future budgets. The use of this internal loan will save the County approximately $25,000 in net interest expense. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution which describes the borrowing and the commitment to repay the Future School Operating Reserve. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: ~~ f Diane D. Hyatt Elmer C. Hodge Chief Financial Officer County Administrator Approved () Motion by No Yes Abs Denied O Church Received O Johnson Referred O McNamara To O Minnix Nickens M:\FIlVANCE\COMMON\Board-Reports\2000\9-26-OO.wpd ~8 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE BORROWING OF $736,680 FROM THE FUTURE SCHOOL OPERATING RESERVE BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of Roanoke County, Virginia, (the "County") has determined that it is necessary and expedient to borrow not to exceed $736,680 from the Future School Operating Reserve of the County to finance certain solid waste vehicles. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to loan monies available in the Future School Operating Reserve to purchase solid waste vehicles (the "Loan"). The Loan shall be made on the terms set forth in this resolution. The Future School Operating Reserve shall lend an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $736,680. There will not be an interest charge for this loan. 2. The General Services Department will repay the Future School Operating Reserve with two annual payments this first in July 2001, and the second in July 2002. 3. The General Services Department may prepay the Loan at any time without penalty. 4. If the funds from the School Operating Reserve are needed before the loan is repaid, a request can be made to the Board of Supervisors to accommodate if possible. 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. M:\FiNANCE\COMMON\Board-Reports\2000\9-26-OO.wpd ~~ GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Unaudited Beginning Balance at July 1, 1999 $7,269,259 6.11%~ Balance at September 26, 2000 $7,269,259 6.11 Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $7,269,259 $7,269,259 6. l 1 Note: On December 18, 1990, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25% of General Fund Revenues 2000 - 2001 General Fund Revenues $118,982,797 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $7,436,425 Respectfully Submitted, ~~ ~~ ~~~ Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer Approved By, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\GENOO.xIs 09/21/2000 / / '~~ CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Balance from June 27, 2000 Board meeting $279,722.09 Balance at September 26, 2000 $279,722.09 Respectfully Submitted, Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer Approved By, ~- Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\CAPOO.xIs 09/21/2000 lr~~ RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2000-2001 Original Budget $100,000.00 July 25, 2000 Contribution to D-Day Memorial (10,000.00) Sept 12,2000 Video distribution for Senior and Challenged Citizens Commission (1,000.00) Sept 12,2000 Project Impact (12,800.00) Balance at September 26, 2000 $76,200.00 Respectfully Submitted, LQ,r,~, ~ . ~.t~ Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer Approved By, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\BOARDOO.xIs 09/21/2000 N-v FUTURE SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation June 23, 1998 Savings from 1997-98 debt fund FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service November 9, 1999 Savings from 1998-99 debt fund FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service Balance at September 26, 2000 Reserved for Future School Operations FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation July 11, 2000 SW Co Regional Stormwater Balance at September 26, 2000 Respectfully Submitted, Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer Approved By, ~f~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator $670,000.00 1,113,043.00 2,000,000.00 321,772.00 2,000,000.00 780,145.00 495,363.00 198,421.00 $7,578,744.00 $1,500,000.00 (290,000.00) $1,210,000.00 2,000,000 (1,219,855) 2,000,000 (1,801,579) M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\SCHOOLOO.xIs 09/21/2000 .a. ACTION # ITEM NUMBER / ' ~S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER FETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid -August 2000 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors: Payroll 8/4/00 Payroll 8/ 18/00 Manual Checks Voids Direct Deposit Checks $5,503,480.83 $559,228.43 $183,299.73 742,528.1 G 580,807.24 195,409.11 776,216.35 1,660.07 1,660.07 0.00 0.00 $7,023,885.41 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. SUBMITTED BY: .~~! a~ ~~~.~/ Diane Hyatt, CFO .' N-5 Approved () Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ~ Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens No Yes Abs ~~ o 0 ~ +~+ y c,., v~ O~ O ~O O O ~--~ 00 v~ O ~O O .-. ~ ~ V O ~O ~ O N ~ M l~ h ~O N O O~ O~ l~ O~ ^-~ ~--~ O ~ O O ~ ~ O ++ N ~ O M O O [~ O oo O~ O O oo O~ N O~ •--~ N O~ O .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ N ~ O N ~ a, ~ O O O O A O ~ M V'1 O~ 01 ~--~ 00 N V1 [~ l~ ~--~ 00 M M M 00 U ~ ~O M \O ~O N 01 ~-+ Q~ 00 N N ro i ~ eo a 6~. ~ ~ ~ ~ A 00 l~ O O~ O l~ O [~ O~ vl ~t O o0 ~ l~ 00 O ~O O o0 00 O~ Vl v'i ~ 00 ~ O ~O M O~ O~ N '--~ v~ ~O ~ N O N O O ~n O N O~ 0 0~ oo r+ .-~ 00 M oo •-+ ~ ~n oo N N o0 v'~ oo N O O~ ~n ~O O O M N N ~ ~ N M O o0 O N O~~ oo M O O~ O M M N M O~ N M O ~n O N N N oo O ~--~ v'l M '-+ Ul ~ ~O ~n ~--~ 00 l~ O ~ O o0 ~--~ O~ 00 ~--~ ~t ~n ~O N v'i [~ O M O d• ~--~ ~O ~ M O ~ N .-. ~ ~ ~ v'~ M ~ l~ 00 O~ M ~ .--~ l~ v'~ M ~--~ M N ~D ~O ~--~ N ~}' M M V' •-+ N ~ 00 (~ ~ O N ~ N M ~ ~ ~ .L ~ ~ O^ .M-~ ~ ~--~ ~p O l~ [~ ~ O~ ~ ~n V ~--~ N N ~n o0 ,--~ O N ~ N Q~ ~ v'i ~p ,--~ N A O~ N N ~ v) M ~--~ N ~--~ N M N N N d' N N M ~--~ M O M •--~ ~~ M~ M N O~ O o0 N ~~~ ~~ O r O ~--~ 00 N O ~ v'~ ~ ~ O~ vl O~ l~ O O~ ~n .-~ 00 00 N ~O N ~--~ vi ~ oo l~ N ~ ~t O~ ~O O~ M ~ M O O CC ~ [~ ~ .-. ~ O~ oo ~n .-. ~ O a, ~ ~ N ~ O N ~ ~ v'~ r N M [~ O r 00 N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .--~ 00 O ~--~ oo v~ 00 N ~ N ~O vl v'l ~ M ~ ~ ~--~ v'i .-~ [~ oo O O [~ ~h I~ O~ l~ a ~--~ ~--~ M M ~ O OO ~--~ ~ N O N d' O~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ N ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~O ~ N .--~ N v'~ ~O N N i. ~ •--~ da ~ O o ~ M >'+ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O N O O N N ~--~ ~ ~ V' N M V1 O .-. M N d' --~ O v'~ ~ N N ~ O ~ aI ~--~ M N ~O M ~n N oo O oo M O~ M l~ O~ ~ oo vi O O .,,~ ~ ~ a ~ v'i N N M O O --~ ~--~ ~--~ h N ~ ~O ~ ~O ~° l~ vl [~ ~ O ~ M N N O ~--~ O ~ N O '~' ~ +~' C ~O O~ ~O M ~O M M o0 N ~--~ N h --~ M M O ~ .~ M ~--~ N 7 O~ N Vl vi O~ O~ 00 vi A ~ 'pC ~ ~ N M ~--~ ~ [~ N ~ 00 ,--~ N ,--~ vl O O~ ~ N M M M N v'i N C G~ W ~ ~ O C~ ~ .~ a ~ ~ C ~ C ~, O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o0 ~ O v~ ~O O ~--~ O [~ O~ ~--~ ~n ~O a~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O~ N O I~ 00 O N O O O O M N N bA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~n O O O v~ O o0 ~ ~O O O~ [~ O oo O oo O~ O~ vi ~--~ W 'O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v'i vi O O ~O O~ ~O v~ 0 0~ v'i ~° O O~ v'i O ~--~ 0 0 ~n t~ O O~ M ~ ~ N a O O M [~ ~--~ ~ v'i O •--~ ~ O N r M M [~ ~ M V [~ N v'i ao O~ ~ ~n O ~n oo l~ ~--~ l~ ~ O p ~Q 00 ~--~ ~--~ ~ ~--~ N v'i 00 O~ ~O .~. ~ ~ ~ ~--~ N N ~ ~ M O N d' V ~ O l~ M ~--~ N ~--~ N ~ .-. N N N V r.+ O N N ~O vi ri N ~ ~ O ~ w r.+ C~ r..+ ~1. '_' >' ~ ~ ~ Grr c3 ~, m ~ E~ ~ ° ° ~ ~ p y w ~, y ° y m ~ '"' ~ b a~ • ~ a~ y '~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ O f-~ v c0 ~ C w ~ b0 ~ y ~" ~ `n ~ • ~ ° y ¢ ~ p°p ~ a-bi ¢ Cn ~.y N y.y 1--1 (,~ ~ ~'+ iC U ~ V1 fA C~.y w ~ O ~ ~ ~ "O y `U ~+ ~' o w a ~ • ~ ~ ~' ~ a~ .~ ~ ~ a °~ ~, ~ ~ ° ° ~ O o an oo ~ a~ > U '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U k' ~, .r ° ~ cd ~ • ~ ~ ~ a> ~ Y a> a~ ~ .b ~, .~ O ~ a> a> >.. s.. ~ v O ~ ~ y `'" v a~"i a'"i ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O O ~ sue. ° ckV •~:+ O fXC +~-+ L: ~ ~ y ,~ ,t°", . ~ N N .~ .~ Q) .'~• N O ~ a) y N ,~ ,Y .Y ~ ~° r~:aaaa~•..aUww~F~xHO¢~..aa,wUawa;a;UUc~~c~:Zv~3o3wOOF-~ ~, °~~' a ~ N Z o O_ ,--. N_ _M ~_ O N M ~ v1 ~O l~ oo O~ O ~ N 7 [~ oo Q~ O N oo O ~--~ ~O O -~ ~ M O N ~° N M N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M~ ~• Ct ~~~ ul ~O ~° ~O [~ 00 00 00 01 01 Gz. N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O .-. °~ y ~ ~ O w N A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, Y ou ~ o 0 " > ~ o a ~ y ~ ~ ~ i ^C ~ M N V 1!^ • C~ ~ N _ L CC a c a~ a> ~a ~~ n.r CA '~ ti '~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ b a '+~+ O ~+ ~ ~ r.+ W C3 O O ~ U ~ a~ E a~ e~ 0 0 .~ M O ^C b C W 0 '% a s C O N O w ~, 0 w ea ~ A ~ o a ~ ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ 7 C y 00 ^C O ~Q .--1 H ~--i r r o, 0 N M O~ O~ N M N 7 O~ .ti .. .. 0 F-~ 'O a c~ ~. C7 0. M ~ ~ N O 00 rr``~ I~1 G 6l V O ~--~ ^C G "~ 0 0 M .--. O Y O O 0 ~ ~ ~ ~~y L L L LL ~ W ~ .L Y oA O ~ c~ c ~ O ~] 'fl O~ ~ ro U y0.j N >"' ro u Li. N~(, z ~ N N-~ ~„ .. o ~ b ~ ~ \ ~ i a W ~ o ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ h O .., r.., C~ .r O it O O ..fin ~ M L7 '~ ~ O ,L. ~ ^" ~ ^C V 6~ C7 y^ ~ C W O ~ '~ ~L ~ a W ~ w ~~I ~ ~ N ~ O U ~ ~ ~ o W ~ w O 6~ '~ 6~ V n. I N ~ ~ M z ~ N L ~ u 7 O 0~ C 6~ V ~ L L ~ ~ A L d C ~ W ~ ~" ~ u C C ~ ~ ~ u OW i T ~ i' C O O ~ a K W ~. a~ ou 'O 7 m 'O {~i a Gi. L C 0 0 .~ C GTM ~ .--~ [~ r ~ V'1 M M M O O Q1 N N l~ O ~ O 0 0~ 0~ r o~ ao .~ o0 00 ~ oe o0 0 ~ 00 00 M N ~ ~ V ~ ~ O O O O vl 00 ~ vl M v~ O v7 r+ O l~ 00 O [~ ~' O M ~--~ ~--~ l~ O ^~ •--~ N ~O [~ N M O~ ~ O~ N 00 l~ ~O M o0 N N ~ l N ^' N ~D O M ~ ~O o0 N d' ~--~ O .--i 00 O~ 00 M .ti N O\ t~ 00 00 N oo .~ t~ ~n M oo O~ M M v-~ `p rl ~ M M 7 .-a ~p ~ N N ~n oo M r O ~--~ O N M \O M N 00 M ~ ~ ~ N N M .-. ~--i ~ ~ M O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 O~ N 00 O~ ~O ~O N O~ ~ N r-+ O N ~ \O O N ~ N v~ O [~ M .--~ r. M °o ~n °o v> O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 00 0 Vl I~ N ~ ~ ~ 0o N ~-- N M 00 .--~ O O~ O O~ O~ M l~ M M oo ~O 7 ~ M i ~ • r ~ O~ i ~ d' '7 O ~n O O M O~ ~ v~ O 00 0o O~ •--~ .--~ O •--~ •--~ ~ ~--~ O M N ~O ~ ~ ~ l~ O~ 00 O~ M N ~ ~ O M O~ ~O ~O O N ~O O~ V' M ~ O N O ~O O ~O [~ N ~--~ O~ \O ~ M ~ H 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn o 0 o a O O O O O O O M 0 0 0 M ~--~ O~ O~ O~ ~ O~ M O N O O~ .--i N N l~ N Vl ~O N ~/'~ l~ V) ~--~ O~ p~ v~ v~ O [~ v~ M v7 O~ 'ct ~ M O ~ ~O M M O~ M O~ O~ N l~ Q~ vi O O ~O ~ ~ O o0 O~ O~ N O N N ~ O~ ~O ~O M 01 O N ~--i i, w+ .~ .~ O cC Q ~ ~ .~ ~ •ro C ^d U ~ ¢o 'y ~~h U +p V Cit ~, o C ~ ~ > ~3 ~ ~ N O .~ ~ bA ~ y O ~-1C7 W o O_ O_ O .-+ O O O 0 C/1 CC •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~--i ~ ~ O U O o ~--~ N O O 0 0 L." O U U 4~"-i [~ O ~ ~ ~~ w L'r N C/~ ~ ~ (~ o ~ ~ °'~ a a w,~" oU a W ~ ~ a w U Q o O O O O M M M M O O O O ~ ~ ~ oro O ~ O t~ ri ~ ~ O v-~ ~ ~O -~ 7 ~ ~ v'i O~ ,--~ O~ vl ~ O [~ 00 ~ H ~ ~ N O V 1 00 O 00 00 .--~ ~O O~ N d' M 00 d' M M 00 O~ 00 O~ •--~ M Vl V) 00 ~ N N d' ~Y ~ ~--~ O ~t O~ ~O M ~ ~ ~"~ 00 O ~ v'~ O~ N ^i M O ~ O ~n O ~ O O~ 00 .--~ O~ ~ N ~O M ~n O v~ ~O ~? ~ ~ N v'i ~ N M ~O oo ~n O~ ~-'~ l~ 00 ~ 7 N •--~ ~ O t~ O ~n O O N O M N O O~ .-w 0o v~ ~ N O~ O~ N [~ O N O~ N ~--i N O~ ~ 00 ^-~ U'i 00 .--~ l~ 00 O M O: p~ l0 ~ .-~ O N ~ 00 .--~ et N N M V'i ~ .--~ .--~ v'i O oo ~ t~ O ~O ~ Oi oo .~ ~ M N N ~ ~ . M . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O v'i N N O~ ~O rf [~ ~O ~t O~ ~--~ ~ .ter ~ vl N O~ 00 N M 00 \O 00 N N N ~O O~ oo ~t [~ ~D M M ~O o0 l~ v~ N Vf M N ~--~ ^' O rr .b O c~ ~ 3 .~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ vii C ~ v bA N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C C7C~~W~C7 0 N M ~ vl ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~ O ---~ O~ M •--~ O O O V'1 •~-~ ~ 'M"' ~ H ~ o 00 0 ~ ~o o ri ~n ~ O l~ ~n N ~ O O~ ~ v7 '~ M vl [~ ~/1 N N O .--~ 00 M O O~ O M ~O H N ~ l~ 00 M M o0 v'1 N 0o O ~D l~ .-. r ~ 00 ~--~ vl N N O N ~ ~ ~' l~ ~O ~--~ M N •--~ ~--~ ~p M O N O M~ O M ~ v'1 O N v'~ l~ ~ O O ~ O~ ~ O~ O v N O O i N tt ~ M O oo ~n ~ ~ .--~ O oo d' r ~n N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O ~n ~ M O O~ ~D 0o O M N N O O o0 7 v'i O [~ ~O M O O l~ O ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V1 ~ O~ O N N O 00 O l~ M t~ 00 ~O M _ ~O 7 ~--~ ~ o0 00 M O O~ [~ l~ h ~D .-i M v~ N ~--~ A N N M ~ O~ 00 00 ~--~ N N ~ .-. r O ,., ~ O G) ~ a+ W rn N N ~~ ~ ~~ y 3 ~ b N Q Q ~ GC . U s .~ ~ . xx~~¢.s~x x it .~.+ .~ c •.V-i ~ c ~ C ~ ~ O ~av°~Ua~v°>>- o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~, ~ 'O ~ ~ ~ A O ~ \° OD ~ ~ W W eC 7 ~ m o~ ~ °~ ~" ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~. ~ u ~ C ~ ~ C ~ '1 .~ ~ i ..w ~ ~ ~ C~ ~O ~ W ~ ~«. Oaa ~ i+- ~ .'~ ~ 0 ~ U ~ a. , N ~ z w N O O ~--i M O 'O 6~ ^C C W b O ~L a~ a 0 C O N O s ~. O fs, u ~ L L CO ~ D O y ? L d ° a~i W ~ ~' 6~ pD u q C C ~ Y ~ 7 u OW ~ L 7 s c 'fl o ~ a x W .. ou 'O 0 m -a a w L c C7 i 0 0 '~ C GT, N O~ l~ ~p O~ \O O~ ~n ~p ~ ~ 00 O O O N O O O N Q~ l~ ~ ~ 00 ~--! N pp ~O ~O O O O ~--i O O O ~ rr V'1 \O M N r A ' _//_j 7 / V "r[I'~ r O\ ~n O ~ ~--~ ~ ~O O .~ ~--~ v~ 0 0 0 0 ~O 0 0 O O O~ M O M M O~ N O ~ ~--~ O~ O O O ~--i O O O N [~ O~ ~--~ 00 v'i oo O O ~ M O~ N O C O 1f~ O~ ~D ~ ~O M v~ ~ ~ 00 00 ~O v~ 00 O ~ O ~ N ~O ~O 1!' M O N N O~ O O O 7 ~--~ ~O 00 O~ l ^ O ~ ~O .-+ ~O t~ 00 ~--~ N ~O ~--~ ~ O O O .-i oo ~O 7 O ~O ~--~ O 00 O 00 O~ M N ~--~ ^' ~ O ~ O 00 ~ ~--~ .-~ O .--~ lp •-+ 00 Vl M O Vl O\ ~ •--' O ~/'1 ~D N IIf nj .-~ M .-ti .--~ .--~ ~ ~ r+ ~ O rr v-i O ~ O~ ~O ~ O ~ O~ ~n 0 0 0 0 ~ O O O O~ O ~O O ~O ~O O l~ O ~; o0 00 .--~ 0 0 0 00 O O O ti O~ O~ O O O v'i O O ~ O O V 0 0 0 1f1 O O O M O v'l O ~O ~O ~n l~ ~ ~ ~O v~ M '~ M O ~ vi O~ ~n l~ ~O ,--~ .~ N o0 O ~"~ V f 00 O ~O ~ N l~ ~O l~ O~ M ~ O N vl M l~ ~O ~ .--~ ~ 01 01 N N M M [~ ~' ~ .--~ N O~ ~O O O ~D O O M O M O O N O O O N O O O N 00 N O O 0 0 0 ~ O O ~--~ O O O .-+ O O O f? ~ O~ O ~ O O v1 O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O~ •--~ ~ ~p ~--~ ~--i O O O ~p O~ ~ .-r .--i \p ~p ~ ~--~ M In ~O ~G N 00 M O M O M N O l~ O O~ ~ ~n O~ O O O 00 O O O N N ~--~ O M O O~ [~ O ~O M ao ~--~ O O O M O O O O N O I M Ct I~ O O N O~ O oo O O O 00 O O O 00 , ~ ~ O O O ~ ~--~ ~ ~ N ~ O 00 [~ ', ~o o, v-~ . ~ ~ v, oo r, .~ vi oo ~n o0 00 '. 01 ~ ~O .~ M v~ ~O ~O ~O M 01 O~ ~ '. M ~--~ I~ M M N v~ ~--i vl O ~O C~ .-. M .~ ,~ ... r M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, O O O ~ O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O M moo; r ~v-~o .-~ rrc~ooo ,~ o;~o vi o, ~ ~ ~O N 7~ M M ~ O M 0 0 0 O ~O N O~ ~ _ N 1!^ O~ oo O~ ~ ~--^ ~ O ~--~ O O O 00 _ 0o O^ N 00 ~n M ~O oo [~ ~n l~ O ~n v'> -~ O O O .~-i o0 ~O et M ~--~ ~ 00 ~ N o0 ~--~ 00 N ~--~ ,--i O O ~--~ O O O ~--~ .--i N ~n O\ ~ O ~ 00 O ~ O ~ •--~ ~--~ M ~ ~ N R N ~--~ ~' ~--i ~--~ N R N ~--~ ~ O~ ~D ~O .--i ti C~ L O a y f1. ,~ ~ ~ °, ~ _O c o ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A .~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ a bA ~ O V ~ ~ ~ . ~ U ~ Z "O b H rs.aU o a.UWU o W~1~E-~R:U o ~~ o ~--~ N M ~--~ N M vl ~ N M V ~O l~ ~--~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~o~o ~~t~r aooooo00000o rna~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O y i.r C~ i.+ O H q c~ ~. C7 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: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Update on CORTRAN Contract COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: At the September 12, 2000 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, a request was made to approve additional funding and the execution of the contract for the CORTRAN program for the current fiscal year. The Board asked staff to find an alternative funding source and to report back to the Board in 30 days. The County Administrator had also suggested in his comments that we seek alternatives for service for the next budget year. In order to maximize the benefit and contain the cost, staff has issued a Request For Proposal (RFP) for the provision of this type of service. We will bring the results of this study and any funding request to the Board of Supervisors at your meeting on December 5. Respectfully submitted, Approv d by lyi ~~ h: John M. Chamb iss, Jr. Elmer C. Hod Assistant Administrator County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Church Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McNamara To ( ) Minnix Nickens ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~-'~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session to discuss Fire and Rescue staffing issues COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the September 12 meeting, the Board asked that the staff bring back a report that addresses Fire and Rescue staffing issues. This time has been set aside to discuss with the Board development of a staffing plan for the Fire and Rescue Department. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson _ _ _ Received () McNamara- _ Referred () Minnix _ _ To () Nickens _ _ r t p ,. , ~rp~~^~ I~ ~r ~. ~ J ~ ~ 1 ~ ~; ~` { _. 1 , _-- ~ ~ t : j-. k~ ,, T • K ~ ~ Y ~1~ Y ~" .. G- ~` ..b; s~ t r, „_. N~yf ~` w r - ..._.. 1 ~, y.' ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~:.~x qr~v ,L~ .. ~ ~ a ~~ 4`P: ~ L , ~.._ ~ r ~~ _ { ~~ i i ~ byJ, q m ~.1,{n~ ~~~ ~ t y { ;. P t }.,.?~ ~.~,. .4 , ~~ 4J •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~q o ~' ~ ~ 0 0~ ~ ~ ~- I-a C? e~i'_' W '~ °~ =: ~J~ ~-~, ~.t"" ~_r ~) La~_ P~~' ! a E ~ ~--- ~... C O .~ N L m 0 0 0 N l~ N L Q~ a--~ Q 0 0 /V, W O O N N O 1 i F t 1 _` _ " 1_ 1 ~~~ _ ~ .° F ~ ~ ~ 1 ~Y ° ~ ~ ~~ ~ o ~ ~ 1 ~ -~ ~ ~, a-' ~ O O 1 •~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ _.__ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ a~ Q _--- ' ~ ° ~~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ z J ~ ._ ,o 1 .,~ o o ~ ~ ca ~ ~ .~ •- ~ ~ 1 ._ ~ i ~ -~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~t; ~ ,_ ~ i ti ° ~ ~ ~ a. m a~ - 1 ~ a~ r~ 1 a~ :~ ° ~ o ~ ~ > ~ ra ._ 0 t •T_ O i ~ ~ ~ ~ N 1 ~ N .~ • • • • • o 1 ~, 2 M r. 1 ~ .~, V ~ O 1 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~~ F t° .~~~~ -- 1 ,~ ~ a~ _ _ W V 1 1 ~ ~ ~ .O ~ ~ U .. ~' 1 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ `~' ~ o K O ~ O 7! e~ .. L io-I r -- ___ ~ ~ ~ ~ I-- 1 __ ___ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ _. ~ _ ~ .- p L ~ ~ V y.; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ '~ cn ~ • - 4~ ~ ~ 1 .- ~ ~ ~ c~ 1 o a~ a~ ~ o 0 ~ U~ ~ ~ z O N 1 ~ N .~ • • • • o 1 ~, 1 d' O M 00 Cn to ~ ~ '~ '~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~(!~') ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > 4~ ~ > O ~ a--~ V V U V V [..~ ~ ~ `" r~ ~ ~L ca 4~ `~ ~ p V ~ O o ~ ~ ~. m ~ ~ o ... ~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ r~ ,~ ~ ca .~ ~ o ~~c~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ V ,~ N '_ ~ N '_ (n O ~ ~ (~ 4J ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ p 0 ~- ca p 0~ c~ o ~ I I ~ I I N N i O '~ I I I ~J ~ r I ~ a~ V ~ ~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ m ~ v ~ ~ ~ I ~r, o ~- ~ > r~ ~ __ ~ y,k ~ ~ ~ O ~ 4J .-: ~ V 1 ~-~~~ ~ ~ a~ ~ _ ~_ ~ _ _ ~ -~ ~ 4~ .~..~ O ~ ~ i 1 _ ___ __ ~ ~ c~ ~ >, ~ ~F 4~ r~ cn v, ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ - I ~ - i 4) i ~ ~ o ~ - ~ I , ~__. _ __ ,U O O ~ ~ ~ ~ > I __~___ __ _ _ ~, ~ O ,,v ~• ~ 4~ 4~ ~ ___..._ .~_ . _ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O o O -~-~ O O X I y ca ~ ~ •- ~ ~ ~ ~ - -- 4~ -~ ' - a--' ~ a-' I ~~ E ~ ~ ~ O v O 4~ ~ O ca I • - ~ ~ (n Cn ~ to o > a~ a~ ~ ~ O ~ O O O H O O o ~ c~U 0~ OQ D O N 1 ~ o 1 ~., 1 I W ,O V I L 0 .~ -~--~ .~ N (~ 4~ ._ ^~ W C, L 4- L .~ U ._ 4~ c~ L ^~ W ^~ ^A W ~' 0 .~ ~.~... O ._ ._ E N (/) C i "~ (a L v Q ~ c~ 0 0 .~ a~ 0 0 0 0 N i ~O N O 3 O ~ ~ k - ~. ' O ^ ~ ~ L ~ L ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~ ~ ___ __ _ N ~ ~~ 1 ____._v }. __ __ ~ J ~ ~ ~~ .~ .~ _ . ____ _ i .. ~~ L ~ -~ :~ ~ 1 ~ o O ~ s ~O~ a ~ •- 1 _._____~._ __ ~ ~ - ,' ___ ~____ ~ ~ V O ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ .- 4~ .~ ~ 4~ `~ ~ O J •- ~ ~ ~ V ~ a--~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ V 4~ .. ~- ~ ~ ._ ._ ~ o ~ ~ i -~ ~ Q ~. ~ • L 4~ V 0 i ~. ca . i- 4J V r~ Y ^ ~ L O ~ V ~ L a~ ~~ ~O ~ O ca ~- • - ~. V O c~ cn ~ J .~ Q Q V 4- ~ -~ O 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ _ .- ~ ~ 4~ ~ .N ._ V - V . _ .~., c~ ~ ._ a~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q .~.~ V 0 0 .~ 0 0 0 0 N N i O~ O 1~ II y ~ ___ Q ~~ 1 ____ . _~__ ~ ~ ~, y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~• 3 tYy7G J ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ryY ~~r ~~~ 1 ~ ~ y ~~ yew _ , _____ O y ~~ Q 4Q ' __ _ ~ v `~ ~ - ~ ~ ,~ __.__- ~ ' v~~ ~`_ ~ ~ y 1 ~~',. _ O ,~ ~ ~, ~ ~` 1 ___ ~~ ___ .~ ._ _.__._-- `I ~ ~ ~ Q ~ p ~ -'~~ ~3 ~ ~ ~~ I ~ ~ ~ CI ~ v, ~~ ~ ~ l ~ ~~ G1 ~ ~ C ~ ~ ' I _~ _ •~~ '~ j m` ~ ~~, ~- ~', ' y ~~~,r ~ ~ ~ I 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ ,1 + ~ ,~ ~O ~ 0~0 ° t~D l~ ° M N O~- O ~.~ ' `w ~~ p ~~ninanS ~o a~u~y~ K . !''' --- ~,~~z:: -__ y O Q ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~~ y ~ w 3 ;~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ A 1~ ~~ '~~ ;Y O i_ •~i ~~~~ 0 °' U ~ O O `~ ~ x Q U .~ m ~ ~ ~ M O N .o a~ O 0 0 0 N N i O .j C ~n ~~ ~W\ ~LJ `~v ~v ~~. s s 0 U a.~ ~--i . ,.~ N D bA 4, 0 .o a~ ~. 0 0 0 0 N i ~O N i O~ O r--i N C~ N Y3 ~~ 1 ___- I Y 1 W 0 M M N 0 O r---I O O ~ ~ QQ r..~ ~ ~ 1 M ~ M a~ .--~ N ~O O \° o o ~ N .o a~ ~, 0 N N O 0 0 0 N N i O~ O N r ~~ N Q1 L O .~ ~. Cn ~~ L L N , ,, ~ ~ LL V ~~ u Ca C~ N C -~ N ~ m O }, ~ ~ O O ~ O (~ U V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ m O ~ c ~ ~ ~ ca o ~ ~ cn o ~~' a ca . ca ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ca ~ o ~ ~ . ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ J i -~ ~ ~ .. ~ O ._ ~ ~ ~ O ~ p C~ ~ U ~ > _ ~ ~ ~ O O N ~ ~+ J "~ ~ O N ~ J _N ~_ . _ ~i U > •"~ r N M ~ ~ a a ~ ~ 0 0 .~ a~ O 0 0 0 N N i O N .-~ '~ ~- 4J ~~ O~ N O ....~ N bA C 4~--i O O ... ~, O O O O N N O 0 N ~ O • I1~ _____ ___ ___~-___ 1 __ _ + __ 1 i _~ ~„~ 1 's O .~ .~ O 0~ ~~ O1 A M v) L r" V ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ 4~ ~ - O t1) ~ 4J p • - ~ W i ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ - oC ~ ~ p i 4~ ~- ~ ~ p L p ~ ~ 4- oC ~ ~ 0 O • - ~' Q O ,~ ~ ~ o moo ~ .~ o ~ .~ ~ o .° ~ _ ~ ~ A ` ~ ^ - ~ -1~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.- 4J ~~- ~ p~ - O p p •- ~ .- - ~ V ~, . - V _ ~~ ~~ _~ ~.~, ~ Q ca ~ O o ~ ~ ~ O o U ~ D ~ Cn U ,~ N O 1 .~' N dl i ~ ~ ~ N ' •ti N V ~ ~ U L Q t ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ o v ca 4.) ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ O .~ oC a~ ~ ~ o ~ a~~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ U ti 1 ~ p Qz ~ ~ ca 1 _ O ~ o "' c ' •~ oC U ' w ~ • • • ^~ W r~ V J U O ~ o .., O ° oC ~ ~ ~ ._ ~ ~ ~ •~ a~ ~ ~ L ~ 0 1 ~~ ~ r~ .~ ~ a. > = o r~ ~ > o N N O I~ I~ ~~ '~~'s 0) . ,y C~ N ~~ 0 N C~ N N ~~~~~ v> 4~ O ~~ O L n , L n , \i/~ ~ ^ , ~1 ~ .,1-~ ~ O V 1 ~ O O - O U ~ ~ ~ 4- J O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ O ~' V ~ U ~~ O O ~. O ~,, ~ L (~ ~ 0 ~ .~ ~ O ~ ~ Q ~ O ~ ~ ~. , i ~ ~ ,V Q ~ .~ a--~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ .. ~ O O O ~ ~ > O ~ O .~, ~ ~- ~ 0 N i ~O N O i~ LJ I~ 1 f~ •~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ cCj ~ ~ "~ 0 0 0 •~ N chi) N L m .-, w 0 0 .~ a~ 0 0 0 0 N i N i O { ~~ i _~ 0 . ,-~ CJ ~U ~'~ 0 v .," N n , W p ~J O ~ ~ L ~ 4~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ O O to ~ i- O O O ~- U ~, ~' ~ .~ Q ~ ~ ~ o ._ ~ U ~ ~ J ° ~ O ._ ~~ ~ O ~. c~ ~ O ,~ ~, V o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~= ~ .~ ~ ' ~. ~ ~ ~. O ~ ~ >` ~. .~ p ~ ~ Q ~ o0i ca 4~ ~ c~ cn ~ O a.., ~ 4~ .. V O ~ > ~ ca ._ a~ o 0 0 ~' ~- i i L 4~ o N i N i O M ~J Q f -\ U N . ,~, ~, V ~ O 4~ ~ ~ O 4~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ cn ~ ~ ~ ~ .p ~ ,~ •- V :~' ~ f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ._ L ~ ~ ~ (n ~ ~ L ~ N i--i 0 ~ ~ V ~- ~ ~ ._ ~ °~ cn ~ ~ ~ •- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ ~ 4~ 4~ ~ ~ .~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ U ~- i ~ ~ Q. ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 p 4~ 4) ~ O 4J U ~ oC ~ Z ~ N O N 4J N ~~ "'~i c 0 d' M 00 (n (~ ~ ~ ~ 4J 4) 4J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O 4> > O c~3 ~ O > ~ O > O ~ V ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O .