The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/9/2001 - Regularo~ aoaroo~. ,~~~;~ F •~ ~ ~ 7838 • ~ • • • Working Document- ub~ ect to Revision ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 9, 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 ALL PRESENT AT 3:01 P.M. 2. Invocation: John M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant County Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS PMM ADDED CLOSED MEETING ITEM CONCERNING PERSONNEL MATTER, PERFORMANCE OF SPECIFIC OFFICERS. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of October 21 - 27, 2001 as Red Ribbon Week in the County of Roanoke as a symbol of opposition to illegal drug use. 1 ® Recycled Paper PROCLAMATION ACCEPTED BY MARY GWEN PARKER. 2. Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of Harry A. Franks, Information Technology Department. R-100901-1 JBC MOTION TO ADOPT RESO URC HARRY FRANKS WAS PRESENT TO RECEIVE RESO 3. Proclamation declaring the week of October 7 - 13, 2001 as Fire Prevention Week in the County of Roanoke. PR-OCLAMATION ACCEPTED BY BATTALION CHIEF DON GILLISPIE CHIEF BURCH, RONALD CAMPBELL, DAVE CHAPMAN AND GARY HUFFMAN D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution reaffirming and amending Resolution 120500-2 supporting the I-581 and Route 220 Corridor for Interstate 73 through the Roanoke Valley. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) HCN MOTION TO GO ON RECORD OPPOSING ALTERNATE 6A AYES-BLJ,JBC,HCN NAYS-JPM,HOM JBC MOTION TO RECONSIDER HCN'S MOTION AYES-JPM,JBC,HOM NAYS-BLJ,HCN RECONSIDERATION OF HCN'S MOTION TO BE HEARD ON 10/23/01 2. Request to accept and appropriate $370,500 Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant from the U. S. Department of Justice. (Ray Lavinder, Police Chief) A-100901-2 BLJ MOTION TO ACCEPT $370,500 AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS AND THAT 2 LETTER OF APPRECIATION BE SENT TO CONGRESSMAN GOODLATTE. URC F. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing the vacation of an existing 20' drainage easement and acceptance of the relocated 20' drainage easement on property of Leon P. Harris and Beverly Y. Harris, Lot 3A, Section 26, Hunting Hills, located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) HOM MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND _ 10/23/01 URC G. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second Reading of ordinance amending ordinance 021098-9 and 032498-7 which vacated and closed public rights-of way and released public property interests in and around Pinkard Court subdivision, to delete the condition in each ordinance that the specified properties be acquired in one common ownership (Lowe's Inc.) And combined into one tract or parcel, and to otherwise ratify and approve each of said ordinances. (Vickie Huffman, Assistant County Attorney) 0-100901-3 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 2. Second Reading of ordinance authorizing the acquisition of flood- prone properties for preservation of floodplain land related to the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project located on Palm Valley Road in the Hollins Magisterial District. (George Simpson, Community Development Assistant Director) 0-100901-4 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 3 3. Second Reading of ordinance amending the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Roanoke for the establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System. (John Chambliss, Assistant Administrator) 0-100901-5 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC H. APPOINTMENTS 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals serving as Fire Code Board of Appeals 2. Grievance Panel 3. Industrial Development Authority 4. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 5. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee. HCN NOMINATED ANN ROGERS 6. Southwest Development Financing, Inc. I. 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-100901-6 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO URC 1. Approval of Minutes -June 26, 2001. 4 2. Acceptance of donation of telecommunication line easement across property of Lewis-Gibbs Corporation for fiber optic cable between the Hollins Fire and Rescue Station and the Hollins Library. A-100901-6.a 3. Designation of a Voting Representative at the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Annual Meeting on November 13, 2001. A-100901-6.b 4. Resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and affirming County appointees. R-100901-6.c 5. Request from Schools to accept and appropriate $500 Virginia Commission for the Arts grant for art education technical assistance. A-100901-6.d 6. Request from Schools to accept and appropriate $6,370 grant from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teacher program. A-100901-6.e J. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS NONE K. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE L. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Annie Krochalis expressed concern about the Bent Mountain Library and reauested that the library improvement needs be met 5 2. Joan Carver, asked for the opportunity to present a video at the Work Session to discuss improvements at the Bent Mountain Library M. REPORTS HCN MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE AFTER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS -URC 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Proclamations signed by the chairman 6. Quarterly Report for the Day Reporting Program. N. