Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/28/2001 - Regularo~ pOANp,~.~ /~- ~ ~ y Z v , az rasa C~~ixxt#g ~~ ~.~~xx~~~e ~D~~.tl~g ~D~tiI1~PI~t -~u~1jPCt tD ~i.ebf~iD~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA AUGUST 28, 2001 ,~~~~,~ 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, will be rebroadcast on Thursday at 7 p.m. and Saturday at 4 p.m., and are now closed captioned. Individuals who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005 at least 48 hours in advance so reasonable accommodations may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call HCN ABSENT AT ROLL CALL (ARRIVED AT 3:17 P.M.) 2. Invocation: Gardner Smith Director, Purchasing Department 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS ECH MOVED ITEM E-1 UNTIL ARRIVAL OF DR. WEBER AND SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS. MHA REQUESTED THAT ITEM C-1. RESOLUTION HONORING DELEGATE CRANWELL BE POSTPONED UNTIL DELEGATE CRANWELL ARRIVES. 1 ® Recycled Paper C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of Appreciation to C. Richard Cranwell for his service to Roanoke County and the Commonwealth of Virginia as a member of the General Assembly. R-082801-1 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT RESO URC DELEGATE CRANWELL WAS PRESENT TO ACCEPT RESO. HCN PRESENTED HIM WITH BRASS PAPERWEIGHT. D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing and Presentation from Virginia Amateur Sports, Inc. on the 2001 Commonwealth Games of Virginia (Peter Lampman, President, Virginia Amateur Sports) PRESENTED BY MR. LAMPMAN WHO ALSO GAVE THE BOARD A PLAQUE IN HONOR OF THE COUNTY'S CONTRIBUTIONS. E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to adopt a resolution approving application to participate in the 2001 Fall VPSA Subsidy Sale for $13,745,000 and notice of public hearing for September 25, 2001. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) R-082801-2 (ITEM HEARD AT 4:50 P.M. FOLLOWING CLOSED SESSION JPM MOTION TO ADOPT RESO AND SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR 9/25/01 URC 2. Request for approval of amendments to the Investment Policy. (Alfred C. Anderson, County Treasurer) A-082801-3 BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENTS WITH SENTENCE IN BOARD REPORT CONCERNING TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY TO AUDIT COMMITTEE DELETED. URC 2 3. Request to award contract and appropriate $12,000 for the Citizen Satisfaction Survey. (Kathi Scearce, Community Relations Director) A-082801-4 HOM MOTION TO AWARD CONTRACT TO MARTIN ASSOCIATES AND APPROPRIATE $12,000 FROM BOARD CONTINGENCY FUND URC 4. Request to approve agreement for project based financing and amendment to Participation Agreement for New River Valley Commerce Park. (Joseph B. Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney) R-082801-5.a HCN MOTION TO ADOPT RESO URC R-082801-5.b HCN MOTION TO ADOPT RESO URC F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. JPM MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READINGS AND SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR 9/25/01 WITH CHANGE TO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT TO WINDSOR HILLS. URC 1. First reading of ordinance to rezone .398 acres from R-1 Residential District to C-1 Office District with conditions for expansion of a medical clinic and related parking, located at 3500 block of Pinevale Road, ,Windsor Hills Magisterial District upon the petition of Windsor House. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance amending notice requirement of enforcement procedures for Section 12-125 "Removal of inoperative 3 motor vehicles, etc.," Section 13-14. "Unlawful accumulations of trash and growth of weeds; public nuisances and abatement thereof," and Section 30-21. "Enforcement procedures of the Zoning Ordinance. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) HCN MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING WITH ORD. AMENDED TO LEAVE SECTION 12=125 ~~AT 15 DAYS AND (K) AT 14 DAYS. 2ND _ 9/11/01 URC SECTION 30-21 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE WILL BE REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND BROUGHT BACK TO BOARD FOR ADOPTION. BLJ AND JBC REQUESTED THAT STAFF CONTACT ROANOKE CITY ABOUT MOWING THE STORMWATER DETENTION POND AND OTHER ZONING VIOLATIONS AT THE POND NEAR NORTH SPRING DRIVE. H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES Second reading of ordinance authorizing creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project -Orchards Sewer Project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-082801-6 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC I. APPOINTMENTS Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals serving as Fire Code Board of Appeals 2. Grievance Panel HCN NOMINATED R. VINCENT REYNOLDS TO SERVE ANOTHER THREE YEAR TERM WHICH WILL EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 10, 2004. 3. Industrial Development Authority HCN NOMINATED STEPHEN A MUSSELWHITE TO ANOTHER FOUR YEAR TERM WHICH WILL EXPIRE SEPTEMBER 26 2005 4 4. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 5. Social Services Advisory Board JPM ASKED MHA TO CONTACT JANET GREEN TO SERVE AS REPRESENTATIVE FROM WINDSOR HILLS DISTRICT. HOM ASKED MHA TO CONTACT MS. PATTISALL TO SERVE AS CAVE SPRING DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE. 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-082801-7 JPM MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO URC 1. Approval of minutes for July 24, 2001 and July 30, 2001 2. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority A-082801-7.a 3. Acceptance of a $6,700 TRIAD grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services to assist with the Roanoke Valley TRIAD program. A-082801-7.b 4. Acceptance of $695.01 into the Police Department budget received during the Police Department Open House. A-082801-7.c 5. Acceptance and appropriation of a $34,628 Bureau of Justice Assistance block grant for law enforcement support. A-082801-7.d 5 6. Acceptance and appropriation of $2,711.28 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of EMS Training Equipment. A-082801-7.e 7. Acceptance and appropriation of $4,585.50 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of vehicle extrication equipment for Hollins Fire and Rescue. A-082801-7.f 8. Request to approve the annual performance contract with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare. A-082801-7.q 9. Acceptance and appropriation of $12,000 School Grant from the Department of Education to improve outcomes for students who have a full range of abilities and needs. A-082801-7.h 10. Acceptance and appropriation of $15,675 tuition for the Schools Preschool Program. A-082801-7.i K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS ECH REQUESTED AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORK SESSION ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS BLJ MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE - URC 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 6 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Revenues and Expenditures for the month ended July 31, 2001 6. Status Report on Decal Enforcement O. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to probable litigation, Roanoke Regional Water Pollution Control Plant upgrade; 2.1-344A (5) discussion of an economic development prospect where no previous announcement has been made; and 2.1-344A (3) acquisition of real estate for public purposes, flood mitigation in Palm Valley area. HCN MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED MEETING AT 3:55P.M. URC CLOSED MEETING HELD FROM 3:55 TO 4:50 CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-082801-8 BLJ ANNOUNCED ONLY 2.1344A ~5~ DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROSPECT WAS DISCUSSED AND MOVED RETURN TO OPEN MEETING AT 5:50 P.M. AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION RESO -URC ITEM E-1 HEARD CLOSED MEETING CONTINUED FROM 5:10 P.M. TO 6:10 P.M. P. WORK SESSION (4T" FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) NONE EVENING SESSION 7 Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-082801-9 HCN MOTION TO RETURN TO OPEN MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION RESO -URC R. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring September 20, 2001 as Southwest Virginia Light the Night Day and September 2001 as Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month. HCN MOTION TO ADOPT PROCLAMATION URC ACCEPTED BY TRACY WOOD. DENISE MATHEWS, BRENDA WALKER AND MARTHA BRINKLEY S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of the American Tower Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located on the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 0-082801-10 JPM MOTION TO DENYORD. URC 2 CITIZENS SPOKE 2. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of The Community of Faith to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious facility on 1.033 acres located at 5343 Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 0-082801-11 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD WITH CONDITION 1 (A) DELETED FROM ORDINANCE. URC 8 2 CITIZENS SPOKE BOARD MEMBERS SUGGESTED THAT IN LIEU OF TAXES OR SERVICE FEE. THE CHURCH CONSIDER DONATIONS TO THE CAVE SPRING FIRE OR RESCUE STATIONS. 3. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of Hugh R. & Carolyn Elsea to-obtain a Speciat Use Permit for a private horse stable on 2.99 acres and a 30 foot right-of-way on adjoining parcel located at 3663 Chaparral Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 0-082801-12 HOM MOTION TO DENYORD, BUT THAT PETITIONERS BE GIVEN 30 DAYS AFTER BIRTH OF THE FOAL TO REMOVE THE HORSES. URC 9 CITIZENS SPOKE 4. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 4.62 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Avenue, Hollins Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) BLJ MOTION TO REFER BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND ROAD ACCESS. URC 1 CITIZEN SPOKE 5. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of RA-DE Div., Ltd. T/A Perfect Touch to Rezone 1.13 acres from C-1 Office District with conditions to C-1 Office District located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 0-082801-13 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC U. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Ona Early, 3387 Mt. Pleasant Blvd. expressed concern that the 9 $500,000 funds allocated for renovations for Clearbrook and Mt Pleasant were not distributed equally and that Mt. Pleasant will receive only $150,000. Mr. Hodge explained how it was determined where the funds would go and that they looked at the need number of calls safety issues and the distance to the next station. HCN requested that the MHA prepare a transcript of Mr. Hodge's and his comments concerning this Dan O'Donnell- updated-the Board orr arecent-meeting to discuss the Mount Pleasant renovations. HCN requested a copy of the minutes of that meetina. 2. Annie _Krochalis. 9428 Patterson Drive advised she attended the March 12 meeting to discuss funding and she also thouaht expectations were that fundina for both stations would be fairly equal She felt that Mount Pleasant needs should be met. V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church: (1) Requested that the light at the entrance to the Board Meeting Room keeps blinking and requested that it be fixed (21 Received an anonymous card asking when there would be public water and sewer to Mason Cove since the septic system failed in April ECH advised that they tried to get a new septic system but it did not perk They discussed purchase of land with adjoining property owners and have discussed other options. They have ordered a special type septic system that iust arrived and it should be operational in September (3) Thanked everyone for their kind words and sympath during the recent death of his mother. Supervisor McNamara: Suggested that the Board look at appropriating the funds to complete all renovations at Mt Pleasant since the cost will only increase to $206 000 Supervisor Minnix: Announced that he is also experiencing illness in his family, especially his mother-in-law who is suffering from Cancer and his father who now needs dialysis several times a week W. ADJOURNMENT TO TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 4. 2001 AT 10.30 A M AT THE REGIONAL FIRE TRAINING CENTER KESSLER MILL ROAD 10 FOR THE PURPOSE OF A JOINT MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AN AGREEMENT FOR REGIONAL FIRE AND RESCUE. HOM ADJOURNED MEETING AT 10:25 P.M. 11 (tOANp ~~~~ ~F L I. p 2 1838 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA AUGUST 28, 2001 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, will be rebroadcast on Thursday at 7 p.m. and Saturday at 4 p.m., and are now closed captioned. Individuals who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005 at least 48 hours in advance so reasonable accommodations may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: Gardner Smith Director, Purchasing Department 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. Resolution of Appreciation to C. Richard Cranwell for his service to Roanoke County and the Commonwealth of Virginia as a member of the General Assembly. D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing and Presentation from Virginia Amateur Sports, Inc. on the 1 ® Recycled Paper 2001 Commonwealth Games of Virginia (Peter Lampman, President, Virginia Amateur Sports) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to adopt a resolution approving application to participate in the 2001 Fall VPSA Subsidy Sale for $13,745,000 and notice of public hearing for September 25, 2001. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) 2. Request for approval of amendments to the Investment Policy. (Alfred C. Anderson, County Treasurer) 3. Request to award contract and appropriate $12,000 for the Citizen Satisfaction Survey. (Kathi Scearce, Community Relations Director) 4. Request to approve agreement for project based financing and amendment to Participation Agreement for New River Valley Commerce Park. (Joseph B. Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney) 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. First reading of ordinance to rezone .398 acres from R-1 Residential District to C-1 Office District with conditions for expansion of a medical clinic and related parking, located at 3500 block of Pinevale Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Windsor House. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance amending notice requirement of enforcement procedures for Section 12-125 "Removal of inoperative motor vehicles, etc.," Section 13-14. "Unlawful accumulations "of trash and growth of weeds; public nuisances and abatement 2 thereof," and Section 30-21. "Enforcement procedures of the Zoning Ordinance. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) H. J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project -Orchards Sewer Project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) APPOINTMENTS 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals serving as Fie Code Board of Appeals 2. Grievance Panel 3. Industrial Development Authority 4. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 5. 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. 1 2 3. 4. Approval of minutes for July 24, 2001 and July 30, 2001 Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority Acceptance of a $6,700 TRIAD grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services to assist with the Roanoke Valley TRIAD program. Acceptance of $695.01 into the Police Department budget received 3 during the Police Department Open House. 5. Acceptance and appropriation of a $34,628 Bureau of Justice Assistance block grant for law enforcement support. 6. Acceptance and appropriation of $2,711.28 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of EMS Training Equipment. 7. Acceptance and appropriation of $4,585.50 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of vehicle extrication equipment for Hollins Fire and Rescue. 8. Request to approve the annual performance contract with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare. 9. Acceptance and appropriation of $12,000 School Grant from the Department of Education to improve outcomes for students who have a full range of abilities and needs. 10. Acceptance and appropriation of $15,675 tuition for the Schools Preschool Program. 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. Revenues and Expenditures for the month ended July 31, 2001 4 6. Status Report on Decal Enforcement O. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members pertaining to probable litigation, Roanoke Regional Water Pollution Control Plant upgrade; 2.1-344A (5) discussion of an economic development prospect where no previous announcement has been made; and 2.1-344A (3) acquisition of real estate for public purposes, flood mitigation in Palm Valley area. P. WORK SESSION (4T" FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) EVENING SESSION Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring September 20, 2001 as Southwest Virginia Light the Night Day and September 2001 as Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month. S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of the American Tower Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located on the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 2. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of The Community of Faith to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious facility on 1.033 acres located at 5343 Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 3. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of Hugh R. & Carolyn Elsea to obtain a Special Use Permit for a private horse stable on 2.99 acres and a 30 foot right-of-way on adjoining parcel located at 3663 Chaparral Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 5 4. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 4.62 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Avenue, Hollins Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 5. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of RA-DE Div., Ltd. T/A Perfect Touch to Rezone 1.13 acres from C-1 Office District with conditions to C-1 Office District located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) U. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS W. ADJOURNMENT TO TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 4. 2001 AT 10:30 A.M. AT THEREGIONAL FIRE TRAINING CENTER. KESSLER MILL ROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF A JOINT MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AN AGREEMENT FOR REGIONAL FIRE AND RESCUE. 6 r ~ 'T ~ ~ -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801-1 EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO THE HONORABLE C. RICHARD CRANWELL FOR HIS SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF ROANOKE COUNTY AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AS A MEMBER OF THE VIRGINIA HOUSE OF DELEGATES WHEREAS, C. Richard Cranwell was first elected to the House of Delegates in 1972; representing the 14`h House District which includes portions of the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cranwell has served his constituents on many House committees including Counties, Cities and Towns, Finance, Labor and Commerce, and Rules; and WHEREAS, for many years, Delegate Cranwell was elected the House Majority Leader by his peers, and currently serves as the House Minority Leader; and WHEREAS, in 1986, Delegate Cranwell was the Chief Patron of the Roanoke County Charter Bill, resulting in Roanoke County becoming the first chartered County in the State of Virginia; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cranwell, as a result of his outstanding legislative abilities, has been of great assistance to Roanoke County by supporting or sponsoring many of our legislative initiatives including: • Enhanced taxing authority for Roanoke County similar to those allowed in Virginia Cities • Funding for Roanoke County's Police Department • Creation of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cranwell has also been active in his community serving on the McVitty House Board of Directors, former president of the Dogwood Festival, • 4 w Roanoke Valley Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Board of Directors, and legal advisor to the Vinton Drug Control Council, Vinton Chamber of Commerce and Vinton, Mount Pleasant and Montvale Rescue Squads. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, expresses its deepest appreciation to C. Richard Cranwell for his many years of service to the residents of Roanoke County as a member of the House of Delegates and an active citizen in the Roanoke Valley community; and FURTHER, the Board wishes Delegate Cranwell success in all his future endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors CC: File Resolutions of Appreciation ... . , ~_r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO THE HONORABLE C. RICHARD CRANWELL FOR HIS SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF ROANOKE COUNTY AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AS A MEMBER OF THE VIRGINIA HOUSE OF DELEGATES WHEREAS, C. Richard Cranwell was first elected to the House of Delegates in 1972; representing the 14'h House District which includes portions of the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cranwell has served his constituents on many House committees including Counties, Cities and Towns, Finance, Labor and Commerce, and Rules; and WHEREAS, for many years, Delegate Cranwell was elected the House Majority Leader by his peers, and currently serves as the House Minority Leader; and WHEREAS, in 1986, Delegate Cranwell was the Chief Patron of the Roanoke County Charter Bill, resulting in Roanoke County becoming the first chartered County in the State of Virginia; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cranwell, as a result of his outstanding legislative abilities, has been of great assistance to Roanoke County by supporting or sponsoring many of our legislative initiatives including: Enhanced taxing authority for Roanoke County similar to those allowed in Virginia Cities Funding for Roanoke County's Police Department Creation of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cranwell has also been active in his community serving on the McVitty House Board of Directors, former president of the Dogwood Festival, .; a Roanoke Valley Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Board of Directors, and legal advisor to the Vinton Drug Control Council, Vinton Chamber of Commerce and Vinton, Mount Pleasant and Montvale Rescue Squads. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, expresses its deepest appreciation to C. Richard Cranwell for his many years of service to the residents of Roanoke County as a member of the House of Delegates and an active citizen in the Roanoke Valley community; and FURTHER, the Board wishes Delegate Cranwell success in all his future endeavors. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~- l1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Report from Virginia Amateur Sports, Inc. on the 2001 Commonwealth Games of Virginia COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: •T ~3 ~:'L''~//-.tii+'~ C:lji~'f~n.+t.,iy fy Qts/lt.d Li.tcJ pi tJ/rurP_ C.'~X(.P-//a.~[;, !t'~n~~r/ cL°f'~ ~~-'~a1 t"i~.~ ea..:vuJl / ~e, y'r~7~Tit . SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Peter Lampman, President of Virginia Amateur Sports, Inc., has requested time on the agenda to report on the economic impact of the 2001 Commonwealth Games of Virginia. He would also like to present a plaque to the Board of Supervisors at that time. The Commonwealth Games of Virginia were first held in July 1990 with more than 4,400 athletes competing in 29 sports. In the 2000 games, 10,322 athletes participated in 43 sports, and over the past eleven years, 90,000 athletes have competed. The Commonwealth Games have a very positive economic impact on Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valley with the total economic in 2000 just under $8 million. Roanoke County has been involved in the Commonwealth Games since its inception, providing funding, fields and other assistance. We want to express our appreciation and congratulations to Virginia Amateur Sports upon the successful completion of the 2001 Commonwealth Games. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~- i ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ Johnson _ _ McNamara- _ _ Minnix _ _ _ Nickens r_i~ VIRGINIA AMATEUR SPORTS, INC. PRESENTING SPONSORS CMT Sporting Goods Kroger Mamsi Sheetz Virginia's 13 ABC PREMIER SPONSORS Clear Channel Communications, Inc. Valleydale Foods GOLD MEDAL SPONSORS Adelphia Business Solutions 88&T Carillon Coca Cola Holiday Inn - Tanglewood K92 Radio Ragazzi's Sprint PCS Verizon Wireless SILVER MEDAL SPONSORS AEP Blue Ridge Copier First Team Auto Mall Lanford Brothers Lewis Gale Clinic Metro Information Services BRONZE MEDAL SPONSORS Advance Auto Parts Delta Dental KMC Telecom Mountain Springs Water PaineWebber Roanoke Electric Steel Roanoke Fruit & Produce Waldvogel, Poe & Cronk PATRON SPONSORS Burgess-DeMarco Member One Credit Union NBC Bank Sir Speedy 711 C 5th Street, NE r ~, 1 Roanoke, Virginia 24016 (540) 343-0987 FAX (540) 343-7407 www.commonwealthgames.org July 26, 2001 Mr. Joseph McNamara Chairman, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors PD BOX 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Mr. McNamara, Virginia Amateur Sports would like to have the opportunity to say thank you to the County of Roanoke for their outstanding support of the 2001 Commonwealth Games of Virginia at y ur Board of Supervisors meeting scheduled for Tuesday, August 28 at pm. My presentation will take approximately 5 - 10 minutes. I would also like to re-present a plaque that I previously presented to Mr. Church at our VIP reception on July 19. If you can have the plaque at the meeting on the 28th, it certainly would be appreciated. Please accept my thank you in advance for giving me this opportunity. I am looking forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Virginia Amateur Sports V Y~ u~ 7YV~(%'-~ Peter Lampman Promoting Sports In The Olympic Ideal Sanctioned by the National Congress of State Games and recognized by the United States Olympic Committee ~~~ Recycled Paper Sponsor of AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801- 2 AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION TO THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $13,745,000 WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board ("the School Board") has applications for financing one middle school and one high school project (the "Projects") in the total amount of $14,000,000 on the Literary Fund Priority Waiting List for which it currently desires to proceed with financing; and WHEREAS, the School Board has received an application for the Virginia Public School Authority ("VPSA") Fall 2001 subsidy sale, and the School Board and the Board of Supervisors ("Board of Supervisors") of the County of Roanoke, Virginia ("County") have determined that it is advisable to contract a debt and issue general obligation bonds of the County in an amount not to exceed $13,745,000 to finance the Projects (the "Bonds") and to sell the Bonds to the VPSA pursuant to the Fall 2001 Literary Fund subsidy sale; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. The County Administrator is authorized and directed to execute and deliver an application to the VPSA in order to sell the Bonds to the VPSA at the Fall 2001 VPSA bond sale. 2. The County Administrator is authorized to advertise a public hearing to be held by the Board of Supervisors on September 25, 2001 on the issuance of the Bonds. G:\BOARD\2001 \Aug28\8-28vpsa#02.doc r - .. - '. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia on August 28, 2001. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution and set public hearing for September 25, 2001, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Danial Morris, Director, Finance Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board G:\BOARD\2001 Wug28\8-28vpsa#02.doc ~ ~_ ~ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA August 28, 2001 At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, held on August 28, 2001, the following resolution was adopted by a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors by the following roll call vote, as recorded in the minutes of the meeting: MEMBER VOTE Supervisor Johnson Yes Supervisor McNamara Yes Supervisor Church Yes Supervisor Nickens Yes Chairman Minnix Yes ACTION # ITEM NUMBER tom- / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution to Approve Application to Participate in the 2001 Fall VPSA Subsidy Sale for $13,745,000 and Notice of Public Hearing COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: / -~+ /1 ~ ~ ® ~r^•':•~t J.•I~ ~l~l :l: a~.tj !ay l1 la~.~U ~'tc~ ~/ '~r. ~c~s.••a~ Sft.f-~' 1"N ~.c l=omd..../j ~r:.r '~ s~ BACKGROUND: The County Board of Supervisors approved the final budgets for the new Hidden Valley High School and the renovations at Glenvar Middle School as shown on Attachment A and Attachment B. The amounts scheduled to be borrowed through the State Literary Loan program are as follows: Hidden Valley High School $7,500,000 Glenvar Middle School 6,245,000 Total $13,745,000 The School Board submitted applications to the Literary Loan program in May 2000. The state has announced that they will offer an interest rate subsidy bond issue for sale in conjunction with the VPSA's Fall bond issue. The objective of the interest rate subsidy program is to maximize the use of available Literary Fund monies to provide low interest school construction loans and to keep the Literary Fund loan waiting list as short as possible. Hidden Valley High is ranked 19 and Glenvar Middle is ranked 31 on the First Priority Waiting List for literary loans. It is possible that both of these projects will be included in the subsidy issue this Fall. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County has recently received the application packet to apply for the Fa112001 Virginia Public School Authority (VPSA) Subsidy Bond Sale. At this time, we would like to apply for the literary loans outlined above. The attached resolution authorizes the sale of up to $13,745,000 in Subsidy Bonds. ~-~ i The School Board adopted the attached resolution at their meeting on August 23, 2001. A public hearing will be held on this issue on September 25, 2001, followed by the adoption of the final resolution. FISCAL IMPACT: The first debt payment on the issue will not occur until the 2002-03 fiscal year. Annual debt payments are estimated at $1,240,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following: 1. Adopt the attached resolution, which authorizes the application to the VPSA to participate in the Fa112001 VPSA Subsidy Bond Sale for $13,745,000. 2. Schedule a public hearing on this borrowing for September 25, 2001. Respectfully Submitted by ~ cc~..~,n...0. ;~..~.~ Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer ACTION Approved by: ~~ rL G.~rn T., ~ lmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No. Yes Als Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara Referred () Minnix To () Nickens cc: File Q H z W Q H a M~ W 0 0 V V d ~ ~O .C a ~~ 2 ~' dl ~~ d a R C 2 o, rn ~ ~ °o ~ ~ N N C O` C (6 w O O y m C ~ N 'j d L ~ C ~ C ~ ~ O ~ O N O (0 N C p' ~ O' N O 01 lD 0 ~ ~ ~. i, U O C ~ (0 O f0 M m O W ¢ 0 ~~ . a~ u ~ p~ o 2 W N 30~ U m m N W _ y O ~ U rn ~ ~ nl j ~O M. oa ODN 00OOOO0Cf O O O M 0 0 0 0 (~'. ornoor~oooor Nh~OOOOOCf Ctn0MOOOO(f ~r• r-MNOM~I Oj r ~ r O O O O O to ~_ N 0 O U N LL7 O O 0 ~ ~ ~ N 00 ~D ~ N d0 rn°o°o °o °o a N ~ ~ O ~ C( aD ao _ N ~ t0OtOOO00N 0000040 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C~ M O O 0 0 0 O O O00 tnOO0Nr•OOOO(O O MON000Nr•OOOOOO~ O N~ f0 N O 'V' ~ (O M O O O O M O ap ~t ~ CO r• O r• M N O M B O N r- CO M ~ ~ ~ ~ cooooov o 00000 0 rnoaooo 00000 0 Oovooco ~ rn ~ 00000 0 M O f0 O O N O O O O l!7 O N N E t0 O~ O 0 0 0 0 r• O 00 cr r' t0 M N O M 0 O CV ~ CD M ~ ~ O <- M O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0~ o ~ ocooo ~ o ~ ~ ~ oo~n tO0 O O O O N ~~~ N r~~~ COr•~n N ~ ~ M pT~ ... O c p O C ~ N O) ~ U C w C ~ w ~ O) 0 N ~ C C ~ C C O N .O V1 N «J 01 ~ ~ V ~ C U U C 'O O~ O O in O p~ O U ~ ~ O 7~>> O N c~ N N O T rte-. .-. O O O L ~- O) 'O .O W N d~ d a '6 -O ~- •N m e c c ,+6 ~ Z c 'o ~ a? ~ ~ ~ ~ p JJ¢>tgUafn fns>Li~U N r ,~^~` O O N O m H Z W U Q F- a ~~ d m Q .F+ 0 V V ~ to a as 'C N ~ ~ t ~ a L C d O O i ~ ~ 0 i ~ ~ i i i i ~ i i ~ ~ ~ --~ N N ~ O ~ ~ 7 i (a ~ l~ O ~ m ..., J 000 co oc~o~ oov O 000 O N~~~ OOI~ aN oO c'~ O cD t1~ cO ~ l~ O 0 0 0 - d OCO~ N (0 N ~()COf~ N r r" M OOT M~ ~ N ~ L C ~ ~` Q O (n r VJ O O O _ ~ O O '^ VJ ~ ~ r a 0 >~ 'a C N ~ ~ m N to CO ~ O ~ N r M L 3 U ~ cn Q N 0000(00 O~ 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0~ 0 0 pp M O O CO O' ' ~ I~ ' 0 0 ~ U O N CO I~ H M O CO f~ O O 00 O N N N E ~ N ~ ~ M M dO' ~ m > O CO ~ Z N ~ v ~ o °o °o °o °o °o °o ~ ' ~ U o uS ~i uS o ~rS v O N ~ tl ~ N 00 CO ~ O` N ma r ~~ .~ r- ~, o m I~ .~ ~ O ~ ` C ~ L U O O ~ N"= Q.U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C ~~ ~ f0 N '~ ~ C (N6 ~ N ~ C O N ~ .~ O O U L A N N E 'O N ~ N "~ 'r U O O a- C U N '~ '~ C N N~~ ~ Q O N~ ~+ N o ~ O ~ •~ C (0 O C (0 O O N O N ~, U O O U~~ > N C N O O O N` U ~. f9 ~ .~. N 'a .~ O L W N ~ N ~ ~ N L .O "a ~ .C ~ ~ Q otS~(n COLLQ~U ~ ~fA j N p C U acn ~~U~ 0 O O N (O r O_ r O O 'O V./ M ti _O M 0 v 0 M M "/ O O N m 0 X om C N U QS Y ~L+ g a_ U U C O O U U C (d C LL -, t~ ~~ RESOLUTION OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION TO THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY FOR LITERARY FUND SUBSIDY FINANCING WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board ("School Board") has applications for one middle school and one high school project (the "Projects") in the total amount of $14,000,000 on the Literary Fund First Priority Waiting List for which it currently desires to proceed with financing; and WHEREAS, the School Board has received an application for the Virginia Public School Authority ("VPSA") Fall 2001 subsidy sale and the School Board has determined that it is advisable to contract a debt and issue general obligation bonds ofthe County ofRoanoke, Virginia (the "County") in the maximum amount of $13,745,000 to finance the Projects ("Bonds") and to sell the Bonds to the VPSA pursuant to the Literary Fund subsidy sale: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD: 1. The County School Board requests pursuant to Section 15.2-2640 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "Code") that the Board of Supervisors of the County issue the Bonds and submit an application to the VPSA in order to sell the Bonds to the VPSA at the Fall 2001 VPSA bond sale and the Superintendent of Schools or such officer as she may designate is authorized to submit such documentation as may be required by VPSA. The School Board consents pursuant to Section 15.2-2638(B) of the Code and Article VII, Section 10(b) of the Constitution of Virginia to the issuance and sale of the Bonds to the VPSA. 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the Roanoke County School Board on August 23, 2001. Clerk, Roanoke County School Board ~~' RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA August 28, 2001 At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, held on August 28, 2001, the following resolution was adopted by a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors by the following roll call vote, as recorded in the minutes of the meeting: MEMBER VOTE ~ -~ 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION TO THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board ("the School Board") has applications for financing one middle school and one high school project (the "Projects") in the total amount of $14,000,000 on the Literary Fund Priority Waiting List for which it currently desires to proceed with financing; and WHEREAS, the School Board has received an application for the Virginia Public School Authority ("VPSA") Fall 2001 subsidy sale, and the School Board and the Board of Supervisors ("Board of Supervisors") of the County of Roanoke, Virginia ("County") have determined that it is advisable to contract a debt and issue general obligation bonds of the County in an amount not to exceed $13,745,000 to finance the Projects (the "Bonds") and to sell the Bonds to the VPSA pursuant to the Fall 2001 Literary Fund subsidy sale; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. The County Administrator is authorized and directed to execute and deliver an application to the VPSA in order to sell the Bonds to the VPSA at the Fall 2001 VPSA bond sale. 2. The County Administrator is authorized to advertise a public hearing to be held by the Board of Supervisors on September 25, 2001 on the issuance of the Bonds. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia on August 28, 2001. A-082801-3 A ITEM NUMBER ~r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Amendments to the Investment Policy COUNTY ADMINISTRAT~/OR' S CyO'MMENTS BACKGROUND: The County has had an investment policy since 1987. At the time the original policy was adopted, it was announced that the policy is a living document and would need to be revised from time to time to address changing circumstances. It has been amended by the Board in 1992, 1994, 1995, and 1997. During the first quarter of this year, the County avoided the loss of public funds due to the default by PG & E on its commercial paper obligations to the County. The Board directed staff to review the investment policy and, if necessary, recommend amendments to the investment policy to minimize the possibility of a similar default risk in the future. The Board held a work session on July 10, 2001 to consider alternatives to the current investment policy. Alternatives considered included amending the investment policy to prohibit investment in prime quality commercial paper, tie ~raxacf~s ^~ ~~~*h^~.~=te.-~.;,r~e eemme~e~r;~~- p°~ z ~~~:res~me~~e ~e ~~e ~~~}~ Eemms~~ee, and placing additional limitations in the form of a cap on any one investment in commercial paper. It was agreed at the work session that the Treasurer would immediately include a cap of $1 million on any one prime quality commercial paper investment and that this cap would be added to the investment policy and returned to the Board for adoption. Attached you will find a copy of the County's investment policy. Please note the following elements of this policy: (1) The "Prudent Investor" standard found on page 7, 1 r ' (2) The diversification percentages and standards found on pages 9 through 11, and (3) The "prime quality commercial paper" provisions found on pages 16 through 18. Finally, in the Reports section of the August 14 agenda packet a report Investment Summary - Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2001 summarized investments in the various categories over the past year and the return realized on these various investments. The report noted data on the investment in and return on commercial paper investments to answer questions posed by the Board during the July 10, 2001 work session. ALTERNATIVES: At the suggestion of the Board, the Investment Policy has been amended to include a limitation of $1 million in any one prime quality commercial paper investment. FISCAL IMPACT: Placing a limit of $1 million on any one commercial paper investment will not have any fiscal impact on the potential investment earnings of the County. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed amendments to the Investment Policy. Respectfully submitted, Alfred C. Anderson Roanoke County Treasurer ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (X) Motion by: Johnson to approve staff Church _ X _ Denied ( ) recommendation with sentence in Board Johnson _ X Received ( ) Report concerning transfer of McNamara- X _ Referred ( ) authoritxto audit committee deleted Minnix _ X To ( ) Nickens _ X CC: File Alfred C. Anderson, County Treasurer Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Danial Morris, Finance Director Paul Mahoney, County Attorney y . 1 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGIl~IIA I. Investment and Portfolio Policy A. Identification: 1. Purpose and Scope This policy shall establish guidelines for the efficient management of County funds and shall apply to activities with regard to the investment of the financial assets of the County. The goal of the policy is to allow the County to obtain the highest possible yield on available County financial assets, consistent with constraints imposed by its safety objectives, cash flow considerations and Virginia state laws that restrict the placement of public funds. 2. General Guidelines The Treasurer of the County of Roanoke is an Elected Constitutional Officer whose responsibility in part is receiving, collecting, safeguarding and disbursing county funds from all sources. It shall be the responsibility of the Treasurer, however he may designate a deputy to manage the day-to-day operations of the investment portfolio and place the actual purchase/sell orders with brokers. The Treasurer shall advise the County Finance Board, which is the Board of Supervisors, when the investment policy is altered and at the end of each month report to them the amount of money on deposit with each depository. Specifically excluded from these guidelines are funds that by statue or ordinance require specific investments. 