~ O V S O o u. ~- ~ u. ~ ~ m ~~ r~ .~ ~ ca .~ ~ o .~ ~ V _ .~ ~ V _ as O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ '- V ~ '- V ,~ N '_ ~ N '_ to 4J ~ ~ Cn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ > ~ N ~ p ~ ~- ca p ~~ ca o ~ I I ~ I I N N i O '~ 0) N ~~ 0 0 ~, ~ U ~ ~ ~ 4~ m i V 4J ~- ~ > r~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ a~ ~ R3 V ~ ~ a--' 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i _ ~ o ~ ~ L i ~ o ~ O ~' ~. ~ O 4~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ._ ._ ~ o ~ O O O -~ L. s- X ~ ~ ~ to ~ `~- ~, o~ o~ o ~~ ~a~ ~~ ~ i ~ ~ J ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ 4~ ~. 4J O > ~ ~ o ~ O ~ 0 0 O H O o ~ vU ~~. DQ D ,~ N i O I: ;_ ~~ _;_-=-- ,_ N ~1 " 1~ S Q N W L I Q.~ _ 0 ~ U ~ Cn O J ~ Q ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ ~ - ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ca ~ ~ ~ .- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ca ~ ~ O I~ ~ N ~ O ~ i V ~ ~ ~ ~. O ~ '- .~ O ~ ~. Cf ~ ~ ~ cv ._ oC ^~ W ^~ W O O ~- i ~- o a~ o ~ ~., ~~ ~ ~ ~ °' ~ ~ ~ ._ ._ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~• ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LL- V - ~ ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ '- ~ a c~ ~ i ~ o c~ ~ ~ ° 0 ~- Q y- N O 0 N U ^~ O W ~~ _~ ~~ O' V ~ 4- ~ ^, W i ^~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ^- •- ~~ O •- ~ O ~ ~ ~, O ~ ~.~- ~ U 4- ~ ~ O ._ ~ O ~ .- V ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ U 4J .. ~ ~ ~ ~ •- .- ~ ~ .~ 0 .~ • "~ O V N ~ L O Q~ V ~V O O L (n Q ~ ,, a ~ ~ L •~ Z ~ V ~ 'i fa ~ f~ Q • .~ 5..~ i O L ~' 0 CJ~ cn .~ ~ O Q ._ U ° ~t- ~ ~ O 4~ ~ ~ O O a--~ [~ ~ N ._ ._ V a..~ ~ ~ .- ~ o ~ ~ o 0 N .~..~ V N 0 ~ ~• 3 ~: ,~v~~ ~ y ~~ y ~ w 0 y '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ,~ ~ y ,~ ~\ W ~ i\ y ~ ;~ ~ yy ~ w ~ ~ p y 10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ y ~ w 3 ;~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ W ,~ ` A~, 0 5~~~ ~ ~ 3 - ~ j ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~+ ~ ~_ •~ ,L m f~ ~ c • _ = • L m ~ ~ ~ i --- ~-- i i I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 O O ~ O N O O O ~ ~ ~ t D t C) ~eninans ~o a~uey~ 0 .~, ~U 00 C ~ O Q ti ~ ~ ~L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U '~ N d ~ ~ M ~ ~ O N r 00 b~A ~1-r O 0 .~ O Q 0 0 0 N i N O~ O ., 4 G~~`_ ~,~._ ~, ~~ ~, __. ~~ . ,~,, OJ ti O D -~ bA Q 0 0 .~ 0 O 0 `~ ° ~ o N • N ~ N r--~ \° 0 N N C~ N 0 M M N 0 r--~ o . ~ o ~ ~ 00 ~, • ~ M ~ 1 ~ ~O T --, 0 N ~ ~ N M . ~--~ ~ N .'..~ C/1 d. N 0 cam, 0 0 .~ a~ 0 O GA 0 0 0 N i ~O N O ~J ~~ N al i O d1 O fl. .~ (/') ~ J = Q ~ L L 0 ~ ~ ~ N ,~; L ~ O Ca C6 ~ ~ m O _ ~ ~ ~ Y N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ m ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ., ca p c o ~ L _c ~ ~ ~1 i.i ' A ~ -1-+ U cQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ .~ o ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ O i.. -~ ~ _ ~ .. C 0 ._ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ U ~ U ~ > _ ~ ~ Y ~ O V J '~ p ~ J .~ to _~ .*.r C . ~i U > _ _ L _ ~ _ ~ _ ~ _ ~ ~ C6 CCf C6 CQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ c~ c~ c~ ~". ~F 0 0 .~ O C/1 O O O N N i O~ O ., N C ~.} p~ ~ - ~ . ~ d N ~j ~ N bA cd O O .., s.. O O O O N N O~ O \° 0 N (~ O _a ~~ } r • r•,, .~ ti d 4~ ~~ '~ O~ w M v, L .~ ~~ ~~ V ~ ~ Cn ~ ~ 4~ ~ - O t!1 ~ 4J p ~ - ~ W i ~ ~ p _ ~ ~ 4J ~- O ~ ~ ~ ~ L 4~ y-- ~ ~ p ~- p ~ ~ 4-- oC ~ ~ 4-- ~ ~ -~ .J p 0 .. Qo ~~~ ~ oo ~ .- o ~ ~ .o ~ p •~ ~ - ~ - ~ ._ .. ~ V ~..~ V V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4- . - 4~ ~ .~ -_ O O O ~ ~ ^ ~ V .~ • ~~ ~~ - ~ ~-,~, ~ Q ~ ~ o 0 U ~ ~ t11 U N i O ., r'1 LJ 0 .,~, 0 V ti c .~ V ~~ ^~ W W 4~ ~ ~ 4~ Q ~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i '- U ~ Q ~1 O 4J - ~ ~,/) . V ~ •- ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ i-- - _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ L V O ~ _ ~ .. ~. C~ ~ ~ N ~ 4~ O i ~ ~ U w ^~ W r~ V J U O ~ o O ° ~ ~~ '~„~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ cn (n ~~ a~ i '- a~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ i '~.'' ~ •~ ~ ~> = o ca i > o N i N O ~~:~ a~ ~- s~ ~1 N . ~, U N ~~ N U N N ~~~~~ ~n .-, 4~ O ^~ ~~ L L ~ a.. -~-~ ~ O ~ ~ O O - o U a~ ~ ~ J a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 ~ .~, O ~ V ~ ~ ~~ O D ~ O V o ~ ~ ~ ~ 4J ~ Q O ~ ~ ~ ._ L ~ ~ V ~~ Q a--~ .~J ^ ~ V~ ~ 4~ ,~ O ~ O C~ O O ~ ~ .. L ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °o N i N i O . , AGENDA ITEM NO. #' APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~ ~~ S ~r\/IJ~L,~Jo~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED BELOW- • Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. • The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. • Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. • Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. • Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: L~~ N ~~l rt~a2~== SS ADDRESS: ~ ~~ ~ ~/~.s ~ N s I~~r - ~N , PHONE: ~ G~ ~- ~ 01~ J AGENDA ITEM NO. ~~ APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ,~~CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: V~ ~ ~ ~-- I l L i I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED BELOW; • Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. • The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. • Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. • Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. • Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~ry ~ ~~ ~i ADDRESS: S ~-~ ~ R~~C PHONE: ~ ~ (- Z ~ ~S AGENDA ITEM NO. APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC NEARING -ORDINANCE ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: v ~~ ~INIA ~A S ~1 P~U~ ~ ~ S~N1~1T would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED BELOW; • Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. • The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. • Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. • Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. • Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~la2tS ~AU~Ni/SS ADDRESS: SOS ~ -CW~.(.t/~, pGL[)GK KNDB ~-UI~Dt ~t7q.NU~~-j ~~ . Zy~~~ PHONE: S U ~I7 OSb(o ~ fi September 26, 2000 Honorable men of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. e With respect to the community's desire for co-location of the new Virginia Gas pipeline within the easement already established for such purpose, the citizens of Roanoke County thank you for your recognition and support of the environmental as well as the public and private property interests of our county. You have demonstrated that preservation of our county's viewsheds, natural resources and beauty must be considered when corporate development encroaches upon our county's public and private assets. Subsequent to your unanimous passing of the August 8, 2000 resolution memorializing the Virginia Gas Pipeline Company, East Tennessee Natural Gas Company and the Duke Energy Corporation to construct a natural gas pipeline on a corridor already in existence and operation in Roanoke County , Virginia, a town hall meeting was held with representatives from Virginia Gas, Duke Energy, Roanoke Gas as well as several Qf our elected representatives in the general assembly,, the State Corporation Commission and Mr. Minnix present at the meeting. The result of this open forum was: A) A general consensus among the state and local officials that property owners were not provided due process in the notification progress; and B) The following day, Duke Energy, recognizing the desires of our community offered several proposals, which included co-location, increasing gas flow through pressurization and other alternatives that would meet the equally important preservation interests of our community and our elected civic and state representatives. However, Virginia Gas Company, and its partner in this endeavor, Roanoke Gas Company, have refused to re-negotiate their contracts in order to placate the property and preservation interests so eloquently expressed by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. Incidentally, the citizens of Montgomery County and its Board of Supervisors have followed Roanoke County's lead and passed a similar resolution and are faced with the same lack of regard for that county's interest as has been demonstrated by Virginia and Roanoke Gas Companies to our community. In fact, Mr. John Williamson, President of Roanoke Gas went on record in the September 14, 2000 issue of the Roanoke Times as stating the options do not serve his company's needs and it is sort of a "Johnny-Come-Lately' opportunistic proposal. He goes onto state the Duke Energy proposal "is an alternative but from our (Roanoke Gas) perspective it is not the best alternative." Statements like these clearly demonstrate that Roanoke Gas, our local gas provider, is simply looking after its own interest and is ignoring the equally if not more important interests formally expressed by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and others. Duke Energy's proposals are the alternatives that the Board of Supervisors requested! Further, we the citizens and consumers believe salvaging our viewsheds and property warrants a re-evaluation of the Duke Energy offers for co-location when these options in fact meet the long term energy needs of the region. Apathy by the Roanoke Gas Company suggests that the clear cut swaths across Poor Mountain that will be in our view forever are not important enough to pursue the logical alternatives that have been offered by Duke Energy. I submit this apathetic attitude by our local gas company towards our citizens and elected officials is simply unacceptable. Nonetheless, the interests of our community are being completely ignored by the domestic gas companies and the project has picked up pace. As I tried to enjoy the privacy of my farm on Monday, Labor Day, I returned to my house which is at the end of a 500 foot driveway to find surveyors parked by my garage studying their maps. Not only has the county's request for a cease and desist while alternatives are considered been ignored but our privacy is being violated even at times when one would think we are at least entitled to it. Therefore, we come before you today, to once again request your assistance in this issue to bring maximum pressure on these gas companies to force cooperation that will result in a gas supply that is provided in a sensible and logical way, respecting the county's interests. If our local gas companies are going to refuse acknowledgment of our local government's interests and community it serves then we must request our county government do what is necessary to protect our rights, as Americans to due process in the hopes of preserving our county's natural resources and beauty. As previously stated it is the general consensus of all our elected officials that the notification did not meet the intent of the law and you have heard from a significant number of the property owners that had they been informed, they would have taken the appropriate steps to appeal the Virginia Gas pipeline easement to the State Corporation Commission. In fact, we have contacted US Congressman Representative Goodlatte to intervene with the State Corporation Commission in this issue and the SCC has provided a written response to our congressman. Their response is an admission to the claims we have for our rights to due process as Americans. I will provide you a copy of this letter and I quote from this SCC letter "You are right (Mr. Goodlatte) to ask whether better notice regarding this particular proposal could have been given. In hindsight, the Commission is asking itself the same question." The letter goes on to state "The Commission, in its order requiring notice, developed the actual wording of the notice. That wording may not have adequately advised the public about the intended project and probably could have been more descriptive regarding routing". Additional violations consist of the following: The code of the State of Virginia #56-265.2:1 subsection C, reads, " If, within thirty days after publication of a notice as required in subsection B of this section, any interested party requests a public hearing, the Commission shall, as soon as reasonably practicable after such a request, hold a hearing at such place as may be designated by the Commission." The first public notice was printed in the Roanoke Times newspaper on May 6,1999 and the printed deadline in the notice for comments and request for public hearing was May 28, 1999. That notice gave the public ONLY 22 days for comments and requests. The second notice (a notice of route change), printed on August 11, 1999 with a printed deadline date for comment and requests for a public hearing on September 7, 1999, gave only 27 days. This is important because the notice was obviously inadequate in terms of providing the public 30 days to respond, as set by the code of the State of Virginia. It has always been very clear to the citizens that because due process was not provided we have a basis for contesting this SCC granting of a certificate of easement to Virginia Gas Corporation. Further, Virginia Gas is not providing appropriate disclosure about its easement granted by the SCC and is probably using unlawful methods in negotiating easements to gain additional economic benefits from the use of an individual's property. The easement agreement (which I will provide you) being proposed by Virginia Gas Pipeline Company includes additional language authorizing easements for "Any other liquids or gases of substances which can be transported through a pipeline and/or telecommunications system." These "other" facilities can include water pipelines, fiberoptic lines, phone lines, oil lines and myriad of other possibilities that will keep our viewsheds and property in a state of development and/or servicing of these lines and systems indefinitely. Further this grant of easement enables Virginia Gas to sell or assign the citizens grant of easement to any other entity with no additional compensation payable to the property owner. While it is certainly appropriate to negotiate for additional easement rights, Virginia Gas is not informing the citizens that its easement granted by the SCC was only for the gas pipeline and this entity is advising citizens that if they do not cooperate and sign this "standard" agreement, that Virginia Gas will place its pipeline wherever it wishes with no regard for the property owners interest. One can only assume this method of negotiating with unsophisticated property owners is another violation of law. We, the citizens, need your help and respectfully request that Roanoke County through the County attorney's office initiate litigation with these various violations and other claims the County thinks appropriate on behalf of the county's citizens. Inasmuch as Rockbridge County has initiated litigation against the Virginia Department of Transportation over the location of cell towers, a precedent has been established for a county government to sue a state agency. Therefore, the citizens are seeking relief by requesting Roanoke County to initiate litigation against the State Corporation Commission and Virginia Gas Company for failing to meet the requirements of the law with respect to providing adequate notification and other practices being used in a negotiation of easement process. At the very least, the citizens expect that the county would file a motion with the State Corporation Commission to reopen the case because: A) the language of the notification failed to inform property owners B) the timing of published notice did not give the required number of days to appeal the notice; and C) The tactics being employed by Virginia Gas to exploit the use of land of property owners; and D) The SCC in the evaluation of the certification approval received a number of recommendations for co-location and once the public learned of this project the SCC received a substantial number of requests to re-evaluate co-location. E) The runoff of this project will likely harm the watershed of the Spring Hollow Reservoir and the Poor Mountain Nature Preserve. In conclusion, we your constituents respectfully request our county government take any and all action at its disposal to protect the citizens of this county from being taken advantage of by a project that was implemented by a process that was inadequate in a number of ways in meeting the Code of Virginia. Your continued support will demonstrate to Virginia Gas Pipeline Company and Roanoke Gas Company that it is in its best interest to conduct itself as a good corporate neighbor by recognizing and implementing practices that reflect the equally important interests of the communities it serves. Wi 'ghes ersonal regards, < ~,G~-.tiyiJ Chris Caveness 5051 Twelve O'clock Knob Road Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 977-0566 (daytime phone) GRANT OF EASEMENT This Grant of Easement, made and entered into this day of 20 by and between `~usband and wife, of ,Salem, VA 24153, Grantor, wnetner one or more, ana vIKGINIA GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, I' O I3ox 2407, Abingdon, Virginia 242 I Z, Grantee. ~4'I 1 NFSSE 1 II That for and in consideration of the sum of S 10.00 aneJ other ~~ood and valuable consideration, in hand paid. the receipt of which is hereb}~ acknowledged, Grantor does hcrch~ Brant. bargain, sell, and convey unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, with general warrant} and Enelish Covenants of title, a perpetual right-of-way and easement 50 feet in width, and an additional temporan construction easement feet in width. The right-of-way and easement is granted upon the propem hereinafter described. for the purpose of~ laying, constructing, maintaining, operatioe. altering, replacine. inspecting, patrolling, servicing and repairing and removing pipelines (not to exceed two in number), telecommunications or fiber optics lines or systems (includine appliances and/or other related appurtenances), together with drips, valves, fittings, fencing and other devices appurtenant to and necessary for the proper construction and operation of such pipelines for the transportation of oil, natural gas, petroleum products or any other liquids or gases of substances which can be transported through a pipeline and/or a telecommunications system. The right-of-wa}' and easement granted hereby crosses a portion of the lands of the Grantor located in the Catawba Magisterial District of Roanoke County, Virginia, and being the same tract of land acquired by Grantor from Ronald K. Testerman and James R. Lindsey, Jr., by deed dated August 5, ] 977, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Deed Book 1073, page 390, and described as containing 88.18 acres, more or less. The Grantee, its successors and assigns, are hereby expressly given and granted the right to assign this right-of--way and easement, or any part thereof or interest herein, and the same shall be divisible among two or more owners, as to any right or rights eranted hereunder, so that each assignee or owner shall have full rights and privileges herein granted to be owned and enjoyed either in common or in severalty. The Grantee shall have all other rights and benefits necessan or convenient for the full enjoyment or use of the rights herein granted, including, but without limiting the same to. the free neht of ingress and egress over and across said lands to and from the right-of-way and easement. The Grantor, his successors, heirs or assigns, reserves the right to fully use and enjoy the said premises except as the same may interfere with the right herein granted. For the consideration above mentioned Grantee shall have the right, without additional payment, to clear all timber, trees and undergrowth on or overhanging right-of- way and easement and from time to time to remove and keep clear by any method all trees and undergrowth on or overhanging said right-of--way and easement and to remove and prohibit the future construction of buildings or portions thereof, other structures or portions thereof, landfill or removal of embankments of earth and other materials infringing upon, extending into, or extending about the right-of--way that may in the sole judgment of the Grantee injure, endanger or interfere with the use, operations, maintenance, safety of public awareness of said pipelines or fittings and appliances appurtenant to any of said lines. The Grantee, by acceptance hereof, agrees to bury all pipelines, unless otherwise agreed, to a minimum depth of 36 inches, except that when in consolidated rock, the minimum depth shall be 24 inches. It is understood and agreed that the above mentioned consideration does not include payment for loss of crops which may arise from the laying, constructing, maintaining, operating, expanding, altering, repairing, removing, changing the size of, adding to and/or replacing Grantee's facilities. Grantee agrees to restore fences to their original condition or better and to restore the disturbed land as nearly as practical to its original condition upon the completion of construction to the extent compatible with the purpose for which the right-of--way was granted. All payments hereunder may be made directly to the Grantor, or as authorized by him in writing delivered to the Grantee. Should there by any change in the ownership of said lands, then such payment shall be made to those acquiring such lands, but no change in ownership of said lands shall be binding upon the Grantee until the muniment of title by which such change becomes effective has been placed of record in the County wherein such lands are located and a certified copy thereof delivered to the Grantee. This contract and such other documents as may be signed by the parties contain all of the promises, terms, and provisions of the agreements made by the parties. The person or persons securing this grant on behalf of Grantee is without authority to make any promise or agreement not expressed in writing. BOB GOODLATTE 6TH DISTRICT, VIRGINIA 2240 RAVBURN HOUSE OFFIf.E BUILDING wnsHINGTON, Dc 2osts aso6 12021225-5431 FAX 12021 225-96A1 www.hous~.gov,'goodla Rr talk2bob[<D mail house: qov ASSISTANT MAJORITY WHIP CHAIfiMAN. HOUSE RE PIJRI.ICiW rucFl rECrmoLOCv WORKING GROUP CO CHAIR. CONGRESSIONAL INTERNET C4UOJS COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ClIn IRMnN, SURC~OM MI iTE f. UN ~`'~ 111111 It` ;~eF~nRrMENr cmrRanonls, ~)v~RSICHr, iR I ~ Nt) I IU N, ANU FORE ST HV sU eCCIr:: Nil r-~ r oN IIVES(n(-. K, DnIR V, nrJD t'(.)IlL iftV Congress of the United States COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY House of Representatives SL)Ri ~r~,^~~T,EF~1"' (.r)lIF S ANI) Ir f ,~F (;Tllnl. PRt~VF RTv September 6, 2000 Su BCOMnnIrT[I Or-; niF. CONS niIn ION Su RCOPJ1 NllTTF[ Or.; RJi MIC3RA 110N Mr. Chris Caveness Caveness Insurance Group P.O. Box 13647 Roanoke, Virginia 24036-3647 Dear Chris: Enclosed herewith please find a letter which I have received. fi•em ti_:e State Coroorati:m Commission regarding your concerns about the eminent domain notification process in the Commonwealth of Virginia. I hope that this information will be helpful to you. If it is not, please let me know. If I may be of further assistance to you in this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to call upon me. With kind regards. Very tru urs, Bob Goodlatte Member of Congress RWG:pI Enclosure '~) 2 SOUTH MAIN STREET SUITE A, FIRST FLOOR HARRISONBURG, VA 2 2801--3 70 7 (5401432-2391 FAX (5401 432-6593 ~. 