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church expressed appreciation to the citizens in his area for their input and emails on various positions including I-73 He advised he made a mistake on his vote earlier on I-73 and will correct it at the next meeting because he has been consistent and does not wish to jeopardize the.project Supervisor Nickens: (1) Asked the people from Mt Pleasant affected by I-73 to "stay tuned" and that he is still workin to negate the impact of I-73 to the community (2) Announced he was impressed with a display on the history of the Vinton First Aid Crew that was at the "To The Rescue" museum and pointed out that the crew was chartered in 1932. O. WORK SESSIONS 1. Joint Work Session with the Library Board to discuss Bent Mountain Library renovations. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) HELD FROM 4:45 TO 5:45 6 BOARD CONSENSUS THAT STAFF DEVELOP PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES FOR ACCEPTING CONTRIBUTIONS AND DONATIONS FOR COUNTY PROJECTS AND-BRING BACK TO THE BOARD. 2. Fee for ambulance transport update. (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator and Rick Burch, Fire and Rescue Chief) HELD FROM 7:35 P.M. TO 8:10 P.M. ECH AND CHIEF BURCH WITH WORK WITH SALEM AND BOTETOURT COUNTY ON HOW TO HANDLE THE FEES P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A.3 (a) discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for public purpose; (b) 2.2-3711 A.5 discussion concerning a prospective business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of the business' interest in locating its facilities in .Roanoke County; (c) 2.2-3711A.3 discussion of the disposition of public property, Salem Office Supply; (d) 2.2-3711 A.7 Consultation with legal counsel pertaining to contract negotiations, i.e. McDonald Farm and shell building at Valley Gateway; 2.2- 3711 A.1,discussion of the performance of specific County officials. JPM MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED MEETING AT 4:40 P.M. CLOSED MEETING HELD FROM 5:45 TO 7:35 PM . HCN LEFT AT 6:10 P.M. Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-100901-7 HOM MOTION TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION RESO - URC. AYES-BLJ,JPM,JBC,HOM ABSENT-HCN (LEFT AT 6:10 P.M.~ R. ADJOURNMENT HOM ADJOURNED MEETING AT 8:10 P.M. 8 F F a I. p Z g> rasa ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA OCTOBER 9, 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: John M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant County Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of October 21 - 27, 2001 as Red Ribbon Week in the County of Roanoke as a symbol of opposition to illegal drug use. 2. Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of Harry A. Franks, Information Technology Department. 3. Proclamation declaring the week of October 7 - 13, 2001 as Fire Prevention Week in the County of Roanoke. 1 ® Recycled Paper D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution reaffirming and amending Resolution 120500-2 supporting the I-581 and Route 220 Corridor for Interstate 73 through the Roanoke Valley. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) 2. Request to accept and appropriate $370,500 Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant from the U. S. Department of Justice. (Ray Lavinder, Police Chief) F. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing the vacation of an existing 20' drainage easement and acceptance of the relocated 20' drainage easement on property of Leon P. Harris and Beverly Y. Harris, Lot 3A, Section 26, Hunting Hills, located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) G. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second Reading of ordinance amending ordinance 021098-9 and 032498-7 which vacated and closed public rights-of way and released public property interests in and around Pinkard Court subdivision, to delete the condition in each ordinance that the specified properties be acquired in one common ownership (Lowe's Inc.) And combined into one tract or parcel, and to otherwise ratify and approve each of said ordinances. (Vickie Huffman, Assistant County Attorney) 2. Second Reading of ordinance authorizing the acquisition of flood- prone properties for preservation of floodplain land related to the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project located on Palm Valley Road in the Hollins Magisterial District. (George Simpson, Community Development Assistant Director) 3. Second Reading of ordinance amending the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Roanoke for the establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System. (John Chambliss, Assistant 2 Administrator) H. APPOINTMENTS 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals serving as Fire Code Board of Appeals 2. Grievance Panel 3. Industrial Development Authority 4. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 5. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee. 6. Southwest Development Financing, Inc. I. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of Minutes -June 26, 2001. 2. Acceptance of donation of telecommunication line easement across property of Lewis-Gibbs Corporation for fiber optic cable between the Hollins Fire and Rescue Station and the Hollins Library. 3. Designation of a Voting Representative at the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Annual Meeting on November 13, 2001. 4. Resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and affirming County appointees. 3 5. Request from Schools to accept and appropriate $500 Virginia Commission for the Arts grant for art education technical assistance. 6. Request from Schools to accept and appropriate $6,370 grant from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teacher program. J. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS K. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS L. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS M. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Proclamations signed by the chairman 6. Quarterly Report for the Day Reporting Program. N. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS O. WORK SESSIONS 1. Joint Work Session with the Library Board to discuss Bent Mountain Library renovations. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) 2. Fee for ambulance transport update. (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator and Rick Burch, Fire and Rescue Chief) P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A.3 (a) discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for public purpose; (b) 2.2-3711 A.5 discussion concerning a prospective business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of the business' 4 interest in locating its facilities in Roanoke County; (c) 2.2-3711A.3 discussion of the disposition of public property, Salem Office Supply; (d) 2.2-3711A.7 Consultation with legal counsel pertaining to contract negotiations, i.e. McDonald Farm- and shell building at Valley Gateway. Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. ADJOURNMENT 5 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER C- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring the week of October 21 - 27, 2001 as Red Ribbon Week in Roanoke County SUMMARY OF INFORMATION RAYSAC, the Roanoke Area Youth Substance Abuse Coalition, and the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare have asked that the Board proclaim October 21 - 27 as Red Ribbon Week. The red ribbon has been designated as the symbol of intolerance of the illegal use of drugs and a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. Attached is a letter from Mary Gwen Parker, Secretary/Treasurer, RAYSAC, describing the special activities that are planned during that week. Ms. Parker will be present to accept the proclamation at the Board meeting. ,~e.~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church _ _ _ Denied () Johnson _ _ _ Received () McNamara_ _ _ Referred () Minnix _ _ _ To () Nickens '~~,~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 21 - 27, 2001 AS RED RIBBON WEEK IN SUPPORT OF A DRUG FREE COMMUNITY WHEREAS, the Red Ribbon Campaign was initiated in 1985 by the Virginia Federation of Communities for Drug-Free Youth; and WHEREAS, the red ribbon was designated as the symbol of intolerance of illegal drug use and a commitment to a drug-free life style; and WHEREAS, a group of concerned citizens, parents, students, teachers, police officers, business people, judges, drug treatment providers, counselors, ministers, and other caring individuals have established the Roanoke Area Youth Substance Abuse Coalition (RAYSAC) to bring better coordination and development of substance abuse prevention programs and resources; and WHEREAS, RAYSAC and Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare have asked that the Board of Supervisors recognize Red Ribbon Week in Roanoke County and are promoting the Red Ribbon Campaign in the Roanoke Valley through a variety of activities. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby proclaim October 21 through October 27, 2001 as RED RIBBON WEEK in Roanoke County, Virginia, and encourages all of our citizens to join in the observances and activities of this event. ~AYSq~, ~,oanoke Area youth Sudstance ~lduse Coalition C-I P.O. Box 13543 ~,oano~e, ti~124035 (540) 982-1427 ~ ~ ~('^I September 8, 2001 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Mary Allen County Clerk 5204 Bernard Drive, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: For the eighth year, citizens of the Roanoke Valley and Botetourt County will be asked to take a stand against illegal drug use through the observance of Red Ribbon Week. RAYSAC (the Roanoke Area Youth Substance Abuse Coalition) and Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, would like to formally ask the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to proclaim October 21 - 27 as Red Ribbon Week in your community. The Red Ribbon Campaign was initiated in 1985 by the Virginia Federation of Communities for Drug-Free Youth following the murder of Federal Agent Enrique Camarena by drug traffickers. Since that time, the red ribbon has been designated as the symbol of intolerance of the illegal use of drugs and a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. The last week in October is recognized as Red Ribbon Week by communities across the country. In the Roanoke Valley a number of events are scheduled: • A Kick-off assembly/press conference will be held at Glen Cove Elementary School on Friday, October 19~' at 1:00. Sunday, October 28, at 7:00 p.m., at the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center, a Candlelight Vigil of Remembrance and Hope will be held to remember those whose lives have been affected by substance abuse. • A number of businesses and agencies throughout the region will sport banners and ribbons in support of this week. RAYSAC is an organization that includes concerned parents, students, teachers, police officers, business people, judges, drug treatment providers, counselors, ministers, and more. Working with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, they are committed to creating a community norm that drug abuse will not be tolerated. Thank you in advance for considering our request for a proclamation. If possible, please present this to your elected officials at a meeting as close to the start of Red Ribbon Week as possible. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 982-1427. The proclamation can be sent to me at 541 Luck Avenue, Suite 230, Roanoke, Virginia, 24016, or please let me know and I will be happy to come by and pick it up. Sincerely, Mary Gwen Parker Secretary/Treasurer ~~ ion Profit Organization ~_ 1~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION 100901-1 EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF HARRY A. FRANKS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, AFTER TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Harry A. Franks was first employed by Roanoke County on December 16, 1975, as a programmer analyst, and has held the positions of Director of Data Processing; Project Management Coordinator; Manager of Computer Operations and Technical Support; and Technical Support Specialist; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks retired from Roanoke County on September 1, 2001, as Technical Service Manager after twenty-five years and eight months of service; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks was the first employee in the Data Processing Department for Roanoke County and has held positions of responsibility which furthered the development and growth of the Information Technology Department; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks was very instrumental in the implementation of the E-911 System; the disbursement of the E-911 budget accounts; and was involved in the networking of telecommunications at the Roanoke County Administration Center, as wel as all satellite offices; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks was not only highly regarded for his wealth of expertise in all aspects of information technology, but was respected by his co-workers, both as a 1 mentor, and as a friend who offered guidance and support, and was never too busy to listen to their suggestions or concerns; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks, through his employment with Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life for its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to HARRY A. FRANKS for over twenty-five years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor Church 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 Joe Sgroi, Director, Human Resources Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology 2 w ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~' ~ Respectfully Submitted by: Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board Approv by: Imer C. Hodge County Administrator -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church _ Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara- Referred () Minnix _ _ To () Nickens _ _ _ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of Harry A. Franks, Information Technology Department COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Harry Franks, Technical Services Manager recently retired after employment with the County for over 25 years. Mr. Franks was the first employee hired by the County in the Data Processing Department. Attached is a resolution recognizing his service to the County. Mr. Franks will be present to accept the resolution. ~a AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF HARRY A. FRANKS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, AFTER TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Harry A. Franks was first employed by Roanoke County on December 16, 1975 as a programmer analyst, and has held the positions of Director of Data Processing, Project Management Coordinator; Manager of Computer Operations and Technical Support; and Technical Support Specialist; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks retired from Roanoke County on September 1, 2001 as Technical Service Manager after twenty-five years and eight months of service; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks was the first employee in the Data Processing Department for Roanoke County and has held positions of responsibility which furthered the development and growth of the Information Technology Department; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks was very instrumental in the implementation of the E-911 System; the disbursement of the E-911 budget accounts; and was involved in the networking of telecommunications at the Roanoke County Administration Center, as well as all satellite offices; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks was not only highly regarded for his wealth of expertise in all aspects of information technology, but was respected by his co-workers, both as a 1 ~~ mentor, and as a friend who offered guidance and support, and was never too busy to listen to their suggestions or concerns; and WHEREAS, Mr. Franks, through his employment with Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life for its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to HARRY A. FRANKS for over twenty-five years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER '~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring the week of October 7 - 13, 2001 as Fire Prevention Week COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Fire Prevention Week was established as a result of the devastation brought about by the Great Chicago Fire which began on October 8, 1871. The fire lasted 27 hours and incurred the most damage the following day, and October 9, 1871, is the date most often recognized with the tragic conflagration. The Great Chicago Fire killed more than 250 people, left 100,000 homeless, destroyed more than 17,400 structures and burned more than 2000 acres. In 1920, President Woodrow Wilson issued the first National Fire Prevention Day Proclamation, and since 1922, National Fire Prevention Week has been observed on the Sunday through Saturday period in which October 9 falls. The proclamation will be accepted by Division Chief Don Gillispie and the fire prevention team. Various activities are being planned by individual stations to commemorate Fire Prevention Week. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors proclaim the week of October 7- 13, 2001, as Fire Prevention Week in Roanoke County. Submitted by, Richard E. Burch, Jr. Chief, Fire and Rescue Approved by, h~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~~~ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Minnix _ _ Denied O Church Received () McNamara _ Referred () Johnson _ _ _ To () Nickens _ cc: File r ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 7 THROUGH OCTOBER 13, 2001 AS FIRE PREVENTION WEEK IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, cooking, heating, and electrical fires represent three of the nation's leading causes of home fires, and are collectively responsible for nearly half of all home fires and almost one-third of the associated fire deaths; and WHEREAS, the vast majority of home cooking, heating, and electrical fires can be prevented by taking simple safety precautions; and WHEREAS, developing a home fire escape plan and practicing it at least twice a year are critical to escaping a fire safely; and WHEREAS, proper installation, testing, and maintenance of smoke alarms are part of a thorough home fire escape plan; and WHEREAS, by preventing the leading causes of home fires, and by developing and practicing a thorough home fire escape plan, people can greatly reduce their risk to fire; and WHEREAS ,the Fire Prevention Week 2001 theme, "Cover Your Bases & Strike Out Fire," teaches the public how to prevent cooking, heating, and electrical fires, and encourages people to develop a home fire escape plan that includes working smoke alarms; and WHEREAS, the fire service of Roanoke County is dedicated to the safety of life and property from the devastating effects of fire; and is joined by other concerned citizens of Roanoke County, and other emergency service providers and safety advocates, 1 r .• t - ~~ businesses, schools, service clubs, and organizations in their fire safety efforts. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim the week of October 7 through October 13, 2001, as FIRE PREVENTION WEEK in Roanoke County and recognize this week in commemoration of the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, which killed more than 250 persons, left 100,000 homeless, and destroyed more than 17,400 buildings; and FURTHER, we call upon the citizens of Roanoke County to participate in fire prevention activities at home, work, and school, and to take the steps needed to make their homes and families safe from the leading causes of home fires, which include cooking, heating and electrical. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~t AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING AND AMENDING RESOLUTION 120500-2 SUPPORTING THE I-581 AND ROUTE 220 CORRIDOR FOR I-73 THROUGH THE ROANOKE VALLEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: At a work session on September 25, 2001, Supervisor Nickens requested that staff to prepare a resolution "reiterating the County position" in support of construction of I-73 in the I-581 and Route 220 corridor, and "specifically opposing the route through Southeast City and Southeast County". Supervisor Johnson expressed support for the request and noted that the Board had "previously opposed the interstate going through specific subdivisions." Supervisor McNamara suggested that the resolution state that "the Board is in favor of I-73, in favor of the central corridor and are opposed to other routes beyond the central route." Supervisor McNamara also suggested a work Session with the Virginia Department of Transportation to discuss the ramifications of construction of I-73 and the potential impact to property along Route 220. Supervisor Minnix advised he supported Interstate 73 but expressed reservations to construction along the Route 220 corridor because of the potential impact to the residents and businesses located in the area. He explained that his previous support was because "this route originally appeared to impact the minimum amount of people and property and be located along an existing highway." Following discussion, there was Board consensus to direct staff to prepare a resolution supporting the construction of I-73 in the I-581 and Route 220 corridor and opposing any other route. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Attached you will find copies of previous Board Resolutions (101293-7g, 112294-1, 032498-6, 090898-1, and 120500-2); a copy of a letter dated June 3, 2001 from Chairman Minnix to Mr. Altizer of the Virginia Department of Transportation expressing the County's concerns with respect to the approval of a corridor by the Commonwealth Transportation Board ("CTB") which could have negative impacts on the residents of southeast Roanoke City and the Mt. Pleasant portion of the 1 `~: County; and Internet research on other states' actions with respect to I-73 location issues; and a copy of a Board report prepared by Mr. Covey from an July 10, 2001 work session, which describes the impacts of the CTB's decision and future actions. A Resolution is attached for your review and action. Respectfully submitted, ,•yn•,- Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by G:\BOARD\2001\Oct9\10-9Interstate-73support.doc Vote No Yes Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens Abs 2 ". AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION REAFFIRMING SUPPORT FOR THE I-581 AND ROUTE 220 CORRIDOR FOR I-73 THROUGH THE ROANOKE VALLEY WHEREAS, the Commonwealth Transportation