3. Authorized Investments As a unit of local government in the State of Virginia, the County of Roanoke is restricted by Virginia Security for Public Deposits Act, Sec. 2.1-359 through 2.1-370 and the Code of Virginia, Title 2 Investment of Public Funds to the following types of securities as described in Sec. 2. 1-327 through 2.1-329: a. Bonds, notes and other evidence of indebtedness of the State of Virginia. ~_ ~` 2 b. Bonds, notes and other direct obligations of the United States and securities unconditionally guaranteed as to the payment of principal and interest by the United States or any agency thereof. c. Bonds, notes and other evidence of indebtedness of any county, city, town, district, authority or other public body of the State of Virginia. d. Bonds and other obligations issued, guaranteed or assumed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Asian Development Bank. e. Certificates of deposit in commercial banks up to their net worth provided they are approved by the State Treasury Board in the State's Collateral protection pool in accordance with the Virginia Public Deposits Act. f. Certificates of deposit in commercial banks, savings and loan associations and mutual savings bank doing business in this State up to FDIC and FSLIC insurance coverage. g. Bankers' Acceptances h. Repurchase Agreements provided the securities for the agreement are written against specific government securities as authorized under Sec. 2.1-328. As a matter of policy, the county must take delivery of the securities purchased through a repurchase agreement if the term of the agreement is greater than four (4) days. If the term is less than four (4) days, the securities may be held in safekeeping by the bank for the account of the county. Pledged securities under repurchase agreements must be based on market value, not face value. When entering a repurchase agreement where delivery is not required, the county shall obtain a safekeeping receipt for specific securities. Refer to Part II Repurchase Agreements for complete details. i. Money Market Funds Deposit-type securities shall be collateralized through the State Collateral Pool as required by Virginia Public Deposits Acts for any amount exceeding FDIC or FSLIC coverage. Other investments shall be collateralized by the actual security held in safekeeping by the primary agent. -~ 3 All investments will be in the name of the County of Roanoke and will name the specific fund from which the instrument was purchased. Safekeeping account receipts will be held by the Treasurer's Office. The Treasurer will continually monitor the contents of the portfolio, the available markets and the relative values of competing instruments, and will adjust the portfolio accordingly. CMOs, inverse floating rate securities, floating rate securities tied to a non-money market instrument, IO's, PO's, Z-tranche securities, residuals, and other securities having unusual features are expressly prohibited. Transactions in options, futures, options on futures, margin buying and commodities are prohibited. Any other security not specifically authorized in this document is expressly prohibited. 4. Maturities Maturity scheduling shall be timed according to anticipated need. Investment maturities for operating funds shall be scheduled to coincide with projected cash flow needs, taking into account large routine expenditures as well as considering sizable blocks of anticipated revenue. Investment of capital project funds shall be timed to meet contractors payments. Short Term versus Long Term Portfolio -Limitation on instruments, diversification and maturity scheduling shall depend upon whether the funds being invested are considered short term or long term funds. All funds shall be considered short term except those reserved for capital projects and prepayments funds being held for debt retirement. 5. Risk/LiquidityBiddin~ The primary goal of the investment policy is to maximize return on investment while minimizing risk to the investment. The Treasurer will diversify use of investment instruments to avoid incurring unreasonable risks inherent in overinvesting in specific instruments, individual financial institutions or maturities. The Treasurer's office shall maintain a listing of financial institutions which are ~' 4 approved by the State Treasury Board for investment purposes and which shall provide their most recent Consolidated Report of Condition. Periodically, these financial institutions must be examined and evaluated to determine their strength and creditworthiness. During the bid process the Treasurer may reject an investment with a higher yield when he feels it carries an element of risk. Speculative investments will not be allowed. Before the Treasurer invests any surplus funds, a competitive "bid" process with three or more financial institutions shall be conducted. If a specific maturity date is required, either for cash flow purposes or for conformance to maturity guidelines, bids will be requested for instruments which meet the maturity requirement. If no specific maturity is required, a market trend (yield curve) analysis will be conducted to determine which maturities would be most advantageous. 6. Reporting and Controls The Treasurer shall report at the end of each month to the Board of Supervisors the amount of money on deposit with each depository. The Treasurer shall establish a system of internal controls which shall be documented and reviewed with internal and independent auditors and meets the requirements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The controls are designed to prevent losses of public funds due to fraud, error, misrepresentation, unanticipated market change or imprudent actions. B. Source of Investment Policy: 1. Current Management Practices The Treasurer shall develop and maintain written administrative procedures for the operation of the investment program. Each investment transaction shall seek to first ensure that capital losses are avoided, whether they be from securities defaults or erosion of market value. The County seeks to attain market rates of return on its investments, consistent with constraints imposed by its safety objectives, cash flow consideration and Virginia state laws that restrict the placement of public funds. ~'~ 5 The Treasurer shall also carry out an aggressive cash management program that maintains true zero balances in the County's checking accounts with temporary idle funds being invested overnight in either repurchase agreements that are secured or collateralized by governmental securities as required by the Code of Virginia or in one or more opened investment funds, provided that the funds are registered under Securities Act (§13.1-501 et seq.) of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the Federal Investment Co. Act of 1940, and that the investment of such funds by the County is restricted to investments otherwise permitted by law and this Investment Policy. Whenever possible funds held for future capital projects (i. e., bond proceeds) shall be invested to produce enough income to offset increases in construction costs due to inflation. Diversification is required through the use of portfolio percentages. Safekeeping will be required using third-party safekeeping in an account in an institution designated as a primary agent. The Board of Supervisors will be given copies of the County's Investment Policies and Practices. All changes will be documented and copies sent to the Board. The Board should contact the Treasurer if they have any questions, recommendations, additions or deletions to the policies. The Treasurer will consider the recommendations and implement such recommendations which he deems in the best interest of the County. ' 2. Prudence Standards The standard of prudence to be applied by the Treasurer shall be the "prudent investor" rule, which states, "Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercised in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." The prudent investor rule shall be applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio. The Treasurer, acting in accordance with written procedures of the Code of Virginia, Sec. .. _ ~` 6 2.1-329.1 and Sec. 58.1-3123 et. seq. and exercising due diligence, shall not be held personally responsible for a specific security's credit risk or market price changes provided that these deviations are reported immediately by the Treasurer and that reasonable and prudent action is taken to control adverse developments. Furthermore, in accordance with Sec. 58.1-3163 of the Code of Virginia, the Treasurer shall not be liable for loss of public money due to the default, failure or insolvency of a depository. 3. State Law The County shall limit investments to those allowed under the Virginia Security for Public Deposits Act, Sec. 2.1-359 through 2.1-370 and Investment of Public Funds as in Sec. 2.1-327 through 2.1-329, Code of Virginia. The Virginia Security for Public Deposits Act provides for a mutuality of responsibility involving a cross guarantee among all commercial banks holding public deposits. In the event of insolvency by a bank holding public deposits, any losses resulting from uncollateralized and uninsured public deposits will be paid by assessments against all other commercial banks holding public funds. The amount assessed against each bank will be based on the ratio that its average public deposits bears to the statewide average. In respect to the savings and loan associations and savings banks, however, there is no sharing of liability for total public funds on deposit. Instead, the savings and loan associations are required to pledge collateral equal to 100% of their public deposits, compared to 50% that is required of the banks. 4. Audit Requirements The Treasurer shall establish a system of internal controls which shall be documented in writing. Accurate and adequate records will be maintained by the Treasurer's Office. Such records will be subject to audit by the Internal Audit Department, as well as the independent auditors and the State Auditor of Public Accounts. Reporting and disclosure requirements will 7 comply with all applicable regulations including the requirements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. 5. Concentration bank The Treasurer will move funds from other depository banks to a central point to maximize the availability of funds. The central point or primary bank will be the concentration bank which shall be determined by competitive bids. 6. Charges for BankingLServices The cost of maintaining the account may be paid either by a compensating balance or by direct charges. If a compensating balance is used the Treasurer shall review with a bank official monthly an anlyzation of the County's account profitability to the bank. Considering interest rates at that time and the bank's average earnings allowance, the bank will determine the balances in the accounts (compensating balances) which will be required for the following month in order to cover the cost of processing the County's banking transactions. Copies of the result of these analyses will be maintained by the Treasurer. 7. Zero Balance Account (ZBAI The Treasurer will take full advantage of clearing time on County checks disbursed by maintaining true zero balances in the County's checking account. As checks are presented for payment, they are accumulated and a single offsetting credit is prepared to bring the account to a zero balance at the end of the banking day. This account is linked to the Master Concentration or deposit account against which the ZBA draws funds to pay the checks presented for payment. Temporarily idle funds will be invested overnight in repurchase agreements that are secured or collateralized by governmental securities as required by the Code of Virginia. The Treasurer will determine excess idle funds and invest them in longer term investments. 8. Diversification ~' 8 Diversification by Instrument: Percent of Portfolio U.S. Treasury Obligations 70% (bills, notes and bonds) U.S. Government Agency Securities 70% and Instrumentalities of Government Sponsored Corporations Bankers's Acceptance (BA's) 40% Repurchase Agreement (Repo's) Two or more nights 25% Repurchase Agreement (Repo's) overnight 70% Commercial Banks Certificate of Deposit (CD's) 100% Savings & Loan Associations Certificate of Deposits (CD's) 10% Commercial Paper 35% Local Government Investment Pool 75% Diversification by Financial Institution: Bankers' Acceptance (BA's) No more than 25% of the total portfolio with any one institution Repurchase Agreements (Repo's) No more than 20% of the total portfolio with any one institution Certificates of Deposits (CD's) Commercial Banks No more than 45% of the total portfolio with any one institution Certificates of Deposits (CD's) Savings and Loan Association. No more than $100,000 with any one institution. Local Government Investment Pool -State Pool 9 No more than $15 million Commercial Paper No more than 25% of the total portfolio may be purchased through any one financial institution; and the maximum dollar amount in any one issue shall not exceed One Million Dollars. Diversification of Funds to be invested in any one issue: No limit- FDIC, FSLIC, Collateralized Certificates of Deposit No limit- U. S. Treasuries and Agencies Maximum- 10% of total portfolio for any Bankers Acceptance and Commercial Paper issue II. Repurchase Agreements Definition A. Investing in Repurchase Agreements 1. The Instrument The repurchase agreements (Repo's) are an integral part of an investment program of state and local government. Their flexibility is unmatched by other short term money market instruments. They provide the investor an excellent cash management tool. The sale by a bank of a government security with a simultaneous agreement to repurchase the security at a later date can insure safety of public funds while securing money market rates of interest. The Repo is a contractual transaction between an investor and an issuing financial institution. The investor exchanges cash for temporary ownership or control of collateral securities, with an agreement between the parties that on a future date, the financial institution will repurchase the securities. The Treasurer will use a Master Repurchase Agreement (See Appendices) as a written contract to establish the County's rights in all transactions. A written contract will also be used with the independent third-party custodian. (See Appendices.) ~` ,'" 10 Customarily, the investor receives interest during the term of the repurchase agreement, as agreed upon at the time of the investment transaction. The eligibility of repos depends on the manner in which the repo is structured. The Attorney General in an opinion written in July 1982 states "that a repurchase agreement which is secured or collateralized by governmental securities which qualify under Sec.2.1-328 is a legally authorized investment." The General Assembly during the 1985 session amended Sec. 2.1-328.5 and added Sec. 2.1-328.8. This legislation authorizes the investment of public funds in overnight, term and open repurchase agreements which are collateralized with securities that are approved for direct investment. 2. Tvpes of Repurchase Agreements An overnight repo is one which is written for one day, as its name implies. These are popular with cash managers seeking to invest funds overnight to meet specific cash needs on the next day or to combine assets with other investments and incoming cash in larger denominations for a longer maturity in another instrument. Interest rates tend to be quoted in relationship to the Fed funds rate, which is the interbank lending rate for bank reserves. Term repos are written for a specific time period of more than one day. The County uses term repos usually for maturities for less than 14 days, particularly when bank regulations require jumbo CDs to be written for at least 14 days with some having 30-day requirements. Collateral is adjusted daily to protect the investor. Open repos are written without a. specific maturity. Either party may end the transaction on a future date and the amount invested can be changed on a daily basis. Open repos are based upon a rate that keys off Fed funds or T-bill yields. 3. Know With Whom You Are Investing The Treasurer must exercise special caution selecting parties to conduct repurchase transactions with and be able to identify the parties acting as principals to the transactions. A ".~.~, 11 written master repurchase agreement is executed between the County, the bank and the third party collateral agent. It is the policy of the County to concentrate its investment efforts to banks located in the State of Virginia which are under the Virginia statutes for public funds and all banks must be approved depositories by the State Treasury Board. 4. Collateral Collateral is the repo's underlying security. Repos are written against specific government securities as authorized by law. The best collateral from the investor's standpoint is short-term U.S. Treasury bills which are liquid and not subject to serve price changes. 5. Delivery of Collateral As a matter of policy, the County must take delivery of the securities purchased through the agreement if the term of the agreement is more than four (4) days. These investment securities may be held by the County or placed in a third party custodial account for safekeeping. If the term is less than four (4) days, such as the overnight repo when third party safekeeping is not required, the securities may be held in safekeeping by the bank, but must be held for the account of the County. The repo must be written against specific government securities as authorized under Sec. 2.1-328. When entering a repurchase agreement where delivery is not required, the County shall obtain a safekeeping receipt for the specific securities purchased. Pledged securities under the repurchase agreement must be based on market value, not face value. 6. Risk Risk is significantly reduced by delivery of underlying securities through physical delivery to a third party custodian. Repos shall not exceed 25% of the total investment in the County's investment portfolio on any one day and no more than 15% with any one institution. Losses can be limited in doing repos, if not avoided entirely, by following these four basic _... 12 rules: (1) operate under the terms of a clearly specified and executed master repurchase agreement with Commercial Virginia Banks, (2) properly assess counterparties including their corporate structure and capital strength, (3) use appropriate procedures for obtaining control of securities, and (4) evaluate securities appropriately and monitor them regularly, making margin calls when necessary. III. Prime Bankers' Acceptances Definition: This instrument as defined by the Government Finance Officers Association, Committee on Cash Management in its June 1984 publication Model Investment Legislation is as follows: "Bankers' acceptances typically are created from a letter of credit in a foreign trade transaction. For example, a U.S. corporation planning to import goods from abroad requests that its bank issue a letter of credit on its behalf in favor of the foreign supplier.This letter allows the foreign vendor to draw a draft on the importer's U.S. bank for payment of the merchandise. Upon receipt of this letter and draft, the supplier ships the goods and presents the draft at its bank for discounting, allowing the supplier to receive immediate payment for the shipment. The foreign bank then forwards the draft to its U. S. correspondent. At this point, the draft is stamped "accepted", with the U.S. bank incurring an obligation to pay the draft (now a bankers' acceptance) at maturity. The accepting domestic bank may buy the acceptance, earning the discount between the purchase price and face amount to be reimbursed by the U.S. importer. On the other hand, the acceptance may be sold to a third party, freeing the bank of all but the contingent liability, for which it collects a small fee. In this case the acceptance--- secured by the bank, the goods themselves and the importer---becomes a money market instrument. In 69 years of use in the United States, the bankers' acceptance has experienced no known principal loss to investors. There have been instances of counterfeit and fraudulent acceptances. Government investors are advised to seek bankers' acceptance from money center banks to insure - ;.~.. `" 13 a secondary marketability unless a lesser known local institution offers a yield premium. Maturities range from 30 to 180 days." As a matter of policy, one of the banks should be a Virginia bank and the. County should only purchase bankers' acceptances of banks that have a rating of no lower than B/C as assigned by Keefe Bruyette or the top local banks. The maximum percentage of funds to be invested in any one issue shall not exceed five (5) percent of the total portfolio. These securities will be held by the County's third party custodial agent in the County's name. IV. Prime Quality Commercial Paper Definition Commercial paper has a history that extends back to colonial times, prior to the existence of a banking system in America. The precursor of commercial paper was the domestic bill of exchange, which was used to finance trade as early as the beginning of the eighteenth century. Bills of exchange allowed the safe and convenient transfer of funds and provided ashort-term loan between the time of purchase and payment for goods. As financial intermediation evolved, banks and paper brokers began discounting paper. The supply of negotiable paper was held by commercial banks or by entrepreneurs investing surplus funds. Commercial paper is a short term unsecured promissory note that is generally sold by large corporations. In recent years commercial paper has attracted much attention because of its rapid growth and its use as an alternative to short-term bank loans. The principal issuers of commercial paper include finance companies, nonfinancial companies and bank holding companies. These issuers participate in the market for different reasons and in different ways. Finance companies raise funds on a more-or-less continuous basis in the commercial paper sales in part to support their consumer and business lending. These commercial paper sales in part provide interim financing between issues of long-term debentures. Non-financial companies issue commercial paper at less frequent intervals than do finance companies. ~.,. _ ~, 14 These firms issue paper to meet their funding requirements for short-term or seasonal expenditures such as inventories, payrolls and tax liabilities. Bank holding companies use the commercial paper market to finance primarily banking related activities such as leasing, mortgage banking, and consumer finance. The firms issuing paper obtain rating from at least one of three services, and most obtain two ratings. In most cases, insurers bank their paper one hundred percent with lines of credit from commercial banks. Present day investors in commercial paper include money center banks, non-financial firms, investment firms, state and local governments, private pension funds, foundations and individuals. The County's policy is to invest only in "prime quality" commercial paper, with a maturity of two hundred seventy days or less, or issuing corporations organized under the laws of the United States, or any state thereof including paper issued by banks and bank holding companies. "Prime quality" shall be as rated by the Moody's Investors Service, Inc. within its ratings of prime 1 or prime 2 or by Standard and Poor's, Inc. within its ratings of A-1 or A-2 or by Fitch Investors Service within its ratings of F-1 and F-2. The maximum percentage of funds to be invested in any one issue shall not exceed five (5) percent of the total portfolio; no more than five (5) yercent of the total portfolio shall be invested in any one issue; and the maximum dollar amount shall not exceed One Million Dollars. These securities will be held by the County's third party custodial agent in the County's name. It shall be the county's policy to purchase only Al - P1 paper. Local Government Investment Pool Act Operated Directly By State Treasurer A. The Act and its Purpose 1. Introduction The "Investment of Public Funds and Local Government Investment Pool Act" became effective January 1, 1981 and provides for a local government investment pool which will produce additional revenues for localities on short-term investments. ~' ~ 15 The pooling of funds enables governmental entities to avail themselves of the economics of large-scale investing as well as active, professional management of funds by the State Treasurer's investment staff. As a member of the pool, governmental entities are able to take advantage of the investment facilities of the Commonwealth. Pooled funds are invested in accordance with Treasury Board investment guidelines for the Commonwealth's general fund monies. This encompasses third-party delivery of repo collateral and other professional safekeeping arrangements. 2. Investment Strategies Investments will be made in conformity with Sec, 2.1-234-4 of the Act. There is a minimum participation of $5,000.00. The minimum period for investment is one day. Rates of return vary. Once the account is established, no minimum balance is required. Additional investments can be made in minimum $1,000 increments. The pool provides liquidity to the investor with one-day notice of deposit or withdrawal of funds. Instructions are to be called to the Department of Treasury at (804) 225-3166 before 4:00 p.m. on the business day prior to the actual transfer of funds. 3 . Income Earnings Accumulated income will be credited to each participant's account monthly. Each locality will receive a monthly report which will contain the following information: Average investment balance Average yield Gross investment credit Administrative expenses Net Investment Credit Changes in participation made during the preceding month 4. Reserve for losses ~.°' 16 It is not anticipated that a reserve for losses will be necessary due to restriction on the quality of investments. Amendments: January 28, 1992 December 1, 1992 June 27, 1995 Apri122, 1997 G:V+TIL7RNEYlutvestrnad.poliry.wpd f ~' A-082801-4 ITEM NUMBER '~ 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Funding Request for Citizen Survey COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ' t `~ // ~u.,. i/f "7v t/. t. C~,~.,~ ~~, , ~: h r X31, ~ Y~r w~ , ii /7 s.~ ~ r. ~/ I?y•tJt- •c ln~~cf f'o fir 11 /~ c: ~_ ~, M,n ~• BACKGROUND: At the instruction of the Board, staff administered a Citizen Satisfaction Survey every other year. Since the mid 1990s, staff has contracted with various offerors in the administration of this service. Prospective offerors for the 2001 survey were sent a Request for Proposal (RFP). In the RFP, offerors were instructed on the scope of work and the necessary components for their proposal. Additionally, offerors were informed that selection of the firm would be based on the following evaluation criteria: ^ Vendor's ability, capacity and skill to perform the contract and provide the service required ^ Vendor's ability to perform the required services in acost-effective and efficient manner within the necessary time frame and budget constraints ^ Character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the vendor. ^ Vendor's quality of performance on previous contracts of a similar nature and complexity ^ Cost ^ Quotation completeness (Vendor's thoroughness in addressing the RFP's scope of work) ^ References Evaluation criteria were based on the standards and requirements defined in the RFP's scope of work. Those standards and requirements included: ^ Demonstration of track record for facilitating meetings with citizens and/or government on issues related to government service levels and survey instruments ^ Demonstration of experience with projects that include surveys of government services levels, citizen surveys and presentations to elected officials and/or citizen committee ^ Ability to be flexible and work within a specified time line and maintain fiscal responsibilities ^ Have experience in designing and developing survey instruments, handling focus groups, performing surveys of a similar nature and magnitude. 4~ ~'' .+~ Consult on the instrument design and preparation of the final formatted version of the survey instrument (provide County staff with guidance on instrument development) Pretest to establish average interview time parameter of survey. County wants aten-minute telephone survey Provide appropriate sized random sample of Roanoke County residents with the margin of error being no greater than +/- 4% with ability to provide a breakdown of sample group's characteristics SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Citizen surveys are an important and effective method for monitoring perceptions and beliefs of County residents. Staff from Budget, Community Relations and Purchasing formed a committee to review the five responses received. Firms submitting were BKL Research & Consulting, Martin Research, Inc., the UVa Center for Survey Research, the VCU Center for Public Policy and Virginia Tech's Center for Survey Research. To present an objective recommendation to the Board, the committee ranked proposals based on the evaluation criteria. Interviews were conducted with each of the offerors, after which the committee completed the second and final ranking. Negotiations were then conducted with the top three ranked offerors to secure the best equitable contract for the County. Upon completion of negotiations, a Notice of Award has been issued to Martin Research contingent on the Board appropriating funding for the survey. The survey would be administered to 500 people via the telephone during the months of September and October. A final summary of survey results would be presented to the Board within three weeks of the survey being conducted. The County currently has an instrument from past surveys, which will be updated to ensure modifications to questions are appropriate. The Board has been sent the 1999 survey for their review and comment. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff has negotiated a fee of $12,000 for the survey. Martin Research will work with staff in conducting the survey with a presentation of a finished, quality report to the Board of Supervisors. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Appropriate $12,000 from the Board Contingency Fund for the Citizen Satisfaction Survey. 2. Direct staff to postpone the conduction of the survey. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative One, appropriating $12,000 from the Board Contingency Fund and awarding the contract to Martin Research. Upon completion of negotiations with the top three offerors, the committee found the proposal from Martin Research to be the most equitable for the County. Martin Research conducted the last citizen survey for Roanoke County, which contributes to administration of the survey in a timely fashion. During the final negotiations, Martin Research added services to their proposal without a price increase, making their proposal the most cost-effective and competitive for the services being provided. Respectfully Submitted by Approved by: Kathi B. Scearce Community Relations Director Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (X) Motion by: Minnix to approve staff Church _ X Denied () recommendation Johnson _ X _ Received () McNamara- X Referred () Minnix _ X To () Nickens _ X _ cc: File Kathi Scearce, Community Relations Director Brent Robertson, Budget Director Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Gardner Smith, Purchasing Director .~. ~- . - . c- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801-5.a AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT BASED FINANCING BY VIRGINIA'S FIRST REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SUCH AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors approved the participation of the County of Roanoke in Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority ("the Authority") by Ordinance No. 081898-8, adopted August 18, 1998, as one of the initial members of the Authority; and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested that each of its member jurisdictions authorize an Agreement for Project Based Financing by the Authority; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has determined that it will be advantageous for the Authority to be able to provide for project based financing. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby approves the provisions of the Agreement for Project Based Financing by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority that is attached to the letter from the Authority's legal counsel dated August 16, 2001, provided that the final agreement shall be in a form the same, or substantially the same, as the one attached to that letter. 2. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the Clerk of the Board are hereby authorized, on behalf of the County, to execute and attest, respectively, such Agreement for Project Based Financing by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority in a form substantially similar to the one attached to the above referenced letter; such Agreement to be approved as to form by the County Attorney. ,~.. ~' . 3. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from the date of its passage. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~- Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors CC: File Joseph B. Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney Douglas Chittum, Economic Development Director Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28new-river-park#05a.. doc w AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801-05.b AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE NEW RIVER VALLEY COMMERCE PARK PROJECT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF WYTHE COUNTY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SUCH AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors authorized the participation of the County of Roanoke in the New River Valley Commerce Park Project ("the Project")which was being undertaken by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority ("the Authority") by Resolution No. 081099-1, adopted August 10, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Participation Agreement provides that a participating jurisdiction may withdraw from the Project as the other participants may unanimously agree; and WHEREAS, the County of Wythe, Virginia, has requested to withdraw from the Participation Agreement and the Project and the Authority and the other participants have agreed to allow such a withdrawal; and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested the County of Roanoke, along with the other participating jurisdictions, to authorize an Amendment to the Participation Agreement allowing the withdrawal of the County of Wythe, Virginia. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby agrees to the withdrawal of Wythe County, Virginia, from the New River Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement and to permit some or all of the remaining participants to purchase the shares of Wythe County in the Participation Agreement. 2. The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby approves the provisions of the Amendment to the New River Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement that is attached to the letter from the Authority's legal counsel dated August 16, 2001, provided that the final agreement shall be in a form the same, or substantially the same, as the one attached to that letter. 3. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the Clerk of the Board are hereby authorized, on behalf of the County, to execute and attest, respectively, such Amendment to the New River Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement in a form substantially similar to the one attached to the above referenced letter; such Agreement to be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from the date of its passage. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /~` Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors CC: File Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney Douglas Chittum, Economic Development Director Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28new-river-park#05b.doc ACTION N0. ITEM NO. ~-7 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution approving Agreement for Project Based Financing & Amendment to Participation Agreement for New River Valley Commerce Park COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~c.ra~l' nitJ,.~~~f nt/s:I ~1 CF.~j'%R[- C.+t'.a~~ Cini~ tom' 4aµ~'~ltc'. fit, '~/lC. /'nr•~"Ijto/ r'/ .~kni~~ i~- ~~'P/.~:~~ ~t// A./~~1~ +7ntawcJ /M~fi~i/r/ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: !J The County of Roanoke is one of the initial members of Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority created by the General Assembly to develop and operate economic development projects on a cooperative basis. In October, 1999, the County entered into a Participation Agreement with several other jurisdictions in the Authority for its first project which is known as the New River Valley Commerce Park Project located in Pulaski County adjacent to the New River Valley Airport. The Commerce Park Project is now under development and the lending institutions involved with the project have requested that the Authority agree to project based financing for projects undertaken by the Authority. Project based financing simply means that any bonds issued by the Authority for this project will be secured solely by the assets and the revenues of the project and the contributions by the participating localities. Such bonds will not constitute a debt or a pledge of the faith and credit of any member locality. Further, Wythe County has requested to withdraw from the Commerce Park Project. The Authority and the current bond holder have agreed to this withdrawal and to make Wythe County's shares in the Project available to the other participants in this project. The resolutions presented for Board approval will, respectively, authorize the Authority to enter into project based financing of its projects and permit Wythe County to withdraw from the Commerce Park Project. Ey FISCAL IMPACTS: There will be no fiscal impact beyond the Board's prior agreement to purchase 638.30 of Wythe County's original 9,000 shares. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of these resolutions so that progress may proceed with the financing and development of the New River Valley Commerce Park Project. Respectfully submitted, h B. Obenshain r Assistant County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Vote No Yes Abs Motion by Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens G:\ATTORNEY\J601AG ENDA\NRVCommercePark.Ag rm ntetc. BdReport.8242001.frm 2 ~"~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT BASED FINANCING BY VIRGINIA'S FIRST REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SUCH AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors approved the participation of the County of Roanoke in Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority ("the Authority") by Ordinance No. 081898-8, adopted August 18, 1998, as one of the initial members of the Authority; and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested that each of its member jurisdictions authorize an Agreement for Project Based Financing by the Authority; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has determined that it will be advantageous for the Authority to be able to provide for project based financing. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby approves the provisions of the Agreement for Project Based Financing by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority that is attached to the letter from the Authority's legal counsel dated August 16, 2001, provided that the final agreement shall be in a form the same, or substantially the same, as the one attached to that letter. E-Y 2. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the Clerk of the Board are hereby authorized, on behalf of the County, to execute and attest, respectively, such Agreement for Project Based Financing by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority in a form substantially similar to the one attached to the above referenced letter; such Agreement to be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 3. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from the date of its passage. G:\ATTORNE Y\JB O\Agenda\NRVCommPark.Res o11.8282001.wpd ~- y AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE NEW RIVER VALLEY COMMERCE PARK PROJECT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF WYTHE COUNTY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF SUCH AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors authorized the participation of the County of Roanoke in the New River Valley Commerce Park Project ("the Project") which was being undertaken by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority ("the Authority") byResolution No.081099-1, adopted August 10, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Participation Agreement provides that a participating jurisdiction may withdraw from the Project as the other participants may unanimously agree; and WHEREAS, the County of Wythe, Virginia, has requested to withdraw from the Participation Agreement and the Project and the Authority and the other participants have agreed to allow such a withdrawal; and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested the County of Roanoke, along with the other participating jurisdictions, to authorize an Amendment to the Participation Agreement allowing the withdrawal of the County of Wythe, Virginia. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby agrees to the withdrawal of Wythe County, Virginia, from the New River `~~ ~y Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement and to permit some or all of the remaining participants to purchase the shares of Wythe County in the Participation Agreement. 2. The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby approves the provisions of the Amendment to the New River Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement that is attached to the letter from the Authority's legal counsel dated August 16, 2001, provided that the final agreement shall be in a form the same, or substantially the same, as the one attached to that letter. 3. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the Clerk of the Board are hereby authorized, on behalf of the County, to execute and attest, respectively, such Amendment to the New River Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement in a form substantially similar to the one attached to the above referenced letter; such Agreement to be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from the date of its passage. G:\ATTORNEY\JB O\AGENDA\NRVCommPark.Reso12.8282001.wpd 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: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for Public Hearing and First Reading for Rezoning Ordinances; Consent Agenda COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions, rather approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for September 25, 2001 The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) The petition of Windsor House, Inc. to rezone .398 acres from R-1 Residential District to C-1 Office District with conditions for expansion of a medical clinic and related parking, located at 3500 block of Pinevale Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. MAPS ARE ATTACHED; MORE DETAILED INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: (1) That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for September 25, 2001. i (2) That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Item 1, 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, "' I~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Action Motion by Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens Nb Yes Abs z 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: 71a~/or Received by: ~ Application fee: Q o o 7 7' PC/BZA date: `i ~ y ~ ° `~ Placards issued: BOS date: q laslor 3J " 9'Z~ ~ ~ Case number ~~ ALL f4PPhICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning O Special Use ~ Variance • rd A. Natt, 3912 Electric Road, Roanoke, VA 24018 725-8180 Applicants name/address w/zip Phone Windsor House, Inc. FaY No. 772-0126 O~N1-q.CT: Edward A, Natt, 3912 Electric Road, Roanok~ eA 24018 725-8180 o Owner sname/address w/zip Windsor House, Inc. Fax No. 772-0126 Property Location Iviagisterial District: Cave Spring =aB 0'' P i neva l e Road Community Planning area: Cave S r i - Tai N1ap No.: 077.09-04-36.01 Existing Zoning: R1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: 0.398 acre Existing Land Use: Vacant R~ZONIIVG fi~vD SPECI.~1L, USE PERi~IIT .-~PPLICAiVTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: Cl Proposed Land Use: Ex ans i on o f med i ca I clinic and related ark i Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes ~ No O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQTJ~2ED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No O IF' NO, A VARIANCE IS REQU-IltED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request'? Yes ~ No O Y.4RIANCE APPLICANTS (~ 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 ITENLS ARE NIISSPi tG OR LvCO1VIPLETE. ~ V V V X ~ Consultation X 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan X Application fee X Application X Metes and bounds description X Proffers, if applicable ~ Tustification Water and sewer application Adjoinin; 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. y~ I I.DSQR E, INC. g Owner s Signature Its PfYGld~h~ JUSTIFICPITION FOR. REZONPi (G OR SPECIAL USE PERIVIIT REQUEST ~~ Applicant WINDSOR HOUSE, INC. ~. 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 purposes of the Zoning Ordinance will be furthered in that the rezoning request will allow for the expansion of an existing medical office facility. The medical office is a compatible use in the area and the use of the subject property for parking in connection therewith will have no negative impact on the adjoining properties. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The proposed project conforms to the guidelines and policies contained in the Community Plan in that it allows a use existing between commercial and residential properties to be used in a manner that is not objectionable to the single-family residential properties in the area. Adequate screening and buffering from the parking will be in place. There will be no additional demand for services as a result of the use of the subject property for parking. 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, parkslrecreation and fire and rescue. There will be no impacts on any of the items set out above as the result of the rezoning. PROFFERS Address of Subiect Property: 0 Pinevale Road Intersection of Pinevale Road and Lawndale Road Cave Spring Magisterial District Roanoke County Tax Map No.: 77.09-04-36.01 Applicant's Name: Windsor House, Inc. PROFFERS F~ The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. That the subject property will be used solely for parking purposes in conjunction with the medical office use on Tax Parcel 77.09-04-36. 2. That screening and buffering will be in accordance with the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. - \VOLLY\SYS\ofnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Silberblatt-Windsor House PROFFERS.doc ~?~ AUG-15-2001 09 ~ 01 05TERHOUDT PP I LLAf~AhJ MATT ae fsa roacw• - ~ r1 ~ ~' ~ ~ ,.., . 3231 ~ ~ 3 ~ 319 0 ~ ~ ° 13. °' 0 3235 ° 319 ~ 2~ 107 106 A_2 106 ~ '~ `~ ~ B ~ 14_1 ~, ~ ~- ~ ~ 106 ~ ° 1~. `~ N 1~. A-1 ° "' 14 . 3521 ~ 3511 35-Q3 ~ X07.7 106.7 ~ 06.7 rneVa~e Ra, 8052 80.52 203.46 ~~ ~~ 33. 3516 ~, ~ 3~.1 _ 3 4 . ~~ ~ 2so 1 0 ~~~~ ~ ~ N N ~~ 3522 c~ 2 ~~ ~` ~~ 3 ~~ ~~ W-1 '~~ 6, W_2 ~ ~ ~' 8.4 72.03 _ 6'r ~ -,~~~ 'I NORTH '`'cp\ 6'~ ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants Name: Windsor House, Inc. DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Existing R1, Proposed C1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 77.09-4-36.01 F-/ Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: LEGAL DESCRII'TION 0 Pinevale Road Intersection of Pinevale Road and Lawndale Road Cave Spring Magisterial District Roanoke County ` 77.09-04-36.01 Windsor House, Inc. METES AND BOUNDS BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Pinevale Road at the northeast corner of Lot 2, containing 0.650 acre (Tax No. 77.09-04-36); thence leaving Pinevale Road S. 60° 25' 00" W. 173.50 feet to a point; thence N. 28° 24' 20" W. 25.00 feet to a point; thence N. 20° 47' 45" W. 145.46 feet to a point on the southerly line of Pinevale Road; thence with the same S. 77° 26' 19" E. 203.46 feet to a point on the westerly side of Pinevale Road; thence S. 29° 25' 20" E. 32.23 feet to the point and place of BEGINNING, and containing 0.398 acre, and being designated-as Lot 1 (Tax Map No. 77.09-04-36.1} on "Topographic Survey Made for Windsor House, Inc. of Lots 1 and 2, Dell F. Critcher and Floyd T. Critcher Subdivision (Plat Book 15, Page 123), prepared by- David A. Bess, L.L.C. under date of July 19, 2001. \UOLLY\SYS\oCnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Silberblatt-Windsor House LEGAL.doc ,~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~-' j AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AMENDING NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR SECTION 12-125. "REMOVAL OF INOPERATIVE MOTOR VEHICLES, ETC.," SECTION 13-14. "UNLAWFUL ACCUMULATIONS OF TRASH AND GROWTH OF WEEDS; PUBLIC NUISANCES AND ABATEMENT THEREOF," AND SECTION so-21. "ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES" OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ` 6/ ~~c•.° `.sJrne.~-1 c~n.J ttr.'/''.rro i'v /n,~o--:~.~r_ f : ~L cs, rC:_S[~.,a- z 41eJ mPc~v /r +,) a, L (l l/s~: •~-; e~.: J W.f~•h 't"7jL (`L>~/h ,r.~ tr ~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board ofSupervisors of Roanoke County has raised concerns about the delays involved in nuisance enforcement procedures followed by County staff, and discussed these concerns at a work session on August 14, 2001. County enforcement staffs are following the specific time periods established in the County Code. The County Code provisions are based upon State enabling legislation authorizing certain enforcement measures "after reasonable notice." This proposed ordinance reduces the time period for compliance by the property owner after notification by County enforcement personnel from fifteen days for inoperative motor vehicles and zoning ordinance violations and fourteen days for weeds and trash violations to ten days. These notice provisions attempt to balance the legitimate private property interests and due process of law mandates enshrined in our Constitution and limiting government in its interactions with its citizens, with the necessity for prompt action to abate or remove imminent and immediate threats to the public arising from public nuisances. It is believed that these significant reductions in the notice and compliance period will not be deemed unreasonable by a court of competent jurisdiction. "Nuisance" is defined in Section 15.2-900 of the Code of Virginia, as including, but not limited to "dangerous or unhealthy substances which have escaped, spilled or been released or which have been allowed to accumulate in or on any place and all unsafe, dangerous, or unsanitary public or private buildings, walls, or structures which constitute a menace to the health and safety of the occupants thereof or the public." Further this nuisance must pose "an imminent and G:\ATTORNEY\PMM\AGENDA\nuisancetimeperiod lOdaysord.rpt.frm 1 ~~ immediate threat to life or property" before the county can abate, raze or-remove such public nuisance, and bring an action to recover the necessary costs incurred for the provision of public emergency services reasonably required to abate any such public nuisance. Previously the Board had directed County staff to work with County citizens to resolve such nuisance problems and to accomplish compliance through voluntary measures, where possible, and to utilize adversarial judicial proceedings only in extreme cases of a wilful noncompliance. From the comments of the Board at the work session, and by the adoption of this ordinance reducing notice and compliance time periods, staff understands the Board direction for a more aggressive enforcement posture by County staff FISCAL IMPACTS: Reducing the time periods required for notice to property owners to abate nuisances, coupled with more vigorous and aggressive enforcement activities by County staff, will require additional staffand resources to be effective. Additional staffand resources will require additional funding. The size and scope of such additional funding are dependent upon the degree of enhanced enforcement activities directed by the Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This ordinance was requested by the Board of Supervisors. It is recommended that the Board consider the adoption of this ordinance at first reading on August 28, 2001. Second reading of this ordinance is scheduled for consideration on September 11, 2001. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Vote No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens G:\ATTORNEY\PMM\AGENDA\nuisancetimeperiod lOdaysord.rpt.frm 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, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE AMENDING NOTICE REQUIREMENTS OF ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR SECTION 12-125. "REMOVAL OF INOPERATIVE MOTOR VEHICLES, ETC.," SECTION 13-14. "UNLAWFUL ACCUMULATIONS OF TRASH AND GROWTH OF WEEDS; PUBLIC NUISANCES AND ABATEMENT THEREOF," AND SECTION :30-21. "ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES" OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 12-125. "Removal of inoperative motor vehicles, etc." of Chapter 12. "Motor Vehicles and Traffic" be amended to read and provide as follows: ~~~~ Sec. 12-125. Removal of inoperative motor vehicles, etc. (a) The owner of the property on which there is an inoperative motor vehicle, trailer, or semitrailer that is not fully enclosed or completely shielded shall remove the vehicle or comply with the screening or enclosure requirement of this article within fiifl~ecrr{~.rj ten (lo) days after being notified by the zoning administrator. (b) Whenever the property owner fails to comply with this article within the £~fteerr(~j ten (l0) -day period of this notice, the chief of police or zoning administrator may remove the inoperative motor vehicle, trailer or semitrailer from the property to the impound lot of the authorized towing service. (c) Whenever the chiefofpolice or zoning administrator removes an inoperative motor vehicle, trailer, or semitrailer from a property, such vehicle may be disposed of after giving an additional fif~.rj ten (10) days notice to the last known owner of the vehicle. ~~~~ 2. That Section 1s-14. "Unlawful accumulations of trash and growth of weeds; public nuisances and abatement thereof' of Chapter 13. "Offenses-Miscellaneous" be amended to read and provide as follows: Sec. 18-14. Unlawful accumulations of trash and growth of weeds; public nuisances and U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\CODE\nuisance.ord.wpd 1 ~^ i abatement thereof. ~~~~ (d) In addition to any applicable criminal sanctions provided in this code, whenever the enforcement agent determines that a public nuisance exists upon any parcel, he shall notify the record owner of such parcel of such fact by certified mail at the owner's last know address, as shown by any source available to the agent, and such notice shall constitute, for purposes of this section, due legal notice as made and provided bylaw. The notice herein required shall direct that the public nuisance be abated within ten (10) days following the mailing. Incase the owner's address is unknown or cannot be found, the enforcement agent shall post the notice herein required at a conspicuous place on the parcel on which the public nuisance exists and the posting shall constitute, for purposes of this section, legal notices as made and provided by law. ~~~~ (h) No more frequently than twice a year, the enforcement agent shall hold hearings at the Roanoke County Administration Center for the purpose of hearing objections to and comments upon reports and proposed assessments under this section, of correcting any mistakes or inaccuracies in the reports and of confirming the same. (i) Not less than ten (10) days prior to a hearing provided for in subsection (h) above, such reports and assessment lists shall be posted at the front door of the County Administration Center with a notice of the time and place the enforcement agent will conduct the hearing on the reports and assessment lists, and the enforcement agent shall send by certified mail to each owner, at his address as determined from county records, a notice of the time, place and subject matter of the hearing. The notice shall advise the owner of his right to object to, be heard upon, and to contest the confirmation of the report and assessment. The notice shall further provide that, upon the confirmation by the enforcement agent of the reports of abatement costs and service charges the same shall constitute special assessments against the owner and the parcel, a personal obligation of the owner and a lien upon the owner's parcel from the date and time of the recordation of a notice of lien, and bear interest at the rate often (10) percent. There shall be included with the notice a statement to the owner of the abatement cost, service charge and accrued interest. (j) At the hearing provided for in subsection (h) above, the enforcement agent shall U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\CODE\nuisance.ord.wpd 2 ~T hear any objections which may be raised by any owner liable to be assessed and may confirm, modify or reject the reports and assessment lists as he may deem appropriate and send those confirmed to the director of finance and the treasurer for collection of the respective special assessment. (k) With respect to all such accounts remaining unpaid ten (10) days after the confirmation of the reports and assessment lists, the enforcement agent shall cause a notice of the lien of the special assessment prepared by the county attorney to be recorded in the clerk's office of the circuit court of the county. The county attorney may take appropriate steps, including a personal or in rem suitor action, in the appropriate court to enforce the lien to satisfy the special assessment. ~~~~ s. That Section s0-21. "Enforcement procedures" ofAppendix A -Zoning Ordinance be amended to read and provide as follows: Sec. 30-21. Enforcement Procedures. ~~~~ (B) Property owners, permit applicants, and/or establishment owners/managers, as applicable, shall be notified in writing of violations of the provisions of this ordinance. The administrator shall, in the notice of violation, state the nature of the violation, the date that it was observed, and the remedy or remedies necessary to correct the violation. The administrator may establish a reasonable time period for the correction of the violation, however in no case shall such time period exceed firf'teeir"(-~ ten (10) days from the date of written notification, except that the administrator may allow a longer time period to correct the violation if the correction would require the structural alteration of a building or structure. C) If the violation is not corrected within the time period specified in the first notification, a second written notice shall be sent. The second notification shall request compliance with these provisions within a period not to exceed seven (7) days. ~~~~ 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\CODE\nuisance.ord.wpd ~ H- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE 082801-6 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, THE ORCHARDS, AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN EASEMENTS, EITHER BY DONATION OR BY PURCHASE WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public sewer system to The Orchards community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public sewer system over ten years at an interest rate of 8%; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on August 14, 2001, and the second reading was held August 28, 2001; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public sewer extension G:\BGARD\2001 Wug28\8-28orchards#06.doc for The Orchards community. The total construction cost of this public sewer project is estimated to be $144,000, to be initially financed as follows: Citizen Participation (12 at $6,050 each) $72,600 Advance from the Public Works Participation Fund $71,400 TOTAL $144,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $71,400 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "The Orchards Sewer Line Extension Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Orchards Sewer Line Extension Project Area is created for a period of ten (10) years. Any owner of real estate within this service area may participate in and benefit from the public sewer extension to this service area by paying at a minimum the sum of $6,800 ($6,050 toward construction costs plus, plus $750 toward the off-site facility fee) said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public sewer extension. 3. That the Board authorizes and approves the payment by the property owners in the project service area who elect to participate on or before November 27, 2001 of their portion of the cost of extending the public sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: G:\BOARD\2001 Wug28\8-28orchards#06.doc 2 (a) That $5,000 per property owner/residential connection may be financed for 10 years at an interest rate of 8% per annum. Down payment of $1,800 will be applied first to the off-site facility fee, and then toward the construction cost. (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 November 27, 2001 deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $9,062.50 ($7,562.50 construction costs) 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 twelve (12) 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 acquisition and acceptance of the necessary water and sewer line easements, as shown on the attached map for the Orchards Project, either by donation or G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28orchards#06.doc 3 by purchase pursuant to paragraph 6 of this ordinance, is hereby authorized across the following properties, referenced by tax map number: Address Tax Map Number 5011 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-35 5019 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-34 5027 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-33 5035 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-32 5043 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-31 5051 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-30 5125 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-22 5137 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-21 5133 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-40 5141 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-41 5149 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-42 5203 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-43 5209 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-44 5047 Labradore Drive 40.09-03-06 5214 Orchard Hill Drive 40.10-03-60 5220 Orchard Hill Drive 40.10-03-59 6. That the consideration for these easement acquisitions 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, or the amount determined by an independent appraisal; and 7. That the consideration for these easements shall be paid from the Sewer Repair and Replacement Fund; and 8. 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, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28orchards#06.doc 4 A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\Z001 \Aug28\8-28orchards#06.doc ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~~°" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIlZGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MF.F.TTNCT nATF.~ August 28, 2001 A(TF.NT~A TTF.M~ Second Reading of Ordinance Authorizing Creation of and Financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project -The Orchards (''OTTNTY AnMTNTSTRATnR'S C'.nMMF.NTS~ RAC'.K(TR(~T TM~~ The Orchards Subdivision was originally developed in the late 1970's with sewer service provided by individual on-site septic systems. Subsequent sections of the "The Orchards" have been developed with public sewer, which presently serves those properties as shown on the attached location map. Since that time, Utility Department staff has periodically received inquiries as to the feasibility of extending public sewer service due to inadequacy or failure of septic system drainfields. In response to property owners' requests for sewer service, Utility Department staff has worked diligently during the last 2 or 3 years to explore various sewage conveyance options and arrive at a workable solution. Utility Department staff determined that the cost to extend public sewer to serve interested property owners would be $6,800.00 per property. A letter dated July 6, 2001 was sent to 35 property owners on Jonathan Lane, Harvest Ridge Road and Appletree Drive. From this mailing, Utility Department staff received thirty-three responses (12 in favor and 21 not interested). Based on this response and the location of interested property owners, the proposed service areas were established as shown on the attached location map. First reading of the subject ordinance was held on August 14, 2001. 4T IMMARY (~F TNFnRMATT(~N: Providing public sewer to the interested property owners would require construction of approximately 2,150 feet of sewer line extensions at an estimated cost of $144,000. This construction cost includes installation of sewer laterals, which would serve all properties in the service areas. In order to make the necessary connections to the existing sewer system, it will be necessary to obtain several sewer line easements across properties located within the unsewered portions of The Orchards, as identified in the attached ordinance. The attached ordinance establishes special sewer service areas for the project with each participating, property owner paying their share of the cost through a special connection fee of $6,800. This connection fee includes the fair share of the construction cost ($6,050.00) required to extend the public sewer system to serve the 21 existing residences within the proposed service areas, as well as, 50 percent of the off-site sewer facility fee of $1,500. The ordinance also establishes a method of financing up to $5,000 for the initial participating property owners. k~ The proposed connection fee of $6,800 would be applicable only if property owners financially commit to participate in the proposed project within 60 days of enactment of the ordinance. Al .rn t;v . 1: Establish special sewer service areas, which could potentially serve 21 existing residences, as indicated on the attached sketch. Approve construction of the gravity sewer lines required to connect the four (4) proposed service areas located along Jonathan Lane, Harvest Ridge Road and Appletree Drive as shown on attached sketch. The estimated cost to construct this alternative is $144,000. For those property owners, who choose to not connect during the initial sign-up period, the construction cost would have a one time 25 percent increase (based on 5% annual increase for five years). Under this alternative, the total cost for initial participants would be $6,800 with later participants paying $9,062.50 (based on the present off-site facility fee of $1,500). Alternat;ve 2: Establish a larger, special sewer service area, which would encompass all unsewered properties within The Orchards and potentially serve an additiona141 properties. The Utility Department would then extend sewer service to additional properties at the time it is requested. The sewer connection fee for these properties would be established at $6,800 for initial participants and $9,062.50 for later participants. Alternative 3: Do not approve request for extension of public sewer service to the proposed service areas of The Orchards. If Alternative 1 is selected, the total construction cost would be $144,000. The twelve (12) interested property owners would contribute $72,600. A transfer from the Public Works Participation Fund would fund the remaining $71,400. Staff recommends that Alternative 1 be approved and that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached ordinance after the second reading. Said ordinance shall authorize construction and financing for the Local Public Works Improvement Project, The Orchards Sewer Extensions. Staff also recommends that the Board authorize Utility Department staff or its agents to negotiate with property owners to obtain the necessary sewer line easements within the project area. APPROVED: Gary Rob~rtsah, P.E. ,%Elmer C. Hodge `~ Utility Di ctor County Administrator AC'TinN VnTF, Approved ()Motion by: No Yes Abstain Denied O Church Received O Johnson Referred McNamara _ to Minnix _ Nickens /i µ-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FORA LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, THE ORCHARDS, AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN EASEMENTS, EITHER BY DONATION OR BY PURCHASE WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public sewer system to The Orchards community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public sewer system over ten years at an interest rate of 8%; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on August 14, 2001, and the second reading was held August 28, 2001; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public sewer extension for The Orchards community. The total construction cost of this public sewer project is estimated to be $144,000, to be initially financed as follows: U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\U7'ILITY\orchards.ord.wpd µ-I Citizen Participation (12 at $6,050 each) $72,600 Advance from the Public Works Participation Fund $71,400 TOTAL $144,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $71,400 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "The Orchards Sewer Line Extension Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Orchards Sewer Line Extension Project Area is created for a period of ten (10) years. Any owner of real estate within this service area may participate in and benefit from the public sewer extension to this service area by paying at a minimum the sum of $6,800 ($6,050 toward construction costs plus, plus $750 toward the off-site facility fee) said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public sewer extension. 3. That the Board authorizes and approves the payment by the property owners in the project service area who elect to participate on or before November 27, 2001 of their portion of the cost of extending the public sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (a) That $5,000 per property owner/residential connection maybe financed for 10 years at an interest rate of 8% per annum. Down payment of $1,800 will be applied first to the off site facility fee, and then toward the construction cost. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\orchards.ord.wpd 2 ~{-~ (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 maybe 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 November 27, 2001 deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $9,062.50 ($7,562.50 construction costs) 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 twelve (12) 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 acquisition and acceptance of the necessary water and sewer line easements, as shown on the attached map for the Orchards Project, either by donation or by purchase pursuant to paragraph 6 of this ordinance, is hereby authorized across the following properties, referenced by tax map number: Address Tax Man Number 5011 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-35 U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\orchards.ord.wpd 3 5019 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-34 5027 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-33 5035 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-32 5043 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-31 5051 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-30 5125 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-22 5137 Jonathan Lane 40.09-01-21 5133 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-40 5141 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-41 5149 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-42 5203 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-43 5209 Appletree Drive 40.10-01-44 5047 Labradore Drive 40.09-03-06 5214 Orchard Hill Drive 40.10-03-60 5220 Orchard Hill Drive 40.10-03-59 }~-1 6. That the consideration for these easement acquisitions 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, or the amount determined by an independent appraisal; and 7. That the consideration for these easements shall be paid from the Sewer Repair and Replacement Fund; and 8. 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. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\orchards.ord.wpd 4 ^ I ~ (~ ~ ~ _ ~ (~ Q ~ 7 0 0 ~ • ~ CD ~ r-F ~-F ~~ ``V mm \V (D ~ T ~ O O ~ ~ ^ -F ` J ..p ~~~ ~ ~ H x ~ ~ z ~' ~ ~~ 5 ~~a ~ b ~ o z x ~ ~ ~ trJ ("1 H v O 4 O l D /~~ cn 5 't ` ` ` cT S ~ ~ ... ;;i:..:,; ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ 0 0 o s _''-;#;%:s'!5~:";: to $ w b %i _rgi~iy_i:. :FiC: O .~.::-..._::..._.. g $ Paw ~ _ - _;:::::'-a o` s ..ma~yy-,,. g O '.° (a0 ' O $ U1 U7 g - p 'fSF..Eei •'~g': o N W o w S Cn b W A g ~ '' _-i;:`yr"4"- ~~•'~..•.iii-• 7 ~ ~i-S.& a b -N ,O ......._ .. .. N m ~N J ~ . ::.:~~::•ri}?..F:_:iii'i •i:_i~'iZr. O :~F:Gi.•n&S J0 W :::;,tl> co '''g o Ut b W ~O ~ b N ~ oyy ~ ~ ~. ~ ~'L $ ~ ~~ ~W K O b 8 CJ7 $ ~ R~`.:#~::::: ~ ~~ O ~ O S CT $~ $ $ >.:: a ~ '~ N w j % s $ a o~ Q g p u W ~ ~ `>`` ~;i!IS363~ o ~ N ~n o D iMP o ~ s ~ ~'.':~..b'.::i::~::::: b!T fT S ~O g N b o j p ~: ~'~~~~• • ri ~}3i ~ i =: O i : $ o . :_ s _ ••~~ $ : _~_ $ o $ ~ w ~ $ _.. "~=iii_:~: ~ U p ._....._.. ..._. :i U '-~g 3: b ' ~ $ ~ ~ t D OD ~ a b ~ $ ~ ~ rte.} ~ {~ '~ S '. ~ £7 A r ~ o N . ~. ~1 . ~ `~ $ ~... ~„ S . a~ .. a f b 0 j 8 $ j Oo W b O ~ b ; v m y (D ~ $ 00 ^' j N ~ ~~ g S ~ ~ ~ JD N ~ ° J ~ ~ CJ~ ^o S ~ ~. o o° w ~ ~ a o ~ O~ CT7 $ m ~ N _ O ~ ~ Qc1 ' ° $ ° ~ J a O $ S (,fi N ~ `^Y a° NW S ~ s ~ ~ a o - - 00 g j _ _ _ a:Ai~i 'a {,~ Q~ ° w ~ ~ '. ~ .: ~3 b ~ w ° • ~.,~ ..:... eai;a~ddV 5801 ~2! ~ ~ H;u ~°~~ Dr ~ > >o 098 v b ~ b N 4ao;~~oW S °w c~$ 07 ~ W ~ ~~ o O $ b ~ b b Vt $ N ~ $ 0 ~~ A ~v a _ ~ a 0 $ $(J~ ~ ~$ A (D u b W w A ~ (JA1 . ~ b N ~w O Q~j .~ „~ R ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER ~~''~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 SUBJECT: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. BUILDING CODE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS (FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS The four year term of David M. Shelton, Jr., Alternate, Fire Code Board of Appeals will expire September 23, 2001. 2. GRIEVANCE PANEL The three year term of R. Vincent Reynolds will expire September 10, 2001. 3. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (not appointed by District) The four year term of Stephen A. Musselwhite will expire September 26, 2001. Mr. Musselwhite resides in the Vinton Magisterial District. The unexpired four year term of Ronald M. Martin, whose term will expire September 26, 2002. Mr. Martin, who resides in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, passed away recently. 4. LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS ADVISORY COUNCIL The one year term of Steven L. Harrah expired on March 31, 2001. 5. SOCIAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD The unexpired four-year term of Raymond Denny, representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is vacant. Dr. Betty McCrary, Director of Social Services has received notification from Mr. Denny that he resigned effective January 17, 2001. The term will expire August 1, 2004. ~. i . The four-year term of Betty Lucas, Cave Spring Magisterial District, will expire August 1, 2001. Ms. Lucas has served two consecutive terms and is NOT eligible for reappointment. ~~ ~.•~'' SUBMITTED BY: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE No. Yes Abs Church _ _ _ Johnson _ McNamara- Minnix Nickens .T~---~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801- 7 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J-CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. that the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for August 28, 2001 designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 10, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes for July 24, 2001 and July 30, 2001 2. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority 3. Acceptance of a $6,700 TRIAD grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services to assist with the Roanoke Valley TRIAD program. 4. Acceptance of $695.01 into the Police Department budget received during the Police Department Open House. 5. Acceptance and appropriation of a $34,628 Bureau of Justice Assistance block grant for law enforcement support. 6. Acceptance and appropriation of $2,711.28 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of EMS Training Equipment. 7. Acceptance and appropriation of $4,585.50 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of vehicle extrication equipment for Hollins Fire and Rescue. 8. Request to approve the annual performance contract with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare. 9. Acceptance and appropriation of $12,000 School Grant from the Department of Education to improve outcomes for students who have a .~ full range of abilities and needs. 10. Acceptance and appropriation of $15,675 tuition for the Schools Preschool Program. 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, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors CC: File Chief Ray Lavinder, Police Department Chief Richard Burch, Fire and Rescue Department John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Linda Weber, School Superintendent Patricia Radcliffe, Roanoke County Schools Beth Umbarger, Roanoke County Schools +k ~~_~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 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 August 28, 2001 designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 10, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes for July 24, 2001 and July 30, 2001 2. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority 3. Acceptance of a $6,700 TRIAD grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services to assist with the Roanoke Valley TRIAD program. 4. Acceptance of $695.01 into the Police Department budget received during the Police Department Open House. 5. Acceptance and appropriation of a $34,628 Bureau of Justice Assistance block grant for law enforcement support. 6. Acceptance and appropriation of $2,711.28 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of EMS Training Equipment. 7. Acceptance and appropriation of $4,585.50 grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health for reimbursement of vehicle extrication equipment for Hollins Fire and Rescue. 8. Request to approve the annual performance contract with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare. 9. Acceptance and appropriation of $12,000 School Grant from the Department of Education to improve outcomes for students who have a -~,f a full range of abilities and needs. 10. Acceptance and appropriation of $15,675 tuition for the Schools Preschool Program. 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. ~i July 24, 2001 435 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 July 24, 2001 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, 2001. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Minnix called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Vice-Chairman Joseph "Butch" Church, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Joseph McNamara, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Kathi B. Scearce, 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 TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Hodge added (1) Item E-2, request to enter into an agreement between July 24, 2001 437 members of the Roanoke-Plant Safety, Health,-and Environmental Committee - -- SupervisorChurch moved to accept the $5,000 and appropriate it to the Utility Department. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 2. Request to enter into a Cooperative Agreement between the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority and the County of Roanoke concerning Explore Park A-072401-2 This was a joint meeting with the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA). VRFA members present were: Alfred C. Anderson, Wick Anderson, Trixie Averill, T. A. Carter, Polly Johnson, Stan Lanford, Jack Loeb, Ralph Smith and Roger Ellmore. Mr. Hodge announced that an agreement has been negotiated by the attorneys for the Authority and the County, and the purpose of the meeting is to execute the contract. He advised that Jack Loeb, chair of the Virginia Recreational Facilities, Roger Ellmore, Explore Park Executive Director and Stan Lanford, chair of the River Foundation were present. Mr. Hodge highlighted the benefits to both Explore Park and Roanoke County of the partnership agreement. He advised that the County will provide Explore Park with operational assistance and the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism will be actively involved in the planning of events for the park. Mr. Ellmore advised that Virginia's Explore Park opened in 1994 and has enjoyed a steady growth as a tourism destination and recreation resource for residents. July 24, 2001 439 withdrew the amendment-when Supervisor-Johnson advised he would-not support it Supervisor Nickens moved to (1) authorize the County Administrator to execute the cooperative agreement between the County and the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority; (2) transfer $200,000 from the County's tourism budget to the VRFA; (3) appropriate an additional $100,000 from the General Fund Unappropriated Balance to the VRFA; and (4) appropriate $250,000 from the General Fund Unappropriated balance as a loan to the VRFA. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: Supervisor McNamara The Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority, on motion by T. A. Carter, moved to approve the agreement. The motion carried unanimously. VRFA Chair Jack Loeb thanked everyone for their support of the agreement. Authority member and Roanoke City Mayor Ralph Smith also expressed appreciation and indicated there was support in the City to join with the County in helping Explore Park. 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 August 28, 2001 The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None July 24, 2001 441 Gity-#o amend-their Sewer Use Standards: Roanoke City-amended their ordinance to-- include the provisions of the proposed amendment to the Roanoke County Sewer Use Standards. The proposed County ordinance conforms to the form and intent of the Roanoke City Ordinance. Mr. Robertson explained that the ordinance is also amended to include failure to allow or complete required inspections as a Category I defect, subject to all other provisions of the odinance. The current ordinance did not clarify the penalty for failure to allow or complete required inspections to determine if inflow or infiltration of stormwater is entering the public sanitary sewer from the building or property. Supervisor Johnson requested a status report on the Sewage Treatment Plant Upgrade. Mr. Robertson responded that they have reached agreement with the contractor who has agreed to pay $290,000 in corrections. They are still in negotiations with the design engineer and will report back. Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for August 14, 2001. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing the vacation, quit-claim and release of a ortion of an existing 20 foot water and sanitary sewer easement across Tract ~ property of Strauss Construction Corporation in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. July 24, 2001 443 ordinance. -A#irst-reading of-this ordinance-was held-on July 10 2001; and asecond - --- reading was held on July 24, 2001; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject real estate (portion of waterline easement) is hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interest in real estate renders it unavailable for other public uses; and, 3. That, subject to the following condition, a portion of a 20' water and sewer easement across property of Strauss Construction Corporation, referenced on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 96.02-01-45.2, and described as the remaining portion of Tract 1A, containing 13.842 acres, on Cotton Hill Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of Roanoke County, shown shaded and designated as "Portion of Existing Water & Sewer Easement (Plat Book 15, Page 63) to be Vacated" on the plat dated April 26, 2001, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., Engineers-Surveyors- Planners, acopy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, be and hereby is vacated; and, 4. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, Strauss Construction Corporation shall be responsible for all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to, any costs associated with relocation of the lines, surveys, publication, and recordation of documents; and, 5. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this vacation, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 2. Second reading of ordinance authorizing the vacation of sanitary sewer easement, two drainage easements, stormwater management access easement, and pump station and access easement in Buckland Mills Subdivision, Plat Book 21, page 169; Plat Book 24" page 1~9 ,. Hollins Magisterial District. Arnold Covey, Community Development Director 0-072401-4 Mr. Covey advised there were no changes to the ordinance since the first reading. There was no discussion and no citizens to speak. July 24, 2001 445 WHEREAS, the 20'-sanitary sewer easement on Lots 9-and 10 and aportion - of Lot 8, has not been used for the installation of sanitary sewer lines or related facilities, and will not be required for such purpose in the future; and, WHEREAS, the 13.45' by 20' portion of the 20' drainage easement on Lot 12 has been alternatively created as a portion of a "NEW 13.45' STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EASEMENT" on "NEW LOT 12-A" on the above-described Resubdivision Plat of record in Plat Book 24, page 19; and, WHEREAS, the 13.45' by 15' portion of the 15' drainage easement on Lot 12 has been alternatively created as a portion of a "NEW 13.45' STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EASEMENT" on "NEW LOT 12- A" on said Resubdivision Plat of record in Plat Book 24, page 19; and, WHEREAS, an alternative access to the Stormwater Management Easement has been, or is to be, granted to the Buckland Mills Homeowners' Association from Virginia Secondary Route 797 (Barrens Road) over the existing 30' Roadway, referred to as Barrens Road (Private Portion), shown generally on said Resubdivision Plat recorded in Plat Book 24, page 19, and over the "NEW 15' ACCESS EASEMENT" created and shown on "NEW LOT 11-A" on the Resubdivision Plat in Plat Book 24, page 19; and, WHEREAS, by the Resubdivision Plat in Plat Book 24, page 19, a "NEw PUBLIC UTILITY LOT" for the pump station has been created as a separate lot and has been conveyed, together with a new access easement, to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County by deed dated July 3, 2001, in compliance with Roanoke County regulations as a preferred alternative to the `Pump Station and Access Easement' on Lot 11 to be vacated; and, WHEREAS, these vacations will not involve any cost to the County and will not interfere with, but will enhance, the provision of public services, and have been approved by the affected County departments; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 10, 2001, and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the "20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT (P.B. 21, PG. 169) TO BE VACATED" on Lots 9 and 10, and a portion of Lot 8, Buckland Mills, shown hatched on Exhibit `A' attached hereto, said easement having been dedicated and created as "NEW 20' S.S.E." on the Subdivision Plat for BUCKLAND MILLS, dated November 12, 1998, and of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 21, page 169, located in the Hollins 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), subject to the conditions specified in this ordinance. 2. That the 13.45' by 20' portion of the 20' drainage easement shown cross-hatched on "NEW LOT 12-A" on the above-described Resubdivision Plat Showing New Lot 11-A, New Lot 12-A, and New Public Utility Lot, dated January 12, 2001, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 24, page 19, a partial copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit `B', said easement having been dedicated and created as "NEW 20' D.E." July 24, 200 447 - - 8. -Tha# #his 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 Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Clean Valley Council Supervisor Nickens nominated Dennis "Chip" Harris to serve atwo-year term expiring June 30, 2003. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-072401-5 Supervisor Church recognized Dorothy Barr, his recent appointee to the Social Services Advisory Board. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLUTION 072401-5 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 July 24, 2001, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through July 24, 2001 449 Hodge-and--the-planning staff-.review-this and report back. -- IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Nickens moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Revenues and Expenditures for the eleven months ended June 30, 2001 6. Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability der Investment and Portfolio Policy, as of June 30" 2001 7. Accounts Paid -June, 2001 8. List of changes to the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System in June, 2001 9. Quarterly Report for the Day Reporting Program. 10. Report on Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission 11. Proclamation signed ~ the Chairman 12. Report of Claims Activit for the Self-Insurance Program for the 4t" Quarter. July 24, 200 451 visitation-program to identify relevant issues, poten#ial for expansion-and other opportunities - for revenue and job growth; (2) District Breakfasts held with the Board of Supervisors members who will meet with the business leaders in their respective magisterial districts; (3) An Electronic Newsletter to all County CEOs or General Managers that will cover items of interest for the participating members. Ms. Cox advised that of the 606 responses to the survey, 185 indicated they were willing to participate in a half-day meeting. Supervisor Church commended Ms. Cox and the Economic Development staff for their work and felt the program will create positive returns. Supervisor Minnix suggested recognizing one or two businesses every month. In response to questions from the Board members, Ms. Cox responded she would check the survey see if there were both large and small businesses responding; that the Certificate of Appreciation program for new businesses is still ongoing; and Mr. Chittum advised they are working with Tanglewood Mall and would discuss with them Supervisor McNamara's suggestion of sponsoring a dance at the mall. It was the consensus of the Board to go forward with the program. b. Center for Research and Technology Uadate The work session was held from 5:15 p.m. until 5:45 p.m. and was presented by Doug Chittum, Community Development Director Arnold Covey, and Assistant Director George Simpson. George Simpson reported that the County has extended the water and sewer that goes under the interstate, they have completed site improvements worth $600,000, and they will be ready to finish the water and sewer in August. The road improvements are listed on the six year plan, but funding will not be available until 2005. July 24, 200 453 _IN RE: __CLOSED MEETING _ __ __ _ _ The Closed Meeting was held from 6:15 p.m. until 6:30 p.m. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-072401- 6 Supervisor Minnix advised that he would abstain from the vote since he was not present for the Closed Meeting. At 7:00 p.m., Supervisor Nickens moved to return to open session and adopt the Certification Resolution . The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Minnix RESOLUTION 072401-6 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 Nickens to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Minnix July 24, 2001 455 Second readin of ordinance to obtain-a SSpecial Use-Permit to-develo a golf course on 364 acres located on 3608 Pitzer Road, SE, Vinton Magisterial District, won the etp ition of Nathaniel C. Haile. The following petition has been continued by the Planning Commission: Second readin of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located on the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the etp ition of American Tower Corporation. The following petition has been withdrawn by the petitioner. Second readin of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a cluster subdivision on 14.25 acres located between Merriman Road and Crystal Creek Drive and 600 feet west of Cartwright Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the etp ition of Caldwell White Associates. 1. Second readin of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit and rezoning from C1-C to C1-C to amend conditions to construct two offices on the back of the existin building and ex and the arkin lot on .5 acres located at 3716 Colonial Avenue, Cave S rin Magisterial District, upon the etp ition of Paychecks Plus. Janet Scheid, Senior Planner July 24, 2001 457 .NAYS: _ None _ _ _ __ __ __ ORDINANCE 072401-7 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A .599-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3716 COLONIAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 77.18-3-24) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C1- C TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C1-C, WITH AMENDED CONDITIONS, AND GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO EXPAND THE EXISTING PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE, UPON THE APPLICATION OF PAYCHECKS PLUS WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 26, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held July 24, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 3, 2001; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing .599 acres, as described herein, and located at 3716 Colonial Avenue (Tax Map Number 77.18-3-24) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C1-C, Office District with conditions, to the zoning classification of C1-C, Office District with amended conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Paychecks Plus. 3. That the current owner of the property requests the following amendment to the proffered conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors by Ordinance 121598-7, which the Board hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall be limited to a maximum of 30 square feet in area with soft lighting. (2) No additional exterior lighting shall be allowed. (3) Uses shall be limited to accounting/financial services businesses. (4) Parking lot access shall be off Thompsons Lane and shall be limited to a maximum of ten spaces. (5) Parking shall be confined to the rear yard and side yard facing the C-2 building (on Thompsons Lane). (6) Hours of operation shall be limited to 7 am until 9 pm, 6 days a week (Sunday off). (7) All external changes to the building shall be residential in appearance. (8) Any additions to the building shall be approved only through the Special Use Permitting process. July 24, 200, 459 Ms. Scheid advised that this request is to construct a new convenience store and expand a gasoline station. The proposal will demolish a circa 1940 building, replace it with a 3,600 square foot modern convenience store and add two fuel pumps to the existing two pumps. The business has functioned as a small country store for over sixty years with gasoline available since 1998 and lies in a large Rural Preserve designated area. At the Planning Commission, the architect explained that the proposed building will have the character of a country store, all merchandise sold excluding gasoline will be stored inside, and that septic drainfields and well are in place. In response to a question from Supervisor Johnson, Ms. Scheid explained that the petitioners had to get three variances from the Board of Zoning Appeals before coming to the Planning Commission. Supervisor Church noted that this project will provide a much needed service in the community and moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None ORDINANCE 072401-8 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CRAW- MART, INC. FOR A NEW CONVENIENCE STORE AND GASOLINE STATION TO BE LOCATED AT 5944 CATAWBA VALLEY DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 13.00-1-56), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Craw-Mart, Inc. has filed a petition for a special use permit for a new convenience store and gasoline station to be located at 5944 Catawba Valley Drive (Tax Map No. 13.00-1-56) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 3, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on June 26, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this July 24, 2001 4~ 1 __ AYES:... Supervisors John on, McNamara,_Church, Nickens,-Minnix - NAYS: None ORDINANCE 072401-9 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PLAY ITAGAIN SPORTS FORA RETAIL STORE ON .601 ACRES LOCATED AT 4347 VALLEY AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 87.08-5-2), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Play It Again Sports has filed a petition for a special use permit for a retail store on .601 acres located at 4347 Valley Avenue (Tax Map No. 87.08-5-2) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 3, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on June 26, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on July 24, 2001. 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 Play It Again Sports for a retail store on .601 acres located at 4347 Valley Avenue (Tax Map No. 87.08-5-2) 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: (1) Access to the property will be from a private drive that serves the Lowe's parking lot, as shown on the site plan drawn by Craighead & Associates, dated 5/25/01. No access shall be allowed from either Valley Avenue, or U.S. 220, Franklin Road. 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 Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Russell Robinson, 4393 Pitzer Road, expressed concern about the approved I-73 corridor which will go through his property and will make it very difficult for July 24, 2001 463 _Glenvarhiddle-School. renovations-.are on ime-and under budget.- Supervisor Nickens: He asked Mr. Hodge and staff to review the proposed development that is in both Bedford and Roanoke County to see if the proposal could be improved. His primary concern was the density of the development. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Supervisor Minnix adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. to Monday, July 30, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. for an economic development work session in the fourth floor conference room. Submitted by, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Approved by, H. Odell Minnix Chairman July 30, Zoos 465 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 July 30, 2001 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being an adjourned meeting from July 24, 2001 for the purpose of an economic development work session. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Minnix called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Vice-Chairman Joseph "Butch" Church, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Joseph McNamara, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board IN RE: DISCUSSION Mr. Hodge offered a list of suggested discussion topics. The Board members had a general discussion on economic development that included regional cooperative efforts such as the joint fire and rescue program with the City of Roanoke, and the Economic Development Work Plan for fiscal year 2001 and Five Year Business Plan which July 30, 2001 467 following recorded vote; AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-073001-1 At 8:20 p.m., Supervisor Minnix moved to return to open session and adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLUTION 073001-1 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-082801-7.a ITEM NUMBER ~ y~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 14, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the Industrial Development Authority COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Industrial Development Authority Atthe August 14, 2001 meeting, Supervisor Minnix nominated Billy Branch to serve another four-year term. His term will expire September 26, 2005. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the above appointment be confirmed. Submitted by: Approved by, Mary H. Allen CMC Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve Church _ X Denied () staff recommendation. Johnson _ X Received () McNamara- X Referred () Minnix _ X _ To () Nickens _ X _ cc: File Douglas Chittum, Economic Development Director Industrial Development Authority File M• - t A-082801-7.b ITEM NUMBER: 'S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance and appropriation of a TRIAD grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services to assist with the Roanoke Valley TRIAD program. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: // BACKGROUND: The Roanoke County Police Department applied for a TRIAD assistance grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services and the Virginia Attorney General's Office. This grant is to support the work of the Roanoke Valley TRIAD program. TRIAD is a nationally recognized alliance of senior citizens and law enforcement officers, for the purpose of enhancing the quality of life for all senior citizens. The grant has been approved by the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services for the amount of $6,700.00. FISCAL IMPACT: The grant is for $5,025.00 in federal funds, and $1,675.00 in local matching funds. The total amount is $6,700.00. The criteria of the grant requires a match of local funds and is fora 12 month period. The local match will be taken out of existing Police Department funds. No additional funds will by requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of the grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: James R. Lavinder lmer C. Hodge Chief of Police County Administrator c .~``.- ..J ACTION Approved (X) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: McNamara to approve staff recommendation. CC: File Ray Lavinder, Police Department Brent Robertson, Budget Director Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ X _ Johnson _ X _ McNamara- X _ Minnix _ X _ Nickens X ~. . , A-082801-7.c ITEM NUMBER: ~"~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Request to appropriate $695.01 received during the Police Department's Open House COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: At the Police Department's Open House in October 2000, money was received from the sale of food, tee shirts, and other events. The Finance Department needs approval from the Board to place this money into a Police Department account for future spending. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Police Department received $695.01 from sales during the Open House and cannot use these financial resources until the Finance Department receives approval from the Board of Supervisors. FISCAL IMPACT: Appropriation of $695.01 will be added to the Police Department's budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of Open House proceeds of $695.01 SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: Ray Lavinder ~ ~~~~-~-= ~" ~-~~- Chief of Police lmer C. Hodge County Administrator r' A ~ ~ + `~ Y • J- ACTION VOTE Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve No Church Yes Abs X Denied () staff recommendation. _ Johnson _ X Received () _ McNamara _ X Referred () _ Minnix _ X To () _ Nickens _ X CC: File Ray Lavinder, Police Department Brent Robertson, Budget Director Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer !` .. ... A-082801-7.d a ITEM NUMBER: ~"'~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) block grant by the Police Department for law enforcement support. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Roanoke County Police Department applied for a BJA grant to provide law enforcement support. The grant will be used to provide overtime funds for additional community policing efforts. The grant has been approved for the amount of $34,628. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Program is administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The purpose of the LLEBG Program is to provide units of local government with funds to underwrite projects to reduce crime and improve public safety. The Police Department applied for funding and received approval. FISCAL IMPACT: The final award amount is for $34,628 in federal funds to be matched with $3,848 in local funds. The local match will be provided from existing Police Department funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance and appropriation of the funds. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: Ray Lavinder ,, ~ C.~ -~„ ~~- ~-~~.~~ Chief of Police lmer C. Hodge County Administrator .. ,.. ,T 5 ACTION Approved Denied Received Referred To (X) () () () () Motion by: McNamara to approve staff recommendation. CC: File Ray Lavinder, Police Department Brent Robertson, Budget Director Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ X _ Johnson _ X _ McNamara- X _ Minnix _ X _ Nickens X ..~,' .. A-082801-7.e ITEM NUMBER ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Grant Funds for reimbursement of EMS Training equipment for the Fire & Rescue Department. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: `Th;, ~4~.;:~,nr.,t i1 /in~r%s-t. _.,~ fr,- .mac":.n /•:~., ,:J. S /c:/~1 c.,s~ BACKGROUND: Special training equipment is required for the County's Paramedics to ensure that their advanced life support (ALS) skills are maintained at a high level of proficiency. The training equipment allows the Department's Paramedics to perform a number of ALS procedures in a training environment. Adequate training equipment is essential to ensure the highest level of care to the citizens and visitor of Roanoke County. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Health, Office of Emergency Medical Services awarded the Fire and Rescue Department a matching grant ($2,711.28) to purchase EMS Training equipment. The Training equipment consists of two (2) ALS baby manikins and one (1) ALS adult manikin. These manikins are designed to allow IV cannualation, endotracheal intubation, chest decompression, and EKG rhythm interpretation. FISCAL IMPACT: The Department has budgeted funds for the 50% match that the State requires for the Grant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of the reimbursement funds in the amount of $2,711.28 to the Fire and Rescue Department's budget. t ., , .~, .. ~.i~' Submitted by, Richard E. Burch, Jr. Chief, Fire and Rescue Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge O County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve Church _. X - Denied () staff recommendation. Johnson _ X Received () McNamara- X - Referred () Minnix - X - Nickens X To ( ) CC: File Rick Burch, Fire and Rescue Department Brent Robertson, Budget Director Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer ~.. A-082801-7.f ITEM NUMBER .~~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Grant Funds for reimbursement of vehicle extrication equipment for the Hollins Fire and Rescue Station COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Over the last few years the number of severe vehicle accidents have increased along the I-81 corridor in the Hollins area. These accidents have required specialized rescue equipment to extricate victims trapped in crushed vehicles. Grants have been requested to purchase new extrication equipment (Jaws of Life) for the first due fire engines around the County. The first grant has been approved for the equipment to be placed at the Hollins Fire and Rescue Station. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Health, Office of Emergency Medical Services awarded the Fire and Rescue Department a matching grant ($4,585.50) to purchase vehicle extrication equipment. This equipment will allow rapid extrication of victims when the squad units are unable to be sent to the scene of an accident. This equipment will be utilized by both the volunteer and career staff. It is hoped that other grants will be approved to continue the placement of such equipment throughout the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The Department has budgeted funds for the 50% match that the State required for the Grant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the appropriation of the reimbursement funds in the amount of $4,585.50 to the Fire and Rescue Department's budget. ~- . ' , '~ Submitted by, Approved by, G~ ~~~~k s~ ~`MV ~~~ Richard E. Burch, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Chief, Fire and Rescue County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve Church _ X - Denied () staff recommendation. Johnson _ X Received () McNamara- X Referred () Minnix _ X To () Nickens _ X _ CC: File Rick Burch, Fire and Rescue Department Brent Robertson, Budget Director Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer .+ A-082801-7.g ITEM NUMBER ~-g AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE AGENDA ITEM: August 28, 2001 Request to Approve the Annual Performance Contract with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare (BRBH) serves as the local Community Services Board (CSB) serving Roanoke City, Salem, Botetourt County, Craig County and Roanoke County. They provide the services prescribed by the State's Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Services. The local CSB can function in one of three methods as prescribed by the State, but must serve each of its member localities in the same manner. Administratively, the localities recommended, and last year each of the localities approved, the "Operating CSB" form whereby the CSB employs its own staff and provides services directly or through contracts with other providers. It is not a city or county government department and the powers and duties are enumerated in Section 37.1- 197.A of the Code of Virginia. The other options would have been to establish the board as an "Administrative Policy CSB" whereby the employees would be city or county employees, or as a "Policy -Advisory CSB" which has no operational powers or duties. Staff felt that the present working arrangement provides the most comprehensive and effective service delivery system for our region and this was the method approved. Each year, BRBH is required to provide a Performance Contract with the State Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services depicting the services that they anticipate providing to their member agencies. A copy of this agreement has been placed in the Board Reading File for your review. The County of Roanoke provides $117,755 in its FY 2001-02 budget for our contribution ,. ~=8 toward these services. This money is leveraged by BRBH to match other state and federal monies to provide or purchase services needed by residents of our community. As one of the localities making up the BRBH, Roanoke County is being asked to approve their plan for FY 2001-02. FISCAL IMPACT: None. $117,755 is included in the County's FY 2001-02 Budget as our contribution to BRBH which is part of the local money included in their plan. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the FY 2001-02 annual performance contract of Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare with the Virginia Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse Services. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~ c` ~ir~,~:~ John M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant Administrator Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve Church _ X Denied () staff recommendation. Johnson _ X Received () McNamara-. X Referred () Minnix _ X To () Nickens _ X Abs CC: File John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare File A-082801-7.h ITEM NUMBER ~'~ MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance by the Schools and appropriation of $12,000 grant funds for Special Education Programs COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Roanoke County Schools has partnered with the Virginia Institute for Developmental Disabilities at Virginia Commonwealth University to apply for a U.S. Department of Education Model Demonstration Project Grant. The grant, entitled School By School is designed to develop a model school of reform that focuses on improving the outcomes for all students who have a full range of abilities and needs. The three schools involved are W. E. Cundiff Elementary, Glenvar Middle and William Byrd High schools. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The amount allocated for each school is $4,000 or $12,000 for the first year. Additional allocations will be negotiated. FISCAL IMPACT: None, no local matching required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Appropriation of the $12,000 School by School Grant to the Grant Fund. Gl~~ r~- Dr. Patricia Radcliffe Director of Pupil Personnel and Special Education Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve Church _ X _ Denied ( ) staff recommendation. Johnson _ X Received ( ) McNamara- X _ Referred ( ) Minnix _ X _ To ( ) Nickens X cc: File Patricia Radcliffe, Roanoke County Schools Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board A-082801-7.i ITEM NUMBER -j -"' V MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Appropriation of Preschool Program Funding COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: R~-~t BACKGROUND: Roanoke County operates 11 preschool classrooms. Each program provides services for 14 preschool children. Prior to August 2000, the program served only children with special needs. Currently 7 classrooms are integrated serving 7 children of normal development funded by the Preschool Initiative Grant. Four classrooms remain segregated. Licensure from the Department of Social Services has been obtained to operate as a State Licensed Preschool Program to enable the acceptance of tuition paying children. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Opening 28 slots to preschool children who pay tuition will provide an inclusive setting in the remaining four segregated classrooms. The proceeds from the tuition will be used to expand and enhance our program. FISCAL IMPACT: The tuition received will offset the cost of the program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Appropriation of $15,675 received from tuition students to the Preschool Program. Mrs. Beth Umbarger Curriculum Supervisor ACTION No Approved (X) Motion by: McNamara to approve Church _ Denied ( ) staff recommendation. Johnson _ Received ( ) McNamara_ Referred ( ) Minnix _ To ( ) Nickens Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator cc: File Patricia Radcliffe, Roanoke County Schools Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board VOTE Yes Abs X _ X _ X _ X _ X • r L.E.A. P. Program Yearly Projected Budget Estimated Annual Revenue: $15,675.00 Current Enrollment: Weekiy Tuition: Weeks per Year: Enrollment Fees: five children $85.00 36 $75.00 per child Expenditures: Food: $1,350.00 Materials: $14,325.00 *This budget is based on current enrollment. J {~ ~~GOUNTysc zo yo Q O ~ ~ 9C~~ht £,xceC~~~'~ OFFICE OF DIVISION SUPERINTENDENT 5937 Cove Roan. Roanolze, Virginia 24019 Phone: (540) 562-3700 Fax: (540) 562-3994 July 13, 2001 Dear Board Members: _.•• ~ ,,~ -I Attached you will find an information sheet regarding the proposal to include Roanoke County Employees' children in our preschool program. This endeavor began as an effort to provide inclusive settings for the preschool children with disabilities enrolled in our school system. With the reauthorization,of IDEA in 1997, the mandate emphasized the importance of educating preschool children in natural enviromnents with normally developing peers. We have accomplished this in seven out of eleven of our preschool classrooms by educating together seven children with disabilities and seven "at risk" children funded by the Preschool Initiative Grant. We are unable at his tune to accept any additional Preschool Initiative children due to funding. During a brainstorming meeting with Dr. Weber several months ago, we decided to investigate the idea of including children of employees' to provide an inclusive envirorunent for the remaining four classrooms. We also noted the great benefits this would provide to employees in terms of dzeir children being in a quality preschool program near their place of employment. During the March 19, 2001 board meeting, I presented this concept to you and requested permission to pursue State Licensure, which is necessary to operate this program. I have obtained licensure for Bonsack, Green Valley, Mt. View and Back Creek as State Licensed Preschool Programs. This expansion of our Preschool Program will not only provide inclusive environments for our preschool children with disabilities but affordable and quality preschool experiences for the children of our employees. As all clvldren learn and grow together, it is my greatest hope that this program will promote diversity and teach acceptance, thereby breaking down the barriers of discriminations that sometimes exist in our community. Sincerely, ~;u^,^ Beth Umbarger Curriculum Supervisor . ,. ,,j - I ~ Roanoke County Employee's Preschool Program Information Sheet • The preschool program will follow the Roanoke County School Academic Calendar for the 2001-2002 school year. • Locations: Back Creek, Green Valley, Mt. View and Bonsack Elementary Schools • Hours of preschool operations will be from 7:30 a.m.-2:15 p.m. each day • After school care will be provided for tuition preschool children only unti14:30 p.m. • Children must be three years old by September 30th of the attending year. • The teacher to student ratio will not exceed 16:3 • Instruction will be designed to address the cognitive, social, emotional and motor development of the children ~~~ • Tuition will be $~-per week excluding summer break and breaks which exceed 5 or more days • Tuition will be paid monthly. • The cost of meals and snacks are included in the child's tuition • Transportation will be provided by the parents • If more then 28 applications are submitted each year, a lottery system will be used to determine enrollment. "` GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Unaudited Balance at June 30, 2001 $7,931,381 6.29% July 24, 2001 Appropriation to the VRFA -Explore Park ($100,000) July 24, 2001 Loan to VRFA -Explore Park (250,000) Unaudited Balance at August 28, 2001 $7,581,381 6. ~ Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $7,581,381 $7,581,381 6.02 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 2001 - 2002 General Fund Revenues $126,027,248 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $7,876,703 Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance Approved By, v~ Elmer C. Hod e g County Administrator I f CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Unaudited bal ug 6,2001 Lloyd Propert ug 14, 2001 Solid Waste C Transfer from Unaudited bal Respectfully ~ Danial Morris Director of Fir /V-3 RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2001-2002 Original Budget Balance at August 28, 2001 Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance $100,000.00 $100,000. Approved By, / Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator N-~ `~ FUTURE SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget $670,000.00 Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund 1,113,043.00 FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00 me 23, 1998 Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund 321,772.00 FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00 FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (1,219,855) 780,145.00 ovember 9, 1999 Savings from 1998-1999 debt fund 495,363.00 FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (1,804,427) 195,573.00 FY 2001-2002 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (465,400) 1,534,600.00 Unaudited Balance at August 28, 2001 $9,110,496.00 served for Future School Operations FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation y 11, 2000 SW Co Regional Stormwater FY2001-2002 Original budget appropriation y 1, 2001 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle Unaudited Balance at August 28, 2001 $1,500,000.00 (290,000.00) 1,500,000.00 (1,858,135.00) 851,865.00 * Of this amount $736,680 is currently being used for the lease purchase of refuse vehicles and will be repaid within two years. Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance Approved By, r/ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator w 0 N \ ~ .. +~ ~ ~ 4w ~ A ~ ~ O ++ ~ c ~ o v v O y ~p ~ 7 C ~ ~ y Chi eS ~ u ~ ~ i. CC RS L ti O C~ Q W O C O U Q ~~ z ~--~ O M O TS 'S7 C W 0 ~L Q1 C O O ~, 0 f~ CC ~ A °' O C ..+ y L ~ CC ~ y ~ p ^ OJ O bA 'O 'C C 7 W L G O O ~--~ w N-5 d' t~ O M O ~O O a\ O N E oO O C\ [~ O V M O 'V ~--~ 00 M O M v1 a, ~ [~ M C1 O v'i O O o0 M O O O~ O~ V N O co ~O O M M ~n M ~n v~ ~O G1 ~--~ ~n M O~~ M t~ ~ ~--~ M~ O O O N~ .-. .--~ Q~ ~ (~ .--~ [~ Vl V') CO 00 V'1 C1i CO Vr M O O\ N 00 ~O M N M O l~ ~--~ N ,--~ .-r .--~ ~--~ M V'1 M N M 0o M O o0 O V N O O ^' ~O ~n [~ ~ V N a1 ~ ~ v'i M V ~ ~O ~O ~--~ a, v'~ v~ o0 0o O O O a\ M 00 -+ O N O 00 \O Vl O ~ M o0 N ~ ~ ~--~ 'J N Vr M ~ OO O o0 ~ N O ~ d' O ~ M ~ O O ~ oO a1 a, O ~ O o0 a\ M O N M ~--~ N ~ 00 V ~O I~ ~ co a, ^' O ~ O ~ ~ v'~ [~ O O v~ O O M ~ ~t ~O ~n O M a1 0o N [~ N ~ M ~ O ~ 00 0o O oo M ~ ~ M N ~ a1 ~ ~ ~ O oo ~ O N O v'i ~ v'~ a1 M O U ~t ~D ~n N ~ ~n N co ~--~ N -~ N ~ O ~ M 7 00 l~ oo ~O M M M O ~ ~O O ~ [~ [~ M M V .-. 01 OO ~ ~--~ ~ 00 M ~ ~ ~--~ N N ~ ~--~ O [~ N vl N ~ ~ 4\ ~ ~"~ N 7 N Vl ~ ~ ~--~ '-. N ~--i .--~ N ~ N N .--~ vl N N l~ N ~ OO O ~--~ 00 l~ M V~ O O M ~--~ ~n ~O M 7 ^" .~ [~ .N- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ vl N ~ ~ ~ ~ Vl M ~O ~ 01 ~--~ Vl 7 M I~ ~ v'~ ~O I~ Vl ~--~ Vl d' ~t N N l~ N ~D .--~ l~ ~ M 00 M r 00 ~--~ Vl .--~ 01 00 .-r V' O\ M O M ~ Vr 00 l~ ~O 00 l~ M ~--~ V1 ~ ~ O 00 O 00 O\ 7 N ~ 00 00 ~ .-• Ct ~ V O ~O O O~ N ~--~ ~--~ v'~ Q1 M v'~ v1 ~ [~ ~--~ O N vi N ~ U '~t ~O V M l~ N M N •-" N ^~ ~O N O ~--~ V ~ v1 N N ,--~ N •--~ N ~--~ M N N l~ N ~ OO O a1 ~' V1 M ~ d' 01 ~--~ vl ~' M f~ ~ V) \O l~ ~ ~--~ Vl V ~ N N ~ .--~ 00 l~ ~ M ~ N ~ .-. [~ 7 M 00 M l~ 00 .--~ V') ~--~ O\ 00 ~--i ~ 01 M O M ~ ~ 00 O O M ^r ~n \O l \O oo l M ~--~ v'i ~ 7 O c0 O o0 a1 ~ N ~ 00 00 .--~ .-• ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~--~ l~ N O AO O D1 N ~--~ ~ v'~ av M vl v~ ~ [~ ~--~ O N vi N ~ av ~' ~ V V'1 ~O v~ 00 ~ ~--~ M [~ N M N ~--~ N ~-» ~ N O ~--~ ~ ~/'~ v1 N N v~ N ~~ ~--~ N rr N ~--~ M N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O oo O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O~ V O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~--~ N I~ ~ O O O O O O vi a, O O O N ~n O O O O O O V oo 'J ~--~ O ~n O ~ O O ~ 7 Vl N ~ ~' 00 O ^~ Vl V1 M M V' N cr ~ Vl V O M ~O M v1 ~--~ 7 M V~ ~O O~ l~ ~ '-' N N ~ N vl N .-. [~ D1 M_ N N V ~ ~ .--~ ~ Q\ .M-~ N ~ ~ ~/'~ M ~O O O a, B O O (~ O O O O ~~ O O~ M~ O ~O O O~ N N O O K oo ~n O ~n O M [~ ~O ~ ~ O o0 ~ [~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ D, 00 l~ GO M O\ ~/1 ~ 00 O ~/'1 M a~ ~ ~ ~ °~ m ~ a ~ Lr. '~ ~ ',~' ~ .OV. m ~ ¢ v ~ ~a ~ F-' ~ iC ~ p ~ O ~ w ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ 'O ~ . v ~ sue. 'b ~, ~"' ~ 4-, f ~ F" ca~i ~ x O f ~ a0i by a~'i v' ~O„ a~ ~ °~ bA ~ v] v] °~ ¢ [-' p . ~ ~ .-~ F-' ,~ u ~ v y rn N cC ~ '~ ~ ,~ sw-• ~ p V] G~-~ '~ ~ O . ~ ~ p U O 'O O Y a" a`i ~ '~ ~ ~ a a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ X O p U ~' w ~ ~ w w .C ~ ~ a~i ~ °~ ~ °~ O ~ ~ ca ~ •:: ~ rj ~ ~ m ~ O ,,,a ~ Q. [~ U -~ Y o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~° ~ as w a~ ~ a~ ~~ (~ N w ~ ~ ~ ca ~ cc ~ . ~ ~ O ai •Y ~ ~ a~ ~_ 'a ~ rn mss. ~ ~ ~ a0i ~ ~ ~ v O U ~ w ~ ` + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cc o O ~ ~ O ~ .~ p ~ '~ ~ c~a a~ a~i ~ .~ ~ a~i a~i ,~ .~ a~ ~ ~ O ~ a~ .~ a~ j ~ ~ x a, a. a, w a U w w~ H~ x H o¢ .-~ a.:~. U a. ~. x x U c~ x~ a: z v~ 3 0~ w o N O_ ^~ N M ~' O ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O\ O ~--~ N V t~ 00 ~ O •--~ N o0 O ~-+ ~ O ~-+ Ct M O N ~ M N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M V V~ ~h v'~ v'~ v'~ Vr 'v rV ~ 00 00 ~ a1 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 _N ~ ~ ~ ~ O +-~ M A C \° ~ M ~ y ~ o ~ ca > eC 7 6. ~ ~ ai CC ,a 7 r .--i V N . . C O~ CC CS M ~ ~ N CC L'i a~ O C O w O C O ~--~ O _~ M r O v w 0 .~ a~ CL, C O O Y ~. 0 w +.+ CC vi Q ~ O C ~. y Y. ~ ~-, y ~_ _ C y O a a~ bD N ~--~ 7 d' O\ .--i 7 R 7' O~ 00 .--i U r N r N .~ ~. 0 F- c ~, C7 I M N ~ O _ z L '~ C a ri/ R L C. Y O O .-i 'C r_O r 0 ~ N 3.. M O Y _ r O ~ O O N 'O 'O 'J Cd N i ti L4 N CJ N ~]y C C C y L:.: W L.I.± 0 ~ V bA ~ ~ ~ O ~ 'G ~ ~ h u y ~ ~ ~ L m v LL N-s ~- °J a ~ O ~ ~ ~ _ 0 C 7 o dD ^ O ~ Z C ~ 9 o ~ L~ ~ n m ~ ~ ~ ~ a G i O V CL C 3 ~ C m CC ~A 3. ".1i L: C~ 0 r.+ Cr" O U 0 N N J ,~ z N 6! u ~ L L ~ ~, y a p '~ O y ~ L O O ~ [~ O_ H M r O 'O 'O C W O O ~L a O G O O L O W d p~ u = C 'D L C O e~ a+ ~ y = u O W d ~ L 3 t +' O 'O O C Q x .. bL Z3 O CO w L L' ~~ ~./ O O ~--~ O ~° Y ^~ N l~ .ti O N M O M M a\ pp [~ ~ ~ ~O N ~D M O O ~ M a, rV O Op o0 00 •-~ l~ r •--~ O N v'i ^ ~ ~ ~ O ~; 00 O ~• N M O O o0 ~ N O O ~ Ct M t~ ~n `p •~ a, p o0 00 00 0o ryj t~ M ~O V O 7 M a, ~ ~O V ~p ~ .-. .--• ~--i •--~ ~--i •--~ ,.y .-. 1~ M ~--~ ~ O M (~ 00 Vr 7 C\ N 00 00 [~ ^ ~D ~--~ a1 v'~ ~O 00 . ~. O l~ N v1 M N 00 N ' O o0 ~--~ 01 ~--~ O N N ^ N v'~ N M 7 N ~ ~ ~--~ M M O Vr OO 'V Vr N ~ v ~ ~O N oo ~O ~O ~n .--i G1 N ~O ~O 7 ~t G\ D, c0 ~J a, r a, 00 O 00 M oo l~ r a\ V~ O N 00 ~ OO O ^ OO M M I~ 00 V~ ~--~ O M M 7 ~ O [~ ~--~ O\ 00 l~ (~ ~ 00 ~-. ,--~ O ~t 01 7 O ^ ~O l U'r l O M M a1 ~ ~--~ 00 a1 ~ 00 .--~ [~ ~ O ~ O l~ N O O ~ [~ a1 ~ 00 ~ [~ O o0 [~ ~ ~ ~ 7 v'i -•+ oo O ~' N M M M ~O N N 00 d' N M ~ ~ M ~O 00 O ~O O M ~/1 V1 l~ '!~ d' ~/1 00 ~"~ 00 N [~ N N o0 ~O Vl a1 N 01 N M M av l [~ v'~ N V') ~ l~ O ~O O ~ ~O l~ ~-i l~ ~ M 00 r~ M N ^ C~ N N ~--~ t~ N ~O ~ O O 00 f~ ~ 1~ -~ --~ ~i' M O I~ N 00 M ~T ~ ^ O l~ oo ~ ~ DO O N ~O a1 O ~ ~ ~--~ O O M N ~ ~ N N D1 D1 N OO 7 M O ~ ~--~ M M ~ ~ ~--~ v~ N ~O ~ 00 O ~ O M ~O a, O C1 O O ~ O M ~ a1 O ^ ~--~ ~ ^-~ d' ~ ~ 0o v~ D1 M ~ v1 •-• ,--~ a, ~ ~ O o0 .-• ,--~ ~ N N O [~ v1 00 O ^~ v'~ 00 1~ OV O V'1 ~D 00 ~--~ O ~!1 ~ ~ ,--~ ~ V ^ 00 ~ M M l r o0 ~t o0 00 N ~n l ~ d~ ~O oo M ~ a1 ~ 7 N N M N O M a\ M a, N ~ ~ O oO ~ ~ ~ ~"~ O M O\ '--~ ~ O ~O r ~ N ~ M M O O V ^ ~ O N ^ 7 ~ N M 7 .-. . ti ~ ~ .-r r-. .--~ ~ 0 0 0 O [~ a1 ~ ^ O ~O O [~ O O ~n oo O ~O O~ O O O O O O N N ~O O H O O~ ~ O N ~ v'~ 0 0 7 O O N O O O O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 d' ~ DO O N O N oo [~ V) ~• ~n ~ v'~ O~ ~n O O [~ O v'i [~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~U ~O O ~ ~ ~--~ ~O 00 N ~ ~t N M D, ^ O D, ~ 00 O 00 00 00 ~ N M R N oO l N [~ ~--~ ~ N 00 '~ ~ ~ O O O~ rt ^ N M ~--~ 01 ~ N N 01 -- ~--i N ~ •--~ M ~O ~ O O ^~ 00 O\ ~O .--~ v'> ~ ~O O l~ ~ O M o0 ~ ~ O 1~ 00 M ~ ~ 7 ~O ~O O O t~ ~O O ~O ~--~ oo ~--~ D1 O N N~ M N~ 7 M O 01 ~--~ M M M ~ N ~ O ~O .~ O M M ~n (~ N ~ O d' O O N O oo ~O a\ O ~--~ ^ ~ ~ oO o0 l~ 00 ~-+ D\ O~ ~n oo M _ oo ~ N [~ a\ ~--~ O oo N N M l~ ~ 00 O ^ O O a, O~ N v'i t ~ [~ 00 ~O O N ~O ~ M ~O r+ l~ O~ M O 00 00 ~ 00 00 N O~ .-r l~ ~O l~ M t~ a\ a\ T ^~ O a1 O ~--i N a, D, ~ N D1 G1 O oo a, v'~ ~ O l~ M d' ~--~ O~ l~ Vl M M ~ V'1 N V) M M O\ O\ \O M O N ^ ~ O ~--~ M M ~--~ M 7 M rr •--~ ~--i 1n M ~--~ 1n ~ ~--~ '-i ~--~ N O ~f• M l~ ~O M O~ ~O M a, N O ~ M M [~ 00 O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 7 l~ ~ ^r 1n D\ N .~ M ~ d' ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ l~ ~ O 00 O O Vr O O O O ~ ~ .-~ ~n ~ .--~ ~t ~n O a, vi N ~ M M a\ O o0 ~ M ~--i O o0 N O O O N N I~ ~ vl N N oo M N N l~ D1 00 O Q O M v'~ v'~ ~ M O N O O O M ~O ~n 00 ~--~ [~ [~ N ~--~ 7 ~ ~O O o0 .~ N ~--~ r-+ a n N O 00 a1 U t~ O O M 00 01 l~ vl v1 00 O ^ .-~ '-+ ~O N l~ 00 O [~ ~ O oO Vr M ~ ^ [~ O O a\ 7 M ~O ~O M ~C _ O~ O ~ O~ ^ v~ O N '~ l~ ~--~ O\ ~O .--~ l~ ~ vl 00 N N .--i O N ~+ N ~O D, ~ l ~ [~ t~ M N ~--i ~7 O O~ 00 v~ N ~--~ V O O I~ ~--~ ~ O~ N ,.y i. •+ .~ .~ 'C ue Q _ L". s , ~ ~„ C O U ~ ~ O ~ a~ 6~ v ~ ~. b U w L ~ ~ y~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ O ~- ~ ' ~ ~ N N ~ ~ ~~ ~ 3 , ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ 3 ¢~ ~ ~o ~ ~~. ~. ~ U ~. . . ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w oU a, ~ . ~ c o OU ~~~ ~ = ~" ~ ~, ~. a, ~, ~ ~. ~x~ ;¢ s~ x ~ ~ ~ ~• . N . s. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~., W ~ N ~ O N ~ C ~ ~ cC O ~ .V. c3 S1.. ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ 7 ..y O O N cC O ~+" UQ M ~ ~ ~ ~ i~W~CJ CJ ~ r C '" C/) ~ U ~ O, A ,~C W O U o ~-1LL O R O r . r .-.~ . N M O O O ~--~ N O O N M V O O O O N M I ~/1 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~--~ M V v'~V" l~ OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O _ _ _ O O O N N O O M M M M O O O O V ~ ~7 tY V ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ V'1 ~/1 ~/1 Vl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'V O N ~ O N O ~ ~ 04 ~ 1 ~ Y a~+ ~ 4.. ~ ~ 3 ° b~D o ~+ ~ b a+ ^i C ~ 7 L x ~~y ~ m 6J ~ OY y ri O C~ .~ Qr O 1. CL ~..~ Q O .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M '^~ O i. ~ ~ O V ~ C.' 'B y ~ ^ W ~ ~ o C~ C3 ~i, a°, ~ a ~ W ^ r~+ L O G ~ '~ ~ •--~ O O U c = ~ ~, ~. Y~ p W ~ w O "~ .C V O N N z N "3 L v ~ O C ~ O u ca C 0~ C v v L CC ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ y 3 L a> u ~- C ~ Lc7 ~ ~' pp u C C ~p i C R a+ _ y ~ u O Lz] y ~ L 7 t O 'C o Z ~ ~ x bA 'O 7 m ~ II 7 Lrr L C.' O O ~--i O w 0o a\ S O O N M ~--~ [~ O O O M O O O \p ,„i M .~r O ~' M ^' ~ 00 .-. ~.j ~ O O N --+ O a1 O O N~ oo O O O ~--~ O O O [~ O O ~ l~ O ~' O N N 'V ~--~ O O O O 0 0 O N ~n O 7 ~~ a, O r O oO N O O O .-~ O O O O Vr l~ ~ a0 v'~ M D1 ~ a\ M~ O O O r N O N ~ ~ [~ [~ •--~ ~ I~ M l~ M VO O O O O O O O O 00 ~--~ O M ~ a1 ~ N .--~ c0 ~ M O ~ O [~ ~ a1 V1 .~ N o0 00 [~ co ~ ~' ~ O ^r O O l~ O O~ O ~O [~ O~ 0o M vi N O~ O N ~O ~--~ ~--~ O ~O ~t O ~--~ .--~ 7 N N ~ `O ~ N .ti a\ O .ti H O M O O oo D1 N O O O ~ O O O [~ 0o O O ~O O v~ O ~ [~ M o0 O O O 4; O O O `p vl O d' 00 O -~ O O ~ .--~ N O O O ~ O O ~ ~ 0o O ~ ~n ~--~ N O~ ~n Vr M M O ~ a1 --~ O ~ N M v1 ~"~ 00 O ~O ~ v'i l~ M M M ~ N ~i' O O O O M O M O O ~O O O O ~D O O O l~ O ~D 0 0 0 7 O O ~--~ O O O .--i O O O ~O O l~ O O M O M O O ~O O O O ~D O O O ~ r 00 00 N N ~O M D, O~ o0 00 U N d' 7 •--~ ^y l~ 00 N N M N O~ O O v'i O .-+ ~O O O O ~O i oo a, V 0 0 0 M O O O ~ ~--~ O ~ ~O O ~--~ O [~ l~ M M O O O 00 O O O ~ a, O ~ 00 O o0 O ~ ~ M O O D 7 O O O 00 00 O 00 v) N N O vl V' Q\ N 7 ~o ~ o, --~o .~ NMN r~ r N ~O O t~ ~ ~ ~ M M ~ ~O N M U O M l~ O N O O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 7 00 O ~ M 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O~ O O 00 O ~O ~--~ O [~ t~ O v1 O O O N O O O [~ v~ l~ [~ _ V~~ ~ ~ O [~ O O O N N O N ~--~ 00 l ~ ~ V o0 ~ 00 ~O O vi O O O N O O O l~ [~ ~n t~ ~O C1 a\ M 00 C, ~ d' O ^-' O O ~O a1 U"i 00 N~ t~ ~ oo O G~ M M -- O O 1~ O M O~ [~ N O ~--~ O ~O ~ M O N Vr --~ ~--~ .-~ ~O V O N Vi .-~ N N ~ v~ O ~ ~O \O N .--~ CQ Y. 7 ~ U ~, y ~ ~ ,, yy ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ U O cC a ~ ~ U ~ ~ e °' ~ ~ c °' ~ A r. x ~ ~ ~ .+ ~ V o ' ~~ ~ 4. c~ U °a ~ L O O O ~ U ~ in ~ ~ p ~ ~ O b ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ti rn '+~ +U. y ' U 'x N W Q c ~ ~ ~ p W :o ~ ^ •`° ~ t y , cQ a i °~ ~ O ' O , U U 4=. a~ U O H H e a Y. W a . ,_, U ~ pq ~ ~ ~ ~ U a~ ~ ~ a~ ~ U N N cC ~ Z ,-o ,-~ [-~ ~" ~ ~ N ~ ~ _ GA ~ O U N ~ rUi~ . ~ z. ~ W +~i ~ O O O ~ O O U O ~ ~ '" O N ~ O W U O U G.~ U W U O cC W L ~ h fyr U O ~ .~ O N M O O ~ N M vl O O O O ~--~ N M I V' !~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~--~ N O O V v0 0 0 r ~ ~ r 0 0 0 0 oo co 00 00 00 0o 0 0 0 0 0 0 C, a\ 0 _H R +.+ O E" 'CS ~i CQ }. V s ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER N' ~0 Submitted by: Approved by: Ray Lavinder Elmer C. Hodge Police Chief County Administrator AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Status Report on Decal Enforcement Efforts COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board of Supervisors recently requested an update on decal enforcement efforts by the Roanoke County Police Department. Beginning in March, the Police Department increased their decal enforcement efforts throughout Roanoke County with the following results: • 1500 notices were placed in vehicles in Roanoke County beginning on March18, 2001 reminding owners of the decal requirements. • Actual ticket enforcement began on June 18, 2001 • 593 tickets were issued as of July 26, 2001 • 158 tickets were paid, and 157 tickets were voided because decals had been purchased but not affixed to vehicle windows • Those remaining will be summoned to court • The traffic unit has conducted three checkpoints in June, four in July and plan to continue this process The Police Department will continue to schedule periodic decal enforcement checkpoints. Additionally, several years ago, all Roanoke Valley governments decided to use the same color decals every year and to regionally enforce the decal requirement which resulted in higher enforcement for all jurisdictions. Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) cc: File N- ~ ACTION Motion by: VOTE No. Yes Abs McNamara Minnix Nickens Church Johnson f ~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801-8 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 Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~'c.~y- ~.r.. Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Meeting File 4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 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. "" .•~.. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 RESOLUTION 082801-9 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 Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~• Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Meeting File 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: August 28, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring September 20, 2001 as Southwest Virginia Light the Night Day and September 2001 as Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month in Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society has requested that the County issue a proclamation declaring September 20, 2001 as Southwest Virginia Light the Night Day and September 2001 as Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month in Roanoke County. The "Light the Night Walk" is the Society's national evening walk fundraiser. Accepting the proclamation at the meeting will be Tracy Wood, Denise Allen Mathews, Brenda Walker and Martha Brinkley. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church _ _ _ Denied () Johnson _ _ _ Received () McNamara- _ Referred () Minnix _ _ To () Nickens ~_I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 PROCLAMATION DECLARING THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 AS SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA LIGHT THE NIGHT DAY AND SEPTEMBER 2001 AS LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA AWARENESS MONTH IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society is the world's largest private organization concerned solely with finding a cure for leukemia, lymphoma, Hodgkin's disease, and myeloma; and WHEREAS, the Society provides assistance and support programs for cancer survivors and their families to improve the quality of life; and WHEREAS, leukemia, lymphoma, Hodgkin's disease and myeloma are cancers of the body's blood forming immune systems, the bone marrow and lymph nodes, and are considered to be related cancers because they further involve the uncontrolled growth of cells with similar functions; and WHEREAS, staff and volunteers of the Society's fifty-eight chapters organize campaigns and special events to raise funds for and awareness of research and survivor services; and WHEREAS, September has been designated National Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month; and WHEREAS, the Light the Night Walk is the Society's national evening walk fundraiser in which walkers carry illuminated balloons to celebrate and commemorate lives touched by cancer; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Virginia Light the Night Walk will be held on September 1 R-I 20, 2001, at Salem Memorial Baseball Stadium, with opening ceremonies beginning at 7 p.m. NOW, THEREFORE, We, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, in support of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, do hereby proclaim Thursday, September 20, 2001 throughout Roanoke County, Virginia, as SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA LIGHT THE NIGH DAY; and FURTHER, do hereby proclaim September 2001 to be LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA AWARENESS MONTH in Roanoke County. 2 -. - . s_i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE 082801-10 DENYING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO AMERICAN TOWER CORP. TO CONSTRUCT A BROADCAST TOWER ON 34.83 ACRES LOCATED ON THE BENT MOUNTAIN SUBSTATION, 8920 WILLETT LANE, (TAX MAP NO. 103.00-1-5), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DIS- TRICT WHEREAS, American Tower Corp. has filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a 180-foot monopole broadcast tower to be located at the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, (Tax Map No. 103.00-1-5) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 3, 2001 and on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matteron July 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matterwas held on August 28, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board, by unanimous vote, denies the petition of American Towner Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to denythe ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28American Tower#SO.doc .~ ~.. r A COPY TESTE: ~, ~. e ~ r Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\American Tower SUP.doc PETITIONER: American Tower Corporation CASE NUMBER: 20-7/2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: July 3, 2001 & August 7, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: August 28, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of the American Tower Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a 180' monopole broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located at the American Electric Power Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. William Spruill spoke in support of the tower and described the inadequate wireless coverage along the Rt. 221 corridor. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION .DISCUSSION Mr. John Murphy presented the staff report. There was lengthy discussion between the commissioners and the applicant trying to justify the need for the 180' height. Ms. Hooker asked why the AEP structure was not considered. Mr. Witt had a concern about the accuracy of the photo simulations and asked the applicant if he would consider a lower tower height. The commissioners requested engineering (RF) studies of the wireless coverage areas at 180', 160', 140' and 120' heights. Ms. Hooker discussed ridgetop protection with the applicant. The commission granted a continuance until the August Planning Commission hearing to allow the applicant to obtain additional studies, verify the accuracy of the photo simulations, and study the Poor Mountain area for a tower site. At the August hearing the applicant discussed the RF studies at various heights. D. CONDITIONS None. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt made a motion to deny the Special Use Permit request. The motion failed on a 2-2 vote. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE There was interest on the part of the commissioners to support one tall tower with collocation opportunities. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Jafiet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission STAFF REPORT ~ - , PETITIONER: American Tower Corp. PREPARED BY: John Murphy CASE NUMBER: 20-7/2001 DATE: July 3, 2001 PART I A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This petition is a request for a Special Use Permit for the construction of a 180-foot broadcast tower located in the 8900 block of Willett Lane on Bent Mountain. The tower in proposed to be located on the property of the American Electric Power Sub Station which is zoned AG-3. The site is designated as Rural Village in the 1998 Community Plan and is located in the Bent Mountain Community Planning Area and Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. DESCRIPTION This is a request for a Special Use Permit for the construction of a 180-foot monopole broadcast tower located at the AEP Substation in the 8900 block of Willett Lane. The applicant is proposing to construct a monopole broadcast tower to lease space to wireless communication service providers. The broadcast tower is engineered to support at least four (4) service providers. American Tower Corporation's primary business is to obtain tenants to collocate on its broadcast tower structures. The monopole will be constructed ofnon-reflective material. The applicant has provided documentation from their aviation consultants related to the proposed broadcast tower's compliance with FAA standards. The preliminary results indicate that the FAA standards are not exceeded. The FAA requires marking/lighting if Obstruction Standards are exceeded. The FAA, for safety reasons, may still require marking/lighting on non-exceeding structures. The applicant's consultant has advised that the FAA should issue a determination of "No Hazard". C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Broadcast Towers are permitted in the AG-3 zoning district with a Special Use Permit. The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance definition of a broadcast tower: Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one (1) or more antennas. The term includes but need not be limited to radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, and cellular telephone and wireless communication towers. Broadcasting tower types include, but are not limited to monopoles, lattice towers, wooden poles, and guyed towers. Excluded from this definition are amateur radio towers, which are described separately. The broadcast tower shall comply with the Use and Design Standards in Section 30-87 of the zoning ordinance. Local Regulations - In the interest of preserving and enhancing the scenic and natural beauty of Roanoke County it is the goal of the County to achieve a long term reduction in the number of broadcasting towers within the County, and where possible, to achieve a reduction in the height of existing broadcast towers throughout he County, with special emphasis on towers located along or near the ridgetops of major mountains and land forms. In addition, it is the goal of the County, where possible, to achieve the relocation of existing broadcast towers and associated utility and access corridors which have a high visual impact on scenic resources. 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. To achieve this end, the County encourages all wireless communication providers to locate antennas on existing structures. Permits for new broadcasting towers should only be requested when no other reasonable alternative exists for locating needed antennas. When new broadcasting towers are proposed as a last alternative, the requested broadcasting tower location, height and design should be chosen to protect and enhance the scenic and natural beauty of Roanoke County. Site plan review shall be required to insure compliance with all Roanoke County Development Standards including compliance with Section 30-73, of the zoning ordinance, as it relates to the Emergency Communication Overlay District. VDOT shall review the project for entrance standard compliance. PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Location -The site is located on the property of American Electric Power at 8920 Willett Lane off of Poor Mountain Road in the Bent Mountain Community Planning Area and Windsor Hills Magisterial District. For references purposes, the site of the proposed broadcast tower on Willett Lane is approximately 2.75 air miles from the WDBJ tower on Poor Mountain. Topo~raphy/Vegetation -The base elevation at the site of the proposed broadcast tower is 2990 feet above sea level. The elevation on Willett Lane near the entrance gate to the site is 2940 feet above sea level. The site has an existing road that will be upgraded but is generally thick with mature trees with the exception of the cleared area for the substation. The existing tree height in this area is approximately 40 feet from grade. Surrounding_Neig_hborhood -The general area is zoned AG-3 with large lots. There are several houses along Willett Lane between Poor Mountain Road and the entrance to the site. Community Meeting - On June 19, 2001 a community meeting was held at the Bent Mountain Public Safety Building. Approximately a dozen residents of the Bent Mountain Community attended the meeting. County staff was available to discuss the zoning regulations and the Special Use Permit process. American Tower Corporation had a representative to describe the broadcast tower proposal with the residents. The visibility analysis map and photo simulations were presented at the meeting. There were mixed feelings from the neighbors. Several were opposed to the tower because of visibility issues and the idea that approval of this broadcast tower would bring other towers to the mountain. Many residents were supportive of the request because of the potential for improved wireless phone coverage. The neighbors supporting the request described poor wireless communication coverage on Bent Mountain. The residents attending the meeting were encouraged to express their concerns in writing and/or at the Planning Commission hearing. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture -The applicant has provided a site plan showing the proposed 75' x 75' leased area south to south east of the existing fenced AEP Substation area. This proposed fenced area is shown beyond the perimeter of American Electric Power's fenced compound. The substation was expanded in 1996 after a Special Use Permit was granted by the Board of Supervisors. The proposed access road is following the existing roadbed and will be widened from 9 feet to 12 feet and constructed of gravel. The existing access road from Willett Lane is secured with a gate. There is an existing lattice AEP structure approximately 80 feet in height to the east of the proposed broadcast tower. This is the highest structure in the area. The proposed broadcast tower will exceed the height of the AEP structure by 100 feet. The tree height in this area is no greater than 40 feet from grade. Access -Access to the proposed 75' x 75' leased site on Willett Lane (State Route 786) is by upgrading an existing 9-foot road to a 12-foot road in the existing roadbed. The existing 9-foot road is dirt and gravel and will be upgraded to full gravel. VDOT has indicated that the existing entrance may need to be relocated. VDOT has indicated that the existing entrance does not meet current entrance standards. Fire & Rescue/Utilities - No impacts are expected for Fire & Rescue services. Public water and sewer are not currently available to the site. Visibility- The visibility analysis submitted by the applicant as well as fieldwork by staff indicate that the proposed broadcast tower will be visible from several areas along the Blue Ridge Parkway. The National Park Service submitted an evaluation based on their mapping resources as well as the visibility analysis provided by the applicant. The proposed broadcast tower is approximately two (2) to six (6) miles from potentially affected areas of the Blue Ridge Parkway. The National Park service comments indicate that there will only be a minor visual intrusion from some limited vantage points along the parkway motor road including vistas and overlooks. The broadcast tower will be clearly visible from the Airpoint Area at the top of Bent Mountain for several miles south along the Route 221 corridor. The visibility analysis indicates clear visibility of the broadcast tower from many of the subdivisions and properties along the Route 221 corridor in the Back Creek and Poages Mill neighborhoods, Cave Spring neighborhoods, areas along Brambleton Avenue, towards the Roanoke City Limits, and in the Green Valley neighborhood. No additional clearing of vegetation will be required for above ground utilities to serve the proposed broadcast tower site. There is an existing AEP lattice utility structure, approximately 80 feet in height, immediately to the east of the site of the proposed broadcast tower pad. This lattice structure is readily visible to the areas identified in the visibility analysis. The proposed broadcast tower will be significantly more visible along the ridgeline that is observed by the residents along the Poages Mill and Back Creek areas, as well as the vehicular traffic traveling south on Bent Mountain Road towards Bent Mountain through these areas. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The subject property for the proposed broadcast tower is designated as Rural Village in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. This designation is a future land use area where limited development activity has historically occurred and where suburban or urban development '`~' patterns are discouraged. These rural community and farming areas are generally in between the intense suburban development patterns akeady established in the County and the designated Conservation and Rural Preserve areas. The encouraged land use types include low-density housing, rural community centers such as schools, parks and religious assembly uses and agricultural and recreational uses. The Community Plan discourages utility and construction structures on the ridgelines. D. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Site plan will be required to insure compliance with all Roanoke County Development Standards and VDOT standards. PART III A. STAFF CONCLUSIONS American Tower Corporation has requested a Special Use Permit for the construction of a 180' monopole broadcast tower on the site of the AEP Substation on Bent Mountain. There are limited existing structures on Bent Mountain that may provide some collocation sites for individual providers to attach antennae for telecommunication coverage on Bent Mountain. The applicant has indicated a desire to provide coverage for multiple service providers at the top of Bent Mountain as well as the Route 221 corridor between the Electric Road area and the top of the mountain. The broadcast tower is a monopole design, which is preferred in the zoning ordinance. There are no historic structures identified in the Historic Architecture Reconnaissance Survey Report in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site. The tower at a height of 180 feet is situated at or near a ridgeline that is distinguishable from the Poages Mill, Back Creek, Cave Spring and Green Valley neighborhoods. The Community Plan specifically discourages broadcast tower structures and utility structures on the ridgelines. The visibility analysis provided by the applicant as well as fieldwork by staff indicates that the proposed broadcast tower at 180 feet will be visible from many areas in Roanoke County and from multiple sites along the Blue Ridge Parkway. There were mixed opinions from the neighbors that attended the community meeting. Some of the neighbors at the meeting wanted improved wireless phone service on Bent Mountain. Other neighbors did not want the broadcast tower to be constructed because of the visibility issue and because it may open the door for other broadcast towers to be sited on the mountain. Some of the neighbors voiced concerns that there were already too many of these towers on Poor Mountain. The applicant has provided information from their aviation consultant that lighting will not be required for this broadcast tower at this site. Lighting on the tower would make the proposed structure significantly more visible from the Roanoke Valley and especially visible from the Blue Ridge Parkway. Staff strongly believes that lighting of this proposed broadcast tower is not an option. Staff encouraged the residents that attended the community meeting to discuss with their neighbors and civic league members the proposed broadcast tower and attend both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor's hearings. Staff has discussed the possibility of using the existing broadcast towers on Poor Mountain but the locations did not meet the needs of the applicant. Staff will recommend the following conditions should the Planning Commission make a favorable recommendation for the petition: 1. The broadcast tower shall be limited to a monopole design. 2. The maximum height of the broadcast tower shall be 180 feet. Any increase above this ... Memorand~un To: Planning Commission From: John Murphy, Associate Planner Date: 07/30/2001 Re: American Tower Corp. (Bent Mountain SUP) On the evening of July 3, 2001 the public hearing was held for the Special Use Permit for the 180' broadcast tower at the AEP Substation on Bent Mountain. At that time the Commission allowed the applicant a continuation of the hearing provided they supply propagation studies at the requested height as well as 160', 140', and 120'. The scale of the propagation studies gives a general description of the differences at the requested heights. Due to the scale of the studies, a thorough explanation of the coverage areas should be provided by the applicant. The applicant was to provide documentation insuring the accuracy of the photo simulations provided with the original application. The applicant has a document from AEP indicating the exact height of the adjoining AEP lattice structure for the overhead electric lines that was used as a comparison in the photo simulations. The applicant will bring additional detailed information that describes their explanation of the need for the proposed broadcast tower at the Willett Lane site versus a Poor Mountain location. ~~ County of Roanoke For Staff Use Only • Communi Develo ment ty p Date received: Received by: Planning & Zoning 3~Z3 6 ! `` _ 5204 Bernard Drive Application fee: ~s~- PC ZA date: P O Box 29800 4d °_® ec . `~ "3"- ~' I Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 placards issued: BOS date: (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 ~ '~ `~ -~ i Case Number `a,b - 1 ~ ~ 6 ~ ,, ~ ,; ,. .. :. ;. ,ALL APPLICANTS , :. Check type of application filed (check all that apply) O Rezoning X .Special Use O Variance Applicants name/address w/zip American Tower Corp. 128 Mill Lane Salem, VA 24153 Phone: (540 378-4061 (540)378-406 Fax No. Owner's name/address w/zip AEB: Contact: Jack Kirby 40 Fr-anklin Road Roanoke, VA 24011 Property Location Bent Mountain Substation 8920 Willett Lane Phone (540) 985-2884 _ Fax No. Magisterial District: Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: 10 3 -1- 5 ~ Existing Zoning: AG- 3 Size of pazcel(s) • Acres : 7 5 ~' x 7 5' 3~, g~ I Existing Land Use: Existing e l e c t r i c s u b s t a t i o n REL;OIVING.~AIVD SPECIAL;USE PERMIT APPLICANTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: AG-3 Special Use Permit Request Proposed Land Use: E l e c t r i c S u b s t a t i o n Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/S V R/S V R/S V Consultation 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan 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 prope or the owner's.agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the Irnowledge and consent of the owner. ,~ ~ ,_.__-• ~~~.--- G~~.,~.)tJV ~~1Ul~.t,~~'1r-, ~-~.~~~ wner's Signature 7USTII'ICAT'ION FOR REZONING OR SPECIAL VSE PERNIIT REQUEST .~~ ~ ,ant Amertlcan Tower Cor oration 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. In the Zoning Ordinance 30-3 purpose #4-A communication tower at the proposed site will greatly improve mobile phone service of the221 corridors from Cave Spring Corners area continuing up Bent Mtm. And reaching the Roanoke County line thus assisting with 911 calls using a mobile phone. American Tower proposes one tower on Bent Mtm. thus working with the county in achieving their goal in the reduction in the number of towers in the county. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County ~ unity Plan. In keeping with the Community Plan to protect our mountainsides and ridge tops, American Tower has proposed ONE tower in an existing AEP substation, which will hold several carriers and reducing the need for several towers on the hillside. The existing access road will be used thereby eliminating the need for cutting up the hillside with any additional roads resulting in erosion, siltation of streams and the loss of scenic quality. Please descnbe 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. The proposed communication site at the Bent Mtm. AEP substation should have little impact on the property itself, since the tower will be located adjacent to the existing Power structure. The adjoining property is farmland and the nearest residence is 958' To the proposed tower. There will be no impacts on public services and facilities, including water/ sewer, roads, schools, parks/ recreation and fire rescue s~l • /~J1/1°RICAN TOWER STATEMENT OF INTENT American Tower Corporation, hereby request approval of its application to construct, maintain, and manage a multiple user wireless communication facility at the property owned by Appalachian Power Company dba/ American Electric Power Company located at 8920 Willett Lane, Roanoke, VA 24018. Introduction American Tower Corporation is the nation's premier, fully integrated tower development company. It combines the ownership and/or management of more than 13,000 towers in 38 states with the ability to provide build-to-suit networks, professional services, and facility management services. Over the past eight years, American Tower has acquired, for carriers, more than 11,000 sites in 48 states. This includes sites for virtually every wireless provider in the country. Proposal . American Tower Management Inc entered into a sublicense agreement as of the 18th day of October 2000 with AEP Communications, LLC. The terms of the co-development agreement between parties hereby leases a portion of the land containing a 75' x 75' area. The proposed wireless communication facility will be comprised of a fenced equipment compound located within the lease area containing a monopole tower structure not to exceed 180' and the necessary transmitting/receiving equipment. The facility will be fenced and locked. The facility will be unmanned (visited on an average of once per month for routine maintenance purposes), will not be lit (except as required by FAA regulations), and will not emit noise or glare. American Tower will lease all available antenna space on the structure to wireless providers, as well as the necessary ground space area to accommodate their respective necessary equipment. Site Selection/Design American Tower has assisted virtually every wireless provider in the country with its infrastructure development and is acutely aware of the associated requirements. The process of developing these systems is to cellular development in that the Basic Trading Area ("BTA") regions are subdivided into small geographic sections or "cells". Each cell site holds the equipment that provides the air interface to the subscriber units and must be precisely located relative to other "cells" creating a communication grid system. This • system must reflect the topography and traffic (user population and building density) of AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION ~ 128 MILL LANE, SALEM, VIRGINIA 24153 ~ 540/378-4061 • FAX 540/378-4062 ~i • /1N1=RICAN TOW.R the "cells" as well as the radius of the radius of the respective antenna's reliable transmission area. A freestanding structure will be utilized to provide the necessary height, this accommodating at least (4) carriers. The proposed facility will be located adjacent to the AEP sub-station and will cause minimal visual impact to neighboring properties. Information Required And Factors Considered In Granting Special Use Permit See attached checklist. In conclusion, American Tower Corporation, respectfully request approval of this application. If there are any questions concerning this application, please contact me at (540) 378-4061 ext.119 Sincerely, • -~~.. _ . ;' John S. Walter Zoning Manager American Tower Corporation AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION • 128 MILL LANE, SALEM, VIRGINIA 24153 • 540/378-4061 ~ FAX 540/378-4062 ~~-i ~ V ' ~ . a P Y ~ : ~ j ~ ~ ~ INIOHIh A1N(100 ~IONVOtl ' ~ ~ r ~ i ~~ ; ~ ~5;~ $3 ~ dFiOO H3MO1 N'dOIFJ3WV ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ z O a Ste- ° ~ ? ~ € #t9 ~{ 3 ~e ¢~ al~~ ~~~~ ~33~~ L80tld-VA dt/W SIS.llt1Nt143HSM31/~ ~ u '.' o o ~ ~ ~ a ~ .. C X00 N r ¢ s ~ € N R a i~ 3 s _ v o~:i € `.~ z: s& o .s ~ s $s a ~ e ~ N • °E~E'p A ~9: 2 ~ x ` s •d s' 80 ( ~ T < "d3 ~E 9 ~ ~ . i~~fi ~~ S 6 $ . Q ~52 go gao := y sa -p § aa9i ~d ~6~ n o5 t _ e ~d s.o e~Y fi ~ A a :_ _. W:8 0 Q o° l u^ ti-~ti+ ~ ,~' flg s d y@iip€ 'g}~`^^~6 4~ 444 ~ tl~ R gg 9 "' H~ ~^ ~ L I I I I I QyGyII I I I Q o ~~ tit', N ~~ g J ~ O ` ~ F ~ $ ~ ~ l ~ ~ A~ g ~w~~e~ ~ ~~ ' $ ^ ~-F"" ~ Q O ~ ~ ~ s3 ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ $ a ~ 111 ~ R ~~ ~ ~v~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ o~s~- ~~"xaW ~ ~ ~ IL ~ ¢ ~ Z ~ m ~ ~ y O ~ ~oo E Q~Q ~ 4 w ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ a 44444444 m ~ S i i ~ ~ ~~ o ~~~ ~ ~ o C ~~~ _ 's s yNfj ` ~~~ / otl ~ R/ / d- /y ~, u ~ '`P' ~` $~" /yge~ / o ~ o' ~~ /// ~ rho .~ "o '"~=Yg (~ 3 ` ~ ~ _ / ' o\.- ` 388 ~+ ~ i / / e$ ~~ ~ ~-+ J :~ a*- ~ ~~ "~ ~ ~~ / ~ .~ ~ ~, ~~ ~ ~ ,. ~. ~ ~~ ~ ~, ~ - ~ ~, ~,,~_ \ ~. - ww ~~ I ~~ / ~ ~~ ~ ~o~ ~ ~~~~~~_ ' >< / ~ ~~~~~ ~ i ~~~~~ ~ ! iii ~ ~~~~~~ ' ~ ~ ~II~II!If I--------------~--------------J I ~ I I I ~ I ~ ;gig I Sd ~Mp4> YS~60 W/Po/Il Enp~l-K\MweV^.^W^~n Iw9\SLIS E3/W3Mm 3~OUg1011\53u5 1MUOJ M3N\nnal uoa~nur~\~3 :opry ~p~ ~~~Y ~.~P G. Marshall Mundy Frank W. Rogers, III T. Daniel Frith, III Vicki L. Wiese ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.O. Box 2240 Roanoke, Virginia 24009 540.982.2900 - ~, ._ o -~- ~ ~~ ~ ,jy~W ~s 4 ' ~~ 1328 Third Sheet, s.w. Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Telecopier 540.982.1362 www.mrf-law.com frogers@mrf-law.com Mr. H. Odell Minnix, Chair Mr. Joseph B. Church, Vice-Chair Mr. Bob L. Johnson Mr. Joseph McNamara Mr. Harry C. Nickens P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 August 9, 2001 RE: American Tower Corporation Special Use Permit Request Case Number: 20-712001 Gentlemen: It is my understanding that at your meeting on August 28, 2001 you will consider American Tower Company's application for special use permit to install a communications tower at the AEP substation off Willett Road. Having an interest in adjacent land, I have expressed reservations about the application, which were outlined in a letter to the Planning Commission dated June 25, 2000, a copy of which I enclose to each of you. It is my understanding that a motion was made at the August 7, 2001 Planning Commission meeting to deny American Tower's special use permit application. Only four (4) members of the Planning Commission were in attendance, the vote tied at 2-2, and the motion to deny could not pass without a rrlinirnum 'of three. (3) s~pporive votes. As i understand it, the special use permit application will be presented on this basis for your consideration on August 28. It seems to me that the vote by the Planning Commission reflects very mixed views on the application, if not outright disagreement over whether the proposed tower is even .necessary. For the reasons set forth in the attached letter, and as a citizen of the County of Roanoke, I would urge the Board's denial of American Tower's special use permit application. It may be that I will be able to appear at the August 28 hearing to state my views for the record, but in the event my schedule does not permit me to be present, I did want my views on this to be known. I respectfully request your close consideration and scrutiny of this application. ~ ~ Roanoke County Board of Supervisors "~' ~ August 9, 2001 Page 2 Let me commend the County staff, and particularly Mr. John Murphy of the Planning Division, for the very helpful and informative manner in which this process has been handled. Regardless of the outcome, I have been informed of developments at every step of the way, and it seems that the input of all interested citizens has been genuinely welcomed by County staff. With kindest regards, I am Very truly yours, Frank W. Rogers, III FWR/Ish Enclosure c: Mr. Bo Rogers ::ODMAIWORLDOXIF'1DOCSIROGERSIPERSONALILSH0268. WPD • 0 ~" November 17, 200 Kim Olson American Tower 4740 Ridge Drive NE Salem, OR 97303 Re: 180-Ft Monopole Site: VA-FA087-A BENT MOUNTAIN, ROANOKE CO., VA Design No.: M00-1292-F Job No.: 22740000 Dear Mr. Olson: FWT designs its monopoles not to fail under the anticipated wind load. We understand that there is some concern on the part of local building officials regarding the potential for failure of communication monopoles. Communication monopoles are designed in accordance with the Electronic Industries Association Standard EIA-222-F, "Structural Standard for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." This standard is modeled after the ANSI A58.1 standard, which is now known as ASCE-7. The EIA standard was introduced to thoroughly address all of the design criteria specifically applicable to steel communications structures. Much of these specific design criteria are often missing in local building codes. The wind loading requirements in ASCE-7 are also the basis for building codes throughout the United States. The above mentioned-monopole is designed to withstand wind speed of 80 miles per hour in accordance with the Electronic Industries Association Standard EIA-222-F, "Structural Standard for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." With the factor of safety included, the wind speed has to exceed 89 mph for the monopole to realize in a decrease in the structural integrity. This simply means that by the time there is a decrease in the structural integrity all surrounding man-made structures, buildings, trees, cars, etc. have already been destroyed, The probability of failure is remote considering the high wind and the factor of safety used in the design. The steel used to fabricate the structure is very flexible to ensure that the monopole does not fall to the ground. P.O. Box 8597 Fort Worth, Texas 76124-0597 817-457-3060 Fax 817-429-6010 1-800-433-1816 1907 Easi Loop 820 South Fort Worth, Texas 76112-7899 Fl/IGf r 1 L_J The monopole is designed to carry the following loads: S-~ 1S` Carrier at top 12 -1' X 5' panel 1- 12-Ft Low profile sectored mount w/service grating 1 - 3/4"QS Lightning rod 2°d Carrier at 165' 12 -1' X 5' panel 1- 12-Ft Low profile sectored mount w/service grating 3rd Carrier at 150' 12 -1' X 5' panel 1- 12-Ft Low profile sectored mount w/service grating 4``' Carrier at 135' 12 -1' X 5' panel 1- 12-Ft Low profile sectored mount w/service grating For your information, FWT has designed and manufactured more than ten thousand communications structures in the last thirty-five years and have never experienced a structural failure. I hope this will clear your doubt in the integrity of our monopole. If you need more information please call me at 1-800-433-1816, ext. 5006. ~~~~~~~r-ii .`~~~~~LTf~ AFL'°. ~O ~,P~= Sincerely, Reviewed by ~ ~ MARTiN L. ~% v DE lx ROSH D w P.E. #"L4997 Re ato G. Buison Martin L. de la Rosa, .E. S ~~A ~' Des gn Engineer `~V Vice President of Engineering CC: Barry Tabor -CSR • P.D. Box 8597 Fort Worth, Texas 76124-0597 817-457-3060 Fax 817-429-6010 1-800-433-1816 1901 East Loop 820 South Fort Worth, Texas 76112-7899 APPROXIMATE LIFTING WT. OF GALVAN IZED POLE SHAFTS (LBS) TOP PLATE + sHAFT t 2aso NOTE; WEIGHTS SHOWN SHAFT 2 6aoo DO NOT INCLUDE ANY SHAFT 3 BASE PLATE + SHAFT 4 s8oo 16850 ATTACHMENTS, MOUNTS, PLATFORMS, ETC. FIELD VERIFY WEIGHTS PRIOR TO LIFTING. APPROXIMATE TOTAL 36300 17.000" ACROSS FIATS 165'-0" SHAFT 1 1/4" X 39.42' (Fy=65) BLACK WT = 2.261 KIPS) 150'-0" 144'-0' SPLICE LENGTH MIN = 36.90" 135'-0" DESIGN = 41.00" MAX = 46.00" SHAFT 2 3/6`X48.67' (Fy=65) BLACK WT = 5.892 KIPS) ~- SPLICE LENGTH MIN = 50.40" DESIGN = 56.00" MAX = 61.00" SH 8 3X 53.00' (Fy=65) BLACK WF = 8.517 KIPS) 53'-O" _ sPUCE LENGTH MIN = 64.80" DESIGN =72.00" MAX = 77.00' SH~"4X 53.00' (Fy=65) BLACK Wi = 10.658 KIPS) ~,~ P.O. BOX 8597 FORT WORTH, TX 76124-0597 ,~ PHONE: (800) 433-1816 FAX: (817) 429-601 O ~., ,, J O B D A T A a e 1 of 1 Job No. 22740000 By RGB Design No. M00-1292-F Date 11-17-2000 Chk d By ~ "1SA/ ~'1J Rev. No. Rev. Date Pole 180 M NOPOLE Site VA-FA087-A BENT MOUNTAIN, ROANOKE CO., VA Owner AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION ef. No. Design ACCORDING TO TIA EIA-222-F 1996 FINAL DESIGN FOR FABRICATION LOAD CASE S CASE 1 80 MPH WITH NO ICE DESIGN WIND CASE 2 69 MPH WITH 1 /2" RADIAL ICE REDUCED WIND WITH ICE CASE 3 50 MPH WITH NO ICE OPERATIONAL WIND P O L E S P E C I F I C A T I O N S Pole Sha e T e: 18-SIDED POLYGON Ta er: 0.228194 IN FT Shaft Steel: ASTM A572 GRADE 65 Base PL Steel: ASTM A633 GR. E 60 KSI Anchor Bolts: 2 1 4 0 x -0 LONG 18J ASTM A615 GRADE 75 • e t ANTEN NA LIST No. Elev. Oescri tion TOP 3 4 LIGH NING ROD ' ' 1-12 178.00 PANEL ANTENNA 1 (12) 1 X 5 178.00 ++++tr++rrrr I 12-FT LP.S. MOUNT W/SERVICE GRATING 13-24 165.00 ` (12) 1' X 5' PANEL ANTENNA ~a~`~y+~LTH p'~;, - 165.00 12-FT LP.S. MOUNT W/SERVI GRATING ` '. 25-36 150.00 (12) 1' X 5' PANEL ANTEN ~ 150.00 12-FT L.P.S. MOUNT W/SE RATING ~ ARTIN L G%~ 37-48 135.00 . (12) t' X 5' PANEL ANTEN - LSE LA ROSA Z U D - 135.00 _ 12-Ff L.P.S. MOUNT W ERVIC GRATIN_G P.E. #24997 i~ /~ L~ I Q;: C`j~ STEP BOLTS FUIl HEIGHT FROM 9'-6" ABOVE BASE PLATE ~'~'°r~rNAl.+~~~`` ANTENNA FEED LINES RUN INSIDE OF POLE. 80 M PH WIND 50 MPH WIND Elevation Lateral Deflection (Inches) Rotation (sway) (degrees) lateral Deflection (Inches) Rotation (sway) (degrees) TOP 175.6 8.647 68.3 3.376 SHAFT SECTION D A T A Section Plate Lap Diameter Across Flats Shaft Length Thickness Slice (inches) Section feet in. in. ®To ®Bottom 1 39.42 0.2500 41 00 17.000 25.995 2 48.67 0.3750 . 56 00 24.715 35.820 3 53.00 0.3750 . 00 72 34.006 46.100 4 53.00 0.3750 ' 43.981 56.075 BASE 2 3/4" X 69.000` ROUND (WT. = 2.916 KIPS) W/(16~ 2.25"0 ANCHOR BOLTS ON 63.000' B.C. WITH MIN. 6'-0" EMBEDMENT INTO PIER (W/NUTS ~ TEMPLATE PLATE ®BOT.) 56.075" ACROSS FLATS MOMENT = 3826 ft-kips SHEAR = 28.5 kips AXIAL = 43.5 kips EST. SHAFT + BASE R WT. = 30.2 kips (BLACK WEIGHT) ~. =RICAN T ~ 128 Mill Lane ~°' ^ O~~ R Salem, VA. 24153 ~ "` ~ C O R P O R A T I O N i March 20, 2001 Department of Community Development Planning and Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive, SW P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 American Tower Corporation's primary business is to obtain tenants to co-locate on its structures. We are very confident that tower locations we pursue in your jurisdiction will be an ideal location for other interested wireless providers to locate their antennas. The site placement for towers has been identified utilizing the latest technology in radio frequency engineering and has been designed to satisfy coverage and/or capacity requirements for various technologies. American Tower • Corporation has a relationship with virtually every major wireless provider in the county. This and every site are aggressively marketed to service a wide range of wireless technologies including PCS (GSM, CDMA, TDMA) cellular, paging, ESMR/SMR, 38ghz/wireless fiber, two way paging, and the new 3G technologies. Sincerely, Lenn ruz~~ Y Project Manager 540-378-4061 (office) 540-378-4062 (fax) • Ed Elswick 8550 Willett Lane Bent llllt. Va June 19, 2001 To the Roanoke County Community Development office and corporate interests Welcome to you all. This meeting causes all of us to take time away from work and family. We appreciate the opportunity to express our opinions about the erection of a 180-foot tower on Willett Lane. I don't believe many Bent Mountain residents are in favor of this tower being built. The benefits would accrue to AEP and AMT and not to those of us who would have to tolerate another blinking light and ugly tower. If history were any indication, this would not be the last tower on Bent Mountain. Poor Mountain has suffered enough for the area--let us not also give Bent Mountains' Willett Lane to the corporate greedy. Personally, having grown up in an Eastern Kentucky "holler", I have always loved mountains. It is a shame we treat them with such disregard for their beauty and contribution to our life. These are scenic treasures that we so easily give to the coffers of the corporate world -our loss is forever, their gain is little appreciated. Our community is unique. Good neighbors share work, cars, trucks, tractors and fellowship. Our . backyards are the mountains and we endure many hardships for the pleasure of their company. Noone would like an ugly tower in their backyard. We believe the contribution of Poor Mountain to the welfare of the Roanoke Valley is more than enough. Please don't ask us to also throw in Bent Mountains' Willett Lane---now or ever again. It should be off limits. Sincerely, Ed Elswick ~- i • i MUNDY (I~OGERS ~ _ ~ FRITH ~~P • Arrow~evs aT Law G. Marshall Mundy 1328 Third Street, S.w. Flank W. Rogers, III P.0. Box 2240 Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Daniel Frith III T Roanoke, Virginia 24009 Telecopier 540.982.1362 , . Vicki L. Wiese 540.982.2900 www.mrf-law.com frogers@mrf-law.com June 25, 2001 Mr. John Murphy Planning Division Department of Community Development For Roanoke County P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 RE: American Tower Corporation Special Use Permit Request Case Number: 20-7/2001 Dear Mr. Murphy: I attended the community meeting on June 19, 2001 regarding American Tower Corporation's application to install a communication tower at the AEP Bent Mountain • Substation at 8920 Willett Lane. Thank you, your department and the County of Roanoke for arranging this meeting so that questions regarding the application could be addressed and so that you could receive community feedback. As a Roanoke County resident, and one who disfavors the proliferation of communication towers on our landscape, I appreciate all of the effort the County takes to make sure its citizens are informed on these matters. My family has long owned a tract of land on Willett Lane which almost adjoins the AEP Substation property. Our land, therefore, is within the documented zone from which this tower will be observable. For reasons I will outline below, I am opposed to the tower, and therefore register my opposition to the special use permit application. Because I am a digital phone user, I can understand the need expressed at the community hearing for coverage of the area atop Bent Mountain and adjacent to Rt. 221. As you know, a number of reasons, personal and otherwise, for the coverage need were expressed at the hearing. As I walked out of the meeting, however, I noticed within easy sight the forest of towers along the Poor Mountain ridge line. It is hard for me to fathom how technology would require erection of the proposed tower when all of the Poor Mountain towers are within the same line of sight. Thus, as the planning commission considers the special use permit application, I would strongly request that it consider whether the use of existing or a newly built tower among the Poor Mountain electronic forest may not be a better alternative. It is also interesting to me that none of the carriers who are committed to the American Tower Corporation project currently have a presence • among the Poor Mountain towers; therefore, I wonderwhetherthe need from a technology standpoint is real, or simply perceived. Mr. John Murphy • June 25, 2001 Page 2 s_ ~ Because I am opposed to any construction which would disfigure the Bent Mountain ridge line, I am opposed to the proposed tower. My personal opposition would be somewhat lessened if I was convinced, beyond all doubt, that a Poor Mountain site would not be viable technologically, and if all other alternatives have been considered and eliminated. For instance, I noticed that there is a communications cap atop an AEP tower at the Cotton Hill Substation. Would this work, alternatively, for the applicant on the AEP tower in question? I can only hope that the Planning Commission will consider all of these questions in the context of the instant application. Finally, if the application is granted, there seem to me a couple of fairly obviously conditions that might be attached. First, it appears to me that the presence of the tower might be lessened in effect if it was not lighted in any manner. This way, for close neighbors, it would simply blend into the darkness at night. Second, if future technology renders the tower obsolete, or if the lease arrangement between the applicant and AEP is terminated for any reason, then I would suggest as an additional condition that American Tower Corporation and AEP be legally obligated to remove the tower and restore the site to pre-construction condition. I do not know whether I will be able to attend the Planning Commission's meeting on July 3, 2001. In light of that, I would appreciate your making this letter a part of the permanent record with respect to this particular special use permit application. Again, thank you for your and the County's interest in the community's reaction to the application at hand. With kindest regards, I am Very truly yours, l _ ~_._~ Frank W. Rogers, III FWR/www c: The Honorable H. Odell Minnix The Honorable Joseph McNamara Mr. Bo Rogers ::ODMA\WORLDOX\F: \DOCS\ROGERS\MISC\LSU6987.WPD 1/ ,1 u • June 27, 2001 Mr. John Murphy County of Roanoke Planning & Zoning P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Mr. P er, ~'~ "'~ ~ ~ ~~ As I indicated to you at the meeting last week, I am very much in favor of the communication tower being placed on Bent Mountain if it will provide mobile phone service in the Bent Mountain area.. I know one person at the meeting referred to mobile phones as "toys" but I don"t agree with that. To me, a car phone is a convenience and ,more importantly, a safety feature when I'm away from home. Unfortunately, my car phone is useless from the top of Bent Mountain to my home at 10388 Bent Mountain Road. (and probably further down the • mountain). As a widow, I live alone and mobile phone service in the area to be covered by the tower would greatly enhance my safety. I know this is true of many people who work in the area, especially the rural mail carriers. As the former Postmaster at Bent Mountain, I knew firsthand of the problems carriers encountered because of the lack of communication. and I'm sure these problems have increased. It is my hope the Zoning Board and the Board of Supervisors will approve the construction of the communication tower in the existing AEP substation. Very sincerely yours, ,~~~~ ~ C~~~~c~-~ Mrs. I. Boyd Overstreet P. O. Box 1 Bent Mountain, VA 24059 S-I • • Ta: Attn: ~; .~ c ~N ~ 2 ~~ /~~ From: Comfort Horx~es Glenn Reed Te1.8~ Fax: 540-929-9028 S-I Subject: ~e,~C ~G~-~ ~`~'L ~~ ~~~m _~, __ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ • i•d BZ06-6z6-ObS paa~{ •~ uuajg eZ0~60 i0 OE unC Ed Elswick 8550 Willett Lane Bent Mt. Va June 19, 2001 To the Roanoke County Community Development office and corporate interests Welcome to you all. This meeting causes all of us to take time away from work and family. We appreciate the opportunity to express our opinions about the erection of a 180-foot tower on Willett Lane. I don't believe many Bent Mountain residents are in favor of this tower being built. The benefits would accrue to AEP and AMT and not to those of us who would have to tolerate another blinking light and ugly tower. If history were any indication, this would not be the last tower on Bent Mountain. Poor Mountain has suffered enough for the area-let us not also give Bent Mountains' Willett Lane to the corporate greedy. Personally, having grown up in an Eastern Kentucky "holler", I have always loved mountains. It is a shame we treat them with such disregard for their beauty and contribution to our life. These are scenic treasures that we so easily give to the coffers of the corporate world -our loss is forever, their gain is little appreciated. • Our community is unique. Good neighbors share work, cars, trucks, tractors and fellowship. Our backyards are the mountains and we endure many hardships for the pleasure of their company. Noone would like an ugly tower in their backyard. We believe the contribution of Poor Mountain to the welfare of the Roanoke Valley is more than enough. Please don't ask us to also throw in Bent Mountains' Willett Lane---now or ever again. It should be off limits. Sincerely, Ed Elswick • S-~ • • ~ ~ ~~- ; ~~/1 tea. :~7 ~~'~- ~11~' ~ ~ ~ ` Y~ c'~ i= ~~ ~ ~ :q~ K.. "°~ yj ` f J lirJt'/ IIJ 4i~ .~i'~ ~ f f' ~!f ddr~~t~~~/. J ~~.r~ .,~ ~~.~° .. • From: "Ed" <eddieelswick@earthlink.net> ~ '~ I To: <twood@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 7/3/01 12:43PM Subject: AMT tower on Willett Lane As probably the most affected by the tower location, I would like to offer my comments. The tower will be visible from my deck. Because the tower will not be lit, it really won't be much of a nuisance. However, my concern is the potential of added towers in the future. This could be the first step to full-scale development of Willett Lane as Poor Mountain has been and I don't think anybody wants that. I believe the question of locating the tower on Poor Mountain has not been fully pursued. That area has already been made into an eyesore and one more won't matter. The green belt question also remains---if we are to maintain some type of limited use of our ridges then this tower would not fit into that concept. Allowing it to be built before we determine our ridge top strategy doesn't seem to be a good idea. Also, if the tower were approved, would that not make it easier for anyone on Willett Lane to have tpwers located on their property?? The commission should use this issue as a vehicle for comprehensive planning . for future use of the Bent Mountain area---let's not do this in a piecemeal fashion--- The Amt representative said towers would need to be located every 3 to 5 miles-----that doesn't seem fitting for our beautiful environment----why should we allow such monstrosities to destroy our views for the sake of some who gab on their phones at the risk of other motorists??? That just doesn't make good common sense-----especially when the cell phone industry is not stabilized and future developments could radically change the requirement. We shouldn't sacrifice for the benefit of companies and talkative people. Ed Elswick 8550 Willett Lane 929 4680 S~I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO AMERICAN TOWER CORP. TO CONSTRUCT A BROADCAST TOWER ON 34.83 ACRES LOCATED ON THE BENT MOUNTAIN SUBSTATION, 8920 WILLETT LANE, (TAX MAP NO. 103.00-1-5), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, American Tower Corp. has filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a 180-foot monopole broadcast tower to be located at the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, (Tax Map No. 103.00-1-5) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 3, 2001 and on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on August 28, 2001. 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 American Tower Corp. to construct a 180-foot monopole broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located at the American Electric Power Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane (Tax Map No. 103.00-1-5), Windsor Hills Magisterial District, and 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:\ATTORNEY\mvw\Forms\American Tower SUP.wpd ~.., ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES, LTD. Cellular Tower Photosimulation ate: April 19, 2001 5320 Peters Creek Road, Suite F Bent Mountain Roanoke, Virginia 24019 . S. G. S. Topographic Map, Bent Mountain, Virginia ° (540) 362-2000 phone angle, Dated 1963, Photorevised 1984, and Elliston, (540) 362-1202 fax it 'nia n e, Dated 1963, Photorevised 1972. _. _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ' ~ ~ i, ~~ - ~ - - ,~ ` - _ r 1 ~•.: , . , ,, ~. ~ ~ 4. n ~ , ... . 1 z . -R ~'~F~I~YI I~tUr~ibel~ ~. \ T _ ,.:. ~~tisri t~f Vtew t ~~ _. t ~ . 9,' ~ •. ~ • ,~fnj.~ t ,~,,~ 2 _. ~ -, ~ , ~ .: ~ ~ - _' - t ~ ,e .. a. ° F - ~ , r • _.. ~. i .. ~. - .": ' ~~~. ~lup' " ~ ~ ..• !. ~a ~ ~ .. ,i a • i X •~ a V *. ~ ~ ~ • i . -:. i, l ~ d + . r z • ~] f a i r ~ ~ i r~{ • ~ ~. • ~ F s _ . x .> ~ ~i m ~ • . :. f83~ t ~~ ~ - ~ i ~ jt99 x ~ a 1 _. ~ ~_ ~ Jrw ~, a ~ ~ ~ r h ~ ~ , _;; •. ~ -~ r , _. .•' ~... 4 ~ .' t ~ ~r r ' "~ ' ( ~ ~ t 4~ ',' ~""y 7 t a ~ ~ •' .,, ~ arovit~~~~s~~'T v1 ~~ , .; .. ~ .,~: ~ ~'~, ~ ,. .. ,. -~ , _ v ~. . ~ _ . ~_ ~ ~ ` ; ~ ~ I ' ~~~ r - ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 j ~ n::x: i, r, ;. ` • •, ~tAun«L .. • { ,. ~~ f t~. ~ ~ i i r~'i, . , . ,, .. ~ .~ . ~ ~ ~ V :y • w r• F ~ ~ t • ~ ~ ~ , 11 i ,',. ,.. ' * • ~ ~ ~~ s ! .. ~. ., ~' ~ ~° ,,, _,. • ~, .- w .. .. _, 3- . dh ~, <. • ~ { ! ~• ~ ~ _ J ; l r ~ ~ i r f Id f _.. d 4 ~ 1 ' / s ~ r f *~ ~ ~~ t .. J F ~ ~ } t p e •.; - ~ • ~ ., • '. • •• ~1' T, .. ~ ~ . .. ~ ~ • / ', "' ,,.~F 167 ~ ~ s • 1r,. `• • t A M. ~ fi Y ,4 .. • ~ ~ ~ ~tv~ rnrr 111rnt Yt7Y a . ~~ _ ~Kjs . 16 ~J;rr- 1 ~ ~ ~. .- ' ~ _. ~ ~ ; • 6, . JJ .1i > l.... . - ~ . ~ 4 F 11. ~' ~ ~ . u_ ,.~ .~- i • i~u '~ LL.O N J ~O N ~(nN~N~pp~Np M ~~ ~5~~ ~~,~;v.. a~ ~ a~ x o~~~~ U ~~ ODa c 'C O G) N N ('~ C_ ~A .~ W • ~ j ~ O U U~~ ~•-~ d~~ 3Q ~ p M .~~~ .. Uf .a. ~ e-O~~ ~amv`--. L~OC ~O~d O O ~ 3 N -p•~Ow a ~ ~- ~Q ~i • • • i~u -~~~~o ~NN~ UN f~~~ •~~'~M~ ~~5~°~ «r a~ ~ a~ ~U c ou. o~on U °: ~ ~~ ~a 'C O ~~ C .~ C W C ~ ~ d N M1 N ~ ~ U cH.~ ~'S ~ co~c,c ~o~m E~~~ m ... ~ U to°~~-s c~aa~ ~~ o rn'~°.~cc~a~ o~ o33Ec~ ~~o cv~ o- > F- L J coo ~- ~ • 1 ' ~J • ~LL~~O .... -'gig t~~N ~ ~ C~~ !~ •~.~.. ~°m m~~ ~mYm~ ~ci ~ ~~ o~oa U ~~ g°a 'C O m~ _C .~ W ~ m 7 ~ ~ ~ N ~ UpC~ ~,~ C~ -p •- C ,~ , p .«~ ~ .~ ~<;. C lQ C C ," 3 ~ O p ~~-F; ~~~~ m M ~ C ~ C aim cm~ a3 a,~'" p~~E~ LppQ~O~,;.~ ~- 5 t- ,~ U' ,~. 1 '"' ... c 0 8 c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~~ 1 ~ C ~ L "3 US N~ 22. ~ A a c o ~ ozzrMH sn a N • ,~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ c °,~,V;, c > AG > '~ F ~'nU ~a ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ O ~ A 3 `~ o~ a a. ~ '~,: a a ~ C ~ E b N , ~ `_ ~ y Qy O •~ . ~` ~wv~a ^ `° U ~ m wY 419 ~ giate~ 0 -. o ~ •'co ~ ' a Ez o- ~ .d c m N 1 N G ~" 3 ~' ~ an~9 o ~ ~ i ' . 1 3~ _~ y ~ tTa \\ a J ~ ~ ~ i C r ~ \~ N .~ w = '~ 3 \ ~ r N ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ M . \ `. ~ \ ~~\ ,~ ~ a~ ~,\ ~' c ~`~ °: ,,~ ~ `N O ~~ O ~y ` Z ``' a ~, 0 8 ^ ~ GC C '~ ~ ,~ _ L ~ ~ ~ ~ U c ~ US 2~2~1 Nwy . ~ _ ~ a A - o ~ - F ~~ °o>a a ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~o~ ~ • ~ ~ aA3`'~, E ~~ `~;.~C: ~' w ~ o a ~~~~ b N .~, ~a~'~ ~ ~ \r o NwY 419 ~ ~ • ce gta u ~ o ~ 'm a ~ r o ~ .ai <a • c m N - EO N C '" UI ~ ; '~.~ ~ ,~ 3 ~ an~9 t~ p ti O ~ ' ~Q -~ ~\ d w ~ ~ R J ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ N •- w - 'j 3 ~ \ ~ r N ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ \ \ ~~ ~ ~~ ai `. ti ~ ,n ~~ ~ `~ ^o N C !~ IN \~, C ~ .~ ~ t ~ ' a U .7- c M C ~ y 1~ v ~ ^-1 ^ < ~ b ~ 1N _~ Q r `~' US N~ 22.1 - ~ A ~ ~ ~ ,r ~ Ozz~fl a o o ° ~>a F T ~ ~ v,U 8 ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ a ~ ,~~ l ~'~ a ~ ~ C ~ ^~O 'i Q N ~wv~a ^ U [~ ` Hwy 419 ~ Stated E+ o c ;cu a ' ~ E_ o• ~ .d R cn m ao N T,y ,, ~ ~~, ~, . , da ~ ~ .~ b pad ' '7_' ~ a,~~ 9 ti ~ ~~/ ~ , ~ PA ~ ~ ~ --- d ~ `~ \ >. ~o R ~ ~ J ~ ~ C O .. y ~ ~ ~ N _~ ~ j ~ \ W N A t \ N \ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ' ~~~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~~ N ~ ~ a1 \\ 7 N ~~ \ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ IN ~ ~~ a U ~~~ --~ ~ ~ c ° ti ~ '~ d ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ O ~ c~ USN~221 ' ° °°'°~° ~ ', *'~ ~ ozz~sn ~ ~ a ' ~ ° a F o c ~ ~ ~ o °~ ,n 's ,.a 8 o `~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~°, ~ ~ c n°~ v1 m ~ ' oY. .''~~> r:, P4 b c v°~ d ~ C O ' b N .~ rC~S y ~ p•i ~ ~ o Q~ > ~ m ~ • ` Q19 H~ o SCate c H ~ c L ~ \ ^ ~" O ~ .d _, ~ \\ ~ ^ \ . ~ ~ N C ~ ~'~ ~ _ ~ ~ ah, c ti J} ~8 ~ ~~ ~ ~ "'~~ ` ` i ~+ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ^ w \ ~a J \ C O G1 ~ ~ ~ _ > ~ W ~ eo t M C ~ \ r" C \ ~ N 6J ~ ~ b lC4 '~ ~~ Iw p .~ L a V\ AGENDA ITEM NO.S -' ~ O~ AOANO,YF` ~ ~« p z ~ ~ z 0~ ~~ APPEARANCE REQUEST 1838 ~:_PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS q t~ ~ .~ SUBJECT: ~' ' ''` E r~~ u~. 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: ,~ ADDRESS: PHONE: /t~~~`~ ~ ~ ~ ?°A"~~F AGENDA ITEM NO. ''S'l o ~~ ~~~ Z : ~, o Z a APPEARANCE REQUEST 1838 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~'~-~ ~ ~~ ~ ~'r" I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that 1 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: ~a;~I~ ~ ~~- u_ ~ ~ I ~ C ~ `~~ U ADDRESS: J ~ ~C) L ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~~ , PHONE: ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I~,O Gc vt ~~-~ Cvuw~y v AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE 082801-11 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO THE COMMUNITY OF FAITH FOR A RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY USE TO BE LOCATED AT 5343 FALLOWATER LANE (TAX MAP NO. 77.19-1-20.2), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, The Community of Faith has filed a petition for a special use permit for a religious assembly use to be located at 5343 Fallowater Lane (Tax Map No. 77.19-1-20.2) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matterwas held on August 28, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to The Community of Faith for a religious assembly use to be located at 5343 Fallowater Lane (Tax Map No. 77.19-1-20.2) 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: 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\community.faith.sup.doc 1 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 Minnix to adopt the ordinance with condition 1 (A) deleted from the ordinance and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Yn.,a~-~-- ,`~ . emu.-e.-.~_ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\community.faith.sup.doc 2 PETITIONER: The Comrriunity bf Faith CASE NUMBER: 26-8/2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: August 7, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: August 28, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of The Community of Faith to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious assembly use on a 1.033 acre site, zoned C-2, located at 5343 Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. S'-~ C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. John Murphy presented the staff report. Mr. Natt represented the church. The discussion centered around the Core designation in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan and the specific language that does not support tax-exempt facilities in Core designated areas. Mr. Witt and Mr. Robinson discussed the fee in- lieu of taxes proposal from the applicant. D. IMPOSED CONDITIONS 1. The church will provide a service fee at 80% of its annual tax base (annual service fee). E. F. G COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt made a motion to approve the request with the condition. The motion failed on a 2-2 vote. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE Commissioners expressed strong concern about a tax exempt facility in a Core area. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission .~ _` ~. 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: ~'13 +Q I Received by: R c -rw Application fee: ~~ ~~ PC/;ate: 8 7 ~~ Placards issued: BOS dat 8~~~~01 Case Number a (o - g /200 ~ ALL tPPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) 0 Rezoning Special Use O Variance ACT : mllllAFtD A. NATI", 3 912 EL.ECf R I C t~D, R(]ANOKE VA 2 4 018 Appplicants name/address w/zip ishone• .989-0000 QNMI`1 I TY OF FA I ll-I c/o Jim Hain, 3433 Brambleton Avenue, Suite B117 Fax No. 772-0126 Roanoke, VA 24018 OOIVfQ;GT : ETJWARD A. NATT, 3 912 ELECTRIC ROAD, PoQANOKPE , VA 2 4 018 h Owner sname/address w/zip one: g g 9- 0 0 0 0 David L. >; Susan B. Dickerson 4138 Woodridge Drive Fax No. 772-0126 Roanoke, VA 24018 Property Location Magisterial District: Cave Spring 5343 Fallowater Lane Community Planning area: Cave S r i Tax Map No.: 77,19-01-20.02 Existing Zoning: C-2 ~~~,~1 A~.~r~~ ; , r .~a_ Size of parcel(s): Acres: 1.032 acres, more o Existing Land Use: G ast ics fac i I i t ess :.REZONING AND SPECIAL 1/7SE PERitiTIT APPLICANTS (R/S~ Proposed Zoning: C-2 - Spec i a l Use Permi t Proposed Land Use: Church re I i i ous assemb I ) 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 O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIltED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No ~ 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 MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. V v X Consultation ~ 8 I/2" x 11 " concept plan `' X Application fee X 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 th ope `th owner s agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. ner s Signature ~ ~'LT~TII?ICATION FOR :REZONING OR-SPECIAL TTSE PERMIT REQUEST Applicant ~I I TY OF FAITH 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 provisions of the C-2 zoning ordinance permit religious assembly. The proposed building fits the type and character of a facility to be used for religious purposes. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. - The provisions of the Roanoke County Com~runity Plan provide that uses permitted in zoning districts may be established there. In the C-2 District, religious assembly is permitted with the granting of a special use permit. The proposed building in its location adequately fits the purposes of the C-2 Zoning District and would provide for a good use of the subject property. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. J° -~,,, The use of the property for religious assembly will not have any negative impact on public services including water, sewer, roads, schools, parks, recreation, fire and rescue. The proposed use is a low demand for any of such uses. PROFFERS Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 5343 Fallowater Lane Cave Spring Magisterial District Roanoke County 77.19-01-20.02 Community of Faith David L. and Susan B. Dickerson PROFFERS The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The subject property will be used solely for religious purposes. 2. There will be no exterior changes to the existing building. COMMUNITY OF FAITH By: L. Dickerson Susan B. Dickerson F:\ofnak\Users\CBaumgazdner\ZONING\Cotnmunity of Faith PROFFERS.doc ~- .~. ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants Name: Community Of Faith Zoning: Existing C2, Proposed C2 Special Use Tax Map No. 77.19-1-20.2 ~~ ~~ Ni=D ryy ~~pp N Apm 2 ~ ~O O 3 C N N N s ~~~ ~~ D ~ N O U~ O N N OO Z A N N 3 O ~ TT 2 3 NA ~ m n ~' rn N -Zi O N O 3 D Av ~~ ~~ I O ~ ~ z ~ '' 8 - !~; LY PE REVISIONS GONGEPT REZONING SITE PLAN ®: ~~ $~ nN~-+ DDDDD ~'~-NU s ~ FOR Y% @~ _xOG~ ti.~ ' ~ : ~ COMMUNITY OF FAITH GHURGH ~~ ~ r t ~~x I I~ --._-.. _.., ~ ., ___....,.._._,_ ~ f ~~Mm ,'O IRON P[N SET' • IRON I'lN F01)plp D.O. t211 , PG. 51 SG\LG: I ° = 40' NORTI I \ N/F vIRGINIA NATIONAL BANK o.a.ll3(~,PG. se TAX MAP # 'I~ W87.07-2-I o'>~~~ Q o `~~~ ~ti~~ ~ W N `Oti 1 T111S IS TO CERTFY THAT MJ ACCUf1AlE FIELD SURVEY OF THE PREMISES S41CVfN HENEON tllti ffEEN rl:nrmMr:D ` UNDER 61Y SUPE FlVISIO N; THAT AEI, IMRROVEMEN TS AND V1510LE EVIDENCE OF ELSE MF.NTS ARE SFIOWN HFAEON. ANO THAT THERE ARE tl0 ENCFlDAOHMENTS m' IMPROVEMENTS EITHER FROM ADJOINING PRGMISES OR FROM .. SUTUEOT PNEIASE 5 OTFIER TITAN SHOWN HEREON. RIIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITROUT RIE OENEFIT OF A H ~l,E REPORT M101S SUI3JEGT TO INFORMATION Y/1ITCH MAY 0E DISCLOSED F)Y JVI:H, PRCI'ERI"71S III F.EMA. cEFINeD zoNE UNSF+AOED X oSA / ~y< ~~ Fez F ~,~ e FTr ti ~ '4k F e / 9 S~So 9~0> &6 ti 69 .. ~3- ~z,3 8_ ~ 00 tea. ~.~- ~Pv p\~c~ J ~ h 14.3 ~~ ~J~,y~a~ UUVO p; ~ 6 zm ~Q e ~ m~ W~~ o J Q h 2~. w O M ~ N o ~ cV N o 0 Na ~' ~ •O_ 0 ~~~ ~~ ~ •o_ ~s °~ s9: PART OF PARCEL ( / 1.032 ACRES r ASPHALT i PARKING ~.. 9 ~~N to l W t- J ~ O ~. _ r` 0 9 °G 'zWl°n~k a 8~~ t>) ~ o ~ o J; r ~ o cV ~" Z _ o MAN NOLC W WC0. 2~ __ _- -.--- _- -___ -_ -- -_- Po1.6a - P. U. E. 2 3T .00 ~ Y 3+-s.d ,o al, 6?AN/~P.O oFN .. -~,. cuae ''~- N`1-7° 38'QC~'~E wATea METEf\ cDnB y,o~ FALLOWATER LANE,. S.'W. (RT. ?95) R/w VARIES 4~. NorES~ I. OWNER OF FiECARD~ AMHERST ASSOCIATES 2. LEGAL REFEFIENCE: PEED 6008 1211, PAGE 4-7 3, TAX MAP NUMF3EFZ: '77.19-I- Z0.2 4. UNDERGROUND UTILITY 8{=RVICE LINES r;IYSI^r~,L 1iv11-Y,UVtiv1ENT SUFv,VEy FoR DAVIDI L.' DICKERSON SUSAN B. DICKERSON SS43 FALLOWATEP, LANE,S,W. (R1-.795 1.032 ACRES AS DESCF\16E~ IN DEED 600K IZIt, PAG~4~7 CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT" RoANO1cE COUNTY ,VIRGINIA SUFLVEY DATE p,000Sr 51199(0 JO6 NUMBER, R9(o20997 ~O~~~p,i.Ti-i O~Gt ~~~~~x ~ JOHN R. McADEN a No.GG~OG2 ~~~.8 ~'- g64 PLANNERS•ARCHITECTS•ENGINEERS•SURVEYORS• 1208 CORPORATE CIRCLE, ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 772-9580 a ~~~ .;; ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 2 o ~~~ h~~ ~~~ ,~. :~~ ~~! ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~P~~ I I r~ I I ~~~ ICI ~ ~ ~~ .. o\ ~' ~"'+r' ~ • z ~ ~ • ~ B \~'s v ~~~.,~ ~~ q~ a i• r ~'~ r ~9. +.. ~ ` tea.,:, ~~,~,~~~ kc r.;v\ «c 7 1 . ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ rJ~s )`r>tr~~ a ~ ,~ g~ ~~~ ~ ~~ E r ~d. m~ y { ~ m ~ ;= ~ 6 ~ f ;~ ~ ~•,~ ~ 43 , a r~ , . ~ ~'~ `•f ~~. ~ m ~~ L ~. ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ `. x m '~ ~' s ~~~ ~©~ ''~,. ~s `~ p r . ~~ :a r" • N ~ ~ ~ o ~, ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ a n k p ~ ~ ~i~ge~v ~~~2~a ~ 9 ~t ~q qa`~~ ~~I R ~~~~ A~~ ~v ~~ ~a " ~~ t ~ F pp ~ W vg a 9~ 4 ~ ~ ~~ ~w ~~ W R 1) ~ `4 ~a~~ `~~ ~~ n z a ~ a ~s~~ a~~ ~4~~ ~~ c ~ 9 ~ W aevisioNS y GONGEPT REZONING SITE PLAN 7d~ ~j ~~~ ncn~ DDDDD~? 0 ,:~ U g FOR ~~ $~ r x°~ CIF _~~ COMMUNITY OF FAITH GHURGH ~~ ~ ; ! ~~x R LAW OFFICES OSTERHOUDT, PRILLAMAN, MATT, HELSCHER, POST, MAXWELL & FERGUSON, PLC Edward A. Natt Please reply to: P. O. Box 20487 Roanoke, VA 24018 Direct: (540) 725-8180 Fax: (540) 772-0126 E-mail: enatt@opnlaw.com 3912 ELECTRIC ROAD, S.W. P. ~. BOX 20487 ROAXOHE, VIRGIPIA 24018.0049 (540) 989-0000 FA.~ (540) 772-0128 July 19, 2001 Mr. John Murphy County of Roanoke Department of Planning and Zoning P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Special Use Permit Request -Community of Faith 5343 Fallowater Lane (Tax Map No. 77.19-O1-20.02) Dear John: ~_ SALEM, VIRGINIA 24153 P. O. Box 27f3 105 N. COLORADO STREET (540) 380-2348 FAX (540) 389-9580 This letter will confirm our telephone conversation wherein I advised you that the Community of Faith Church is willing to pay a service charge in lieu of taxes on the property on Fallowater Lane. This letter will further confirm our telephone conversation that a church is a permitted use in a C2 district with a Special Use Permit. The Board of Supervisors has the right to attach conditions to the Special Use Permit. My client is willing to accept a condition relating to the payment of a service charge in lieu of taxes. Very truly yours, OSTERHOUDT, PRILLAMAN, NATT, HELSCHER, YOST, MAXWELL & FERGUSON, P.L.C. CNw~A~ Edward A. Natt EAN/csb pc: Mr. Jim Hain Community of Faith Church 3433 Brambleton Avenue, Suite Bl 17 Roanoke, VA 24018 STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: Community of Faith PREPARED BY: John Murphy DATE:. August 7, 2001 S~ CASE NUMBER: 26-8/2001 PART I A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This petition is a request for a Special Use Permit on a C-2 zoned property at 5343 Fallowater Lane for a Religious Assembly use. The parcel is 1.03 acres and currently houses the Roanoke Academy of Gymnastics. The subject property is designated as Core in the 1998 Community Plan. The property is located in the Cave Spring Community Planning Area and the Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. DESCRIPTION This is a request for a Special Use Permit on a C-2 zoned property at 5343 Fallowater Lane for a Religious Assembly use. The applicant has provided two (2) "proffered" conditions to be included with the Special Use Permit request. These conditions include limiting the use solely for religious purposes and making no changes to the exterior of the existing building. The property is designated as Core in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan and is located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS In considering a Special Use Permit, the proposed development shall conform to the County's Community Plan and other County policies including the purposes of the zoning ordinance, have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood in terms of traffic congestion, noise, drainage and other factors listed in Section 30-19-1 of the zoning ordinance. The religious assembly use is permitted in the C-2 zoning district, with the approval of a Special Use Permit. The C-2 district permits a wide variety of retail and service related uses. Land uses permitted in_ this district are generally consistent with the recommendations set forth in the Transition and Core land use categories of the Comprehensive Development Plan. Site development regulations are designed to insure compatibility with adjoining uses. VDOT may evaluate the existing entrance, with the change of use for the property, to insure compliance with the commercial entrance standards. Sealed building plans shall be reviewed by the Building Commissioner and Planning staff for any interior building changes. PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Location -The property is located at 5343 Fallowater Lane (State Route 795) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. Topography/Ve etg anon -The existing building and parking is situated slightly above road grade ~`°'~ with thick vegetation near the southeastern side of the property. The building is located to the rear of the site with the parking situated between the building and Fallowater Lane. Surroundin~Nei~hborhood -Immediately adjoining the subject property to the west is the Boone Office Park. On the southern side is the K-92 Building and to the east is the access drive from Fallowater Lane that serves Valley Bank. Fallowater Lane serves several office complexes in the general area and is situated between Bernard Drive and Starkey Road. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture -The existing building is a steel building with a partial stone facade. There is a front access with several steps up to a landing for primary access. A second access to the building is a set of double doors at parking lot grade on the eastern side of the building. The applicant has "proffered" two (2) conditions and one of those states that no exterior changes will be made to the building. Access -One commercial entrance exists to the property from Fallowater Lane. VDOT will require a new commercial entrance permit application since this is a change of use. VDOT will also evaluate the stormwater discharge from this site as part of the entrance permit. Additional drainage infrastructure maybe required along Fallowater Lane. The posted speed limit on Fallowater Lane is 25mph and has an estimated traffic count of 3,370 vehicles per day. Traffic Circulation -The existing parking area has arrows on the pavement marking the recommended traffic flow. The anticipated additional traffic for this proposed use would be at "off-peak" times such as Sundays and evening hours. Fire & Rescue/Utilities -The property is currently served with public water and sewer. There is no anticipated impact on public safety services. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The property is designated as Core in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. Core is a future land use area where high intensity urban development is encouraged. Land uses within Core areas may parallel the central business districts of Roanoke, Salem and Vinton. Core areas may also be appropriate for larger-scale highway oriented retail uses and regionally based shopping facilities. Due to limited availability, areas designated as Core are not appropriate for tax-exempt facilities. The area of the subject property is also located within the Economic Opportunity Area for South County as shown in the Roanoke County Community Plan. D. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Any site development changes would require site plan review to insure compliance with Roanoke County Development Standards. Building changes will require sealed plans for review by the Building Commissioner and Planning staff. PART III A. STAFF CONCLUSIONS This petition is a request for a Special Use Permit for the conversion of an existing commercial building to the Religious Assembly use. The applicant "proffered" two (2) conditions with the ~...,~ application. These proposed conditions would limit the use of the property solely for religious purposes and not permit any changes to the exterior of the building. The proposed conditions, if imposed, would not benefit the site. If exterior changes were necessary or requested, to enhance the building's appearance, another public hearing process would need to be initiated prior to construction. The second "proffered" condition solely limits the use for religious purposes. The proposed Religious Assembly use is within a Core future land use designation and South County Economic Opportunity Area. These designations promote highway-oriented retail uses and shopping facilities. According to the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the availability of Core designated properties are limited and are not appropriate for tax-exempt facilities. Staff is recommending that these conditions not be imposed. The Economic Opportunity Area designation is the first step to potentially reserve the zoning designation of property to allow the County necessary land resources to remain competitive in the economic development market. The requirement of a Special Use Permit for a use allows the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors the ability to evaluate a proposed use and the consistency with the Community Plan and Roanoke County policies. The Department of Economic Development strongly opposes this petition because the area is an established commercial district in the Tanglewood Mall vicinity. Land for new office and other commercial uses in the Tanglewood Mall area is at a premium. Staff has discussed, with the applicant, the issue oftax-exempt facilities not being supported in Core designated areas. The applicant has supplied a letter indicating a willingness to pay a service charge in lieu of taxes for the property on Fallowater Lane for the Religious Assembly use. Staff would encourage the Planning Commission to discuss this issue with the applicant. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, ~~ VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO THE COMMUNITY OF FAITH FOR A RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY USE TO BE LOCATEDAT5343FALLOWATERLANE (TAXMAPN0.77.19-1-20.2), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, The Community of Faith has filed a petition for a special use permit for a religious assembly use to be located at 5343 Fallowater Lane (Tax Map No. 77.19-1-20.2) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on August 28, 2001. 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 The Community of Faith for a religious assembly use to be located at 5343 Fallowater Lane (Tax Map No. 77.19-1-20.2) 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 church will provide a service fee at 80% of its annual tax base (annual service fee). 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. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONI NG\community.faith.sup.wpd OF ROANO,,~~L ~ .~ z ~ o *Z v ,~, ~°a AGENDA ITEM NO. -S -~ ~~83a APPEARANCE REQUEST v~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / 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:~~II.~MFS ~~~ ~.~T7j,~ ADDRESS: ~~~~ ~~To~ ~~ ~ S ~ G~~ ~ X01 ~ PHONE: ~~-g~a ~"' ~ 9 ~ ~ G~fr~- ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ 8 `' Supervisor's Meeting August 28, 2001 Mr. Chairman, members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors: The members of Community of Faith appreciate and thank you for your gracious consideration of the matter before you at this time. I have mailed to each of you a letter outlining the history of our denomination and congregation. We come from a proud tradition of persons who have worshipped under the banner of Brethren In Christ for more than 220 years. In our effort at establishing a body of believers iu this denomination in the Roanoke Valley, we have searched valiantly for a place to grow our young church. We have found that Roanoke County is a difficult place to do that. The public school system was not at all receptive to this group of taxpayers renting a school facility for the purpose of starting a church. Therefore we were compelled to move to Roanoke City to rent g SP~E from the Seventh Day Adventist Church until such time that we could amass enough financial support to purchase our own facility. We found and purchased the property at 5343 Fallowater Lane, which has had few interested buyers over the year that it was offered for sale. Thus we purchased that facility, hoping to move our group to a place of our own and back into the county where the members of our church live. We humblyrequest that you approve our usage of that site for religious assembly. The Planning Commission pointed out to us several weeks ago that this site is in the core development area for business in Roanoke County. We believe that the core area of any city is the place for a house of worship. That fact has been borne out in literally thousands of cities across America since we became a great nation. Proper supervision of a county's resources is not simply a matter of gaining as much wealth as possible from a tax base. Proper supervision means giving guidance to awell-rounded and holistic plan of development for the benefit of the citizens of any locality. I submit to you that any such plan of development ought to allow for places of worship to have visibility in core areas. There is great historic precedence for that sacred idea, even here in the Roanoke Valley. In„ ~x~.~~s.-1 a wcU,,~aNcgs Our congregation ~ to work out an appropriate arrangement for offering to the County a sum of money to offset any loss in tax revenue because of our ownership of said building, (as you have already heard here tonight). We desire to be good citizens of this valley. We will continue to be a positive influence to this area, as is the case with the gymnastic group, which is meeting there presently. May God bless you as you make your decision. We thank you for all you do to supervise our wonderful county. ~~~ coo ~5~ ~_ ,~,.. _.:~ ,„,. a~ P°ANOkF AGENDA ITEM NO. ~'~-~ ,~ ~ Z az ,83a APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / 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: ~~ a A Y~'Y~ ~ ra V v ,. . ~ ADDRESS: ~G1~~-1 ~.-~ ° V' ~`~,c.~J .~r~~r~. PHONE: ~ ~ ~- ~~~~ ..,.- ~ `.-~ -.~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE 082801-12 DENYING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO HUGH R. ELSEA AND CAROLYN ELSEA FOR A PRIVATE HORSE STABLE ON 2.99 ACRES TO BE LOCATED AT 3663 CHAPARRAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 87.09-3-3), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Hugh R. Elsea and Carolyn Elsea have filed a petition for a special use permit for a private horse stable to be located at 3663 Chaparral Avenue (Tax Map No. 87.09-3-3) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on August 28, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board, by unanimous vote, denies the petition of Hugh R. and Carolyn Elsea to obtain a Special Use Permit. 2. That the Petitioner will be given 30 days following the birth of the foal to remove all horses from the property. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to deny the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\elsea.stable.sup.doc 1 A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\elsea.stable.sup.doc 2 PETITIONER: Chaparral Drive Private Stable ~_~ CASE NUMBER: 27-8/2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: August 7, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: August 28, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of Hugh R. & Carolyn Elsea to obtain a Special Use Permit for a private horse stable on 2.99 acres and a 30 foot right-of-way on adjoining parcel located at 3663 Chaparral Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Several citizens spoke. Ms. Hurley Ward spoke in favor of the petition, citing benefits of horsemanship for children. Mr. Gary Atkinson spoke in opposition to the petition, citing manure odor, insect problems, possible surface water contamination, incompatible agricultural land uses. Bonnie Dickerson spoke in favor of the petition. John McCleary spoke in favor of the petition, citing no odor or noise problems. Chris Lee spoke in favor of the petition, and said that the acreage of pasture was adequate. Robert Hamblin spoke in opposition, citing concerns about long-term impacts to existing tree buffers and ground cover. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. David Holladay presented the staff report. Ed Natt, counsel for the petitioner, presented a history of the case. Ms. Hooker asked about how much acreage was actually being used as pasture. Mr. Robinson commented that the approximately 1.5 acres of pasture seemed insufficient for three horses. Mr. Witt expressed concerns that the stable is proposed in a densely developed residential area. Mr. Witt offered a list of recommended conditions. D. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS ^ There shall be maximum of two horses on the property. ^ There shall be a 50' setback on the northwest side (Snowgoose Court side). ^ There shall be Planning Commission Review of the Special Use Permit in one year. ^ The new fence shall be constructed of natural wood. ^ The waste shall be completely removed at a minimum of twice weekly. ^ The pastureland shall be divided into two areas and the animals shall be rotated between pastures. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt then made the motion to recommend denial of the Special Use Permit with the above conditions. Motion carried 3-1. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission ~~~ 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 O 1 Date recei ~, j/ 0 Received by: ` ~ 1 / J 5 Application fee: ~ PC/BZA date: Placards issued: BOS date: s-as-o, Case Number a 7- g 2 0 Q 1 AI;L APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) O Rezoning $I Special Use ~ Variance EDIV~AGT : FJ7WARD A. NATT, 3 912 ELECTRIC P,OAD, RCIANOKE, VA 2 4 018 Applicants name/address w/zip Phone• 989-0000 Hugh R.,,Jr. and Carolyn Elsea 772-0126 3663 Chaparral Drive Fax No. Roanoke VA 2 40 1 Q~yg ~ p eA 24018 p ~~' 3912 ELECTRIC RQ~4D, RCIANOI~F~o / ~ ~r n iz ame/address w Ow ns 989-0000 Hugh R., Jr. and Carolyn Elsea 3663 Chaparral Drive Fax No. 772-0126 Roanoke, VA 24018 Property Location Magisterial District: Cave S r i ng 3663 Chaparra I Avenue Community Planning area: Cave S r i Tax Map No.: 87,09-03-03 Existing Zoning: R-1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: 2.99 acres + 30 Existing Land Use: Res iclent i a ao rig ~a `may on a Io~ni~ parce ', REZONING AND SPECLAL TJSE PERIYTIT APPLIC,~VTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: R-1 Special Use Permi t Proposed Land Use: residential wi th a r i va to s tab l e Does the parcel meet the minimum Iot azea, 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 FIItST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes 0 No ~ Vt1RlANCE 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 MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. / / V / V X Consultation 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan X Application fee X Application Metes and bounds description X Proffers, if applicable X Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owne f the pr erty or the owner s agent or ontract purchas and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. ~ r Owner s Signature ~~` JZI~TIF`ICA`I!TON ,p'OR REZONING OR. SPECIAL USE PERNTIT `REQUEST Applicant Hugh R. E I sea , J r . and Ca ro I yn Goodspeed-E I sea 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 Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance permits a special use permit for a private stable on R-1 property under certain circumstances. The Ordinance, in including in its guidelines certain limitations, provides for an appropriate use on a parcel of land of sufficient size to justify the same. The applicants in this case desire to have a private stable for their personal horses. The applicants have established fencing boundaries so that the horses do not .come to the property line. The pFans do not include a barn. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community -Plan. The general guidelines and policies in the Roanoke County Comprehensive-Plan allow for private stables in an R-1 District with a special use permit. The proposed use here is simply for personal use and would be limited to a maximum of three horses at any time. This is in keeping with the provisions of the County 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/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. The project will not have a negative impact on public services and facilities including water, sewer, roads, schools, parks, recreation, fire and rescue. .~-3 PROFFERS Address of Subject Property: 3663 Chaparral Avenue Cave Spring Magisterial District Roanoke County Tax Ma~No.: 87.09-03-03 Applicant's Name: Hugh R. Elsea, Jr. and Carolyn Goodspeed-Elsea Owners: Hugh R. Elsea, Jr. and Carolyn Goodspeed-Elsea The undersigned owners do hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The subject properly will be used for a private stable for no more than three horses at any time. 2. The private stable will be solely for the private use of the owners and no commercial activities will be associated with the same. H g se , Jr. Carolyn oodspeed-El ea \UOLLY\SYS\ofnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Elsea PROFFERS.doc ~3 z w a ~~~ o ~+ P ym 6. L' ~ •e ~ ~ 61 C ca 1 ~ ~ Fi 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 3 o L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I v, ~ ~' ' ~ ~p1ASG i I ~O `° ~ i i ~;,• ~ ~ M s ~ ~~ B ' ~ ~ ` ~. ~ o I i .~ y ~ i w .~ ~ o ~ ~ ~, m d' ~ ~ ~ ` ~ + I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ o w o ~o ~ i ~ - ~ ~ ~ I R o v Q ` ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ K_ .~ ~ a ~X ~ ~ ~ ~. l ~3~ ~E ~:~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~X~ .~~ ~~.~ ~~ xw~ ~.~ z ~ ,..i N M ..~ .~ 1.9-686~ObS Paadspoo~ u/~~as~ Wd 6Z b LOOZ '6L /~In~ '~eps~nyl ..~'; 16 /~ 3 1g8• ~ ~ 562 20 ^~ 3609 y39.52 3565 3559 ~ N ~ 17. ~ 8 19 ^ . ro ~ 15 A~' ~ ~ @ 7 v 3607 m o 15. 5568 l. 0 ,~ 26. 0 0 Al 91 1s 18. ~ 16. 210.94 0,' 4A a 41 p ~ °i 17 . N ^a 3644 ~ °~ 9 ' ' 1' all '0o fa - 1s 15 , 27. fo ~~ o ~t 4 16 102 5574 18' ~ 36`78 5 ~ 3632 I s~ 1391 >7 t 02 -i'1 1 1Ag• 152 273 9g'~ J 28. ~ O 1p ~ 0 7 ? 706 9 46 t4 63.85 10 .22 8 2j2 6 ~ g 2 9 ' 1 1 5582 , 13 6~ 10 0 . ~ ~ 6.0 BS 110 5° 4043 19 3624 ? 90.06 54.19 35.63 . 74 0h 8 ' ^ 30. 8 s fa ~ 3. . ~^ 4os1 '9S 100 _ ~ ~ u 162 8q ~.°~ '~ 1 1 3614 31. ~ 32. A 3566 35 fl0 9. ~~O '`fli g ~ 1~ 4032 2g5 1~S 3608 ~ °~ 3602 f1 1,i 110 175 ~6 73 ° ~ 4061 ~~~ ~ 6786 .~ gay S6 109.65 m 7 44 ~5 5 $1' ' ' 9 60 234.22 . w - g 7 f0 10, 99 ~ ~ 2 1° B ° 7. 7 3040 N 1 43 8 69;15 GO ~0 9 ~ ~ 6 45. 4 M0 h 3 4071 'ss 0~' 1 ° , 9 4081 1° ~O~ 40.12 63?3 11 1 ~ 7 ~~ ~ ~ 12. ~ . ti° 4° ~ 6'64 A5 ~ tigy ~ s~, s ~, 5 f7 8 ` 25.05 ~88 N~ 11° - . 46 72.7 g ~ 1 AA ~ ,~ 8 ` 6 4040 3034 . 11 4 9 0 06 l, 1 05 1A$~ s c 1y O 79 •ya 6 gs 47. 9 S~ 4050 ~ 90 4 5~ g0 5 2 4 J 3026 11 ~ 50 ~ • 1 ~ 6 5 Al ~ ° 0 - y 1 ° 4o5a 2,eG a~. 48. a 3 1~° 3020 ~ ~ m 3 4066 A 365.7 9O 1~° 74 "S3 S 1~~ A ~~ 1 29 Ac ~ . . 9 O 8 . ~ ~ 3647 1.36 Ac. `SSO ~ ~~ ~6 ss~ ' ~ ryy'S e ti b - 7 • ` C 1 ~ '1 L 3659 6$ ~ 1 3665 ,~ ~ 3645 4.2~S , ~~51 10 °ry e ~ S ~ 21 10. g ~ $ a '~ 5 ' / 2 9 ~ ~, c 3721 1g° . 3671 ~~ a 2 2 12. 3.36 Ac. Penn Forest Wes/eyan Chinch 3735 ROANOKE COUNTY Applicant: Hugh R. Jr. and Carolyn Elsea DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: RI Special use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 87.09-3-3 ~ J STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: Hugh & Carolyn Elsea PREPARED BY: David Holladay CASE NUMBER: 27-08/2001 DATE: 8/7/01 PART I A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Hugh & Carolyn Elsea are requesting a Special Use Permit for a Private Stable on a 2.99- acre tract. A maximum of one horse per acre would be permitted. The property is designated Neighborhood Conservation in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. The proposed use does not conform with the policies and guidelines of the Community Plan. B. DESCRIPTION Hugh & Carolyn Elsea are requesting a Special Use Permit for a Private Stable on a 2.99-acre tract. The property is zoned R-1, Residential, and is located at 3663 Chaparral Drive, in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Private Stables are allowed by Special Use Permit in the R-1 zoning district. Use and Design Standards for Private Stables allow a maximum of one stable animal per acre, for lots less than five acres. Erosion and sediment control measures may be necessary, depending upon the extent of grazing in the pasture areas. PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background - In June, 2001, the Department of Community Development received a call that horses were being kept at 3663 Chaparral Drive. Investigation of the complaint revealed three horses on the property. In a letter dated June 12, 2001, Mr. & Mrs. Elsea were informed that keeping the horses on the property, without a Special Use Permit, was a violation of the zoning ordinance. Two alternatives were given for corrective action, either apply promptly for a Special Use Permit, or remove the horses within 15 days. The Elseas were also informed that if the Special Use Permit was denied by the Board of Supervisors, that the horses would have to be removed from the property. ,~ ,~ Topog_raphy/Ve etg_ ation -The property slopes gently from northwest to southeast. Much of the southwest portion of the property is grass yard. The remainder of the property includes a single family home and mature trees surrounding the house. Surrounding_Nei~hborhood -All adjoining properties are zoned R-1, Residential. Land use in the vicinity includes single family homes. Most lots in the immediate vicinity range in area from 13,000 to 18,000 square feet. Three adjoining or nearby lots are slightly larger than one acre. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout -The petitioners have established two pasture areas on the western and southern sides of their driveway. Each pasture area contains a shaded feeding station. Fly traps are hung near the feeding stations, and other locations. Manure is removed twice weekly. No structures are available or planned for the horses. The three horses are currently kept in the western pasture area. The western area shows signs of grazing, and some of the pasture and wooded area has lost ground cover. The petitioner intends to alternate grazing in each area. According to the petitioner, the horses may not be on the property all the time, but their intention is to have some space near their home to keep horses during delivery of foals, or acclimation to humans, training, etc. Other pasture on Bent Mountain will be available for them to use. The Elseas are requesting a Special Use Permit to keep three horses. With their petition, the Elseas submitted proffers limiting the number of horses to three, and limiting the stable to the private use of the owners with no commercial activity. While proffers cannot be accepted for Special Use Permits, the Planning Commission and/or Board of Supervisors may impose conditions on Special Use Permits. If the Planning Commission makes a favorable recommendation, conditions limiting the number of horses, and establishing aone-year administrative review of the permit, should be imposed. Fire & Rescue/Utilities -The proposed use would not affect fire and rescue service. Public water and sanitary sewer are available to the site. C. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The property is designated Neighborhood Conservation in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. The Neighborhood Conservation designation applies to areas where established single- familyneighborhoods are delineated and the conservation of the existing development pattern is encouraged. Encouraged land use types are single-family homes, and neighborhood institutional uses such as schools, parks and churches. The proposed agricultural use does not conform with the policies and guidelines of the Community Plan. 2 D. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The property meets the minimum lot area requirements for private stables. For lots less than five acres, the petitioner is limited to one stable animal per acre. The petitioners' legal description of the property describes a 2.992-acre tract. The petitioner was informed that staff would accept a private stable application for three horses. PART III A. STAFF CONCLUSIONS The private stable is proposed on a 2.99-acre parcel. Two alternating pasture areas are proposed in the southern and western portions of the property. No stables or other structures are proposed. While the petitioner's property meets the minimum required lot area for private stables, most adjoining parcels are more typical in size and comparable with other nearby subdivisions. Land uses in the vicinity include single family homes, schools and churches. The property is designated Neighborhood Conservation in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. The proposed agricultural use does not conform with the policies and guidelines of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. If the Planning Commission makes a favorable recommendation, conditions limiting the number of horses, and establishing aone-year administrative review of the permit, should be imposed. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO HUGH R. ELSEA AND CAROLYN ELSEA FOR A PRIVATE HORSE STABLE ON 2.99 ACRES TO BE LOCATED AT 3663 CHAPARRAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 87.09-3-3), CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Hugh R. Elsea and Carolyn Elsea have filed a petition for a special use permit for a private horse stable to be located at 3663 Chaparral Avenue (Tax Map No. 87.09-3-3) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on August 28, 2001. 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 Hugh R. Elsea and Carolyn Elsea for a private horse stable to be located at 3663 Chaparral Avenue (Tax Map No. 87.09-3-3) 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) There shall be a maximum of two horses on the property. (B) There shall be a 50' setback on the northwest side of the property (Snowgoose Court side). (C) There shall be Planning Commission Review of the Special Use Permit in one year. (D) A privacy fence shall be constructed of natural wood along the south side of the property as shown on the 7/19/01 sketch (Exhibit A). (E) All waste and horse manure shall be completely removed at a minimum of twice U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONI NG\elsea.stable.sup.wpd ~~~~ weekly. (F) The property shall be divided into two pasture areas (as shown on the 7/19/01 sketch- Exhibit A) and the animals shall be rotated between the pastures, in order to avoid denuding the property of vegetation. 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. U:\WPDOCSWGENDA\ZONING\elsea.stable.sup.wpd 2 Thursday, July 19, 2001 4'29 PM lJ c~ J7r+ve? a y `_~ ~~ ~~ Carolyn Goodspeed 540-989-6117 P u~ ~' 7/19/01 Exhibit A w N !- ~z. ~"o Sao ~o ~~ ~-~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ a ~o~ G ~ A C O ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ g' o~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ a -- ~ - ~ ~ ~ A v _' I I ~ ~ m ~ R. ~ I ~ ~ ~. ~ A IV a ~~ ~ ~~ ~ A ~- ~ a f ~ --o ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ I ~ ~g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ t o ~: I ~ w `~ ~ ~ y i ~ ~ ~~ d A i ~ 1 ~ ~~R a ~~~ i r ~~ ~ a ~ ~ a Q~ ~ ~ (~ N • ~. t I 7Srnf1 a~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ o ~o.. ], ~~~ ~' < ~s ~. ~~~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~ ~g~ N '.7 7/19 ~' Exhib~ o ~~~ y A a o~ PoaNO,~F AGENDA ITEM NO. ~~ .; Z o ,Z J ':.y a ,83a APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: S,o~'c%gC u S~ ~~2~n/~ ~~£'~v ~ ~~1,~-~ 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 ^ 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: ADDRESS: ~~67 ~1.4S~~F~ ~a-~c- ,~j' PHONE: ~Z~~ ~ ~/73 ~,onn-o,~F AGENDA ITEM NO. `S .. ~ of . .* Z o . ,az J APPEARANCE REQUEST 1838 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, 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: fi~A~~: /..~~~ ~..1~~r~ v ADDRESS: ~`f'p ~ ~~l /rl eh r ~1~'~; ~ ~ ~ ti S~v _ ~D ~~ 6~ PHONE: ~ ~a- 77~~--~78;~'" QOAN o~ ; ~F AGENDA ITEM NO. .S - °~ ti '~ 9 z ~~ ,,, ~ o ~ Yz ~ `a ,83a APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: Sptt~a-Q. l,~c-1~?luvw~ ~~ra,a. Ph.~..,~~, ~M.~- S. I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / 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: ADDRESS: ~3 :e~ CP ~~~~ PHONE: ~~~- ~"~ 70 O~ p,0AN0,{~~6 ti ' ~ '' z ~ ~ ,;z v a AGENDA ITEM NO. S " ~' 1838 APPEARANCE REQUEST ~/ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE /~CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: --P~-~- r r~ ~~ D~ ~rJC.~ ~` ik ~ ~ ~ ~.Cr c.Y~/ ~~ lE ~v~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / 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: ~~ r ADDRESS: 3C~(~~ ~'~~ t~~C+ ~,~~~t _~, PHONE: ~~ ~~~ Z3 O~ POANp,Y~` ~ '~ 9 z ~ o a v a AGENDA ITEM NOS'3 r83a APPEARANCE REQUEST ~'' PUBLIC HEARING ~ ORDINANCE ~" CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~ 5 p ~ - ~~r,~,a1 (,~.~1~~Nm~~'' ~ 5~~21 C- I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AHD ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE G[J/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: ~ Thy -1 F-~~p ~~ a ADDRESS: ~~~. ~i~Ct~1 ~ C c ~-- PHONE: ~'1~S°1 J Q''1 ~S a~ PoA^!okF AGENDA ITEM NO.--~~ - .3 ~" Z o Z J a APPEARANCE REQUEST 1838 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~)~~5~ STv9r~~-~ ~~J e~I4gl~~1~~~L ,~~. 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 fo represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~~v2 y ,~I-T~i /~ S ~ ~ ADDRESS: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G~ D S ~ ~ ~ ~' PHONE: % ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~- ~ a~ P~ANOk~c AGENDA ITEM NO. -s ~ ~ :~ ~ z ~ ~ z ov `a ;838 APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE '~ CITIZEN COMMENTS n ~ SUBJECT: ~'~ T~r'~G-iU ~;; ~lvr:;f.,. ~C~~-- ~.~ot`j~ ~ ~`u~ 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: ADDRESS: PHONE: ,J /.~~U ~ C~r~7`L~ ~)~'~`S ,~-~-~ ~~ «~~~ ~~ o~ PoaNO~~ AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ~ .° Z o ,Z J a APPEARANCE REQUEST 7838 ]~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: 'sue ~~-re-%~,1 ~T ~ ~ ~S ~ < I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / 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 wilt 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: .~~~~_ Cr~1FF~Ti-4 ADDRESS: ~-0~ 3 S ~lo~~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PHONE: ~ 7~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ?°ANO~F AGENDA ITEM NO. 's ' 3 .~ Z o ~_ v _, ~a~ ,83$ APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: _ -_.. I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED ~~ A ^ 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: t~°,~ / ~J~ f //~~G'•'~~ .J ~I '~'(:~-. ~j ~~i e ~ ,c~c Vy~ ADDRESS: ~LI~7/ //tLLz~ I.%'tzz-I,tv /~X -~'~ ~`-i`'e- VIQ PHONE: ~\ ~`~~~ ~ G ~3 ~- J'~ ~' ~ / • N ~/ O ~ - (~1 ~ `q~ Q J04 ~ W J W _ ~ .,~, u o 'D e; Q1 ~ ~ . N s r;6'~ ~o S7 ~ ~~ 13a.8 :. ~ ~ ~' o ~fy `6~ .a `b ~ n . ~ C~ ~pO ~i~ ~~ -' ~ ~ a sP ~ ~ ,n ~ / • pa 46 ~' L N r 09 .~1 L O / SI O o _~J v ~.~ O ~,, ~~ c ~+ u . ` ° X41 9 Q~ i.+ ~ ~ ~. a, ° ~' O ~ ~• 19 ~J ,J~Q.7 O ~ o ~ o. ~ p ~ ~ ~C ~ O Ul 0° oa oa ~ ~ y'L . cD a9 4 - ~, 6~ O ~ eL~S C `, ~ (ND m •(D "' ~ - ~ ~~ ~ Q y 1 °~ ~ LL '~ u y ~J/ C ~ ~~ .o N v S Ol ri. \1 v~,~ ~ ~ `a ° ~ ~ W •w .w D O J b~' ~ '~A ;° ~ ` ~ = o . a a ~~2.ag c, `o 1 0 ~ T ~, Q~ ~ V• J ~ ~ C~ I ~ d n l ° .m 'o W .o O ~~` p o j '~ ,r o ~ 7 4~ ~~ ~ N • W ~ ~r A _ 1 - o c~ T ~ c? N a 1r Q f T_ 40 lD ' N O° /a3 ~ N ~ U n ` ~ .A y l£1 ~~ o i ~ _ N O ~ ~ ~?J J O p ~~ i ~' .~°1 ~ 90~ G 3 - ~ ° ? O 'v e ~ ° a Y ~ ._ °~ it O 1'• ~ a O /~ .~ '~ • a o . ~ ob aa~y a :~ (' ~. - ~ ~, 1~ o '1 ens N ..A ~ b - Q \ \Sl ~S+ ~ h p v~ r \ ao . ~ D aoy `~ (V ` `~~ J oo W " y la L ~ '~ d ~ U ob aJ0 ~ °2 ~y c 3r ~ ~ \ r-~ (y1 ~i. r~ 4 ~ 2431 ~`~ ~O ~ ~ ,L4 ~~ ~~ 1 E I,S53,000 4' ~ -p ' 0 ~ 8y 63 „~ 2J Sil Z t ~ ~~ ,` 0 ~ O u ~j y6 y0 ?i d O i -~ w ti r. A 2y W ~ 4a Opp r^ • s, 1 ~ o~by~o~ ~ ~~ ,a~Q ,L S ~ ~' . w ~ a~ ~ ~ tD .~ e1 ors o~ arses ~a~ a~, ~~ ttJe, ~ -,LLa, -l~a~ ~, c~-~a -cam a a~u~~ .+~.a . ~Ji„ ~,,, a -Eke `rte ~k ~~-¢~ o..~ ~~ ~ ~.~ ~,M ~~~ a.~- ..h.~,~e- ~ , .l o l,h t~~s-Ke~r~ ~J ~'• .~ ~ r 5. P ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~. Q ~ ' i ~ e. C,~.n~-- ~. 5~3~ ~v~,N~w~e~ ~~~ ~, 3 ~-~ ~ L aruto~Q ~r h ~ ~e~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~-~~ rr~ ( ~~~ Z~~~ ~, 3 ~''' ©~ i ,- .-, . o• ~~Zor~.~ ~~yY~~~ ~~`N~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ -~ ~~ ~~~~' ~~, . ~ ~~~ ~ I ,lG- --_ _- ~ G 45 G~ a-p ar ~a 1 ~ r. ~ ~o~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ .v 9/l0.~, p,At~. ~ 1. Y~b+har~ ~a fl. ~z. ,8~.<. ,0~.-, ..,-~ ®~ G2's~b~C1~'A `~~~ ~ '/5 a ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ f ~F~1~11 ~ ~. [3n Gh~~.,-r~~ '1a(~~ ~`toul ~,~'t~R~ ~'1Gdi~iona~ S~P~S ~~- ~ ~ ~`~' /~< (aeE ~len p~i.Qi'~'~- ~~ ~~~~~ ,,. /~i ~!~ , /~~"~~SS 41og ~qn~~e circle a7~o u-h~-P~licgnLa--~ /so s Rid oaK w R~~ (yOG~/ ~/'i ola ~c IZI~e~ ~y oc-~c~e t-ane ~ ct. a yr` Ca~~ G~re- ,~ S ~O I !~ ~e r. ~ ~ c !.c Tn M i~ f __.v., August 2. 2001 Mr. & Mrs. John T. McCleary 3671 Chaparral Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 County of Roanoke Department of Community Development P (1 Rntir 7Uftnn Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Board of Supervisors: My husband and I are the closest neighbors to Carolyn and Dick Elsea at 3663 Chaparral Drive. We have no reservations at all about them keeping the horses on their property. There is no problem with noise or unpleasant odor from the horses. We are both retired and spend suite a bit of time in the yard, around the pool, and doing yard work. It is actually eniovable to look over and see the horses. In fact many of our guests at our home have commented on how pleasurable it is to see them over the fence . We are animal lovers and support anvbodv who feels the way we do. It is almost impossible to imagine anvbodv complaining of odors since we are by far the closest to the horses and smell nothing. We strongly believe they should be granted a Special Use Permit for a private horse stable. Sincerely. y~ ~ Q any ~ `~~ John T. & Sandra McCleary cc: Hugh R. & Carolyn Elsea Ti~~ 7`l~f%S ~~ P. n~ ~ T ~~ ~~Fc~ s ~..~ d- ~ ~ ~ ~=~ ~ S % j C~-~ ~ I~G ~2 S ~ S'7'"l~- ~~~ y1/ i 1, ~.. ____-T ~3r lN~~~R.r~Q~z ~v ;T~ ~~~~~~r~ f~d~~~ ~ ~ ~?~f~ lS /V ~r ~ KB~~ l~d~ 1~A-rvt ~ P~ ~ ~ 2 ~ SS ~,~,~ ~~ :~ 3~a~ ~.~ M, .~ ~ ,a~~ ~~ ~,~ ,Polo ~ ~ ~ d~~ ~ ~ ~~~z ~ ¢~ ~ ~. ~'~ ~. ~,~ .~ a 1? c? ~' t.~ ~1 t~ 1 e 1. f c ~ ~- o~~ ~' ~~ 7 rho ~ ~ ~jYf..~.J I~,tih~'~TaJ o'~.~i32 /(~t°~ ~/N~l ~~ ~~~'~' 7 C~6~~~ ~ ~o ~S' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~' G~ U~ ~ ~a~~ J ~,~~ ~ d~~~ 3~~~ ~~~~.y~-~ ~.~ . sue- ~~~~ , ~~ .~ ~~~ 91„x. ~s~ ~ ~ _ C.-a-~~--~ ~ C>~~' ~ ~~..` ~~~ ~~`~ ~~L ~~~! ~ ~~ u ~ ~ ~e~~~S~ v ter ~c~c~. ~ ~ 1~ac~ n ~ ~ 5 ~e~.~ 5~ ~~ ~ `~ ~~ .~~~~ ,~'/ j~(,Q~rl,Vh.~YIS Lf!„~~ i~ ~~~~~ " l~ ~ ~."_ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~-~ ~~~~ >~~~ ~a~a~~~~ ~ ~~ 2~~~ a-~.Csz ~G~6~tf~~L. ~11~. Cc.~'~ .~.. ~~~ ~~ ~ `' Y~ ~0 f IR~C, (~,~ ~^jk~ Ust, ~l~l ~o .S7 t-f ld_,ai •-n-syl~ j,Y~ 1~~.~~~aL, tee-~l~~- ~7 3 3 ~3~~ ,~) ~. X7.33 (~~~~,~. 3 ~3 5 ~ ~~~;,,~9~d ~~ S~ ~`~r(~p,~ ~ r ~i..~.~/~ 3 l ~ 3 ~ L/ YV1 N'~ In Ce KJ l !' O S `l•.i~ 1 \ ` ~Q ;1v It 1L Z ~(7 ~ ~. J J f~i v ;~ ~. ~~('ry 3~4 3 /-fur~M ~~yQ~~o r..a, IbAn~K~, vA, _a~~ ~~ .' ~cc,~/~... ~~ Z~' ~u ;)o pry ~, ~2;~ Z~ ~ l ~' r ~ '' +~ PETITIONER: Challenger Drive Multi-Family ~~ ' CASE NUMBER: 28-8!2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: August 7, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: August 28, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to rezone 4.62 acres from C-1 Office District to R- 3Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Drive, Hollins Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Janet Scheid presented the staff report. The request is to rezone 4.62 acres of a 5.12 acre parcel to R-3 for the development of 35 townhouse units. Mr. Ross expressed concern about converting commercial frontage to residential. Mr. Robinson expressed concern about the location of the private access road and recommended that the road be located to serve both the remaining C-1 property and the R-3 development. D. CONDITIONS The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., under date of June 11, 2001. • The "Common Area" between the property to remain C-1 and the private access road as shown on the plat dated June 11, 2001, shall also remain C-1. • Access to both the C-1 area(s) and the R-3 area shall be shared with one access road. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Don Witt made a motion to approve the request with the conditions. Motion carried 4- 0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other R~, Ja et Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 4 k: ~', 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 ~~ Fnr Staff Use Onlv Date rece~ j 2Z ~ ~ ` Received by: ~ / Applicarion fee ~ g,J ° ~ PC/8~,4 date g' 7' 0 Placards issued: BOS date: ~'Zgl6 f Case Number a g - g' 2.0 a ~ ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) j~1 Rezoning 0 Special Use ~ Variance Applicants name/address w/zip Phone• 989-0000 I-L1AI'Tl7N, INC' 772-0126 c/o Edward A. Natt, 3912 Electric Rd., Roanok A Fax No. ~4o~s Owners name/address w/zip Phone: ggg-0000 Robert L. and Reba S. Metz c/o Edward A. Natt, 3912 Electric Road, Roanoke VA Fax No. 772-0126 2461s Property Location Magisterial District: Ho I I i ns 3990 Challenger Avenue Roanoke, V i r i n i a Community Planning area: Ho I l i ns Tax Map No.: Part of 50. 5-1-1 0 Existin Zonin g g~ C-1 / ~ J . I pi C~ L/~ ~ Yrz~ Via,; ,' Size of parcel(s): Acres: 4.62 acres r~!>--, ,a~ Existing Land Use: Vacant REZONING AND SPECIAL-USE PE~IIT APPLICANTS {RIS) Proposed Zoning: R-3 Proposed Land Use: Townhouses Does the parcel meet the minimum lot azea, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes ~ No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIItED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No O IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIItED FIItST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No ~ ~, ~ _, ,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 WII~L NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. I V V V X Consultation X 8 1/2" x 11 " concept plan 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. _ RpgERT L. METZ ; ~ Owner's Signature REBA S. METZ: Owner's Signature "'' JL7STII+'FICATION FOR .REZONING C>R 9P.ECIAL USE PERIVIIT'12EQUEST Bowman-Dalton, nc. Applicant 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 welfaze. 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 use of the subject property for townhouse construction will further the purposes of the County Ordinance in that it will provide an orderly transition from residentially zoned property to commercial property. It will provide a significant number of housing units while reserving a large green space on the property. All setbacks required by the Ordinance would remain in effect. Commercial property will remain for a portion of the frontage on Route 460. Please explain how the project confozms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The use of the subject property for townhouse construction will provide a transition from commercially zoned to single-family residential property by use of amulti-family housing district. The townhouses will be two or three bedrooms with approximately 7.5 units per acre. 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, pazks/recreation and fire and rescue. The impact of the request on the County's public services and facilities would be minimal in that water and sewer are available. There will be minimal impact on the road as there will be one entrance on the approximately 300 feet of Route 460. Impacts on other County services will be minimal. PROFFERS -~~ Address of Subject Property: 3990 Challenger Avenue Hollins Magisterial District Roanoke County Tax Map No.: 50.05-1-1 Applicant's Name: Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Owners: Robert L. and Reba S. Metz PROFFERS The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. under date of ~~~~• August 8 , 2001 x~xxxx~ ~~~x~-~xx~~x~ ~~~. 3. The C-1 and R-3 property shall share a common access road. Applicant: BOWfM/A'N-DA~LT'ON, INC. BY ~r ~- ~ ~" , ~ / u- ~_ _. _.. °~ ., ~L 7 Owners : _ ( ~ ~ ~, ~,, ~ ~ - . ---- Robert L. Metz ~'~ ~ ~ ~ __- _~ ,~ - -~ ~ ` ~ r' Reb S. Metz ~ ~ _ ~ \\10LLY\SYS\ofnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Bowman-Dalton PROFFERS.doc ROANOKE COUNTY Aplicants name: Bowman-Dalton, Inc. DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Rezoning from C-1 to R-3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 50.05-1-1 Address of Subiect Property: 3990 Challenger Avenue .~ Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 50.05-1-1 Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Robert L. and Reba S. Metz LEGAL DESCRII'TION All that certain parcel of land situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia: BEGINNIl~IG at a point on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-01-03); thence N. 37° 15' 00" W. 499.37 feet to a point; thence N. 51° 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37° 15' 00" E. 277.00 feet to a point; thence S. 48° 45' W. 250.00 feet to a point; thence S. 41 ° 15' 00" E. 108.58 feet to a point; thence S. 32° 00' W. 318.47 feet to the place of BEGINNING, and containing 4.62 acres. F:\ofnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Bowman-Dalton LEGAL.doc AUG-2Z-2001 10 14 OSTERHOUDT PRILLAMAN NATT 15407740961 P.02i02 Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 3990 Challenger Avenue 50.05-I-1 Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Robert L. and Reba S. Metz S-Y LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that certain parcel of land situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia: BEGINNINC at a paint on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-01-03); thence N. 37° 15' 00" W. 499.37 feet to a point; thence N. 51 ° 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37° 15' 00" E. 277.00 feet to a point; thence S. 48° 45' W. 305.80 feet to a point; thence with the east side of the private road in a southerly direction to the northerly right-of--way line on U.S. 460; thence S. 32° 00' W. to the place of BEGINNING, and containing 4.33 acres. \VOLLY\.SYS\OFNAK\Uscrs\CBaumgardnor\ZONINC\Bowmen-Dalwn LEGAL.doc TOTAL P. a2 .- ~/ ' ~'J - v 1VO77.IN30SWl11~9111hV ~IItM1V-3 Stt6-ZLL (Ot5) YVJ llii-t[L (Ot513NOHd ~I ~ < ~~ 9t06Z VIIJI7UTA 9XCX~IYUN 69902 X09 'O'd ry15'3(1N3AY NpJ31BYVYN9 t99t Amans-S"l13~N~~~ a ~ ~~ ~ : ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ b pp ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 9~~ ~~&~~g ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~~~ ~~ a~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~"~8 ~~~~ ~~~~~g~~~~ ~~~~ s~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~4~~ ~ ~ € ~~~ Y~ ~9 ~ 9~~~95~~ ~ ~ ~~e~~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~A~~~ L~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ / !~`// / ! ~~,' ~ ~/ ! ~~ illl a ~_ ,'~ ~;~ i~ ,~~ ./• ,~ , ~ ~~ ~f~ .l,' ~ ~~ /' ~~ ~~~ /~ ~~l i ~~ ~ i~~/ i ~ ~ R //` i f ~~ .~-_ Y, / ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~. ~~ ,, 30 <~i~ €I ~~~~3~ .mil -.l -r ~I C"~ y1 ~ w ~~ ~~ ~ W )-. o N aN 4~ ~+ w STAFF REPORT S-~ PARTI PETITION: BOWMAN-DALTON, INC. FILE NO.: 28-8/2001 PREPARED BY: Janet Scheid DATE: July 27, 2001 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a request to rezone 4.62 acres from C-1, Office to R-3, Multi-Family for the construction of 35 townhouse units. The property is located off Challenger Avenue in the Hollins Magisterial District. The property is designated Transition in the Roanoke County Community Plan and the rezoning request is consistent with that designation. B. DESCRIPTION Petitioner is requesting to rezone 4.62 acres of a 5.12 acre parcel to R-3, the remaining 0.5 acre to retain its C-1 zoning. The concept plan shows 35 townhouse units with a private access road. There are no immediate plans for the remaining C-1 property. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A commercial entrance permit will be required by VDOT. Townhouses are allowed by-right in R-3, Multi-Family. Maximum gross density: 12 units per acre. Site plan review will be required. Petition: 1 File No.: PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS S-`/ The property currently has two single-family homes on it. The property slopes steeply to the northwest with the steepest portions of the property being wooded. The property is adjoined on the north east and north west sides by the Villa Heights Baptist Church and on the south west side by single-family residential. The property proposed for rezoning has approximately 350 feet of frontage on Challenger Avenue, Route 460. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT New Construction: Petitioner plans to construct 35 townhouse units, 2-3 bedrooms each. As shown on the concept plan, the units are arranged in 9 groups of 4 townhouses each, with the exception of one group of three townhouses. The overall density is 7.5 units per acre. The townhouses are a story and a half and the 18 end units have garages. 2. Access: Access will be from a private access road off Challenger Avenue. VDOT will require a commercial entrance permit and has commented that the access road shown on the concept plan should be moved to the north east to serve both the residential development and the future C-1 development. For east bound cars, the crossover at Carson Road would be used to come back in a westerly direction to access this development. VDOT is conducting a Route 460 corridor study and will be reviewing all existing crossovers. 3. Traffic: There is an estimated traffic count of 28,520 vehicles per day on Rt. 460. Development of these proposed townhouses will contribute an estimated additional 150-175 vehicles per day. 4. Public Utilities: Public water currently serves this property. Public sewer will be extended to this site from the area of Huntridge. 5. Economic Development: The Economic Development Department has provided comments on this rezoning. Their general concern is that this rezoning request, if approved, adds to the erosion of the commercial tax base by eliminating commercially zoned land fronting on a major highway. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The property is designated Transition in the1998 Community Plan. Transition areas Petition: 2 File No.: generally serve as developed buffers between highways and nearby or adjacent lower intensity development. Transition areas are suitable for office, institutional and multi- family residential. The proposed development is consistent with this land use designation as is the current C-1 zoning on the property. PART I I I STAFF CONCLUSIONS Petitioner has proffered the following condition: The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. under date of June 11, 2001. Staff would suggest that if the Planning Commission chooses to make a favorable recommendation of this petition that the above condition be modified. This modification should allow for the access road to be re-located to provide joint access to both the residential development and any future commercial development on the residual property. Petition: 3 File No.: 17 ~C, ~) ~,/(~ f3 -~ ~ ~It'~41 Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 3990 Challenger Avenue 50.05-1-1 Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Robert L. and Reba S. Metz LEGAL DESCRIPTION Sy All that certain parcel of land situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-01-03); thence N. 37° 15' 00" W. 499.37 feet to a point; thence N. 51° 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37° 15' 00" E. 277.00 feet to a point; thence S. 48° 45' W. 305.80 feet to a point; thence with the east side of the private road in a southerly direction to the northerly right-of--way line on U.S. 460; thence S. 32° 00' W. to the place of BEGINNING, and containing 4.62 acres. F:\ofnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Bowman-Dalton LEGAL.doc s-r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 4.33-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3990 CHALLENGER DRIVE (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 50.05-1-1) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF BOWMAN DALTON, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held August 28, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 4.62-acres, as described herein, and located at 3990 Challenger Drive (Part of Tax Map Number 50.05-1-1) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Office District, to the zoning classification of R-3, Medium Density Multifamily Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Bowman Dalton, Inc. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (a) The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the plat entitled "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., under date of August 8, 2001, Exhibit A. (b) The C-1 and R-3 property shall share a common access road. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\bowman.dalton.rzn.frm 1 S-Y the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-1-3); thence N. 37 deg. 15' 00' W. 499.37 feet to a point; thence N. 51 deg. 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37 deg. 15' 00" E. 277.00 feet to a point; t hence S. 48 deg. 45' W. 305.80 feet to a point; thence with the east side of the private road in a southerly direction to the northerly right-of--way line of U. S. 460; thence S. 32 deg. 00' W. to the Place of Beginning and containing 4.33 acres. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\bowman.daiton.rzn.frtn 2 ?' 1\ I ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. F C rYlfifDi,~ nT r11sT ~\ \ , :Le7era ~ ~d ~~~ ~ -~ .~" I sp1Or rA~L1f flp1~. r `~ ; M ~awmntrmrc o-t aTiarne7ACr \ ~r 7r A~.t rmlw nol/rrruo-rAr<r,alsawlAL asn6nrAtio O-t I A0lD106~ Ati{ dL AC76B 6* AN o-r. nn AOC- A E.lA107 /Y AA!/ PpYA: rM7FR MO illOr ~~ ~ ~ / / Kawa- r4av sn n. ` '7lYQ rl AL7I ~~rAf ! 1S RI7 ~' Ill/ PIMt AG}0 AOf134 ritsr r m~i w~eyr ~ m rl~ auln' Aua~' >: wn ~r Aoe' u r~ Mo ~ n~ui[m 0 WA P6l ApF ~ AKQ ~ AfOU'Of 100 AOQ (~ LM7~1 ;~ 'y ,3 /IR710ta 4JJ A06L- ,410 AOn'rO/Y/Y / PIIgYA !/'AKJtlII[ !0'MM~I I / >OQ .WRYMr A MW,i ~ ~ AKA LX~RM~ I N7E]IOFD / / POr /1r[.C LA6L ! A6y x6AlM0 ~MI/IIM Kf{1I16U LOYlAMi/OrIV.pSK /id1B fW / w 11r i Ii011V LONA{Mf I LM' LCQ tl1I/1 ~\ _ _ J / / 'Y / 'AT AEA RWl7- ltM ,~ f7 (IN70q~J >Zm ]Y fL (OIO fO/Sl \ J / / ~ AEI N1171fICY 1,N0 l1'{ Fr. / 607 ]O fT. (00 /OTJ ~~~ / / ~ ~M RIXIl3 /0' ~~ / //:Of ~/N /111710L ~ _ 'iii / /dIV7J N n11W/ X~k /0 /I1I79 i j // lN71 N YIQ/ P1CIr1@ I W75 -. -. ~ ~~ // 'LOT ODIl161ar AlIOQk d6f (IiL61pJ ` / ~/~ ~/0TmW14f PMOI0@ lOl /~i~1 _ ~ ~/ //rG'Im M~OM1 /.rAO[7 /Ml-Wr~LN 70 .iAQJ 1DTK -~~~/ %~/ .I.ILa PINI®• l.IA[a POl W7/N1aQ1 __/ ~ / OIO WR J AAL~ PO-Wr ()~Qtli Oi N G416F,1 ~ ~I-~_//%'~4R ACLM llr A11701rrL/IF OILr r11F Y - ~~ _ [P701Y k r ~V ~ Id I/TR rAK ~ f/""-" f~~ / /~ / ~ Lrmv a x'rvru rAro ^rmrrrram yf // / !,~ ~~=~~~~ / -- ~ ~ ~ / Q h0T lOCA~ r/1IY 7K LY/S ff A /LO 6:N RIXO AI/~4KY A! _ . - ~ - ` -. J / ~ -YA)07 r PDIl4 71n1 n7YOV d 6tID QV AN /Y![CAgY !Y li /40CO - -~ ` ~ ~^ J~Q ,6171 rAP Ar10 rAl AOT rmV IOlm //' AC7LAL f60 0LLI7101¢ T rrl PIpA~ /76a17T 7111 AOIO/r ? A L7I6®YT 7781 APIXT AM 77N1 -~ / aIr aw~eAnar Irw .rrErr 77!' P11O~O-Ar M7r.9A0IN M>eC1i~L _`_` ~ 1 T MS PI0Rl6® /9pl/ CIS/J1Q IlID67S AND OIS M7f L~716A7V7F A _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~~ raA~l~erswlcr. / / nrA A6rtlr arww ROWING EXHIBIT ZTY or- • & REBA S. METZ ~o.os-ol-ol , Exhib AVENUE - U.S. ROUTE #460 ERIAL DISTRICT v~rv vrnr_ rTrr~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ggo ~~~ w~~ o~c~ d ~ 3 m Z c N Z Z ~$~ ~gs N 1,r ~ lZSgl mm (<~ ~ O & ~t] z_ z .t] • ~ ~ ~ `~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE 082801-13 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.13-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 5681 STARKEY ROAD, (TAX MAP NO. 87.18-1-40) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 OFFICE DISTRICT WITH CONDITIONS TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF RA-DE DIV., LTD., T/A PERFECT TOUCH. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held August 28, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 1.13 acres, as described herein, and located at 5681 Starkey Road (Tax Map Number 87.18-1- 40) inthe Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1 Office District with conditions, to the zoning classification of C-1, Office District with conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of RA-DE Div., Ltd., T/A Perfect Touch. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28RA-DE Div#13.doc 1 (1) That the existing residence on the property would be used for the office use ~`• (2) That there will be no printing in connection with the business operation. (3) The existing house structure is limited to future enlargement not to exceed 700 square feet and shall be built behind the front line of the existing house. (4) . Signage shall be limited to 24 square feet, 5 feet in height. Monument style sign shall be required. (5) The cinder block garage to the rear of the existing dwelling will be used only in connection with the operation of the business on the property and will not be leased to outside businesses. (6) All on-site parking shall occur to the rear of the front line of the existing dwelling. If petitioners choose to construct additional parking, that parking shall be of a pervious surface. (7) Landscaping is to be planted to provide a visual buffer between the existing parking lot and Starkey Road. Landscaping shall include at a minimum, 1-2 Leyland Cyprus or other evergreen type tree, not to include white pine, and 3-4 deciduous or evergreen bushes planted along the eastern side of the parking lot. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Starkey Road, Virginia Secondary Rt. 904 at the Southeasterly corner of the property now or formerly known as the Baptist Parsonage; thence with the westerly side of Starkey Road South 24 ° 16' West 154 feet to a point in the center of a dry branch; thence leaving Starkey Road North 73° 30' West 310.6 feet to a point; thence North 21 ° 37' East 191.75 feet to a point; thence South 66° 33' East 316.6 feet to the point and place of beginning 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed G:\BOARD\2001\Aug28\8-28RA-DE Div#13.doc iw to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\2001 \Aug28\8-28RA-DE Div#13.doc 3 . ~ e i PETITIONER: RA-DE Div., Std, T/A Perfect Touch Interiors ..--~ CASE NUMBER: 29-8/2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: August 7, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: August 28, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of RA-DE Div., Ltd. T/A Perfect Touch to Rezone 1.13 acres from C-1 Office District with conditions to C-1 Office District located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Ms. Janet Scheid presented the staff report. Petitioners want to expand the existing house to accommodate their business. Mr. Witt inquired about existing conditions on the property. D. CONDITIONS • Not withstanding the petitioner's current request, the existing house structure is limited to future enlargement not to exceed 100 square feet and shall be built behind the front line of the existing house. • Signage shall be limited to 24 square feet, 5 feet in height. Monument style sign shall be required. • The cinder block garage to the rear of the existing dwelling shall be used only in connection with the operation of the business on the property and shall not be leased to an outside business. • All on-site parking shall occur to the rear of the front line of the existing house. If petitioners chose to construct additional parking, that parking shall be constructed of a pervious surface. • Landscaping, to provide a visual buffer, between the existing parking lot and Starkey Road shall be planted. Landscaping shall include at a minimum 1-2 Leyland Cyprus or other evergreen type tree, not to include white pine, and 3- 4deciduous or evergreen bushes planted along the eastern side of the parking lot. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt made a motion to approve the request with the conditions. Motion carried 4- 0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ tall Report _ Other C-~~ Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive ~~i ~ ~~' P O Box 29800 ~ ~ Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 Fnr Ctaff i Tse (~nlv Date received: ~/a~lo1 Received by: Appli ation fee:o ~q ~~ ° PGBz~dace: g- ~ '~~ Placards issued: BOS date: g ag-o ~ Case Number Ot R -~ ~ ~Z DO ) ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning ^ Special Use ^ Variance n Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: I ~~~ ~ f -~ ~ ~ 1 //~~ p --~ --~ W rk: S ~ ~? ~~ ~il~-Wt /.~ L L= ~~ ~ ~ ~.. , ~ , (..~ . ~n.~ 3= Fax No.: ~ r~C1 - ~- ~? (.g,. Owner's name/address w/zip Scc wi.e__ Phone #: Fax No. #: Property Location ~~/, ;~- Magisterial District: ~, ~ J -. ~ ,t ~. )--'d . ~ , +~'I ~'<. ~~` ~ " Community Planning area: ~,, c Tax Map No.: Existin Zonin -- 1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: I ° i ~ ~~ ~ Existing Land Use: 4!-~~~.l~i-- ~ ~.~ ~, ~, ItEZONL'1TG AND SPECIAL USE PER:bIIT APPLICANTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: ~-'" ~ , Proposed Land Use: ~?~2 ~~~ , ~L c~ ~;,~,.-y-c;~;~c, 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 ^ A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST IF NO , If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ^ No ^ V.ARI4:VCE APPLICANTS (i~ ~,..- ~,,,r of the Roanoke Coun ®ning Ordinance in order to: Variance of Section~s}•--"`~ w,....-~-t ~..-- ~ Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/S V R/S V R/S V Consultation / S 1/2" x 1 I" concept plan Application fee Application Metes and bounds description w 1~ Proffers, if applicable Justification /V ~ Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner o e property or the owne - agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. /L~v Owner's Signature zaa saRraYC~t ~~~rr~xas ~~ c@ a+~~az ~rrr~i~~ gv~posss c~cY, - ~~as sv~~r$~ rs snaxac~ so r~~ATr~ ~arc~ ~+-x as ~rs+~cc3scn 8Y TITG$ ~-~ST~tACT ~' 7~•~c: cares l.~t ,,7,~ , _...~,_ ~'~ SRN_ SFtN~R ' ~- Masi K fs'Qt~ ~ 3I. ~ ~ ~- `~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ ~, ~~ ri ~ ~ #- ~ ~4 ~~ ~~ i :~~E~ /aJ.~! i A~'Ar ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Sd~.p ~ ~ I ~ ~ tt. D ~ ~l_ S ~ ~ I ' ;* ~~. ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~. ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~a_ ~, ~~~ ~ ~/ ~ ~,~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~.__ ~ ~` ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~Q~ -~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~N~ ~, ~ ~~~ ~s~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 3 x a ~_-..- ___ gam! ~~~ '2. tw ~~~ }}~L'3~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N s~.7 _. _ .. .._ 2 ~ ~ ~~ m~ zt-+oa ~ ~ ~~ ~~ a~~~+ ~ ~.3 Z !~ f~ '~ V 4 ~ ~w4~Ha`~ ~#' ~ ~ Q~ ~~xLR7~y! ~„ ~ ~ ~ ~a~~~A nc~ ~~~ ~~ f ~, ~~~c' ,.,.~ - c~~5 Aplicants name: RA-DE DIV., ROANOKE COUNTY Ltd. T/A perfect touch Inc. DEPARTMENT OF Proposed Zoning: C-1 COMMUNITY DEPELOPMENT Tax Map No. 87.18-1-40 i+ t S-5 ai.~~ f4lde~e~u9', FiflaldalRR i •TiC \11 t11-f T-iA9 ~~ lQfvCa~. sat.3teF'aA 1 $~3t#~'19~ ~t ~ p4i1"-t s!f't tl~~ vrsr'tteri}~ i~e3w ~$~ St~rMcay ito~t!„ 1tir~gl~la ~~~fsr~z2ary i~~, ~0+! a3 Elie Saea~hca~tart~ co~t~i~9!r of fl'~is proq~~rty nv+y ~r form~rdy k~eerrs s3 the i3tp~~?~t ~~rraxsrge; th~rsce Wi t~ !!~~ d-o~~tcri~ ~ ~¢'#~C ~f 5#~r~~'}~ R~~a$ rs~sestir 2~R' ~g~~ P#~t~t~ 73° 3ii~ Est ~ti#.~ f~~i t~ as ~aclnt: #h~rsca ldr~rtt~ ~t® 37' i~~rst #~1.~5 4'fl~~t to ~e ~oint~ tttcnc~t 5c~ttt~ G~' 33' i`~~t ~'~'.~ i'~~'t to tea lFrtPrrL ~rtr.~ gs;a~t.t $~ -~- wi ih the f~si ic~i~~ cctrsc3iti~t~~: 7 . Tlrc t t ~ra~ r~ ~: ! i r4r~ +~rf g ~~rtea ~rrt l7~r~F ~p~~rfFr 4'p es~uld 1aa u~~t~ fct- ;~~ cffirA u~a ~Jti~ n~ a~ditl~~~ rrrsttt tha sxcaptJon aC Jrnpravlny ttte P=rki~g Crn '[!'re prflrpert~. Z . That t L1"i~rr~ vx1 1 t h~ '~~ i~r; stt ~~ i r, c~sarse~# =aura x~it`~ Lha l~u~insss o~str~tisxn. 3. Tha[ rxi3#lre~ ~ifttCfitta trv`ii ~!#9 Cti$~$tZ3t~ var i i~s~t7 i sra J ~ ~~~tmeerr 1 . q, ?'hm ~.qu~ra ir~t~tac~+t of #~gtts she!! rfai C~C~~t3 2~ ~(jT3ST~ ~fiaft. ~`$ fXrfif't#~Yf~~Y' 1'~~" ~~`?P"Y' ~t~~Pt~ 3`p?.Y~~ ~ . 'J"h+~ c3nda~r tzjo~k grrsge c~ the rs~r o~ L~'1~ taxz~;inc~ c~a}Jdrrrq +~AiOi br a~srd rarlJ}r ire c+arar°sacleod~ arcJth t?te aura L 1~;•s of l;a~ #esy mess t~~7 Lf'!e pro~~ri}+ and rti J t not b~ 1 ~et.+~:td to Cut3ia~{c ~u:~a3~~sa1s_ 6_ ~ AJJ ~Cf--3ila l7s~rking aE~seJ! peCUr t~ #fae raaar o~ #hc Front ii;~si air tfite~ e~istt~q t9wetilr~g. a - ~ ~~ S:s PETITION OF RA-DE DIV., LTD. TO REZONE: PROFFERS: • Not withstanding the petitioner's current request, the existing house structure is limited to future enlargement not to exceed 100 square feet and shall be built behind the front line of the existing house. • Signage shall be limited to 24 square feet, 5 feet in height. Monument style sign shall be required. • The cinder block garage to the rear of the existing dwelling shall be used only in connection with the operation of the business on the property and shall not be leased to an outside business. • All on-site parking shall occur to the rear of the front line of the existing house. If petitioners chose to construct additional parking, that parking shall be constructed of a pervious surface. • Landscaping, to provide a visual buffer, between the existing parking lot and Starkey Road shall be planted. Landscaping shall include at a minimum 1-2 Leyland Cyprus or other evergreen type tree, not to include white pine, and 3-4 deciduous or evergreen bushes planted along the eastern side of the parking lot. DATED: ~UGUST 10, 2 1 SIGNED ~~,~~ -" STAFF REPORT PART I PETITION: RA-DE Div., Ltd. PREPARED BY: Janet Scheid A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FILE NO.: 29-8/2001 DATE PREPARED: July 27, 2001 This is a request to remove and revise the existing conditions on a property zoned C-1, Office District. These existing conditions do not allow for any expansion of the building. Petitioners need to expand the building by 216 square feet to accommodate their business. B. DESCRIPTION Petitioners own an interior decorating business. This business provides interior design services working primarily through home building contractors. It is not a retail business. The property is properly zoned for their use but the structure cannot be enlarged based on conditions imposed in 1989 when it was rezoned from R-1 to C-1. In order to accommodate their business, petitioners need to add a 12' x 18' addition to the rear of the building. Therefore, they are requesting the removal of two conditions imposed in 1989. This property is located at 5681 Starkey Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The property is partially within the 100-year floodplain and will be subject to floodplain regulations. An approved site development plan will be required prior to commencement of construction. A commercial entrance permit will be required by VDOT. Petition: 1 File No.: j-5 PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS The property consists of an approximately 1,400 square foot brick house and a cinder block garage. A small, 6-space paved parking lot has been constructed to the south of the house. 2. The general area surrounding this property is a mix of single-family and multi- family residential, institutional and office uses. Around the corner on Buck Mountain Road is C-2, Commercial. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT New Construction: Petitioners plan to leave the existing house and garage as they are with the exception of constructing a 216 square foot addition on to the rear, west corner of the house. No new parking is required. 2. Access: Access will remain the same. VDOT has commented that the existing entrance does not meet current standards for a commercial entrance and will have to be improved to meet those standards. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The property is designated Core in the1998 Community Plan. Office and institutional uses and personal services are use types that are encouraged in this area. PART I I I STAFF CONCLUSIONS It is staff's opinion that the petitioner's request should be approved with the following conditions: Not withstanding the petitioner's current request, the existing house structure is limited to future enlargement not to exceed 100 square feet and shall be built behind the front line of the existing house. 2. Signage shall be limited to 24 square feet, 5 feet in height. Monument style sign shall be required. 3. The cinder block garage to the rear of the existing dwelling shall be used only in Petition: 2 File No.: S_5 connection with the operation of the business on the property and shall not be leased to an outside business. 4. All on-site parking shall occur to the rear of the front line of the existing house. If petitioners chose to construct additional parking, that parking shall be constructed of a pervious surface. 5. Landscaping, to provide a visual buffer, between the existing parking lot and Starkey Road shall be planted. Landscaping shall include at a minimum 1-2 Leyland Cyprus or other evergreen type tree, not to include white pine, and 3-4 deciduous or evergreen bushes planted along the eastern side of the parking lot. Petition: 3 File No.: S-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.13-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 5681 STARKEY ROAD, (TAX MAP NO. 87.18-1-40) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 OFFICE DISTRICT WITH CONDITIONS TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 UPON THE APPLICATION OF RA-DE DIV., LTD., T/A PERFECT TOUCH. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held August 28, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 1.13 acres, as described herein, and located at 5681 Starkey Road (Tax Map Number 87.18-1-40) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1 Office District with conditions, to the zoning classification of C-1, Office District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of RA-DE Div., Ltd., T/A Perfect Touch. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) That the existing residence on the property would be used for the office use~t~ (2) That there will be no printing in connection with the business operation. (3) The existing house structure is limited to future enlargement not to exceed 100 square feet and shall be built behind the front line of the existing house. G:\ATTORNEY\mvw\Forms\RA-DE Div. Rezoning.frm 1- = ~ - S_ s (4) Signage shall be limited to 24 square feet, 5 feet in height. Monument style sign shall be required. (5) The cinder block garage to the rear of the existing dwelling will be used only in connection with the operation of the business on the property and will not be leased to outside businesses. (6) All on-site parking shall occur to the rear of the front line of the existing dwelling. Ifpetitioners choose to construct additional parking, that parking shall be of a pervious surface. (7) Landscaping is to be planted to provide a visual bu.,~er between the existing parking lot and Starkey Road. Landscaping shall include at a minimum, 1-2 Leyland Cyprus or other evergreen type tree, not to include white pine, and 3-4 deciduous or evergreen bushes planted along the eastern side of the parking lot. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Starkey Road, Virginia Secondary Rt. 904 at the Southeasterly corner of the property now or formerly known as the Baptist Parsonage; thence with the westerly side of Starkey Road South 24 ° 16' West 154 feet to a point in the center of a dry branch; thence leaving Starkey Road North 73° 30' West 310.6 feet to a point; thence North 21° 37' East 191.75 feet to a point; thence South 66° 33' East 316.6 feet to the point and place of beginning That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. G:\ATTORNEY\mvw\Forms\RA-DE Div. Rezoning.frm 2 a~ PpP'"0~F AGENDA ITEM NO. S - ~M ..~ Z ~ 2 ov ..; .ate ,83a APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~" CITIZEN COMMENTS ~~ SUBJECT: r`~ e ~ 2 -f' ~- ~~ r~<~ r--f-- 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: c,~~ n -~ . C~_J 1 -~- -+- ADDRESS: ~-;cf b ~, (_~~ "Y~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ,-, 4 ~ ,~ ~~~ _,~~~~~ PHONE: ``"~ --~ -I ~-~ `~- ~ -~ o~ AOANp,Y~ AGENDA ITEM NO. u- ,* " ' Z ~z J . .a, APPEARANCE REQUEST 7838 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE /CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED BELOW: 1 ^ 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 shat! 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 ~ na NAME: ADDRE PHONE: ~ ~ ~~ ~-4 ~ ~ • - ~ g'- o~ P°ANO~F AGENDA ITEM NO. ~, Z ~ ,2 v ;;;; .a X838 APPEARANCE REQUEST (~. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~1 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. ^ lndividua/s 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: ~~~1,1'I t-~Z ADDRESS: ~~~ /~Q~~~"" r~ PHONE: ~~ ~ ~ ~~C~ aoaruo of .: ~F ~~ z c~ ,. a= ~~~aaxx~~ .~~ ~~xr~.~..e 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE MARY H. ALLEN, CMC ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 BRENDA J. HOLTON CLERK TO THE BOARD (540) 772-2005 DEPUTY CLERK Internet E-Mail: mallen@www.co.roanoke.va.us FAX (540) 772-21 93 Internet E-Mail: bholton@www.co.roanoke.va.us September 5, 2001 Mr. Billy H. Branch 3604 Penn Forest Boulevard Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. Branch: The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service as a member of the Industrial Development Authority. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed ail too scarce. I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, August 14, 2001, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to re-appoint you as a member of the Industrial Development Authority for another four year term. Your term will begin on September 26, 2001, and will expire on September 26, 2005. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered prior to your participation on this Board. Please telephone Steven A. McGraw, at 387-6205, to arrange to have this oath administered, and Mr. McGraw has asked that you bring this letter with you. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Douglas Chittum, IDA, Secretary Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circuit Court ® Recycled Paper OAN pF P OAF a a ti• ~ z ~ rasa MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD Internet E-Mail: mallen@wvwv.co.roanoke.va.us P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2005 FAX (540) 772-2193 September 5, 2001 Mr. David Rundgren, Executive Director New Valley Planning District Commission P. 0. Box 3726 Radford, VA 24143 Dear Mr. Rundgren: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Internet E-Mail: bholton@www.co.roanoke.va.us Attached are copies of resolutions adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, by a unanimous vote. (1) Resolution 082801-5.a authorizing an agreementfor project based financing by Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority and authorizing the execution of such agreement. (2) Resolution 082801-5.b authorizing an amendment to the New River Valley Commerce Park Project Participation Agreement for the withdrawal of Wythe County and authorizing the execution of such agreement. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Doug Chittum, Director, Economic Development Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney ® Recycled Paper 08/23/2001 13:32 FAX 540 882 0465 - - CHCS BILLING ~ ~ 2.~- f ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ooz ~~ ~~ uUP~I U~> ~ ~ I ti 5'~ O~ ~~ 1 { ~,.~ V l ~ ~ Pik ~' s ~ c~ ~~-~-1. ~ f 1 ~ ~~ ~-c~ l ~'~ ~v V~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~-tl~ ~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~,~~rJkLz`~ ~a. ~ _~~~ ~~~ S 08/23/2001 13:32 FAX 540 982 0465 CHCS BILLING ~ 001 cAR~1ION ~to~~ c s~RVxcEs ..._.........-:---._..... -------~ --- e VA 24014 ... .. -----..... ... -._.. -~ 1917 Franklin Road, Suite D, Roanok , (540) 224-4700 fax Transmiltta~ To: ~ Fax#: `77~~~~ R3 From: ~lee.r~~a.. r n1 +1 l..C _' "' Date: o ! Time: l ~ ~ Remarks: ~ero p l ~ ~ G~-~ ~~~'~ °-Q - Please respond ASAP Provided for dour infoz-~ation Number of pages to expect, including Transmittal Sheet ~ Confidential and Privileged ~'he ir~ormation contained in this facsimile is privileged and confidential information intended for the sole use of the addressee. If the reader of this facsimile is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it tv the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution yr copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this FAX in error, please immediately notify the person listed above, and return to vrigi~nal message by mail to the sender at the address listed above. Carilion Homc Carc Scrvlces FAX Numi~crs' 08/15/2001 10:09 FAX 540 982 0465 CHCS BILLING [~j001 _ _ _.~~- i o' °~ ~ Q1~E CARE S~T.tVICES .. CARI~1I~I~ ~ ._.......~--- ~---~-----~-- ---- ..e-.vA 24014 ~~-~ -~ Suite D, Roanok , --- .~.. ~ - - 1917 rx'anklin Road, 224-4700 . (540) /, ~~~ ~ fax 'Transm,Yttal ~ ~~, y,.j.,Q rlc~s~eS - 'fo: M Fax#: ~`l~{mil R ~ From: ~ - Date: ~.. v v 1 Time: l7 ' v Remarks: Please xespond ASAP Provided for your information 3 dumber of pages to expect, including Transmittal Sheet Confident~a! and Privileged The information contained in this facsimile is privileged and conft o~ tthe nt d direcip en t yr for the sole use of the addressee. If the reader of this facsimile is the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to ~~ ~ f thdisdco cinmunic ion ais strict y notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying o lease immediately notify the person listed prohibited. If you have received this FAX in error, p above, and return to original message by mail to the sender at the address listed above_ Carillon Homc Carc Scrviccs FAX Nun~Ucrs: 08/15/2001 ].0:09 FAX 540 982 0465 CHCS BILLING X002 i,a, a -_ Leukemia & Lymphoma Awareness Month; Sample proclamation lang ~ ht Walk Southwest Virginia Li ght The Nig is the world's largest private organization the Leukemia, gi Lymphoma Society ~ home, Hodgkin's Disease, and Whereas' a cure fvr leukemia, lymp concerned solely with finding myeloma; and rovides assistance and support Programs f°r cancer survivors and Whereas, the Society°p a the quFility of life; and their families tv imp home, Hodgkin's disease and myeloma are cancers of'the body's Whereas, leukemia, IYraP ow and lymph nodes, and are considered blood forming iuunune systeYns, the bone mart owth of cells with to be related cancers because they furtl'er involve the uncontrolled gi' sunilar functions; and 's fi eight chapters organize camp~gns Whereas, staff' and YOr~sc funds for and awarene s of research and survivor services; and and special events tv ereas September has been designatedNativnal Lcukemxa & lymphoma Awareness Wh , month; and t the Night Walk is the Sveiety's national evening walk ~draiser in Whereas, the Ligh ers carry illununated balloons to celebrate and eornincmorate lives touched y which walk canceF, and as the Southwest Virginia Light The Night Walk will be held on September 20, Where ~ with o erring ceremonies beginning at 7 pm; p 2001, at Salem Memorial Baseball Stadium, and location here), in support of the Now, therefore, do we, (insert government bod~l~ Thursday, Septenr-ber 20, 2001 Leukemia & fymPhvma Society, do hereby p t Day, and throughout (insert location here) as Southwest Virginia Light the Nigh roclaim September 2001 to be Leukemia & Lymphoma ,e,~„~eness Further, do hereby p Month in (insert location here}. 08/15/2001 10:04 FAX 540 982 0465 CHCS BILLING _ _~ X003 - -.-~~- the Leukemia & Lyrtrphomd Society" fighting 9Jood-ReloCed Cancers ~~.a; ,`; ,3 _ _ :~ Ours 5t°n ~s the world's largest, Pri- The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society vote organization concerned solely v'nfh finding a cure for leuke- mia, lymphoma, Hodgkin's disease~and myeloma ands a vane the quality of life of patients and their families. Throng ty of service programs such as: l Research _ : ~~ Since 1949, the Society has awarded over $175 million to can- -.. , ; car research, pioneering many life saving approaches to treating ...-, ;} and finding a cure for cancer. Patienleg Noma Society is committed to reaching out The Leukemia ~ LYmp Noma, riodgkin`s disease and mye- to those with leukemia, lymp Loma "rn meaningful ways. programs have been developed all over the country to meet the needs of patients, families and on- cology professionals; the people who deal with leukemia every day and,t~e peopie,who_care for them.. We have listened to the feedback from patients, volunteers and scholars. We have heard that the day to day benefits they re- ceive from support, outreach, community and our strop erns for searatr program make a difference. The Society's prog patients and their families incude= • Patient Aid • Family Support Group • First Connection Cancer. Keys to Survivorship Information Resource Center The Irish Green Back to School Program for children with Cancer ;: l . ~ l . ~f.rz::;.;.., r,'.~~, ~, , .1, • Advoca The Society's advocacy Program goals are to promote increased federal funding of biomedical research ens too rualiencancea care care reform issues including ready acres q ty and insurance coverage of patient care cost in clinical trails- Professional Education ym osia to in- The Society sponsors national seminars ands p form the medical and health care communities about new re- search findings. Community Servicg All chapters provide soaal service agencies and treatment fa- alities, resource materials and support groups. -ry= a The D~, isease , Leukemia, lymphoma, Nodgkin s disease and myeloma are can- cers of the body's blood forming immune systems: the bone mar- row and lymph nodes. They are considered to be related cancers because they involve the uncontrolled growth of cells with similar functions. Did Ya^ u~ K~"r7 es 1.14. • Leukemia is the number one killer of children, ag • Ten times as may adults as children are Stricken with leuke- mia. More than half of a41 cases occur in persons over 60_ • leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma witi kill an estimated 60,500 persons in the United States this yefatal cancers in • Leukemia and lymphomas are the leading young women and young men under 35. • Every nine minutes, another child or adult dies from leuke- mia, lymphoma, or myebma. • An estimated 6homaoand myelomae presently living with leukemia, lymp enous leukemia (CML), • A new therapy for chronic myelog one of the four major common forms of leukemia haT aens- developed b}i Dr- Brian Druker, a leukemia Society -fated Research scientist to improve blood counts. • Overall five-year survival rates for leukemia have tripled in the last 30 years. Noma is close to • Five year survival far non-Hodgkin's lymp 51 %. Cha ter Leadershi Events tensor artize The staff and volunteers of the Society's 58 Chap 9 campaigns and special events to help fund research and patient services- Activities include: -• Team In Training • Light the Night • Man & Woman of the Yeat • Dress Down Day • Legends of Sporks Week • The Society Ball (Black Tie) • The Volvo leukemia Regatta • Golf Toumarnents • pennies for PatientslPena~es for Pasta • Mother's Day Tea • Dress gown Day .~ For More Information on Society Events & Services call tt Virginia Chapter of the leukemia ~ S66p4483 Society 1 (800} 766-0797 or 1(800) _ ti. - _,:- _ C~ `.~ - ;.~,, _ _ ~__ - _ - x! ~+' ~~.' - -- - s'~ - - - . .. ~ •` :rte ~«'~~ - - -- ~- - -^„ - ~ Mary Allen -Legal Notice -Reply Page 1 ----- From: Legals Staff <legals@roanoke.com> To: <MALLEN@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 8/13/01 10:07AM Subject: Legal Notice -Reply thanks - ad will run Aug. 14 & 21 -cost $139.30.... have a good day.. martha LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the American Tower Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located on the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 10, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board (1734331) ~ ---- - __ Mary Allen ; Legal Notices -Reply Page 1 From: Legals Staff <legals@roanoke.com> To: <MALLEN@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 8/13/01 9:22AM Subject: Legal Notices -Reply this ad runs Aug. 14 & 21 -cost $123.38... thanks Mary.. martha LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of The Community of Faith to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious facility on 1.033 acres located at 5343 Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 8, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board (1734254) Mary Allen ;Legal Notices -Reply From: Legals Staff <lega-s@roanoke.com> To: <MALLEN@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 8/13/01 9:32AM Subject: Legal Notices -Reply this runs Aug. 14 & 21 -cost $135.32... thanks... LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS - - Page 1 The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Hugh R. & Carolyn Elsea to obtain a Special Use Permit for a private horse stable on 2.99 acres and a 30 foot right-of-way on adjoining parcel located at 3663 Chaparral Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 8, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board (1734277) Mary Allen :Legal Notices -Reply Page 1 From: Legals Staff <legals@roanoke.com> To: <MALLEN@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 8/13/01 9:47AM Subject: Legal Notices -Reply Ad run Aug.14 & 21 -cost $135.32... thanks LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on petition of RA-DE Div., Ltd. T/A Perfect Touch to Rezone 1.13 acres from C-1 Office District with conditions to C-1 Office District located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 8, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board (1734306) Brenda Holton -Additional Legal Ad - Page 1 From: Tammi Wood l;.~I3 ('Yu~-~. ~ /"-` To: Mary Allen Date: 8/10/0110:07AM Subject: Additional Legal Ad - ~~~~ ~~''~'~ ~ f %~ _/~ ~7/[, ~ THis is the ad for the continuation of the American Tower C orp petition. This ad was run for the Planning Commission but was never run for the BOS -due to the continuation. So it needs to be run also. Please send it to Martha at Legals at the Roanoke Times. LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the American Tower Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located on the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 10, 2001 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, August 14, 2001 Tuesday, August 21, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: American Tower Corporation 128 Mill Lane Salem, VA 24153 (540) 378-4061 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Tammi L. Wood Community Development Planning and Zoning Division Roanoke County, Virginia (540) 772-2068 twood@co.roanoke.va.us CC: Brenda Holton LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the American Tower Corporation to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a broadcast tower on 34.83 acres located on the Bent Mountain Substation, 8920 Willett Lane, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 10, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, August 14, 2001 Tuesday, August 21, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: American Tower Corporation 128 Mill Lane Salem, VA 24153 (540) 378-4061 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board 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, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Hugh R. & Carolyn Elsea to obtain a Special Use Permit for a private horse stable on 2.99 acres and a 30 foot right-of-way on adjoining parcel located at 3663 Chaparral Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 8, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, August 14, 2001 Tuesday, August 21, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: Edward A. Natt 3912 Electric Road Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 989-0000 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 2 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of The Community of Faith to obtain a Special Use Permit for a religious facility on 1.033 acres located at 5343 Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 8, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, August 14, 2001 Tuesday, August 21, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: Edward A. Natt 3912 Electric Road Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 989-0000 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 1 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 4.62 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of Multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Avenue, Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 10, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, August 14, 2001 Tuesday, August 21, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: Bowman Dalton, Inc. C/o Edward A. Natt 3912 Electric Road Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 989-0000 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 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, August 28, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on petition of RA-DE Div., Ltd. T/A Perfect Touch to Rezone 1.13 acres from C-1 Office District with conditions to C-1 Office District located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: August 8, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, August 14, 2001 Tuesday, August 21, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: RA-DE Div., Ltd. T/A Perfect Touch 4510 Brambleton Ave, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 989-7801 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 5