916 MAIN STREET SUITE 300 LYNCHBURG. VA 24504-1608 18041845-8306 FAX (8041 845-8245 10 FRANKLIN ROAD, S.E. SUITE 540 ROANOKE, VA 24011 -2121 15401857-2672 FAX (5401 A57-2675 1 114 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE S TAUNTON, VA 2440 1-330 7 (5401AA5-3861 FAX 15401 885-3930 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER pMMpNWEALT>~- pF VjR KEN SCHRAD ~ I (, t DIRECTOR v I ~ A J tt- ANGELA P. BOWSER ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ~ ~ ` ~.,p'ER i'f1'r l' STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION INFORMATION RESOURCES August 30, 2000 The Honorable Robert W. Goodlatte Member, House of Representatives Congress of the United States 10 Franklin Road, S.E., Suite 540 Roanoke, VA 24011-2121 Dear Congressman Goodlatte: SAP OC: 2~~~! PO BOX 1197 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23216-1197 (804) 371-9141 TDD/VOICE: (804) 371-9206 FAX (804) 371-9211 http://www.state.va.us/scc Virginia law governing the State Corporation Commission's responsibilities when considering an application for a certificate to construct any utility facility, including a natural gas transmission line, includes a requirement to provide advance public notice. In the case of the application by Virginia Gas Pipeline Company, the notice requirement was met. You are right to ask whether better notice regarding this particular proposal could have been given. In hindsight, the Commission is asking itself the same question. Whether the Commission has the authority to direct an applicant to do more than what the law requires is subject to interpretation. Certainly, an applicant proposing such a facility has every incentive to operate as a good corporate neighbor and should be ready, willing and able to reach out to any and all affected parties. However, the applicant would also be shouldering the financial cost of such an effort. Any notice requirement must balance effectiveness with cost. The statue only requires that "the public utility provide 30 days advance public notice of the proposed pipeline by publishing a notice in a newspaper or newspapers of general circulation in each of the counties and municipalities thrrnz¢h which the pipeline is proposed to be constructed." The company clearly did this. y The Commission, in its order requirir. notice, developed the actual v~ordir~g of tl:e notice. That wording may not have adequately advised the public about the intended project and probably could have been more descriptive regarding routing. I have enclosed a chronology of events and background information regarding this particular application. The Commission directed the applicant to run display ads giving notice of the application in local newspapers on two occasions. There were several news stories about the pipeline (including a map of the proposed route) in the Roanoke Times. And, all local governing bodies directly impacted by the proposed pipeline were sent notice of the application. The Honorable Robert W. Goodlatte Page 2 August 30, 2000 When the Commission grants a certificate for such a facility, it is doing so because it has found it to be in the public interest based on the criteria set forth in Virginia law. It is hard to argue that "better notice" is not in the public interest. The Commission will work closely with state lawmakers to develop legislative language that meets that objective. If you need further information regarding this matter, please advise. KJS/eb Enc. CHRONOLOGY VIRGINIA GAS PIPELINE COMPANY CERTIFICATION OF A NATURAL GAS TRANSMISSION LINE CASE NUMBER PUE990167 March 19, 1999 Application filed April 15, 1999 SCC order directing notice and inviting comments and requests for hearing May 14, 1999 Date by which to publish a display ad in newspapers notifying public of application Date by which to provide local government officials notice of application May 28, 1999 Due date for comments from public/interested parties Virginia Department of Environmental Quality submits invited comments on environmental aspects of proposed pipeline June 6, 1999 National Forest Service publishes decision notice and finding of no significant impact on Jefferson National Forest July 14, 1999 Modified application filed July 16, 1999 SCC order directing additional notice/extending filing deadlines August 16, 1999 Date by which to publish a display ad in newspapers notifying public of modified application Date by which to provide local government officials notice of modified application September 7, 1999 Due date for comments from public/interested parties October 16, 1999 SCC staff report filed recommending approval December 6, 1999 SCC final order granting certificate PUE990167 -Application of Virginia Gas Pipeline Company for a certification of a natural gas transmission line under the Utility Facilities Act Background 57.4 miles of pipeline and related facilities beginning in Radford and continuing in a generally northeastward direction to the city of Roanoke, then eastward across the Blue Ridge Mountains to Rocky Mount. Counties along route: Pulaski, Montgomery, Roanoke and Franklin. Eight-inch pipe for first two segments, 6 inch pipe for last segment. Construction corridor of 1,000 feet for flexibility to determine final route which will involve permanent right of way width of 50 feet. Pipeline to provide 21,500 decatherms of gas per day and is an extension of an already existing pipeline that runs 43 miles from Chilhowie to Radford. The gas being transported will be delivered to existing local distribution companies -Roanoke Gas and United Cities Gas Estimated construction cost -- $11.1 million Estimated date of completion -- November 2000 General criteria upon which SCC determines approval of a certificate 1) A finding of need for the additional service within the time frame contemplated. 2) A determination that there are no suitable alternatives to the proposed construction. 3) The reasonableness of the estimated cost, choice of technology, construction plans, and the proposed manner of carrying out the project. 4) The affect on the environment, public safety and economic development and establishing such conditions as necessary to minimize adverse environmental or safety impacts. E ~ • ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS VINTON TOWN COUNCIL JOINT MEETING 5:00 P.M. Roanoke County Administration Center Fourth Floor Conference Room 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 A. WELCOME: Joseph McNamara, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 1. Introduction of Herb Cooley, new Police Chief for Town of Vinton Supervisors B. INVOCATION AND DINNER: Dr. Harry C. Nickens • Roanoke County Board of Supervisors C. ROLL CALL: 1. Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 2. Vinton Town Council D. OPENING REMARKS 1. Chairman Joseph McNamara 2. Mayor Donald Davis E. REQUEST TO ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS F. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Discussion on McDonald Farm Cooperative Agreements. G. RECESS: The Board of Supervisors will be in recess until 7:00 p.m. in the Board Meeting Room. • H. ADJOURNMENT: Vinton Town Council „„„ ° I I • •~~ ~i' /' ~ - -"' $~ / 1. ~ ~ ~ ~• ~ ,~ / o ~ R_ 1 ~ ~, / _ ~ ( ~ __= - .~ . ~. .. `~ 1 ~ ONAL \~ ~~` ~ / e ~ ~ 42 ACR _ ~~~ / ~~• ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / .~ a _ . / ~ ^P ~ `! ` ' _ i Mattern & Craig, .~~, ,~„ iE3 eR Ar ~ ~~nNa~> ~oI aeP.xa • auaveroxe 4~ 3 is oo NOT TO SCALE FOANOI($ VINAINIA 21Q16 IE.3 230 iE4O1'"~" `:; OCTOBER 26, 1999 i64p ttl`T071 PAX _ _ _ --- /i ~ / / o ~~ / / / / R-1 0 0 Di ~- -~ • r~ % CHURCH . ~ ~~ ~~i /1 .f1 0 „i• / i c ~\!~„/ J e ~~ i ~~ ~~ ~ ~ . ~ / - ~ nr \ ~ ` ~~ 8 SF ~_ s ~ ~ `- ~ ,.,,-- r~ REGIONAL \~'~ I I 7A ~~ _ ~~- ,,. ~° ' ~ i © URCH ~' O ~• o ~ .^~ ^ ~ ~w ~~ - ~ 1 ~E CARE FAC1 ~+ '- 1, _ _ 18.3 SF&-r ~ .1 ~, r . ~ - . © ~• ~ _ e / ' ~ ~. c ~ ~~. • I R AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION 092600-6 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND ROANOKE COUNTY RELOCATING THE. BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN SAID GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, AND AUTHORIZING THAT CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS RELATING TO SUCH BOUNDARY LINE BE TAKEN AS PROVIDED BY LAW WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Article 2, Chapter 31, Title 15.2, 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, the governing bodies of Montgomery County and Roanoke County wish to petition the Court for approval to relocate portions of the boundary line between these two jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the relocation of the boundary line of such governmental entities in the area proposed will permit more effective and efficient delivery of municipal services and promote the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the governing body of Montgomery County has adopted a measure reflecting its desire to relocate and change a portion of the boundary line between the two counties as requested by certain property owners within said areas; and WHEREAS, Montgomery County and Roanoke County have agreed to the boundary relocation by action of their respective governing bodies. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that: 1. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors is hereby authorized to execute an agreement between Montgomery County and Roanoke County, on a form approved by the County Attorney, establishing a new boundary line at certain points between said jurisdictions, as more particularly shown on plats prepared by T.P. Parker & Son, dated November 18, 1998 and January 22, 1999, which are incorporated by reference herein (Exhibit 1 and 2). 2. The boundary line set forth in said agreement will be described by metes and 1 bounds as set out in the Notice of Public Hearing (Exhibit 2). 3. Notice of the proposed boundary line adjustment has been duly published as required by §15.2-3107 of the State Code. 4. Upon approval of the execution of the agreement between the governing bodies, the County Attorney is authorized to petition the Circuit Court of one of the affected jurisdictions to relocate the boundary line in accordance with the plats and the agreement. 5. Upon entry of an order by the Circuit Court establishing the new boundary line, a certified copy of such order will be forwarded to the Secretary of the Commonwealth. 6. The County Administrator and County Attorney are authorized to take, or cause to be taken, such other actions, and to execute other documents as may be required by law to effect the change in the boundary line as set forth herein. 7. The Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to forward an attested copy of this resolution to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Jeffrey D. Johnson, Administrator, Clerk, Montgomery County Board of Supervisors Ed Natt, Attorney for Petitioners 2 ~}unoa ~.zauio~~uoy~ ~ axouBOg ~;suB.zZ ~i~.zado.zd ~ ~uauz~snfpd auri ~fa~epunog ~uauidojanaQ ~~iunuzuio~ ;o ~uaui~.zBdaQ ~f~}unoa axou~eog rn rn rn 0 ~d ui ra 0 0 0 II ui c~ U Action No. Item No. ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 26, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN MONTGOMERY COUNZ'YAND ROANOKE COUNTY RELOCATING THE BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN SAID GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, AND AUTHORIZING THAT CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS RELATING TO SUCH BOUNDARY LINE BE TAKEN AS PROVIDED BY LAW COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~~~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This Resolution authorizes the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to execute on behalf of the County an agreement to relocate the boundary line between Montgomery County and Roanoke County. BACKGROUND: The County Attorney's office has reviewed the Boundary Line Adjustment Agreement and the Petition to Relocate the boundary line between Montgomery County and Roanoke County for submission to the Circuit Court. Two plats have been prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, dated November 18, 1998 and January 22, 1999; metes and bounds descriptions and the required public notices have been prepared by the attorney for Heslep/Thomas, Ltd. The procedure followed is established in Article 2, Chapter 31, Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia. Over the past several years the County has followed this procedure to relocate the boundary line between the County and Floyd County, and between the County and the City of Salem. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\boundary.heslep.thomas.rpt.rso.wpd S-I SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This resolution authorizes the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to execute an agreement on behalf of the County with the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County to relocate the boundary line between the respective governmental entities. The corporate boundary line between Montgomery County and Roanoke County would be adjusted so that (a) the property of Arthur W. Heslep, et ux. (Montgomery County Tax Map No. 47-A-43) containing 3.720 acres and (b) the property of Richard A. Heslep (Montgomery County Tax Map No. 47-A-62) containing 1.960 acres would be added to Montgomery County and (c) the property of Thomas, Ltd. (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 63.03-1-1) containing 36.726 acres and (d) the property of Thomas, Ltd. (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 63.03-1-1) containing 0.882 acres would be added to Roanoke County. The metes and bounds descriptions and the plats showing the proposed boundary line adjustment are incorporated by reference into the Resolution of the Board of Supervisors and will be filed with the Petition to Relocate with the Circuit Court. The plats are available for review by the Board in the County Attorney's office. The Zoning Administrator has reviewed this proposed boundary line adjustment and based upon surrounding land uses, topography, access options, and current use of these parcels he supports the transfers as proposed. Further, he recommends that these two parcels of land to be transferred to Roanoke County should be placed in the zoning classification of AG-1. FISCAL IMPACTS: There would be minimal impact upon total assessments and revenues as a result of this action. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of the proposed Resolution. It is further recommended that if the Board adopts this resolution, that this matter will be referred to the Roanoke County Planning Commission for its recommendation with respect to classifying this property as AG-1. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\boundary.heslep.thomas.rpt.rso.wpd 2 S-I Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved () Motion by Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) to Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens No Yes Abs U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\boundary.heslep.thomas.rpt.rso.wpd 3 S-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND ROANOKE COUNTY RELOCATING THE BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN SAID GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, AND AUTHORIZING THAT CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS RELATING TO SUCH BOUNDARY LINE BE TAKEN AS PROVIDED BY LAW WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Article 2, Chapter 31, Title 15.2, 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, the governing bodies of Montgomery County and Roanoke County wish to petition the Court for approval to relocate portions of the boundary line between these two jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the relocation of the boundary line of such governmental entities in the area proposed will permit more effective and efficient delivery of municipal services and promote the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the governing body of Montgomery County has adopted a measure reflecting its desire to relocate and change a portion of the boundary line between the two counties as requested by certain property owners within said areas; and WHEREAS, Montgomery County and Roanoke County have agreed to the boundary relocation by action of their respective governing bodies. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that: The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors is hereby authorized to execute an agreement between Montgomery County and Roanoke County, on a form approved by the County Attorney, establishing a new boundary line at certain points between said jurisdictions, as more particularly shown on plats prepared by T.P. Parker & Son, dated November 18, 1998 U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\boundary.heslep.thomas.rpt.rso.wpd 4 S~ and January 22, 1999, which are incorporated by reference herein (Exhibit 1 and 2). 2. The boundary line set forth in said agreement will be described by metes and bounds as set out in the Notice of Public Hearing (Exhibit 2). 3. Notice of the proposed boundary line adjustment has been duly published as required by §15.2-3107 of the State Code. 4. Upon approval of the execution of the agreement between the governing bodies, the County Attorney is authorized to petition the Circuit Court of one of the affected jurisdictions to relocate the boundary line in accordance with the plats and the agreement. 5. Upon entry of an order by the Circuit Court establishing the new boundary line, a certified copy of such order will be forwarded to the Secretary of the Commonwealth. 6. The County Administrator and County Attorney are authorized to take, or cause to be taken, such other actions, and to execute other documents as may be required by law to effect the change in the boundary line as set forth herein. 7. The Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to forward an attested copy of this resolution to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\boundary.heslep.thomas.rpt.rso.wpd 5 • • A _f. `~ ~~ gray 20, 1999 c~ H a 0 ~ ~ a ~, ~~ +, o ~ U N +~ ~ ;b O d ~ ~ O ~ ~ b O ~ ~ O O W fx O a 0 ~ °' ~o°' ~ A O .*' ~, a~°'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oa~io aA~ f AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE 092600-7 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO DAVID J. BELL TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU TO BE LOCATED. AT 4840 HOLLINS ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 38.16-1-3.3), HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, David J. Bell has filed a petition for a special use permit to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive-thru to be located at 4840 Hollins Road (Tax Map No. 38.16-1-3.3) in the Hollins Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26, 2000. 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 David J. Bell to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive-thru to be located at 4840 Hollins Road (Tax Map No. 38.16-1-3.3) in the Hollins Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The site is to be designed in substantial conformance with the submitted site plan. (2) The drive-thru lane shall be clearly marked, and the edge of the lane closest to the travel lane shall be marked with 3-dimensional and/or reflective marker. 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 Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, MC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 PETITIONER: David J. Bell CASE NUMBER: 20-9/2000 Planning Commission Hearing Date: Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: September 5, 2000 September 26, 2000 -T= A. REQUEST Petition for a Special Use Permit on a parcel of land approximately 6.7 acres in area and zoned C-2 General Commercial. The Special Use Permit application is for the operation of adrive-through facility in an established fast food restaurant. The lot is located in the shopping center on the northeast corner of the intersection of Plantation Road and Hollins Road. The property is in the Hollins Magisterial District and Community Planning Area B. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission discussed the hours of operation and number of vehicles that would utilize the drive-through. The applicant answered questions about what types of items were to be served and the characteristics of his other facility in Botetourt County D. CONDITIONS 1. The site is to be designed in substantial conformance with the submitted site plan. 2. The drive through lane shall be clearly marked, and the edge of the lane closest to the travel lane shall be marked with 3-dimensional and/or reflective marker. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Ross moved to recommend approval of the petition with staff conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Witt, Thomason, Hooker, Robinson, Ross NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other r~ Terrance H ringto ecretary Roanok ounty anning Commission STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: David J. Bell CASE NUMBER: 20-9/2000 DATE: 08/31 /2000 PARTI A. Summary The request is for a Special Use Permit on a parcel of land approximately 6.7 acres in area and zoned C-2 General Commercial. The Special Use Permit application is for the operation of adrive-through facility in an established fast food restaurant. The tot is located in the shopping center on the northeast corner of the intersection of Plantation Road and Hollins Road. The propertyis in the Hollins Magisterial District and Community Planning Area. In the Community Plan, the property is designated as Core. Core areas by definition are where high intensity urban development is encouraged, including larger-scale highway- oriented retail uses. B. Description This is a request by David J. Bell for a Special Use Permit in a shopping center located at the intersection of Hollins Road and Plantation Road. The applicant is proposing for the addition of adrive-through window at an established fast food restaurant, the Sno Shack. The drive through window would be for service of coffee. The parcel is located in an area of mixed-uses, mostly commercial, with a few residential neighborhoods close by. C. Applicable Regulations The proposed drive-through is considered a fast food restaurant. According to Section 30-29-5 of the Zoning Ordinance, a drive in or fast food restaurant is, "an establishment primarily engaged in the preparation of food and beverages, for either take-out, delivery or table service, served in disposable containers at a counter, a drive-up or drive through service facility or offers curb service." Specific use and design standards for fast food restaurants are: All drive-through windows shall comply with the standards for drive-through facilities contained in Section 30-91-10. 2. A special use permit shalt not be required for any fast food restaurant that is located within a shopping center (excluding outparcels) and which does not propose drive-in or curb service. Additionally, the following requirements are applicable: Site Plan review and approval by County staff, in accordance with Section 30-90 of the Zoning Ordinance, will be required. 2. Off street parking, including handicapped spaces, will be in accordance with Section 30-91 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Exterior lighting shall conform to section 30-94 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. Building codes may require structural modifications to comply with ADA standards. Applicant will need to check with Inspections Department. PART II A. Analysis of Existing Conditions Use The property is currently in use as a shopping center. Uses include a grocery store, a restaurant, and a video rental store. The Sno Shack is located in the parking area at the eastern side of the lot. Location The property is located in the Hollins Magisterial District and the Hollins Community Planning Area, at the northeast corner of the intersection of Hollins Road and Plantation Road. Lot The proposed use is in the parking area of an existing developed shopping center. Staff has determined that there is an excess of parking spaces as required for a shopping center, and that the existing and proposed uses of the Sno Shack will not bring the required parking out of compliance. Surrounding Neighborhood Adjacent land uses consist of mostly commercial uses and vacant land. Within the shopping center where the Sno Shack is located are several commercial uses, including the Food Lion, the China Star restaurant, Movie Starz movie rentals, and a bank on an outparcel. To the immediate east of the property is vacant land zoned C-2 General Commercial. Further to the east is a nursery. Across the Hollins Road to the south is Big Lick driving range. To the west across Plantation Road is the Winn Dixie shopping center, now vacant. To the north of the property is vacant land zoned R-3 Medium Density Multi-Family Residential. B. Analysis of Proposed Development Site Layout/Architecture The applicant is proposing the addition of a 10 foot by 8 foot section to the existing building. The current plan shows the drive-through access going against the flow of traffic in the parking area, heading south towards Hollins Road. This creates a conflicting traffic pattern, where the drive-through traffic will be going against the flow of traffic in the parking lot. Additionally, the proposal does not meet the requirements of Section 30-91-10 for stacking spaces and drive-through facilities. Staff discussed this with the applicant and proposed an alternative alignment and location for the drive-through that appears to meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The plan shows the lane utilizing the flow of traffic from the Hollins Road entrance and moving towards the shopping center. The proposal will place the building at the edge of the former parking spaces, utilizing several of them for the required stacking. The applicant has reviewed this proposal and has agreed to set up the drive-through in this manner. Access/Traffic Generation The applicant anticipates the peak service hours being in the early morning during "rush hour", when there will likely be little traffic associated with the other uses in the shopping center. The property already has access points and commercial entrance permits for their existing access points on both Hollins and Plantation Roads. The applicant does not see the need for, or nor is he proposing, additional access points. Fire & Rescue: Emergency vehicle rescue time is estimated at four minutes or less. Screening_& Bufferina: Sine this is the expansion of an existing use in a commercial development, the screening and landscaping along the property lines has either already been put in place, or is not a concerns for this particular business. Water/Sewer: Public water and sewer are available to this site ~.'" C. Conformance with the Community Plan This property is designated Core in the 1998 Community Plan. Core areas, according to the Plan, are, "...where high intensity urban development is encouraged." Additionally, these areas may also be appropriate for larger-scale highway-oriented retail uses and regionally-based shopping facilities. Tax- exempt facilities are not appropriate for land of this designation. Favorable land use types include general retail shops and personal services, office and institutional uses and limited industrial uses. All land use determinants are favorable, which include locations where commercial uses have been developed or will likely be developed, areas where commercial zoning exists, service by an arterial street system, proximity to population concentrations, and availability of urban services. Overall, the proposed project conforms to the goals and objectives of the Community Plan. D. Conformance with County Development Standard With some work on the placement of the drive through facility, the proposed project would likely comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Review and approval of site and building plans will be required. PART I I I Staff Conclusions This property is designated as Core in the Community Plan. It is located along a major commercial corridor in the northern portion of Roanoke County. Adjacent uses are a mix of mostly commercial and vacant land uses, with several neighborhoods close by. The proposed use meets the goals of the Community Plan. The use as a fast food restaurant is allowed in the C-2 zoning district with a Special Use Permit. Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit Application and recommends the following conditions: 1. The drive through lane shall be clearly marked, and the edge of the lane closest to the travel lane shall be marked with 3-dimensional and/or reflective marker. County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 For Staff Use Only Date received: Received by: Applica on fee: ~~~.~~ PCBZA date: ~~~-S ~v~!.J Placards issued: BOS date: Case Number ~ v ~~ ~, ~ r' ,4~L APPLICA~~`?'S Check type of application filed (check all that apply) t O Rezoning Special Use ~ Variance Applicants name/address w/zip Phone:.~~D ~ gR Z - ~~ ~9/~P~c J . ~~G-~- s~0- ~Z -ZZ~g ax No ., U!' . ~ `~~ /,~~ ~U~.S ts1 t C r-C. ~ ~ /~ /~Cu,~J r Phone Z3 ~~S-S' DOOM i ' p ~ s name/address w/z Owner ~'SSCCr ~°S ~~l'~J..~'G~~,frJT ,yt~C, ~~~ f , Fax No. ~7..3y~ ~~~ Z Property Location ' Magisterial District: r1 ~1..~-Z; (o~ S p f-fOGL.~i~S . [~g~ ~J~A'.c/D~~ Z~~ /~ Community Planning area: ~ p (~(.~~y Tax Map No.: -.~ Existing Zoning: C' Z Size of parcel(s): Acres: ~.~ Existing Land Use: s~10 ~j ~ C~~G''t' R~'ZOI~IING AVD S~ECLAL L'SE PE`~1~iIT =~PPLIC<~ STS ;(It/S) 1 Proposed Zoning: ~ ' ~ ~ ~ C~~'rtJ9 a Proposed Land Use: ~~~+~5 t O~ p ~ ~. ~ /- pp ~tt5a r•~eSs Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes l~ No O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. ? Yes ~ No O T ype Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use IF NO, A VARIAllTCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes O No O ~'~~~ I V4RI~NCE APPLIC.4:'~TS (V~ Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF' .4tNY Off' THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOlYII'LETE. R/S ; V R!S ,, V R/S Consultation - 8 112" x 11" concept plan ~ Application fee Application Metes and bounds description -! offers, if applicable y/` Justification '-~ Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners Sl ~~ ~~~ I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the pr the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. !~ .~ Owners Signature ~r~.~~~ ,.. ~, ; ,JU$TIEICATION .;rOR REZQNING OR':SPECTAL USE PERIVIIT REQiTEST - Applicant D A vZ (~ J3C L L O ~ ~A ~~ M ~ SN o H ~~ J Pt ~/Pc 7G _ 6 0 The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The property is presently zoned C-2. The applicant is requesting a special use permit to allow the commercial property to be used for adrive-thru coffee and cappuccino shop serving the needs of the public. The applicant is currently operating a seasonal (6 month a year) fast food establishment. With the addition of the drive-thru the applicant would then serve the needs of the public 12 months a year. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan calls for commercial uses in small undeveloped areas to serve the needs of the community. The use of the property for the shaved ice/coffee shop will be in conformity with that policy in the Comprehensive Plan and with the general guidelines encouraging commercial use on major arterial roads. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. T- The development of the property will not have any negative impact on public services or facilities. Due to the present position of the business, expansion will not reduce the current available parking space. T- David Bell of Bahama Sno and Java To-Go request a special use permit fora 80 square foot expansion of their existing facility. The request conforms to the policies and guidelines of the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. Bahama Sno and Java To-Go currently operates a location in Daleville of Botetourt County Virginia. They wish to expand their locationwat 4840 Hollins Road Roanoke to offer to the public the same services. The applicant plans to build onto the back of the current business to include adrive-thru coffee and cappuccino shop in addition to the existing shaved ice portion. The expansion of the current location would allow for the current seasonal fast- food establishment to remain open 12 months per year. As opposed to the current 6 months a year it currently operates. The new addition would allow the applicant to serve the needs of the public year round and to also offer a new product to its customer base. . Considering the volume of peak traffic that their current drive-thru (Daleville) experiences, it is anticipated that 65% of their drive-thru business will be done before 10:00 A.M. At this hour no other establishment in the strip mall is open except for Food Lion who operates on the other end of the mall. No negative impacts are anticipated. w.f.+ t ~DQ~ Ltt~(~ ~ve® HDLLWS (~DRD" ~Y V~V~7~ 1~1.(T~~l~el I,v .i. 9'ei~v', r~.w.v-~'~i _ "- ~. ~. t i~ ~~ ,. ~,.,..., J ~.,__, '. ~ --~. t I ___ fir------7 _. n ~... ..._... _ ..___.. _..__. ~, __ .: ~ ...: .... ' ~X.i S~'ti:,~ L~Cc~~'i Q~ Soc© Slnac,l ~ . PROPOSED ~-_ i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE GRANTINGA SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO DAVID J. BELL TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU TO BE LOCATED AT 4840 HOLLINS ROAD (TAX MAP NO.38.16-1-3.3), HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, David J. Bell has filed a petition for a special use permit to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive-thru to be located at 4840 Hollins Road (Tax Map No. 38.16-1-3.3) in the Hollins Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to David J. Bell to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive-thna to be located at 4840 Hollins Road (Tax Map No. 38.16-1- 3.3) in the Hollins Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The site is to be designed in substantial conformance with the submitted site plan. (2) The drive-thru lane shall be clearly marked, and the edge of the lane closest to the travel lane shall be marked with 3-dimensional and/or reflective marker. 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. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE 092600-8 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PAXSON COMMUNICATIONS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING TOWER WITH ANEW 199 FOOT BROADCASTING TOWER TO BE LOCATED AT 8241 HONEYSUCKLE ROAD (TAX MAP NO.93.00-1-47.1), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Paxson Communications has filed a petition for a special use permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower to be located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road (Tax Map No. 93.00-1-47.1) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26, 2000. 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 Paxson Communications to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower to be located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road (Tax Map No. 93.00-1-47.1) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The height of the proposed lattice tower shall not exceed 199 feet above grade. (2) The lattice tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. (3) No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure unless required by the FAA. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. (4) If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications and broadcasting is discontinued, the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. (5) The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the site plan included with the application entitled "Proposed Site Diagram" dated 6-21-2000, as prepared by Schwetye Architects. (6) Removal of the existing tower will be required prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara 2 ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEYELOPMENT Paxson Comm~unicat~.ons Zon~,ng: Special Use Tax Map No. 93.00->-47 ~~ PETITIONER: Paxson Communications CASE NUMBER: 21-9/2000 Planning Commission Hearing Date: September 5, 2000 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: September 26, 2000 A. REQUEST Petition for a Special Use Permit on a parcel of land approximately 3 acres in area, in the 8200 block of Honeysuckle Road, Route 916, at the top of Poor Mountain, in order to construct a 199 foot tall lattice broadcasting tower to replace an existing tower. The property is in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District and Glenvar Community Planning Area and designated as Rural Preserve. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission questioned the need for the new tower, and the applicant explained the structural weakness of the existing tower for supporting the new digital antenna equipment. The applicant was asked if he would provide space on the tower for the users on the older tower, and the response was that he would. The Commission discussed the new technology and digital television, and the possibility of another digital television server locating on the tower. The applicant stated that there would be capacity on the tower for such a user. D. CONDITIONS 1. The height of the proposed lattice tower shall not exceed 199 feet above grade. 2. The lattice tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. 3. No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure unless required by the FAA. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. 4. If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications and broadcasting is discontinued, the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. 5. The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the site plan included with the application entitled "Proposed Site Diagram" dated 6-21-2000, as prepared by Schwetye Architects. 6. Removal of the existing tower will be required prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason moved to recommend approval of the petition with staff conditions. carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Witt, Thomason, Hooker, Robinson, Ross NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: ~ Concept Plan Zc Vicinity Map ~ Staff Report x Other !- Terrance Har ngton ecretary Roanoke C my Planning Commission .-~^ ~"'~ The motion STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: Paxson Communications CASE NUMBER: 21-9/00 DATE: August 31, 2000 PART I A. Executive Summary The request is for a Special Use Permit on a parcel approximately 3 acres in area, in the 8200 block of Honeysuckle Road, Route 916, in order to construct~a 199 foot tall lattice broadcasting tower to replace an existing tower. The property is currently zoned AG-3 Agricultural/Rural Preserve and is designated as Rural Preserve the Community Plan. There is not a direct correlation between the land use determinants and policies of the Rural preserve land use designation and usage of land as a tower. However, towers are not specifically mentioned in any of the Community Plan Land Use Designations. Adjacent land uses are a mix of vacant land and other towers. Access for the proposed project is from Honeysuckle Road, Route 916. B. Description This is a request by Paxson Communications for a Special Use Permit on a 3 acre parcel of property located off Honeysuckle Road, in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. The proposal is for the construction of a 199 foot tall lattice tower that will replace an existing 209 foot tall tower. The existing tower will be removed. The new tower is engineered with greater strength and is required for the new heavier digital television antenna. The applicant anticipates utilizing existing buildings on the site, and no other improvements to the lot are anticipated. C. Applicable Regulations Towers are allowed by Special Use Permit in the AG-3 Agricultural/Rural Preserve district according to Section 30-32-2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The following requirements are applicable: The tower would have to meet the requirements set forth in Section 30-87, for tower design standards, lighting and airport safety, and site plan review. Site Plan review and approval by County Staff, in accordance with Section 30-90 of the Zoning Ordinance, will be required. Federal Regulations - In 1996 the Federal government amended the laws that apply to the cellular telephone industry, including guidance on local zoning authority. The Federal Communications Act of 1996 preserved local zoning authority in the siting of broadcasting towers. However, Section 704 of the Act states that such local regulations: I) shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; and II) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services". In adopting this language it was the legislative intent to "provide localities the flexibility to treat facilities that create different visual, aesthetic, or safety concerns differently to the extent T~ permitted under generally applicable zoning requirements". The act also clearly maintains the FCC's jurisdiction over radio frequency emissions and any radio interference. Finally, the act requires substantial written evidence in a written record for any decision to approve or deny a cell site. Local Reg._ulations - In the interest of preserving the scenic and natural beauty of Roanoke County the goals of the County are: to achieve a long term reduction in the number of towers, to achieve a reduction in the height of towers, especially those located along or near ridgetops of major mountains and landforms, and to relocate towers that exist within a high visual impact area. It is the official policy of the County to encourage and promote the co-location of antennas on existing public and private structures within the County. Therefore permits for new broadcasting towers should only be requested and granted when no other reasonable alternative exists for locating needed antennas. When no other reasonable alternative exists for co-location, broadcasting tower locations at elevations lower than surrounding ridge lines are preferred. PART II A. Analysis of Existing Conditions Location The property is located in the Windsor Hills off Route 916, on Poor Mountain. The site for the proposed tower is towards the northwest corner of the lot, and approximately 50 feet from the site of the existing tower. Lot The currently has facilities for the Paxson Communications system, which include an existing tower to be removed, an existing structure housing equipment and several satellite dishes enclosed in a chain link fence. All are located towards the center of the lot Access The applicant anticipates utilizing the existing access from Honeysuckle Road. Surrounding Neighborhood The area in proximity to the proposed project consists of either vacant land or other broadcasting towers and structures associated with them. Several television station towers are to the north of the lot. To the south are several other various towers. Across Honeysuckle Road are a few vacant parcels. To the west of the site is vacant land. B. Analysis of Proposed Development Property Characteristics: The property is zoned AG-3 Agricultural/Rural Preserve. This use is allowed only by Special Use Permit. The lot currently houses Paxson's communications facilities, including an existing tower. The lot is relatively flat, with some tree cover in undeveloped areas of it. Site Layout: The site plan shows the existing structure in the north central portion of the property. The tower itself is to be surrounded by chain link fencing. A portion of the building is within the fencing. The tower is proposed to be 199 feet tall, and similar in look to the existing tower. It is unclear at this point what capacity the tower has for coloration of various communications systems. The ..,~._- applicant has stated that in order to remove signal interference from the tower itself, the antenna array would have to be located at the top of the structure. It would logically follow that if this is the case, other digital television providers might not see locating further down on the tower as acceptable for their purposes. There are no proposed structural changes to the existing building, or other portions of the lot. Access/Traffic Generation: Access to the site is proposed from Honeysuckle Road, at the western side of the lot. The existing entrance, via a gravel path, will be utilized. Traffic generation will be minimal once the tower is completed. VDOT has stated that a commercial entrance permit will not be required if the existing entrance is utilized. Fire & Rescue: The development itself should have little if any impact on the levels of service. However, the tower must comply with Section 30-73 of the County Code, which deals with the County's emergency communications system, to assure that the tower does not interfere with the system. Drainaae/Floodplain: There are no floodplain or drainage issues on this site. Water/Sewer: Use of these facilities is either currently in use and not impacted or not anticipated. Miscellaneous It is unclear whether the tower is within any flight path of the Roanoke Regional Airport, requirements of Section 30-72 will still need to be met. FAA approval is not required because of the previous approval for the existing tower and its proximity to the proposed new one. Relation to the Zoning Ordinance The following discussion is taken from the checklist and materials required for each application, and conversations with the applicant: As this is a proposal for the replacement of an existing tower, the applicant did not seek out alternative sites. The lattice tower is not the most favorable type as set forth in the Broadcasting Tower ordinance (the most favorable type is a monopole). The tower will replace an existing lattice tower, and will be similar in appearance. The tower is stronger than the existing structure. The site is served by an existing State dirt road, which is barely visible from any view. The road is utilized by other service providers. Poor Mountain could be considered a "tower farm" in that there are numerous existing towers, antennae, satellite dishes, other structures and support buildings all along the ridge. With one of the highest elevations in the County and Roanoke Valley, Poor Mountain has proven to be an ideal location for communications providers of all sorts, including cellular and digital telephones and television transmissions. The photograph simulations show how the existing tower looks on Poor Mountain. From the photo, several other towers can be seen. The replacement tower will have the same, if not less of an, impact since the tower will actually be lower. ~~ The enclosed viewshed analysis map depicts the The tower appears to be visible from several areas County. Again, as mentioned previously, while th other existing towers on Poor Mountain. visibility of the tower throughout the valley. in the western and northern portions of the e tower is visible from many places, so are The enclosed map entitled, "Predicted Noise-Limited Contour" serves as the provider' depiction of the area(s) covered by the Poor Mountain facility. The note at the bottom of the drawing shows that the area this single tower will service is approximately 35,370 square miles. Discussions with the applicant revealed that the closest of their towers is in the Washington D.C. area. The applicant anticipates the ability to cover a tremendous area, and does not anticipate the need to construct another tower in the Roanoke Valley. The applicant has stated that the tower will have the capacity to hold additional communications providers as required in the Zoning Ordinance. However, it is unclear what types of providers will be allowed to colocate. On the existing tower is another television system that will be dislocated with the removal of the existing tower. From discussions with the applicant, this company would not want to locate on Paxson's new tower because of the tower interference issue. The applicant has stated that in order to avoid interference created by the tower structure itself, the other company would also want to locate at the top of the tower for their signal to be optimal. The site plan shows the existing facilities and the location of the proposed replacement tower. Besides the tower itself, it appears that the only additional change to the site will be the extension of the fencing to surround the new tower. All structures appear to meet the setback requirements. C. Conformance with the Community Plan This property is designated as Rural Preserve 1998 Community Plan. The Rural Preserve category designates limited land use types, in areas of mostly undeveloped, outlying lands. These areas generally require a high degree of protection to preserve agricultural, forestal, recreational, and remote rural residential areas. Desirable land use types include agricultural and forestal uses, parks and outdoor recreation facilities, rural residences and mining and extraction operations. Some of the favorable land use determinants for this project include a location where agricultural, recreational and forestal uses exist, some limited rural residential uses, and access from an existing roadway. Unfavorable land uses include a location of valuable and irreplaceable resources and a location outside the urban service area. One of the themes of the Community Plan is the preservation of ridgelines. According to the Plan, "Utility and communications structures should not be placed on the ridgelines." Additionally, the Plan calls for limitation of mountainside and ridgeline development as well as the preservation of mature trees. The height of the tower is 199 feet while the treeline is between 40-60 feet above the ridgeline; thus the tower is above the existing tree line. The photograph verifies that the tower is and will be above the ridgeline and treeline of Poor Mountain. According to the applicant this is the lowest possible tower height for his needs. D. Conformance with County Development Standard The tower appears to meet applicable development standards. The overall height of the tower meets the maximum allowable 199 feet. It has the capacity to locate additional communications systems, although it is not clear what type at this point. The tower appears to meet the setback 4 requirements (as the previous tower was approved). The applicant does not anticipate the need for additional towers to complete his "network" of communications in the Roanoke Valley. PART III Staff Conclusions According to the Community Plan, this area has been designated as Rural preserve, which is suited for agricultural and forestal activities, limited rural residential development, and parks and open space. The adjacent properties consist of other vacant agriculturally zoned lots, and several existing broadcasting towers and their associated uses and structures. According to the Zoning Ordinance, broadcasting towers are allowed by Special Use Permit. The site is along a ridgeline that has multiple existing towers. The tower will have minimal impacts on traffic, utilities, or other public services. The tower does not conform with the goals of the community plan in relation to the ridgeline protection themes. Specifically it is the development of communications structures on a ridgeline, the diminishing of views, and the loss of trees. The tower does not conform to some of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, this is not a colocation and not a monopole. However all other requirements will be satisfied. If the Commission is in support of this Special Use Permit application, then the following conditions, remaining from the original tower application, and reflecting the new ordinance, must be imposed: 1. The height of the proposed tower lattice tower shall not exceed 199 feet above grade. Any extension of the proposed tower shall require a Special Use Permit. 2. The lattice tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. 3. No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure unless required by the FAA. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. 4. If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications and broadcasting is discontinued, the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. 5. The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the site plan included with the application entitled "Proposed Site Diagram" dated 6-21-2000, as prepared by Schwetye Architects. 6. Removal of the existing tower will be required prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. Proposed Zoning: u~G~~ _ i ~~ staff use only Use Type: Proposed Land Use: ~~~~ ~'=/tG,i--~°i- ~ srY ~.~ . Is the application complete? Please check if enclosad. APPLICATION ~11LL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLE T "t. ~ `3 'v.~ ti~ /v~`" ~-(D" +`'` ~ v Z.C ~ J~ S ~ Q i '~ R/S V R/1 V R/S `~ r Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1 ' concept plan Application fee "S ~ -G~%~~=~ Application ''~~' Metes and Bounds description Proffers, if applicable Justification ~'~~ Water and s=_vver application Adjoining property owners l hereby terrify that / am either the owner of the property cr the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting ~.virh the knowledge and co en/r, of the owner. r Y""`""___ "~°~ _ '(~°a`~ ~ T 17'3-t A~ Owner's Signature: ~~ ,: .. :1 :::: .>~. < t~~ ~: ~~~~~'~~ _~_ ' . ~ _ ~F~ ~~R Does the p-rcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES ~ NO IF N0, A VAnIA~'~1CE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for th° requested Use Type? YES / NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES NO Case Number The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification far the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the zoning ordinance. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/se~Ner, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire rescue. ..~~ ~g~~o s~ To GoMS~c~x-°r" A ~M I c,~R- , ~v~- ~-~o~-t ~- ~ e~~.~c.~M ~ ~r' 1 o Irate-tF= ~R- ~1'~ ~t5Tr1C7 I~c~ 1..1~, ~~ ~ *~-*~ ~'"ca 1-l'E-~' N ~ t.~: ' `~~ ~.. ~~.M ~ ~fi'S'E.1Cn 1-F~f"' ~ Go~1 '~tC~ v (~~°~'r1o1~-t ~a„~ `-T~~ ~s~C i ~'Tt ~ ~ ~'o ~,-~ ~ ~ ~- 1,-!~ ~.1 't"o ~ e-~ 1-~t ~~.. ~~ C.ol~t~-t~-UC-r-~ L.l -~r~°' N X70 ~ ~ F= `t~a'E. ~ -~TtxG~ ~~ 4-a ~•K- , t.~ oN God ~ ~ ~...-rt ~~ ~ 't~i~- ~ ~ 5`n >J G, "~'~ W ~- 4-1 ~ L-z. 6 ~.. ~~M ovFrG~ .. 4-~-C. 'f c 1-~ ~ i~ t ~.~.. ~.Ldlr-+o GAP p~~ N~..1.J ~ t G~ i~TF~t.. "T~-ti.~/l s ~ vrt 'rj'E.K.'~flG~. Tok= ~,~~-Ma `.~Tr{-~1"10M ~t-i'~. r '~ ~+~GC. o~ ~T~'~1'>E_ '~AG.1t_I'~ ~ ~ w Nom-- ~~ ~~n~~-m.~~~Y Gt-~,a-~e~~.-o ~~rn `-}-~. Gum-~-~-~ ~.?>-~~ rnor+~s . ~'1 ~ `~o~---~ E~ T`if'+~ .~1.~ f~GG.taT--o~72~ Gc>- 1.®c.,~ztZa7-+'~ Applicant r !~'rU 1._ 1 i`I"LN'~iF-t~'cl~ , ~~'Se7?-t ~jl-a 1-~ V r-t t C.f~l.PJ~ SCHWETYE ARCHITECTS i n c o r p o r a t e d 19 July 00 Mr. David Tickner, AICP Planner County of Roanoke P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 RE: replacement tower for W PXR Tv Mr. Tickner, We have assembled a package containing the information that you requested. Please let us know immediately if there is anything else that you require. Project Description: WPXR will be replacing the existing self-supporting lattice tower at their current transmitter site with a new tower of the same height, or slightly lower, approximately fifty feet from the current location. The new tower is engineered with greater strength required for a new, heavier Digital Television antenna required to meet federal requirements. The new tower will be the same height or slightly lower than existing tower. The design drawing indicating the height and loading of the tower as designed by Central Tower Company is attached. After the new tower is constructed the existing tower will be removed. Since the new tower will be less than'/2 second of Latitude and longitude (50') away from the existing Tower Paxson Communications is not required to re-file with the FAA. The FCC construction permit applications are attached. WXPR broadcast system: WPXR is a television station that services the Roanoke market. This will be the only tower associated with their operations in this area. The next closest tower that Paxson communications currently operates is in the Washington DC area. Federal Government Documentation: I have included a package of forms that were filed with the Federal government (FCC 301) relating to the permit for construction of the Digital Television site. This package contains the technical information regarding the site as well as the registration numbers of the facility and a coverage map, titled "Predicted noise-limited contour". This map represents the B grade coverage area with a radius of approximately 75 miles from the tower. Please refer to the technical documents enclosed for detailed information. Documents: We have attached an 8x10 color photo of the existing tower site in this package. The new tower will be of the same height or slightly lower, and located less than 50' from the current location. Therefore the attached photograph is an accurate representation of the appearance of the tower site when construction is complete. In addition to the technical analysis a viewshed analysis map has been generated and is attached. Please let me know if I can assist you with any further information Sincerely, M~tt Forman ; 215 north meramec avenue, saint louis, missouri 63105 (314) 726-4858 fax (314) 726-6194 ~molJl!-^^N~'~o In cmi~ c N ro'~lo o~nf~ ~ <io $ n ~~•~ a ~ ~'~sh~ul<i a'm a ul_'m i< ~ m ~ I I W z W 0 ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ i~ O ~ ti ~ _ FIB ~ r~ ~ W a~ o ~ ~ ~ k ig vC i .- ui u ~ ,q,,II +aa' ~!'~ <~ ° z ~+l~j` ti'p` ~ Q ?16 <~~ W W i ~~W t y U `1` Q ~il~ a H~ r~iH 2 z ~•zzlp,~~' < W ~ ~ ~ ^ 6 b ~ m ~ 3~~ ~ N ~ ~ W~ 6 y ~ u 4~ ~< ~ ~ t ~s ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ m!~ d O ~ F m @ I ~ d- ~ _I m ~j ~~u ~ W L~iNN Q-k b WI@p +L -N ~.Vlbnmo,IQ ;Ih~M~ I i to y N C O ~_ ~ `I po ~ ~ @SW C > W Q h~ 2 rn ~ 3Ua L J ZZ < < ]] n ~20~~ ~ ~ ~~~y06~ ~ s W `i~ Wh C `~y'~U a r` N~~~'noe w IOC ~ ~~^~ ~~IZ ~IGVi W W Nzw ~ g~ W z< ~ < . Nj~~~~ Z ~~~ ~ < ~q~ g¢ ~ Wp~z ~U ~ 3l~ _ OW $3 ~ ~O 22 '2 O ~U ~ W1@N C ~ a W ~`^W C~~ ~YW<~ ~ k ~~C 21O.~ C U~WN Q C ~ vt 4 ~Z .J ILA G yy~~ W~4J yyW~~OW Wes. ~3WZ.x. ~ W~~L~SZ a p~p ~~C GG2m \ ~ tin ~ tn`Ntu VI tnWi.S 2 JO` <iu ~ WB2 ~ N~-Utl_ tn2 22 ~ COIn~41~ WO p< 0o 2 N2 X222 W<~W~ '~+ Z=n W ~SJ`W`~iZZe `~ QyU Z S FC4<<6W In+9~ty l0 < H'-y¢ ~`zG S~~ < ly `c ~ 2 ~6<~ `~ vl In¢@~y ti ^qw2.<s 3ifn~ Stu^Nti w^u, <+y-~ Z ~~~-~l<i~3<~ W j^ w I- <~WC ~W ~~a30 ~W~ 20?O Ut ~~p WSl!..y ~ !~ .~ < W xWl<2 C3<W 55,~ ZQi ~W,c~ J Wtn L1gL2J ~ u ~ <`3~~z w~2_~ I-W S ~ C ~W~UZ~ ~j1=GL' ~ ~ WW<'w`~W W~.~+n N3+ 2N_mC ° ~UU'x+2~<N~C ° ` VI IWi+IIUR ~` ~a0 ; JOC tiGOy t~ 2~o~u, ~ > m ~~ <W`~y3a n^3 .>n x ~~ wi^wN~,~~ r~cnW.... iV ooG4JJ <W 2h0.o ~~Q p^~ J~1~i ..tiln¢~ ;'~..+In Otn>ti ~~((qq yy Iy~ ~VIJ CtiW WOi ill tIWFW ULL VGGUCgW ~Q<~Wn'~I-2Z10~ ~'~~ ~VI `IJ4y U12 .F-S «:J` ti~ •gW^~~~W~ NNN`W< @^:n GUI-U< < J J2 VCU~W\ Ujh-N«UI .~ttwq ~~w ~<~~-w a~hw In <~wu~a ~. e<a< ~c ~S in9 C^ why WU CCW W_2 < ~s N 0-~ WH W ,Ti C=GU~C •~Cyi WUI W2<Sd 2 2 < V WWVS 2.,V0 3 OWE CV1 gJ~Y W~e<~C~tiU`WC ~y ~^ 4 ~W W'I~1Wk C'`~ w ri. S4y kl„gW~~l-~~~uwiW`~~ :. 3~'InW JC~y~Ow<C~ C G01=+=lnitn ~IWvl^<C-.C yi~3l=vi<G~3am~!-nJtit11 ~C * O q Q ~_ ~~~ 1 w M~ F _~ 21 ! ~ G c ou ~' ~ a 1~'',I~ J Q ~ ti '4~~ In ~ ~ IYIY Y ~ - ..ia 1. ~ / ~ \` ~~\ / / \\ ~~ ~ ink -I ~ X ;^ ti ~ \~ ~ L it ~ I ~ ,; ~ci ~ ~ c ~~I~I d`~ ~ <m _ ~~ 1 ,C ~ F ` -: ` ~ ~,n oa a ~o - U ~ Cl 3 ~ : ¢ w @ < ~ Io i 11 ~• Q ' ~ a 4+ , , ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~' aI n° ~ ~ - ~ f Q Q O ~C 3 I ~ ` ` o D ~ ~ Q ~.~ ~ z ~f w 0.U1 ~ ~~ z ~ e <o ,. G ~ Z>v ~ ~d w~ o GZ Q z N x-! H z` 1~ ~~ C G' < i v i [ m a 3 a ~ "J p ut~ Cyl u i a l 'G u i n ~~ ~ G <'~ ~`T ~` ., 31 b 31 y ~_ ~. [ ~` ~ ~ W~ OQ ~ J W ~~ F e ~~ N~ m. 0 0 a6 0 ~. ~s J Q I- W N ~' o ?- o F-' ° r J °o d r O ~ P N d J i Z ' K m H p W Q U z o?N 0 0^- r N ° ~ _oa ~ ~ P m ~ J Z m ~ W ~o I- m m ~ ~ V Q U p Q r m ~'oo m~ moo= ~o~ ~ s W m Z Q ~ ~ I i 1 I~ ~~ I I ~, i I I II a~l o - ~ Q W ~ N O ¢ ~ ~ u~ V = H Q m ~ N ~ O °~ VI ~ Z ~ Z N m ~ ~ . ~ a I I I D~ ~ ~ o ~ 0 U cn c~ ~ W Q ~ W W `~ `/ Z V V Qa O O z 3 Y ip ~yFm m p W r N F m Z ~~< r 3 ~ < mW 0 ~~~ ~;~a s 0 0 P 2 Q F 3 J a w so N " ~-- 0 ~ J °o a ~O~ W ~j P N p ~f O ? ~ Z m ,J F O VI W L Q '7 ~' Q~ R ~ ~ V. ~~ .^ ~ _~os _ ~~y _. x ~E~ s ¢ ~ ~~~ d_ U Z Q . ~ _. ~~ca o~cn ~ W m ~~ ~ ,U (J.l ~~E ~e Q'~ x ( . ~ V x L.IL ~ ' ^ VJ ~ N~ L ~~®r i..~ ,~n v , O g 295. m ~ W Z~ UQo° a ~om~ E-°°_ o~ ~~Z~ 0 w m z _ w I z ~~~ °C° I Q ~~ ~Q ~~ ~~ _ col F- N N gj! W ~ ~ ^ W ~~ L_~ ~~ S~ m _~ ~~ W LL Z Q ~~~ ~ ~ ~W I ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ W~ , ~ ~I ~ I -~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ W ~ ~- W Q X ~~ W ~~ ~- ~_ X ~ i ll! D c L C~ .L~.1 ~W Q (~, U LIL ~ ® 0 0 Z S ~~ ~~ Q~ ~~ V ~ ~~ .`~....' N W _ o s J ~ ~. ~ ~' •- x ~ _ ~E~ _ ~ Q U U '~ ~ ~_ m Z ~ L Q ° ~ ,~~ ,~ ~ ~ o~EQ ~ V ~ ~ cx ,~ Q LJL a. ~ - CV Figure 3 .... ... - ~ ~ ~ - r ~ j - ayPr;y~ WerxO~ " BnW Ga1k ~ DurM_ ~ ' / Rochrn p rr I ~~~ ~.~ 'C - 1Lp ,, ~ 'Emacm v~uio-a 3.-~ ~ P J. a i > ~ :~ ) , S~~e ~ ~- x S w ~' J~ (~/Z , ti avm , ee, Ivcbste~ is o. cr~~. cb ~ eqw ~ A4 m Cwm +w na,an ~ l i " ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ` - ~ „~~" ,,,aw ~ h{arris burg ` M la no Co ! , [ L U [n yam,,,- . ' y ~ ~ _ o in~n as a ,-e l! '~ - _ - i ue•.,.~k Carr,denm.! ,a,.kv ` . rm S„n r l ~ S oerc>dc. j ^liC.bo uS Co .,rag+v+~ H ~ ~' !gun A Y~'CE 19 Surtr*w~tYAig" ~ _ ,rasa raar '~ ~ - - ~ ~ 3vne. August 1999 Aesk Cmae lslei ,~ Ra:nwood ~ ~ AA, ~~ ~ Abhau: f" ?..ncnk "n n V I -- rya B .,ee en 3,nao Ga^ ire _ .'r q. I"Mw ;~dr..: ~,, .m. Ga xky~ yiA~.wc __,~.. `- ~v.,..r ~a~. rau,oo,o S13tUt! Gz-~ Pree i ~ v + e '~^ _ " s.m ~ in ~ E cam, ~ . ,~e w \ _ _ sA ~o»e _ CecOerbvwt. V 'asfeMk '~ ~ p~ ~ '9e`"~ Mr~ JQi ~~ r/oZel ^ ~ 5' ~,v+w .~M ~ 1 va e0e'd~ 1 wrra' -` .,' -,-. rc~m ~ s ~ 'b` ' - __ ]f. . J. r !.trr~r '~~ Daft _ .- -~ W e ~ ~ Mean i~ow ° --- SrMesmr-._ ~ r 11 Cana ~ Qwroo--_-_ -. _. __ _____ - ~ `d I. uuM-~o..° -_~~ --_-__ _ -.-_. -' _ _ _ _ _ _ __. ,r !,d Q -_ - -,= ~ ~ Wh kM11C ~ ~Eu~ ~(~ } `~~rdk ~~,n G'(ff nbfiol LJ. P. ~ ~ / $hra ,~ AYYnrx) 1.SIbxP ~/ - 41 d B u / ; A, a~le ; r]ea. ~^.tv* yob ~e~ na G'd~ty GreriJ«d , ~.. ~.arowe, Ba.vo.+ Cap, b.'v ~~Ve'}bva Ijryrmer k / Ane,ary n Wno =e+~~ ~ ~... Brepev IAeaaw ir»u r. K<u~er ~ aleYy SPnrq - -- '. ~ uoere~a ~ e~ GT. { Fe~s h ~r rarw~e.. _ - Ar+,ee See, a : I "~ ~n '~ g \.' ` // ~ Ar)va,e ~~ ~ Eanm C ~ ~ -. l r axkfiv, S ~ ~~. - a ,C~ ~' _. - _,.. _-` ~ rrapMl ey B - Pam . I _ : , . ~ ~ ~«'^^Lexi17 n - Koppenlm ~ _ `^o `' 'A6~r*r eon cr air ;~~ N~ en~V~la'~ ~'~ °n •4 Ald~nm Sw,m '' rmun Pmt / Ga ~tibkca.: ~ Ban+eno..~ - -y ~ar,aG<„.ar s Gaw ab. ~, Hx1~On WNkreek ~~ Fpt KerrJd, j i.eei,~+ntl('S ~ .. Be ssezi ~ ~ B.avrb+l, G'nOM"- - Gd>¢Y,Y - ~ S HyH,.,~ R!uxn Eal. - ' ~ - - Oris.em wev ~~ - ~,~ 'Jraw ~! mk PnevJk ~ :.~X:. Tp~ axv+k - '.~ Blrtv alOf l'..7. ~ ~ ' >l+(~nl~ I b[XfIC'U.'i _ ~ 3uCk1r)jJ ~ .. ~„m B2r.rS-, v, .wPPder I ~~ , . av yar,a ~ .,o,.,e. -- sP~ ,a ~~~ s~rya ~ C F ~ Me,~„ Lxroa HoH rK Crm C. Wry ~.- _ __ w+sv, cee,Mar t1\ Bala^. ._ ,°~ 9 - r aerar• eA I I - rmslb rtryrtuaenc.vn. `'v'"; ~ ~ I ~ ~` ~~ ~ ~ - i Darr+k ~ . xaya+a>e Sewrg Crzea ~ fdercr ~J ' ~" ` .. P - Dekn _ Rnso ~.u Lynch ~ { '~ Gary Ertv. L ~ whro ;~a gaga s ue PnnCBtAR ~{. Blue R1]ge ~-~ - , h " , .. Ana,val~ Mx„~m t ors a. ,a,~:; ~r ~ cazn,~r' oKe Bed~d T~ e / ~ e~a„ plan J ~-- P ... - - ` _ , .~! r`w r~ I.sta , - ~ 1 _. `P4e °" ,,..,e - ~~ ~ ~ -Pam ~ Ah~a v al mod'" 4PC~Gao .a::;,natik BlacKsburg ~r Pn" ~ ::.,1; ~_cco Cave.: _~ "_ , _ o.. 270°True c . 1 - 90°True ~ "- _~ „e,x„ ~ '-: `1...~, Gad., 1 - ~...-{g=¢srM P"r„rd ~ ~~ ~ .F"i1a"`~l_C.~'w5 9 neaGaraen wee ea„ont 7 8ovrs wA ~7aaaa ~~y ,..oaoes ~~ G,uen ~ - ~ iron ~ - - ' ~ P,Aas `~,' .• ~~ P a--- ~ ~ I ~~~~ J `~.~( 1 J~ ~ 6rtAne CvMlk Qwn Wu ~~ . - _-__. _ --.' ~ ~ J ._.-.~ - SYJre H. avsce .._ ~I ROC OVrtf i " C,aC,arn W 91aoJKx I :one• ;YSOr•e - ` Marv A.r ~ _ , em,m ra, .,e,2a. west ~ x. a.u -._ -~ ~ i, G,mm i / _ tiux[s _ " ~ A M M n ~~ ,sPr.,ya -- - G+Pae~ees~3assh.n _ _ ~:.' ~~ ~ ~_ ~ o~~- - `~ `~°~ a~a~m ' e~t7 rrraa ~ o , ~ - woon.~rc Aeou ~ 6Nesw ~ ~,qar Grv+e ,_ _ ~ . ~ rfr • " ~ r ~ - . Ml n ' ~~ ~ _ _ - , F~,: ~ ~Bassen ~_ rarraa " ~ ' , ' Gry (Vrk I SCbn3drl9 n - a e DC4 CrT.:n Jy- r~;„eak ~ .'P rr•r~lCo. vros<on„ ~ >. -~ ; $erMk '~.C IIl$VI~e $ouNBoslon _ aronsvd~e " ~ " ~arx.,we~ avwPU Ga~dx ~ar~~ao-. - swr-- _ -_..., _ „a ~ r ~ ~ ,u _ _ Be~,crP. - ~ _ D~ ~ ~ ~ ~'r Mu»~asm r - ~ PuamrSy.ya ~ /~„ _ ~. A2ral ar,a aaw.,ae -_ i w ~a 4C------- y ~e nN~a-~esarC¢w~- - - :_ .~"°'e•-^Cw ~a~t ape.~ar u~ , ~sk _wq,,,_.~+,!! _ ,mm,- -'--? r----- e a 5akm ;,,~.,y s„~.ae, . >,~ 5~, Je °"aa= 1 1, girt/ c~m ~ ;, ~ ,, - a~osi r.:j sera ;.% aec«rw° den,~, ,. ,a s ~u' ~~ 1 y ~" .err '`t zvq^ Westfield G •• / VJ ^+ - f' ^ q p, n, S,° a, r~.al vernpe Purser _ ` Cerb ~ Gears ~ S avoxik S10"e"'k FD2314a1e fwodmsm! I Bernd J, ll emern eek a,r~ C:nm ~ rv;e _ SlJket Tma O2 K++oo ~ ~~ ~~~ ~„msm Pd l ~ ~ n bra 'i Oak r1N lkrd N~0" r~d'~1r"e P r0 `'_ 4asm roCk;ng:~om C~! - L -R~G Ge.++ 3gre Sanerwnie G ^ _ an a BeavwGeea ~°v°ea is #ta.n;an-an CaPeaa r,P.r, eam.~ *wa~eson ~ ~.r,;am 1 ~ ~s sor SuieF;a:~ wrd s i G •'eV A ~ ~ ...- w_ % r _ l ~" Mai, - Re. e P taKm;ea"-- _. EK°0o° s ~~ _- „ ,u ,we s C~ fker.ooo ~ Geran , B , y i " (pest W Can+P S 6usm Fo•a OXI ~ ' ~ ~ n,nam ..~ 3vayi. ~c¢to;e. Stwal ing ~ (; v = oov.xri ~ ~ / ,~~ ceroan.Petrfw aaynel `t,~ea ui, -~. O.~~erem &1 n ~ 7 t o ~ Mal 9csvrv1k 'y'm,.. fir' '"' _ / l n\ S+Meam+ey ~e,rlari twbe!vobnl ~~ .: ~ ' i r ` ` ~~ East B«d ~ ~B gown ~ - Cble. SI tie ~ ~ a mmi \ ~~ CaR ~ S,mmer6e+d 'P.oC" ~ skm :a. iLva, ~ ~ Lade SPrry Nonn Vrdkesdoro C"~„" ~ '~Ckrn ~~ weue~ aixrei,a..oss, WWBbge ~~. ~y °~` Arra.+ka~lwobru i ~"z~, \ sror Ptenwts ~p,~, 9roen~rulp.awY --O,cg Yadklpyille Enos ~ i Bank Fpdy lw 1 6rtre.wdtwtQrstnl r~suaalsuopls.m,' ~~ln nWra Energy a ~ ,"+era,-~,.,1: -e,:~~k -~~ W~nSt iaG, "r''°°e ~ ; ' BUf In t n ~ - .. Noise-Limit d P 1990 C ) 1 158 941 ~ ~ g ' ~. E:eR f0 ~ n ..,Gr,uor,, A ` ' ~ ~~ ` I e op. ( , ensus , ~2a gyp. Fes, ~ ~^~xes,.ePap,V..kGa~ - .- Land Area (Square km) 35.370 a ~ ~ liigh~oin ' FaaslOaks - °°d uc ,^ yak Nn,eavale ~ ~-r ~ - - AruOa "Y" r AW ~ duMMr 2PT,an IA - ~0 0 '0 10 60 80 100 130 miles '0 0 d0 80 120 IGO kilornetcrs PREDICTED NOISE-LIMITED CONTOUR STATION WPXR-DT ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CH 36 700 KW (MAX-DA) 626 M du Trell. Lundin & Rarklcv. Inc Sarasota. Florida ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Paxson Communications Zoning: Special Use Tax Map No. 93.00-1-47.1 r~yuic v Sheet 1 of 3 ~„~.~" DTV -> TV Separation Study ~ ~„ Job Title :WPXR-DT Separatior_ Buffer 161 u-n Zone 2 FCC T'~ DB Date 08/19/99 Channel 36 (602-608 MHz) Coordinates 37-11-37 80-09-25 Call City Channel ERP(k~rl) Latitude Bear. Dist. Req. Status St FCC File No. Zone HAAT(m) Longitude True (km) (km) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- WJPP, LYTICHBUF.G 21(-)•4170 DA 37-i9-14 72.9 48.57 LIC VA BLCT-930513I4E II 500 79-37-59 -24.47 WLFL RALEIGH 22(0) 5000 DA 35-42-52 143.5 203.41 LIC NC BLCT-861113KR II 510 78-49-Oi 106.81 GdKPITV PIKEVILLE *22(-) 1320 DA 37-i7-06 273.5 210.36 LIC KY BLET-810616KI II 430 82-31-29 113.76 WrRDC DUPi:A1~? 28 (+) 5000 35-40-35 138. 8 222 .44 LIC NC BLCT-910116KE II 585 78-32-09 125.84 WVIRTV CHARLOTTESVILLE 29(-) 5000 37-59-00 58.7 171.99 LIC VA BLCT-930210KE I 363 78-28-54 ~ 91.49 ltiILPXTV CHARLESTON 29(0) 5000 DP. 38-28-12 315.4 201.00 CP MOD WV BMPCT-980529KG I 368 81-46-35 120.50 WPBYTV HUNTINGTON *33(+) 2090 DA 38-29-41 309.5 230.70 LIC WV BLET-950905KE I 379 82-12-03 150.20 WRLHTV RICHMOND 35(+) 2570 37-30-22 80.2 220.38 LIC VA BLCT-870930LA I 384 77-42-03 114.38 WRLHTV RICHMOND 35(+) 5000 37-30-22 80.2 220.38 CP VA BPCT-960705KE I 384 77-42-03 114.38 WCNCTV CHARLOTTE 36(0) 5000 35-20-49 204.2 224.26 LIC NC BLCT-880914KF II 595 81-10-15 -20.34 W'iTNPTV R0~?VOKE RAPIDS * 36 (-) 1550 36-1 7-28 115.2 230.22 LIC NC BLET-861120KI II 368 77-SC-10 -14.38 WGPT OAKLAND * 36(+) 245 DA 39-24-14 16.8 256.71 LIC MD BLET-940415KE I 216 79-17-37 39.41 24.1/96.6 SHORT1 24.1/96.6 CLEF.R 24.1/96.5 CLEP.R. 24.1/96.6 CLEAR 24.1/80.5 CLEAR 24.1/80.5 CLEAR 24.1/80.5 CLEAR 12.0/106.0 CLEAR 12.0/106.0 CLEAR 244.6 SF-IORT1 244.6 SHORT1 217.3 CLEAR WTVQTV LEXINGTON 36(0) 2240 38-02-03 285.3 385.57 244.6 LIC KY BLCT-800619IX II 305 84-23-39 140.97 CLEAR ~ Proposed DTV operation complies with~~CC's ~~/'~0~ inter~erence policy using procedures ou~lined in FCC's OET-69 Bulletin. ,y~,~ Sheet 2 of 3 ~~~ D TV -> T'/ Separation Study Job Tit le :WPXR-DT Sepa ration B uffer 161 km Zone 2 FCC TV DB Dat e 08/19/99 Channel 36 (602-608 MHz) Coordi nates 37-11- 37 80-09-25 Call City C hannel ERP(kW) Latitude Bear . Dist. F.eq. Status ------- St FCC File No. ------------------- Zor_e ------ HAAT(m} -------- Longitude True ---------------- (km) -------- (}cl-n) ------------ WPXR ROANOKE 38(-) 1350 DA 37-11-37 0.0 0.00 24.1/96.6 APP VA BPCT-970721K~E II 616 80-09-25 24.10 CLEAR WPXR ROANOKE 38(-) 1350 DA 37-11-35 237.8 0.13 24.1/96.6 LIC VA BLOT-860110KN II 616 80-09-29 23.97 CLEAR WLF'B BLUEFIELD 40(-) 3160 DA 37-13-08 272.0 98.05 24.1/80.5 CP MOD WV BMPCT-960531KE I 391 81-15-39 17.55 CLEAR [~JKFT FAYETTEVILLE 40(+) 5000 35-30-45 150.2 214.49 24.1/96.6 LIC NC BLCT-860630KE II 561 78-58-40 117.89 CLEAR UTRAZ RALEIGH 50(+) 5000 35-40-35 138.8 222.44 24.1/96.6 LIC NC BLCT-950925KE II 549 78-32-09 ~ 125.84 CLEAR WVPT STAUNTON *51(-) 525 DA 38-09-54 34.2 130.97 24.1_/80.5 LIC VA BLET-222 I 680 79-18-51 50.47 CLEAR ** End of TV Separation Study for Channel 36 ** Sheet 3 of 3 DTV -> DTV Separation Study Job Title :WPXR-DT Separation Buffer 161 km Zone 2 FCC DTV DB Date: 12/18/98 Channe l 36 (602-608 MHz) Co ordinates 37-11-37 80-09-25 Call City Channe l ERP(kW) Lati tude Bear. Dist. Req. Status St FCC File No. Zone HAAT(m) Long itude True (krr;) (}~) DWGHPTV HIGH POINT 35 759.4 35-48 -47 169.6 155.75 24.0/110.0 DTVALT NC ~ II 387 79-50 -36 45.75 CLEAR1 DWPXR RCANOKE 36 50 37-11 -35 237.8 0.12 DTVALT VA II 616 80-09 -29 DWFAY FAYETTEVILLE 36 50 34-53- 05 158.9 274.11 223.7 DTVALT NC II 256 79-04- 31 50.41 CLEAR1 WFPX-DT FAYETTEVILLE 36 1000 DA 34-53- OS 158.9 274.13 223.7 APP NC BPCDT-990426KF II 242 79-04-29 50.43 CLEAR1 DIGITAL TV DWTTG WASHINGTON 36 1000 38-57- 21 53:0 333.22 196.3 DTVALT DC I 235 77-04- 57 136.92 CLEAR1 WTTG-DT WASHINGTON 36 1000 38-57- 22 53.0 333.20 196.3 CP DC BPCDT-980501KI I 201 77-04- 59 136.90 CLEP.R ** End of DTV Separation Study for Channel 36 ** W 0 o~ a S 7-a ' Sheet 1 of 2 I TECHNICAL EXHIBIT APPLICATION FOR DTV CONSTRUCTION PERMIT STATION WPXR-DT ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CH 36 700 KW (MAX-DP.) 626 M Technical Specifications Channel 36 Frequency Proposed Site Coordinates (NAD 27) Site Elevation above mean sea level 602-608 MHz 37° 11' 37" North Latitude 80° 09' 25" West Longitude 1146.0 m Average elevation above mean sea level of 8 equally spaced radials, 3-16 kilometers Overall height of antenna structure Above ground Above mean sea level Height of antenna radiation center Above ground Above mean sea level Above average terrain DTV Transmitter Rated power output (average) Combiner Loss (0.25 dB) Transmission line Nominal diameter Length Efficiency (0.50 dB loss) Antenna Polarization Peak Power Gain Beam Tilt Main Lobe 578.4 m 64.0 m 1210.0 m 58.2 m 1204.3 m 626 m 20 kW 94.40 HP Heliax (5") 12.7 cm (220 ft) 67.1 m 89.20 Dielectric TUP-SP4-8S-1 Horizontal 49.1 1.00° 72° T .y,., ~ .. _ Sheet 2 of 2 Proposed Operation Transmitter output power (average) 16.93 kw Combiner Loss 0.95 kW Transmission line loss 1.73 kW Antenna input power 14.26 kV~l Ma;~imum Effective Radiated Power 700 kW (at Main Lobe) FRCi'1 CEN?'~~i__l"JIJER. ?NC. F'~'~INE hJQ. : ~Si23~3665~ Jul. 19 21~~3~7 ~+,5: 1?Ph1 F 209.0' 2G0.O' ;00.0' 140.0' :tea. o' ~o.o° 40.0' U.O' Central "fmwsr lnc. 2855 t-Ih+~+1'. 2G1 ; Ntvrbtargh, IN. 47630-®146 Phc~na: ~B't 2~ 853-£15;15 Fax: ([112j $53•[:6x2 Client. !?AX.aCAI Joh No: n-GO61C2A. date; ':3 ;u~ ?OOG Location: k0R't,IOKE, vA Tc;wer He_Ght: ZGS.OO` Stande~rd: RNSIIEIF, 222_E 1996 G+esi n Wind a Ie=: .0 mnh, "i/c" ICE ?roject: d;'~.teorersa\~OO61U?.io3 Snee` I of 1 17.0' TOTAL F4Ut7D:.TION LOA.)S INDI4IDUA~ iOO^liYv I,BADS H-33.99s HH=2O.63k 4=55.36?. V•37i.96k M~4562.7gk-f-. i1~-314.9Bk EiEYATICN Tw-21.Onk°fi T-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PAXSON COMMUNICATIONS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING TOWER WITH A NEW 199 FOOT BROADCASTING TOWER TO BE LOCATED AT 8241 HONEYSUCKLE ROAD (TAXMAPNO.93.00-1-47.1),WINDSORHILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Paxson Communications has filed a petition for a special use permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower to be located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road (Tax Map No. 93.00-1- 47.1) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Paxson Communications to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower to be located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road (Tax Map No. 93.00-1-47.1) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The height of the proposed lattice tower shall not exceed 199 feet above grade. (2) The lattice tower structure and all attached hardware shall be a flat matted color so as to reduce visibility and light reflection. (3) No lighting shall be installed on the tower structure unless required by the FAA. Security lighting may be provided on site, at a height not to exceed 25 feet. (4) If the use of the tower structure for wireless communications and broadcasting is discontinued, the tower structure shall be dismantled and removed from the site within G:\COMMON\September\paxson.sup.wpd / '~ 30 days of notice by the County, and the Special Use Permit shall become void. (5) The location of the tower structure and related equipment shall be as shown on the site plan included with the application entitled "Proposed Site Diagram" dated 6-21-2000, as prepared by Schwetye Architects. (6) Removal of the existing tower will be required prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 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. G:\COMMON\September\paxson.sup.wpd 2 r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD O~ SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE 092600-9 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO GRACE ASSEMBLY OF GOD TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH TO BE LOCATED AT 5530 CATAWBA VALLEY DRIVE (TAX MAP N0.7.00-2-55), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Grace Assembly of God has filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a church to be located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive (Tax Map No. 7.00-2- 55) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26, 2000. 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 Grace Assembly of God to construct a church to be located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive (Tax Map No. 7.00-2-55) in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 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. 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 1 to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~.. Brenda J. Hol n, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 ROANOKE COUNTY Grace Assembly of God DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Special Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 7.00-2-55 T-3 PETITIONER: GRACE ASSEMBLY OF GOD CASE NUMBER: 22-9/2000 Planning Commission Hearing Date: September 5, 2000 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: September 26, 2000 A. REQUEST Petition of Grace Assembly of God to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a church, located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Ms. Hooker asked about the removal of trees. Lorraine Taylor, pastor, stated that there are no plans to remove all the trees, just what is needed for the building, D. CONDITIONS None. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Ms. Hooker moved to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Ross, Witt, Thomason, Hooker, Robinson NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: ,,Concept Plan ,Vicinity Map (Staff Report _ Other Terry Harrin on, S retary Roanoke ounty Planning Commission STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: Grace Assembly of God CASE NUMBER: 22-9/2000 PREPARED BY: David Holladay DATE: 9/5/2000 PART I A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / -' This is a request for a Special Use Permit to construct a church. The 9.4-acre site is wooded, and adjoins agricultural fields and single family residences. The area is designated Rural Village in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. The proposal is consistent with the policies and guidelines of the Community Plan. B. DESCRIPTION Grace Assembly of God plans to construct a new 8,100 square foot church building, with a 250- seat sanctuary. Anew 56-space parking lot is also proposed. The building would be served by a private well and septic system. The property is zoned AGI, Agricultural/Low Density, and is located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, in the Catawba Magisterial District. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Site development review is required Religious Assembly is allowed by Special Use Permit in the AG-1 zoning district. Use and design standards in the zoning ordinance require screening and buffering where parking areas and recreational areas adjoin residential land use. If a new driveway entrance is constructed, the Virginia Department of Transportation requires a commercial entrance permit. The Health Department requires a septic permit. PART II A: ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Conditions -The existing structure was renovated and converted to a church in 1991. The church is approximately 1,300 square feet and has a sanctuary seating capacity of approximately 100. The existing parking lot has 33 spaces, and according to church officials, is insufficient when church attendance is at or near capacity. Two driveway entrances serve the parking lot. • Topogra~hy/Ve etation -The area where the new structure is proposed slopes gradually up to the south. The lot is wooded with relatively young deciduous and evergreen trees, and mature woodlands. The area with the younger vegetation was previously used as a nursery. Some of the rows of shrubs and trees from the nursery are still visible in the woods behind the existing parking lot. Surrounding Neighborhood -Adjacent property to the south is zoned AG3 and is wooded. Property to the west is zoned AG1 and contains agricultural pasture, and asingle-family residence. Properties to the north, across Rt. 311 are zoned AG1. One property across Rt. 311 has a single family home that is set back from the highway, and buffered by trees. The other properties across Rt. 311 are wooded and contain no structures. Adjacent property to the east is zoned AGI, and contains asingle-family residence. This home is separated from the proposed development area by at least 300 feet of wooded land. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture - As shown on the concept plan, the petitioners propose to construct a church and parking lot in the northwest corner of the property. The site development would incorporate the existing church and parking area. The existing church would become a fellowship hall, and the existing parking lot would be used as currently designed. The concept plan shows a new 8,100 square foot one-story building. The seating capacity of the sanctuary is planned for 250. The new 56-space parking lot, combined with the existing parking lot meets Roanoke County parking requirements for the proposed sanctuary. Use and design standards in the zoning ordinance require screening and buffering between church parking areas and adjacent residential land uses. The concept plan could require minor adjustment to provide a buffer yard between the western edge of the parking area and the adjacent residential land use. A septic drainfield would be constructed to the east of the new church building. Access/Traffic Circulation -The concept plan indicates a new driveway entrance located to the east of the existing parking lot. In their review of this petition, VDOT staff commented that the two existing entrances appear to have adequate site distance. VDOT staff also commented that no additional entrances to Rt. 311 will be allowed, and that if a new entrance is desired, then one of the existing entrances will have to be abandoned. If a new entrance is to be constructed, a commercial entrance permit would be required from VDOT. Fire & Rescue/LTtilities -Fire and Rescue service would continue as presently provided. The site is served by a private well and septic system. The petitioners plan to use the existing well for both the new church and the existing structure. Anew septic system would be constructed to serve the new structure. 2 • C. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The site is designated Rural Village in the future land use guide of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. Neighborhood institutional centers, such as churches, are encouraged land use types. D. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The site has ample space to conform with use and design standards for religious assembly, as well as other county development requirements. Screening and buffer yards may be required between the parking area and adjacent residential land use to the west. VDOT approval is required if a new entrance is constructed. A. STAFF CONCLUSIONS PART III The petitioners' request for a Special Use Permit for religious assembly is consistent with the policies and guidelines of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. The site has ample space to conform with all applicable development standards. No negative impacts are anticipated. County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-079$ (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 For Staff Use Onl Date receiv~ Z~ ~~ Received by: _ Application fee: ~ PC/BZA date: ~~ Placards issued: ~ BOS date: e , Case Number ~: '~ ALL ,4PPLICf1NTS Check type of application filgci (check all that apply) O Rezoning Special Use ~ Variance A licants n /address w/zi Phone• Jay ~ t~~~~ a~ ~ ~ ~ V~, ia Ga#zt.~,dc~' L~ _ Fax No. Owners name/address w/zip Phone: Fax No. P operty Loc tion ~'~., f.~ ~~j~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ . ' / Magisterial District: ~~ '~ "~,~ ~,~ ~{~ / ~'~ ` "~~ ~~~~~ ~ h Community Planning area: , / Tax Map No.: ,J ~, `~ ~~ Existin Zonin : ~ ~ --- ~ ~ g g ,. . Size of arcel s :Acres: , p () ~ Existin Land Use: g ~I "'~ ~1~'~ REZONING-EIIVD SPECIAL USE PER1i~IIT ,~PPLIC,-I.NTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: ,~~~~-~~ f~ ~~ Proposed Land Use: Does th~sparcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? ' Yes ~ No O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes O No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No O VARIANCE APPLICANTS. (V) Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: ...~' ~°~ 1 ~- FYoY1+L.~ Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/ V R/ V R/ V Consultation ~~ 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan r Application fee Application Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. ,, ~ J.Z~~. ~ ~ A ' )( U~-~x~ Owner s Signature JUSTIFICATION,`F'OR -REZONING OR SPECIAL USE PERNIIT REQUEST Applicant ~~~~~ SSA (~ ~ ~` ~d ~ '~ ~~~~~~ ~' The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district class tfication the Zoning Ordinance. ~ ~~ r Please ex~lain how the proje~ct~conforms to the general guidelines and polic' s co~~,t-aine~d~ th Roan~,o~ke C~o-ry Co unity Plan. C%l! ~ ~~1,~tlYtG/` ~~. ~-~Ci.y:l~' ~~?c..%C ~.=f~~'~~(:t-~f12~1~~ C~xP .,~ Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and acilities~' eluding ester//sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and f e an rescue. C~ C~~~t j c ~L~~" '`~l.G~l-~-'~L~G~Ci Lr7~' C~LJ {Z.~--~-~tL' i i~-~ ° ~. w yy o ~aII ~ w ~ ~ a~ ~" i> ..I~~di ~' ~ O yy SS i -P ~ ~ y'0 ~~~ is M ~:~-_~ i 3<~ .~ ~~ 0 ~ ~ O e ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a g w 2 =0r'x~3 - r p .. - LL ~ ~ Q}~ Q ~~ q ~O V ... +aaee ~ ar xri ~ P4 1OM/1 Y YbII dll~ 1',tiiS ~ V V ^ v, o v i `, _ r' ~ ,MOef. •~ ,~.nr an Y era ~ ~ 4 I W ~~ ~. (~ I T ~ ~ ~ _ ~ I T ks ~ ~- ~ cn v- 1 1 3 ~ W ~g~ ~~ izW`` I ~ T ~c .s- ~o y~~N I I ~ T ~ ~ 4~ W ~ ~3°~~ ~ a~ oQ- T "~' o~ vw~c~Q I 1 T a ~ ~ ~~ LQZ~ I M t . ~ ~ 2 Q~>> 0 L ~ Z llt C9 I 1 ~°. ~~ ~02¢ao *L_ : a ~ I f o V Zti I ~ 3~ ~~~Jo ~~-O I ~ j~o `n sn ~ , T I y T ~ ~•1° Yom I ~~ i ~a~i°gtu, ~ ~ a ZV ~ Z O I ~ ~ ~ AI lII0 ~ ,~ ~[O.M yr p ! 'C a T O ~1 ' ~ ~ ~ V.i ~ ~tY.~~ she4 1 U j ~ ~ ~ ~~ d~ i~A r ~ < 1 z ~~((( • m ~ ~ r yyy~ •• ~: 6c ~_c n ~ I nmor-a a i r 81.2 NOR H 80.3 ~~ ~ ~~ 9 f'' ROANOKE COUNTY Grace Assembly of God DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Spectral Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 7.00-2-55 ~ / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO GRACE ASSEMBLY OF GOD TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH TO BE LOCATED AT 5530 CATAWBA VALLEY DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 7.00-2-55), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Grace Assembly of God has filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a church to be located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive (Tax Map No. 7.00-2-55) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on September 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 2000; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Grace Assembly of God to construct a church to be located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive (Tax Map No. 7.00-2-55) in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 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. 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. G:\COMMON\September\grace.assembiy.sup.wpd "~7", (~ r' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 DENIAL OF ORDINANCE 092600-10 AMENDING AND REENACTING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE VIRGINIA BY THE MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS FOR THE STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, in 1992 the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted a new zoning ordinance for Roanoke County ,including provisions pertaining to the parking of vehicles in residential districts; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has requested the Roanoke County Planning Commission to prepare an amendment to the zoning ordinance addressing the allowable storage of recreational vehicles in residential districts; and, WHEREAS, public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice support an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Roanoke to provide for the storage of recreational vehicles in the street-side side yard of corner lots in residential districts; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this amendment on September 5, 2000; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Roanoke. WHEREAS, public notice and advertisement of this amendment has been provided as required by Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, and the Roanoke County Code. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and motion failed by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor McNamara NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney T4 `• PETITIONER: Roanoke County Planning Commission CASE NUMBER: 24-9/2000 Planning Commission Hearing Date: September 5, 2000 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: September 26, 2000 A. REQUEST Petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend Section 30-91-2 (A) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Pertaining to the Parking of Recreational Vehicles in the Front Yards of Corner Lots B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Don Witt said that if the County does not want to allow boats and recreational vehicles in the front yards of homes near streets, we should apply this standard equitably, even on corner lots. Ms. Hooker stated that she believed the current standard was appropriate. Mr. Robinson stated that he did not believe the County should amend the zoning ordinance for the convenience of one person who has a violation. D. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt moved denial of the amendment. Ayes: Ross, Witt, Thomason, Hooker, Robinson Nays: None E. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. F. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report x Other Terrance H ingt ,Secretary Roanoke , ounty Planning Commission Tv Roanoke County Department of Community Development Memorandum TO: Planning Commission ~i,~. FROM: Terrance L. Harrington, AICP DATE: August 29, 2000 RE: Public Hearing on Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment Section 30-91-2 (A) l.; Parking of Recreational Vehicles in Front Yards on Corner Lots SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board of Supervisors has requested that the Commission prepare an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow corner lot property owners to park their recreational vehicles along the side of their homes, in the side yard adjacent to the public street. A draft ordinance to accomplish this change is attached. BACKGROUND: Roanoke County has historically prohibited the parking or storage of trailers and recreational vehicles in the front yard of residential properties. Prior to 1992 this prohibition extended to corner lots. Property owners on corner lots could not store their recreational vehicles in either yard that faced a public street. The 1992 zoning ordinance contained new definitions of front yard and front building line. The net effect of this definition change was to continue to prohibit recreational vehicles in the front yards of corner lots, but to allow then to be stored in the "side yard" of the house, even though the "side yard" was facing a public street. This was an unintended change. Between 1992 and 1998 the zoning ordinance allowed the Ty parking of recreational vehicles in the side yards of corner lots. When periodic complaints were received, staff advised citizens that the zoning ordinance did not prohibit such vehicles from parking in the side yard of corner lots. Citizens generally did not agree with this inequity, as vehicles parked along the street side of corner lots had the same visual impact on the community. In 1998, the staff proposed, and the Commission agreed, that language should be added to the zoning ordinance to specify that on corner lots, both sides facing the street are considered "front yards" and thus unavailable for the'storage of recreational vehicles. This amendment was included in a package of zoning ordinance amendments adopted by the Board in April 1999. Staff receives hundreds of complaints each year regarding the parking of recreational vehicles in front yards. Only a very small number of these complaints pertain to vehicles on corner lots. We estimate less than ten violations per year involve vehicles on corner lots. The vast majority of all complaints are resolved administratively with the staff requesting that the property owner store the vehicles behind the front(s) of the house in a side or rear yard. Property owners generally comply with our administrative requests, and no other action is required. Variances are an option for owners who have a site hardship, and cannot get their vehicles into a side or rear yard due to topography, or building locations. The adoption of this amendment will not have a major impact on land use within Roanoke County. If adopted by the Board, staff will in the future, advise citizens that it is permissible to park recreational vehicles in either side yard of corner lots. TY AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE VIRGINIA BY THE MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS FOR THE STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, in 1992 the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted a new zoning ordinance for Roanoke County ,including provisions pertaining to the parking of vehicles in residential districts; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has requested the Roanoke County Planning Commission to prepare an amendment to the zoning ordinance addressing the allowable storage of recreational vehicles in residential districts; and, WHEREAS, public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice support an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Roanoke to provide for the storage of recreational vehicles in the street-side side yard of corner lots in residential districts; and, and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this amendment on September 5, 2000; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Roanoke. WHEREAS, public notice and advertisement of this amendment has been provided as required by Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, and the Roanoke County Code. follows: NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as 1. That the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Roanoke is hereby amended and reenacted to provide as follows: I. ARTICLE V SECTION 30-91-2 (A) 1. IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: Sec. 30-91-2 General Regulations for Parking (A) In the AR district and in all Residential districts: Except for vehicles parked within multi-family developments all recreational vehicles, boats, and utility trailers shall be parked ~ behind the front building line, unless space is provided in a completely enclosed garage or other building. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after October 1, 2000 AGENDA ITEM NO. APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS .r- , SUBJECT: ~ ti ~ ~, ~ `~---) ~--~-~-- I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED BELOW; • Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. • The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. • Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. • Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. • Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD r NAME: ~-- ~,~~~`~ ~ ~~ ~~-f ~~ ~ ~ ~ ADDRESS: ~ ~ Gt L/ ~ ~`J ~"~ `~ PHONE: ~~~~ L~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 RESOLUTION 092600-11 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the Certification Resolution; and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, Nickens, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~~~ Brenda J. Holt , CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Session File ~tO,F COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 .i ~- Cn~~~~ of ~~~trtn~t.E P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JOSEPH McNAMARA, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX, VICE-CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT JOSEPH B. "BUTCH" CHURCH CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (540) 772-2005 September 27, 2000 Rev. James W. Reynolds, Retired United Methodist Church 5139 Cherokee Hills Drive Salem, VA 24153 Dear Reverend Reynolds: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank you for offering the invocation at our meeting on Tuesday, September 26, 2000. We believe it is most important to ask for divine guidance at these meetings and the Board is very grateful for your contribution. Thank you again for sharing your time and your words with us. It was good to have you with us. With kindest regards, ~~ seph McNamara, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Internet E-Mail Internet E-Mail ® Recycled Paper bos@www.co.roanoke.va.us ehodGe ~ Www.co. roanoke.va. us ~ ~OANp~~ ti p 2 G7 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD Internet E-Mail: mallen@www.co.roanoke.va.us 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2005 FAX (540) 772-2193 BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Internet E-Mail: bholton@www.co.roanoke.va.us September 29, 2000 Mr. Jeffrey D. Johnson County Administrator Montgomery County Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 6126 Christiansburg, VA 24068 Dear Mr. Johnson: Attached is a copy of Resolution No. 092600-6 authorizing the execution of an agreement between Montgomery County and Roanoke County relocating the boundary line between said governmental entities, and authorizing that certain other actions relating to such boundary line be taken as provided bylaw. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, September 26, 2000. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Attachment cc: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Ed Natt, Attorney for Petitioners ® Recycled Paper September 29, 2000 NOTE TO: Mary Allen and Agenda file 9-26-00 FROM: Brenda J. Holton SUBJECT: Reg. Community Criminal Justice Board Resolution 092600-5.a The Board approved the resolution and appointed John Chambliss to this Board. However, John wants to see if Jim Phipps can find a way to appoint Betty McCrary instead of him or also appoint her to the Board. He asked me not to send anything to Jim Phipps until Betty finds out something. Told him I would go ahead and do resolution since he would have to come back and reappoint or whatever. Just wanted you to know why I did not send letter and resolution to Jim Phipps, or place in the Committee Book yet. COURT-COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS 516 East Main Street Salem, Vuginia 24153 Phone: (540) 387-5230 FAX: (540) 387-5570 INT: ADVISORY TO: County A 'strators City agers FROM: J' Phipps DATE: S ptember 2, 20 0 SUBJ: Re~ioa aamunity Criminal Justice Board - Joint Resolution Your assistance is requested to adopt the attached resolution, replacing the resolution previously adopted in 1995. As you may recall the General Assembly amended §53.1-183 of the Code of Virginia, changing the required membership. The code section now requires that each locality appoint, in addition to current appointees " a member from each governing bode or a cite or countu manager oountu administrator or executive or assistant or depute appointed bU the governing bodr~...'. In order to comply with the new legislation the attached resolution has been prepared, listing the current appointees by name and title and leaving a space for the, ~dditiona3. name of the specific appointee from your governing body. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me (540-387-5231) I will be happy to meet with you at your convenience. Also, I would be glad to forward this resolution to your office on a diskette. I leave you with the best of my regards. Enclosures: Resolution Legislation (§ 53.1-183) 'Itr~~~~ -}, ~p r _..~ ~ f r A ..* ~ i ~ ~ a . ~ ~, ~ a ~ . ' ` ~ ~' ~. W ~" ~ . , ~~` I;~gislative Information System § 53.1-183. Community criminal justice boards. Page 1 of 1 Each county or city or combination thereof developing and establishing a local pretrial services or a community-based probation program pursuant to the provisions of this article shall establish a community criminal justice board. Each county and city participating in a local pretrial or community- based probation program shall be represented on the community criminal justice board. In the event that one county or city appropriates funds to the program as part of a multijurisdictional effort, any other participating county or city shall be considered to be participating in a program if such locality appropriates funds to the program. Appointments to the board shall be made by each local governing body. In cases of multijurisdictional participation, unless otherwise agreed upon, each participating city or county shall have an equal number of appointments. Boards shall be composed of the number of members established by resolution or ordinance of each participating jurisdiction. Each board shall include, at a minimum, the following mandatory members: a member from each governing body or a city or county manager, county administrator or executive, or assistant or deputy appointed by the governing body: a judge of the general district court; a circuit court judge; a juvenile and domestic relations district court judge; a chief magistrate; one chief of police or the sheriff in a jurisdiction not served by a police department to represent law enforcement; an attorney for the Commonwealth; a public defender, and/or an attorney who is experienced in the defense of criminal matters; a sheriff or the regional jail administrator responsible for jails serving those jurisdictions involved in the local pretrial services and community-based probation program; a local educator; and a community services board administrator. Goto( )or( )or( )or( http://legl .state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+53.1-183 08/31/2000 t IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE the day of , 2000 A RESOLUTION of the Board of Supervisors for the County of Roanoke, establishing, by joint action of the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista., Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem, the membership of the Court-Community Corrections Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to serve the region composed of those Counties and Cities. WHEREAS, Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem have established and operate the Court-Community Corrections Program, a local pretrial services and community-based probation program established and operated pursuant to the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 5 of Title 53.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Comprehensive Community-Corrections Act for Local-Responsible Offenders (Virginia Code § 53.1-180 et seq.) and the Virginia Pretrial Services Act (Virginia Code § 19.2- 152.2 et seq.) require the establishment and appointment of a Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program; and WHEREAS, a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program previously has been established in accordance with law, and this Board of Supervisors now, and in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which participate in this multijurisdictional program, deems it appropriate to reconstitute the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program, pursuant to the authority granted to local governing bodies under Virginia Code §15.2-1411 and in consideration of the changes in the Code of Virginia since the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board's establishment; -1- NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted to this Board by Virginia Code §§15.2- 1411, 19.2-152.5, 53.1-183 and the organic law of the Commonwealth, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program is established. 2. The Counties of Allegheny, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Clifton Forge, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem are the jurisdictions which participate in the Court-Community Corrections Program. Each of these jurisdictions shall be represented on the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board. The Regional Community Criminal Justice Board shall consist of 25 persons, a number established by this resolution and by similar resolutions of the governing bodies of each of the other participating jurisdictions. The composition of the Regional Community Justice Board shall at all times comply with all applicable statutes and regulations. Each participating city or county shall have an equal number of appointments. 3. In conjunction with resolutions of appointment adopted or to be adopted by the governing bodies of all participating jurisdictions, this Board of Supervisors appoints the following persons to the Regional Criminal Justice Board for the terms of years set forth below. -2- Each appointment shall be effective as of July 1, 2000. Because §53.1-183 mandates that the Name and Title Term 3 Years Honorable George E. Honts, III I Year Judge, Circuit Court Twenty-fifth Judicial Circuit Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr. 2 Years Judge, General District Court Twenty third Judicial District Honorable John B. Ferguson 3 Years Judge, Juvenile @ Domestic Relations Court Twenty-third Judicial District James C. "Chris" Alderson, Esquire 3 Years Commonwealth Attorney Alleghany County/City of Covington Sheriff George McMillan 2 Years Roanoke City Sheriff s Office Sheriff Gerald Holt 1 Year Roanoke County Sheriffs Office Sheriff Ronnie Sprinkle 1 Year Botetourt County Sheriffs Office Sheriff C. E. "Butch" Simpson 2 Years Alleghany County Sheriffs Office Mr. John Higgins 3 Years Acting Superintendent Rockbridge Regional Jail -3- Board's membership include persons who hold certain positions, this resolution sets out, beside the name of each person hereby appointed, a descriptive title for that person's position or occupation. • . ' r William H. Cleaveland, Esquire 3 Years Attorney-at-Law Roanoke, Virginia Mr. Ray Burton Fitzgerald 2 Years Chief Magistrate Twenty-fifth Judicial District Dr. David Smith 1 Year Superintendent Bath County Public Schools Ms. Gail Burrus 2 Years Director, Counseling Services Blue Ridge Community Services Board Roanoke, Virginia 4. This Board, in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which have established the Court-Community Corrections Program, hereby reappoints the City of Salem as the fiscal agent for the program. -4- Brenda Holton -Virginia Gas Pipeline Memo Page 1 From: Mary Allen To: Paul Mahoney Date: 9/20/00 10:30AM Subject: Virginia Gas Pipeline Memo Elmer said that you are preparing a memo for the Va. Gas Pipeline Closed Meeting at the Sept. 26 meeting. He asked me to prepare a memo from him to go out with the packet, but asked that I check with you to make sure the two memo's don't conflict. When you complete the memo, can I have a copy so I can compare with ECH's memo? Mary CC: Brenda Holton; Elmer Hodge / ~8d DRAFT - 9-20-00 - 4:30 p.m. ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7 P.M. and Saturdays at 4 p.m. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. NOTE; At 5:00 p.m., the Board will meet with the Vinton Town Council in the fourfh floor conference room. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. BRIEFINGS 1 E.~ n j` ~:; XL~ . ~o~ ~- NEW BUSINESS . ,, ~.. ~ ~~ .. 1. L ~ of -~~ far-server--new -solid-waste--tr~Ek~. (Elmer Hodge, County ~ Administrator) -~ ~~ ~, ~ t . f,.~, ~ ~ ~ :. ~°; ~~ ; ~ , ~ r f ~, ~.,_ M ~ ~ / ~., ~, 1 Request for authorization to execute a contract with American Electric Power for the purchase of electricity. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) / ~ ,fir. ~ Request to approve the budget for the Day Reporting Program for FY 2000-2001. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. ,/ .,y 1. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious assembly, located at 5471 Keller Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Church of God. ~ ~ ; 2. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas station located at 3434 Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Properties, LLC. ~ ~ 3. Ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-2 with conditions to C-1 with conditions to construct an office building, located in the 3000 block of Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Certified Medical Representatives Institute. ~ 4. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a broadcast tower, located in the 8300 block of Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Aircable of Roanoke, LLC. ~ ~ 5. Ordinance to rezone 0.809 acre from C-2 to R-2 to construct a two family dwelling, located at 5929 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Mexicorp Inc. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 2 J `a 1. First reading of ordinance to amend the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan as it pertains to the future land use map and policies for the I-81 Exit 146 Interchange/Plantation Road. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES / 1. Second reading of ordinance to extend the current franchise agreement with Adelphia (Salem) Cable for ninety days. (Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) / 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing acquisition of necessary easements to construct the Campbell Hills Water Line project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) ~ I. APPOINTMENTS J. 1. Grievance Panel 2. Hanging Rock Battlefield and Rail Preservation Foundation 3. Highway and Transportation Safety Commission 4. Industrial Development Authority 5. League of Older Americans Advisory Board 6. Social Services Advisory Board CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. ~~-;I1 ~~ 1 ~;il ~ `~ 2 r ti?..~r~ -fir Approval of minutes for July 25, 2000, August 8, 2000 and August 22, 2000. Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional 3 Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and confirmation of County appointment. / ~ 3. Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. / v 4. Donation of a 15 foot drainage easement from Dane C. McBride, President of the Roanoke Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Tax Map NO. 46-07-01-01) in the Catawba Magisterial District. / ~ 5. 6. Donation of a 10 foot strip of land for public right-of-way from Ira Garland Bower, Wanda Ruth Huff and Charlotte Anne Bibb (Tap Map No. 50.01-1-16.9) in the Hollins Magisterial District. Renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. ,,- 7. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Northbrooke, Section 1. / -~ ~ , K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS ,j ,~ 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance ~ ~ 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund ,~ 4. Future School Capital Reserve ~~~ ~~ 5. Statement of Treasurer's Accountability per investments and portfolio __ .,__,_._,.__.------ policy as of / 6. Accounts Paid - ,~,~~~-} Jado 4 `~ 7. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for two month period ended August 31, 2000 '/ 8. Request to defer CORTRAN funding request to December 5, 2000 to obtain proposals to provide CORTRAN Services. O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) S-};1 I Nz~~'~ 1. Work Session on Fire and Rescue staffing issues (Richard Burch, Fire and Rescue Chief) (Need new tifle~ P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344A (7) probable litigation to discuss legal alternatives with respect to the SCC decision granting Virginia Gas a certificate of public convenience and necessity. Q. DINNER AND JOINT MEETING WITH VINTON TOWN COUNCIL (5:00 P.M., 4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) ~ R. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION S. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing for the purpose of considering boundary line changes ~ between Montgomery County and Roanoke County. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) T. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES too -~~`~~~- 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to allow ~~ ,~ ..,- ~1 the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive thru, located at ~,. r _k~ ~~ 4840 Hollins Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of f David J. Bell. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 2. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower, located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Paxson Communications. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 5 3. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a church, located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Grace Assembly of God. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 4. Second reading of ordinance to amend Section 30-91-2 (A) 1. of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the parking and storage of recreational vehicles in front yards in residential districts, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS W. ADJOURNMENT TO OCTOBER 10, 2000 AT 12 NOON FOR PURPOSE OF MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL 6 Brenda Holton - Re: Consent Agenda Page 1 From: Mary Allen To: Liz Belcher Date: 9/19/00 7:38AM Subject: Re: Consent Agenda If you want it on the next agenda (the Sept. 26 meeting), you need to get to us by tomorrow. If you want to wait until the Oct. 10 meeting, we need it by Oct. 2. Let me know. Mary »> Liz Belcher 09/18/00 05:53PM »> We would like to have an item on the consent agenda for next BOS meeting to approve my use of office space. OUr current agreement runs out in October. I talked to Elmer about it several weeks ago, and he agreed, and I sent the agreement revisions to Paul Mahoney several weeks ago (haven't heard anything). When do I need to get a Board report to you? Liz Belcher Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 540-776-7159 FAX 540-772-2108 Ibelcher@co.roanoke.va.us CC: Brenda Holton DRAFT - 9-18-00 - 3:00 p. m. • ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7 P.M. and Saturdays at 4 p.m. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County should contact the Clerk to the • Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. NOTE: At 5:00 p.m., the Board will meet with fhe Vinton Town Council in the fourth floor conference room. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. BRIEFINGS • 1 / 1. Briefin th Virginia G .life .Project. (John Chambliss, Jr., • ( stant Cou nistrator) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for approving of funding methodology and appropriation of $736,680 for seven new solid waste trucks. (Elmer Hodge, County A mini trator d s ) ~~'1 2, Request for authorization to execute a contract with American Electric Power for the purchase of electricity. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) ~~ ~~ F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF • REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by fhe Planning Commission. 1. Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious assembly, located at 5471 Keller Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Church of God. 2. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas station located at 3434 Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Properties, LLC. 3. Ordinance to rezone 3.77 acres from C-2 with conditions to C-1 with conditions to construct an office building, located in the 3000 block of Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Certified Medical Representatives Institute. 4. Ordinance for a Special Use Permit to allow a broadcast tower, located in the 8300 block of Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, • 2 upon the petition of Aircable of Roanoke, LLC. • 5. Ordinance to rezone 0.809 acre from C-2 to R-2 to construct a two family dwelling, located at 5929 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Mexicorp Inc. An ordina a nd the fi ~. m unit~Y a to incl~d a opS of a u re la d use for th Nollns/ 7_.int~~cfia e.ar~a (exit 1 and ~e inc. tior~i:i~n~ dev,~~d ~ment.g d ~~ ~~s for s~ area, upon he petitio a oanoke -ty Pla mg mmission . G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance to amend the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan as it pertains to the future land use map and policies for the I-81 Exit 146 Interchange/Plantation Road. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner • H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to extend the current franchise agreement with Adelphia (Salem) Cable for ninety days. (Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing acquisition of necessary easements to construct the Campbell Hills Water Line project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Grievance Panel 2. Hanging Rock Battlefield and Rail Preservation Foundation 3. Highway and Transportation Safety Commission 4. Industrial Development Authority • 5. League of Older Americans Advisory Board 3 • 6. Social Services Advisory Board J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of minutes for July 25, 2000, August 8, 2000 and August 22, 2000. 2. Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and confirmation of County appointment. ~3. Request to approve the budget for the Day Reporting Program for FY 2000-2001. 4. Acceptance of Northwalk Drive and the remaining portion of Pettit Avenue into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS • N. REPORTS 4 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance • 2. Ca ital Fund Una ro riated Balance p Pp p 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Statement of Treasurer's Accountability per investments and portfolio policy as of 6. Accounts Paid - 7. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for two month period ended August 31, 2000 8. r 'ces . to provide CORTRAN Services O. WORK SESSIONS (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) • ??? 1. Work Session on Fire and Rescue staffing issues (Richard Burch, Fire and Rescue Chief) V~"- P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344A (7) probable litigation to discuss legal alternatives with respect to the SCC decision granting Virginia Gas a certificate of public convenience and necessity. Q. DINNER AND JOINT MEETING WITH VINTON TOWN COUNCIL (5:00 P.M., 4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) R. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION S. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing for the purpose of considering boundary line changes • between Montgomery County and Roanoke County. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) T. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive thru, located at 4840 Hollins Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of David J. Bell. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 2. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower, located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Paxson Communications. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) 3. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a church, located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Grace Assembly of God. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) • 4. Second reading of ordinance to amend Section 30-91-2 (A) 1. of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the parking and storage of recreational vehicles in front yards in residential districts, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Terry Harrington, County Planner) U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS W. ADJOURNMENT TO OCTOBER 10, 2000 AT 12 NOON FOR PURPOSE OF MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL 4 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 26, 2000, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of David J. Bell for a Special Use Permit to allow the expansion of a fast food restaurant with drive thru, located at 4840 Hollins Road, Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: September 6, 2000 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, Septer ~~~r 12, 2000 Tuesday, Septa ' 9, 2000 Direct the t^' ~~ David J ~ ~~ 154 B ,.p ~~ Troy ~5 ~ z s~o~ C ~` s> r ,69 9~ ,'..,, ,~ ~ ~~ o 1Z4~ P~ a PQI ~~ ~g ~P ~o~ uBLICATION TO: JF SUPERVISORS JKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 26, 2000, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Paxson Communications for a Special Use Permit to replace an existing tower with a new 199 foot broadcasting tower, located at 8241 Honeysuckle Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: September 6, 2000 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, September 12, 2000 Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Direct the bill for publication to: Paul Tutchenal Paxson Communications 11300-4th St. North, Suite 180 St. Petersburg, FL 33716 (727) 576-2876 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: R OANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 26, 2000, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Grace Assembly of God to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a church, located at 5530 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: September 6, 2000 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, September 12, 2000 Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Direct the bill for publication to: Grace Assembly of God 5630 Catawba Valley Dr. Catawba, VA 24070 (540) 384-7297 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: R OANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 26, 2000, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend Section 30-91-2 (A) 1. of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the parking and storage of recreational vehicles in front yards in residential districts. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: September 6, 2000 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, September 12, 2000 Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Direct the bill for publication to: Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2080 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: R OANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 *~`~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ LEGAL NOTICE `~ P,---'''~~ ROANOKE COUNTY ~ r ,~ ~~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 26, 2000, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Roanoke '"`` County Planning Commission to amend the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan as it pertains to the future land use map and policies for the I-81 Exit 146 Interchange/Plantation Road area in the Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: September 6, 2000 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, September 12, 2000 Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Direct the bill for publication to: Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2080 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: R OANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 Mary Allen -Public Notice -Reply Page 1 '1 From: Legals Staff <legals@roanoke.com> To: <SPATTERSON-BANE@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 9/6/00 7:59AM Subject: Public Notice -Reply Ad will run Sept. 12 & 19, cost $692.64. Thanks Sue.... martha NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, will hold a public hearing on the 26th day of September, 2000, for the purpose of considering boundary line changes between Montgomery County and Roanoke County to permit changes of the Montgomery County/Roanoke County boundary line crossing: 1. the property of Arthur W. Heslep, Jr. and Annie L. Heslep (Montgomery County Tax Map No. 47-A-43); said property to be added to Montgomery County containing 3.720 acres; and 2. the property of Thomas, Ltd. (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 63.03-01-01); said property to be added to Roanoke County containing 36.726 acres; and 3. the property of Richard A. Heslep (Montgomery County Tax Map No. 47-A-62); said property to be added to Montgomery County containing 1.960 acres; and 4. the property of Thomas, Ltd. (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 63.03-01-01); said property to be added to Roanoke County containing 0.882 acre. CHANGE IN BOUNDARY ALINES BETWEEN MONTGOMERY COUNTY ANDS ~ROANOKE COUNTY SAND NOTICE OF HEARING The Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County, Virginia and The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia intend to approve a written agreement to change the boundary line between the two jurisdictions, having determined that the proposed boundary line change would be in the best interest of said Counties and of the owners of the property affected. The proposed boundary line changes would incorporate the changes: (a) Additions to Montgomery County, Virginia: (1) 3.720 acres of the property of Arthur W. Heslep, Jr. and Annie L. Heslep; and (2) 1.960 acres of the property of Richard A. Heslep. (b) Additions to Roanoke County, Virginia: (1) 36.726 acres of the property of Thomas, Ltd.; and (2) 0.882 acre of the property of Thomas, Ltd. The new boundary lines incorporating the above changes are set forth below. Said boundary line changes will result in more convenience to citizens and facilitation of the provisions of governmental services for the affected properties. It is proposed, and the agreement between the said Counties provides, for a change in their common boundary line so that the same shall read as follows to accomplish the purpose of the agreement: REVISED BOUNDARY LINES BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE NUMBER 1 ~ Mary Allen -Public Notice -Reply Page 2 BEGINNING at a point on the southerly right of way of Stones Keep Lane (Virginia Secondary Route 813) at the existing Roanoke County/Montgomery County line; thence leaving said line and with the southerly right of way of Stones Keep Lane, N. 77* 30* 00" E. 121.84 feet to a point on the southerly line of the Roanoke River; thence generally with the same S. 56* 51 * 07" E. 41.27 feet; S. 66* 03* 54" E. 172.11 feet; S. 73* 45* 29" E. 149.87 feet; S. 76* 13* 01" E. 155.73 feet; N. 73* 25* 23" E. 45.78 feet to a point on the branch; thence with the same S. 09* 15* 00" W. 331.16 feet to a point on the northerly line of the Norfolk & Southern Railway; thence with the same N. 73* 38* 03" W. 22.77 feet; N. 16* 21 * 57" E. 30 feet; N. 73* 38* 03" W. 90.60 feet; thence with a curved line to the left, having a chord bearing and distance of N. 76* 58* 40" W. 342.34 feet, an arc distance of 342.53 feet to a point on the existing Montgomery County/Roanoke County line. BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE NUMBER 2~ BEGINNING at a point on the northerly right-of-way of the Norfolk Southern Corporation N & W Railway; said point being N. 72* 43* 00" W. 646.71 feet from the northerly right-of-way of U. S. 11 - 460; thence the following courses and distances: N. 72* 43* 00" W. 280 feet; N. 03* 53* 00" E. 160.35 feet; N. 47* 00* 00" E. 94 feet; N. 47* 00* 00" E. 39 feet; N. 00* 57* 26" W. 255.75 feet; N. 19* 09* 16" W. 105.97 feet; N. 53* 50* 44" W. 1033.29 feet to a point; thence N. 52* 39* 00" W. 1775.11 feet to a point; thence N. 05* 21 * 17" W. 341.37 feet to a point; thence N. 02* 48* 45" W. 1453.87 feet to a point at the intersection of the property line of Harold J. and Yvonne P. Wimmer, Gary Pahl and Sandra Pahl and Thomas, Ltd. Said boundary line changes are more particularly shown on plats of survey dated November 18, 1998 and January 22, 1999, prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, Engineers-Surveyors- Planners. A true copy of the proposed agreement is on file with the Clerk of The Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County, Virginia and with the Clerk of The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. The Board of Supervisors of the Roanoke County shall hold a public hearing on the proposed agreement on September 26, 2000, at 7:00 PM, at the Roanoke County Administration Center. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ~OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ~BY Mary H. Allen Its Clerk (1504572) C O V E R FAX S H E E T Clerk to the Board To: Roanoke Times Legal Notices Fax #: Subj: Date: September 5, 2000 Pages: 4 including cover sheet COMMENTS: Attached is a legal notice for a public hearing. Please publish on Tuesday, September 12, 2000 and Tuesday, September 19, 2000. Call me if you have any questions. From the desk of... Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Phone: 540-772-2003 Fax: 540-772-2193 RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS TEL~540-7~2-2193 Sep ~5'~~0 1156 Transmit Confirmation Report No . Receiver Transmitter Date Time Made Pages Result O12 RT-LEGAL RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS Sep 05'00 1156 02'01 Norm 04 OK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, will hold a public hearing on the 26th day of September, 2000, for the purpose of considering boundary line changes between Montgomery County and Roanoke County to permit changes of the Montgomery County/Roanoke County boundary line crossing: 1. the property of Arthur W. Heslep, Jr. and Annie L. Heslep (Montgomery County Tax Map No. 47-A-43); said property to be added to Montgomery County containing 3.720 acres; and 2. the property of Thomas, Ltd. (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 63.03-01-01); said property to be added to Roanoke County containing 36.726 acres; and 3. the property of Richard A. Heslep (Montgomery County Tax Map No. 47-A- 62); said property to be added to Montgomery County containing 1.960 acres; and 4. the property of Thomas, Ltd. (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 63.03-Ol-Ol); said property to be added to Roanoke County containing 0.882 acre. CHANGE IN BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN MONTGOMERY COUNTY AND ROANOKE COUNTY AND NOTICE OF HEARING The Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County, Virginia and The Board of O5TERHOUDT, FERGUSON, Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia intend to approve a written agreement to change the NATT, AGEE & KIDD ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW boundary line between the two jurisdictions, having determined that the proposed boundary ROANOKE, VIRGINIA line change would be in the best interest of said Counties and of the owners of the property 24018.1699 affected. The proposed boundary line changes would incorporate the changes: G:\Users\CBaumgardner\Real Estate\Heslep-Thomas ROANOKE NOTICE.doc.doc August 25, 2000 (a) Additions to Montgomery County, Virginia: (1) 3.720 acres of the property of Arthur W. Heslep, Jr. and Annie L. Heslep; and (2) 1.960 acres of the property of Richard A. Heslep. (b) Additions to Roanoke County, Virginia: (1) 36.726 acres of the property of Thomas, Ltd.; and (2) 0.882 acre of the property of Thomas, Ltd. The new boundary lines incorporating the above changes are set forth below. Said boundary line changes will result in more convenience to citizens and facilitation of the provisions of governmental services for the affected properties. It is proposed, and the agreement between the said Counties provides, for a change in their common boundary line so that the same shall read as follows to accomplish the purpose of the agreement: REVISED BOUNDARY LINES BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE NUMBER 1 BEGINNING at a point on the southerly right of way of Stones Keep Lane (Virginia Secondary Route 813) at the existing Roanoke County/Montgomery County line; thence leaving said line and with the southerly right of way of Stones Keep Lane, N. 77° 30' 00" E. 121.84 feet to a point on the southerly line of the Roanoke River; thence generally with the same S. 56° 51' 07" E. 41.27 feet; S. 66° 03' S4" E. 172.11 feet; S. 73° 45' 29" E. 149.87 feet; S. 76° 13' O1" E. 155.73 feet; N. 73° 25' 23" E. 45.78 feet to a point on the branch; thence with the same S. 09° 15' 00" W. 331.16 feet to a point on the northerly line of the Norfolk & Southern Railway; thence with the same N. 73° 38' 03" W. 22.77 feet; N. 16° 21' S7" E. 30 feet; N. 73° 38' 03" W. 90.60 feet; thence with a curved line to the left, having a chord bearing and distance of N. 76° 58' 40" W. 342.34 feet, an arc distance of 342.53 feet to a point on the existing Montgomery County/Roanoke County line. BOUNDARY LINE CHANGE NUMBER 2 L75TERHOLIDT, FERGLISON, NATT, AGEE & KIDD ATTORNEYS•AT-LAW RDANGKE, VIRGINIA 24018.1699 BEGINNING at a point on the northerly right-of--way of the Norfolk Southern Corporation N & W Railway; said point being N. 72° 43' 00" W. 646.71 feet from the northerly right-of- way of U. S. 11 - 460; thence the following courses and distances: N. 72° 43' 00" W. 280 feet; N. 03° 53' 00" E. 160.35 feet; N. 47° 00' 00" E. 94 feet; N. 47° 00' 00" E. 39 feet; N. 00° 57' 26" W. 255.75 feet; N. 19° 09' 16" W. 105.97 feet; N. 53° 50' 44" W. 1033.29 feet to a point; thence N. 52° 39' 00" W. 1775.11 feet to a point; thence N. OS° 21' 17" W. 341.37 feet to a G:\Users\CBaumgardner\Real Estate\Heslep-Thomas ROANOKE NOTICE.doc.doc 2 August 25, 2000 point; thence N. 02° 48' 45" W. 1453.87 feet to a point at the intersection of the property line of Harold J. and Yvonne P. Wimmer, Gary Pahl and Sandra Pahl and Thomas, Ltd. Said boundary line changes are more particularly shown on plats of survey dated November 18, 1998 and January 22, 1999, prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, Engineers-Surveyors-Planners. A true copy of the proposed agreement is on file with the Clerk of The Board of Supervisors of Montgomery County, Virginia and with the Clerk of The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. The Board of Supervisors of the Roanoke County shall hold a public hearing on the proposed agreement on September 26, 2000, at 7:00 PM, at the Roanoke County Administration Center. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BY Y~'L°e~t"c'~ ~' Its Clerk PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE ROANOKE TIMES ON Tuesday, September 12, 2000 Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Direct the bill for publication to: ^STERHOUDT,FERGUSON, NATT, AGEE & KIDD ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW RDANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 Mail affidavit to: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Ed Natt Osterhoudt, Ferguson, Natt, Agee & Kidd 1919 Electric Road Roanoke, VA 24018 G:\Users\CBaumgardner\Real Estate\Heslep-Thomas ROANOKE NOTICE.doc.doc August 25, 2000 ROANOKE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive, S. W. -Room 431 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Phone 772-2007 -FAX 772-2089 MEMORANDUM To: Mary Allen From: Sue Patterson-Bane Date: 31 August 2000 Subject: Boundary line changes - Heslep/Thomas, Ltd. Attached you will find the Notice of Public Hearing and the Agreement for the above mentioned boundary line change. You need to sign the Notice and it needs to be faxed to the newspaper for publication on September 12 and September 19 for a public hearing on September 26. The Agreement is supposed to be "on file with the Clerk." Please let me know if you have any questions. /spb ~~~ ~ ~~ Brenda Holton - Re: Agenda Staff Mtg 9-18-00 Page 1 From: Gary Robertson To: Brenda Holton Date: 9/18/00 8:44AM Subject: Re: Agenda Staff Mtg 9-18-00 ~~ I have an agenda item titled Authorization to Execute a Contract withe American Electric Power for the Purchase of Electricity. I also have a second reading for easement acquisition but you already have the title. Thanks! »> Brenda Holton 09/18/00 08:41AM »> Staff meeting for the September 26 agenda will be held today at 3 p.m. in the Board Conference Room. If you have items for the agenda, please plan to attend this meeting and a-mail me the titles. Thanks! Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 540-772-2005 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us Brenda Holton - BOS 9/26 Page 1 From: Paul Mahoney To: Mary Allen Date: 9/17/00 2:18PM Subject: BOS 9/26 Mary: Please add a closed session for the 9/26 meeting. Sec. 3.1-344.A(7) Probable litigation to discuss legal alternatives with respect to the SCC decision granting Virginia Gas a certificate of public convenience and necessity. This communication and advice is provided to you within the scope of the attorney-client privilege,. and as such, it is confidential and is exempt from disclosure under the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney CC: Elmer Hodge MEMORANDUM 1 TO: FROM: SUBJECT Board of Supervisors John Chambliss Letter from Va. Gas ~~ 'j f~ 1 ~ A ~~~ ~ ' ~ j ~" DATE: September 1, 2000 ~"'~`'~ ~ ~ t ~` t•.,.1 ~,,- , ; ~ . ,,~ ~ ..~~~v the letter that I received from Michael L. Edwards President of Attached is a copy of , Virginia Gas Pipeline Company. This is in response to the resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors on August 8 and my letter to them and to Duke Energy on August 9. I have had several conversations with Brad Swanson and Michael Edwards of Virginia Gas Pipeline Company; Greg Harper and Liz Johnson of Duke Energy; and Becky Coleman of Congressman Boucher's office. Duke Energy and Virginia Gas have both indicated a willingness to discuss the issue of co-locating within some easements. They indicated that they are talking and working together on other projects, however, they remain competitors and the likelihood that very much of the new pipeline will be co-located appears slim to me. At the September 12 Board meeting, staff is planning to offer a briefing of the progress to date on this matter. Please let me know if you have questions on this matter. cc Elmer Hodge Paul Mahoney Pete Haislip Gary Robertson irginia as a e~ine ~mpany 28 August 2000 P.O. BoX2407 • ,~(binBdon, 7~A 24212 • 540-676-2380 • ~ax540-619.5230 Mr. John M. Chambliss, Jr. County of Roanoke P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Dear Mr. Chambliss: Thank you for your letter of 9 August 2000 and for takin time to discuss my company's project over the telephone on Monday. 14 August 200. As you are aware, all of the issues you presented were raised during the application proceeding before the State Corporation Commission in 1999, when we received our certificate. Today, we continue to discuss specific siting issues within the c~tfificated 1000 foot corridor with representatives of East Tennessee Natural Gas Company (ETNG), American Electric Power (AEP), and Roanoke Gas Company (RGC). All three companies have some existing utility easements in the corridor, and all have indicated a willingness to work with us to share easement rights wherever practical and legally permitted. We are sensitive to the County's desire for us to maximize coloration of our P-25 pipeline in the other companies' easements for aesthetic reasons. There are several tradeoffs and other factors involved, however, which we will need to consider in a final routing deasion. For example, safety and quality of service need to be balanced with thorny problems such as viewshed impact. i would like to take this opportunity to explain some of these issues in more detail. around Spring Hollow Reservoir and in the section from Wabun to Strawberry Mountain putting our line in ETNG's easement would take it outside of the 1000 foot corridor approved by the State Corporation Commission. This would require reopening our certrFication proceeding and result in a significant delay in providing seance to Roanoke Gas Company. Our contract with RGC specifies that we must be in service in November, 2001. RGC officials have said that they will begin to run short of peak winter pipeline capacity in the winter of 2002/2003. Second. development in the County since 1964 when the ETNG line was built have resulted in there being several areas where it is very difficult to build along the ETNG line today. For example, exactly paralleling the ETNG line inside their easement would require us to go through Spring Hollow Reservoir, the Twelve O'Clock Knobs ridgetop area, the Poor Mountain Nature Preserve, and the soccer fields at the Merriman facility. We rerouted around ETNG south of Spring Hollow Reservoir at the request of County officials, and have agreed to build hiking trails, to provide parking spaces, and to consider letting the County use our easement for future water lines from Spring Hollow. Mr. John M. Chambliss, Jr. 28 Auggust 2000 Page 2 After detailed alternate route analyses and discussions with County officals in 1998, we came to the conclusion that overall impact between Spring Hollow and Roanoke would be reduced by paralleling AEP's easements in parts of the County rather than ETNG's. This has become most controversial for about two miles where we diver a from the ETNG route near Route 612 south of Wabun, cross Poor Mountain generally ~ollowing AEP's line to where we rejoin the ETNG corridor around the Strawberry Mountain subdivision. wahun -Strawberry Mountain Section Impact Analysis ETNG Corridor AEP Corridor Residential Neighborhoods: Dan Coleman Poages Mill Briar Patch Estates Country Hills Luther Park Strawberry Mtn Mount Chestnut Residential Tracts Affected 22 12 Total Landowners 75 53 Number of Stream Crossings 11 7 Linear Feet 44, 000 30, 000 Linear Feet along Ridgetops 14,000 6,000 While I sincerely regret the fact that construction of our line following AEP's corridor from Wabun to Strawberry Mountain will result in some adverse impact to citizens along this route, by so doing we will disturb 2.5 miles less ground, affect three less subdivisions, ten less residential properties, twenty two less total properties, four less stream crossings, and reduce ridgetop construction by over a mile and a half. We also rerouted along AEP rather than along ETNG around the Cotton Hill Estates subdivision to avoid as many residential properties as possible. We rerouted around ETNG near the Merriman soccer fields at the County's request, to avoid the Hunting Hills subdivision, and to stay away from the County water line that runs along Route 679. We agreed to provide grade work at the soccer fields to improve drainage and to limit construction to periods when the soccer fields aren't in use. From the terminus of the ETNG line at Clearbrook Roanoke Gas has agreed to let us share their easement where possible, maintaining a ten foot separation between lines. We will also be using as much AEP easement in this area as possible to avoid as many residential areas in Garden City as possible. ~, although, as a general matter, pipelines can be safely paralleled, the risk of construction mishaps affecting the existing ETNG line increases the closer one pipe is to the other pipe. The safest possible configuration is having the lines as far apart as is practical. I Mr. John M. Chambliss, Jr. 28 August 2000 Page 3 don't mean to imply that there aren't places in urban areas where many different facilites are crowded into much narrower spaces than what we are talking about here, but merely want to stress that co-locating our line within ETNG's easement will be riskier from a construction management point of view than locating the new pipe on a separate easement further away. With eight-inch pipe such as we and ETNG have in this area, a fifty foot permanent easement is standard, with the company usually obtaining the right to lay a second line for future growth from the landowner. The first line is generally laid fifteen feet from the edge of the right -of-way, leaving room for a second line twenty feet from the first, which will then be in turn fifteen feet from the other side of the permanent easement. We generally need an additional twenty-five feet above and beyond the fifty foot permanent easement of temporary work space to accomodate all of the men and construction equipment, and to allow access for access by trucks. Being able to share ETNG and AEP easements for construction work space will eliminate the need for this additional twenty-five feet. Fourth. co-locating our pipe in ETNG's easement rather than on a new easement will make it much more difficult for either Virginia Gas or ETNG to add additional capacity in the future by building new pipe, since both companies would have 50% less space within which to work than if a new permanent easement is acquired. This will limit the ability of County economic development efforts to recruit new energy intensive industries to the south side of Roanoke. We have an agreement in place with ETNG that allows us to temporarily use up to 30 feet of their easement for work space. I have been very pleased at the very high level of cooperation that ETNG's new owner, Duke Energy, has given us. AEP likewise has indicated that we will be able to use approximately 30 feet of their power line rights-of-way, which are cleared every twelve years in areas where the power lines are less than 100 feet from the ground. A small amount of RGC easement at the end of the line near Riverland may be suitable for joint use. However, some landowners within the corridor have expressed the desire to have the pipeline located on their properties in new rights-of-way rather than in existing utility easements, and we will endeavor to accomodate them wherever practical. While we will not be able to determine the exact location of the line and exactly how much new clearing will be necessary until surveying is completed in November of this year, we know from work done to date that there are many areas where significant additional clearing may not be necessary. We will make every possible effort to minimize adverse impact in Roanoke County, and appreciate all the input that you are currently providing us and have provided in the planning process over the last two years. Fi h the cost of construction inside ETNG's easement would be up to double that of working on a parallel right-of-way, because it would take much longer to build in a confined work space resulting in significantly higher contract labor and supervision costs. I know from discussions with some of the approximately 215 residents of Roanoke County affected by our proposed construction that many of them don't care how much it costs us. This is a Mr. John M. Chambliss, Jr. 28 August 2000 Page 4 difficult issue because if we complied with their requests throughout the entire area we would have to increase what we charge RGC for transportation service, and they in turn would have to increase their charges to their customers. I would imagine that the approximately 52,000 gas customers of RGC almost certainly „ !~ care how much their gas service costs them. i h putting the line inside ETNG's easement could possibly require the additional approval of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should ETNG or others protest. y guess is that some of the residents of the subdivisions we are avoiding with our SCC- approved corridor but which would be affected by going inside ETNG's easement (Dan Coleman, Briar Patch, Luther Park, Strawberry Mountain, Mount Chestnut, Cotton Hill Estates, etc.) would probably object at the Federal level, resulting in a challenging certification proceeding. We are not aware of any cases in the last 30 years where the FERC or its predecessor the Federal Power Commission ever forced a company such as ETNG to put another company's pipe inside its easement. Indeed, my legal advisors know of no statutory or other authority that would permit FERC to do so. In conclusion, I would like to repeat that Virginia Gas Pipeline Company will make every effort to reduce the impact of our P-25 project to the minimum possible level by working with other utilities in Roanoke County, including ETNG, to share easements wherever this is practical. I continue to believe that the route that we have selected, with your help and that of other County officials, will best reconcile the sometimes competing goals of safety, highest volume at lowest cost, and fastest in-service date with the goal of adversely impacting as few people as possible. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at (540) 619-5247. Sincerely, VIRGINIA GAS PIP INE PANY Michael L. Edwards President r ~ r ~ • * ti'