Board has previously selected Alternative Corridor 6A which general ly fol lows Route 220, I nterstate 581, I nterstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to the West Virginia state line west of Narrows as the location for the proposed I-73 north-south interstate Detroit to Charleston, SC corridor; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has previously indicated its support of a refined corridor for I-73 which would follow the present location of Route 220 into the City of Roanoke and then overlap the present Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to West Virginia on numerous occasions as set forth in its Resolution 112294-1 of November 22, 1994, Resolution 032498-6 of March 24, 1998, Resolution 090898-1 of September 8, 2000, and Resolution 120500-2 of December 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, the previously selected Commonwealth Transportation Board Alternative Corridor 6A will have a negative on the residents in Southeast Roanoke City and the Mount Pleasant portion of Roanoke County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: 1. That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, strongly reiterates its prior recommendation that the corridor for I-73 immediately follows the existing Route 220 into the City of Roanoke, and then overlaps Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed ~~ "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to the West Virginia state line near Narrows, and opposes all other options or alternatives including Alternative 6A Corridor. This recommended corridor would utilize existing road corridors wherever possible, on routes that are already designated for improvement which would thereby reduce the cost of construction and the expenses associated with additional land expropriation; and 2. That the Board of Supervisors directs that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Commonwealth Transportation Board, the Interstate Route 73 Communications Committee of the General Assembly, the Roanoke City Council, and the Roanoke Valley Chamber of Commerce. G:\ BOARD\2oo 1 \Oct9\ 10-9Interstate-73af£irmreso(2).doc 2 ~..... AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OB SIIPERVISORB OF ROANOEE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOICE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1993 RESOLIITION 101293-7.Q SIIPPORTING THE CONSIDERATION OF THE ROANORE VALLEY I-73 CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVE WHEREAS, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) identified in section 1106, (Identification of High Priority Corridor on National Highway System) proposes a north- south interstate (I-73) from Detroit to Charleston, SC; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke corridor alterntive is identified as following the U.S. 460 corridor from Princeton, West Virginia to the Blacksburg-Christiansburg area, then follow I-81 to the Roanoke Valley, and run south along U.S. 220 to the North Carolina state line; and WHEREAS, Roanoke Valley companies manufacture and distribute goods and services to customers along the proposed corridor; and WHEREAS, the proposed I-73 corridor would make the Roanoke Valley more accessible to visitors along the corridor; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Roanoke County board of Supervisors wishes to express its support for the Roanoke Corridor Alternative to the Federal Highway Administration and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: .M, . ~~..~, ~- Mary H. len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Timothy W. Gubala, Director, Economic Development Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Federal Highway Administration Virginia Department of Transportation Roanoke Area Legislators - State/Federal ~l AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVIBORS OF ROANORE COUNTY,VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINIBTRATION CENTER ON TIIEBDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 1994 R880LIITION 112294-1 SIIPPORTING THE ROIITING OF PROPOBED INTERBTATE 73 THROIIGH THE ROANORE VALLEY WHEREAS, in early 1994, the Virginia Department of Transportation prepared a corridor location study that evaluated highway corridors for the location of I-73 through Virginia; and WHEREAS, in March 1994, the Commonwealth Transportation Board selected Alterative Corridor 6A for the location of proposed I-73 which enters Virginia from North Carolina on Route 220, south of Martinsville, and generally follows Route 220, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to the West Virginia State Line west of Narrows. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia joins the Roanoke Valley Business Council in requesting the Commonwealth Transportation Board to consider refining the selected corridor to provide that the selected alternative generally follows the Route 220 corridor into the City of Roanoke, and overlaps Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to West Virginia. This refined alternative would utilize existing corridors where possible, on routes that are already designated for improvement, thereby reducing the cost of construction and expense associated with additional land expropriation. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors directs that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Roanoke Valley Business Council. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the Resolution, and ~! carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Jeff Echols, Resident Engineer, VDOT James W. Arend, Vice Chairman, Roanoke Valley Business Council John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator ~~~. ,. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1998' RESOLUTION 032498-6 REQUESTING VDOT TO CONTINUE FUNDING PROJECTS CURRENTLY ON THE PLAN AND ADOPT THOSE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AS "PROJECTS NOT ON PLAN" FOR INCLUSION INTO THE 1998- 2004 PRIMARY AND INTERSTATE SIX YEAR IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Six Year Improvement Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction; and WHEREAS, this program is updated annually to assist in the allocation of federal and state funds for interstate, primary, and secondary roads. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1. That the following projects identified as "Projects on Plan" are recommended to continue to receive funding for planning and construction; and • Interstate 81 -Roanoke County is very pleased with the Interstate 81 improvement study recently published and will be forwarding our concerns within a couple of months. • Interstate 73 -Again, Roanoke County is very pleased with the progress on future Interstate 73 and we continue to support the 220 corridor as an I-73 location. Roanoke County will be forwarding our preferred corridor/alignment later this year. • Rte. 221 (Bent Mountain Road) -Roanoke County is requesting continued allocation of funds for this project. Roanoke County is very receptive in splitting this project into two phases; especially if construction funds are not available for the whole project. Our immediate concerns are the horizontal curves within the first mile of proposed improvements. E ,l Rte. 220 South -Roanoke County is pleased that the two miles of 220 South are being straightened. We look forward to the completion of this project. • Rte. 111460 West -Roanoke County is appreciative that this project finally made the plan. Roanoke County requests additional funding so this project can move forward as quickly as possible. • Rte. 419 -The right turn lane proposed along 419 at Hidden Valley school is also a welcome improvement and we look forward to its completion. 2. That the following projects identified as "Projects Not on Plan" have been identified by the Board of Supervisors as extremely important to the growth of Roanoke County and are requested to be included in the VDOT Six Year Improvement Program for the 1998-99 Fiscal Year. They are listed in priority order. 1. Rte. 11 Williamson Road) Need: Now that Rte. 11 has been widened from Plantation Road (Rte. 115) to Hollins College, there remains one section of three lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the realignment of Florist Road with Rte. 11 have created additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.52 miles, is a three-lane road with the center lane used for turning movements. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. Traffic counts: 15,000 vehicles per day from the Roanoke City limits to Peters Creek Road. This stretch of road has also been identified as an alternate route in case of a blockage on I-81 /581. Recommended Improvements: Afive-lane highway with appropriate turning lanes, which will complete improvement of Williamson Road from the city limits to the intersection of Rte. 115. Cost: $10, 000, 000. 2. Rte. 115 Plantation Road) Need: The existing road, 2.43 miles, is two lanes with many side 2 ,~--~l connections to residential neighborhoods. The road needs to be improved from Roanoke City limits north, to Rte. 11. If full funding is not available, various spot improvements, such as turn lanes, alignment and grade improvements, would help with safety issues. Additional land is available along the road for future development, which will increase traffic in the future. Traffic Counts: From the Roanoke City limits to Williamson Road, 11,000 vehicles per day. Recommended Improvements: Five lane flush highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $12, 000, 000 - $15, 000, 000. 3. Rte. 220S (Franklin Road Need: Increased development (Roanoke City and County) along this stretch of road is creating traffic congestion for 220 expressway and Rte. 419. This section of road is a bottleneck for local and commuter traffic. An additional lane in both directions would reduce the traffic congestion in the area. Traffic counts: 20,000 to 25,000 vehicles per day. Recommended Improvements: Asix-lane divided highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $10,000,000 3. That the Board of Supervisors request that the Commonwealth of Virginia create an expanded pool of funds to meet increasing transportation needs throughout the state. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: 3 p~ Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Fred Altizer, District Engineer, VDOT The Honorable Shirley J. Wbara, Secretary of Transportation and Chairman, Commonwealth Transportation Board Lorinda G. Lionberger, Salem District, Commonwealth Transportation Board Dave Gehr, Commissioner, Department of Transportation 4 ,~„ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1998 RESOLUTION 090898-1 SUPPORTING THE I-581 AND ROUTE 220 SOUTH CORRIDOR FOR I-73 THROUGH THE ROANOKE VALLEY WHEREAS, the Commonwealth Transportation Board has previously selected Alternative Corridor 6A which generally follows Route 220, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to the West Virginia state line west of Narrows as the location for the proposed I-73 north-south interstate connecting Detroit to Charleston, SC; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has previously indicated its support of a refined corridor for I-73 which would follow the present location of Route 220 into the City of Roanoke and then overlap the present Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to West Virginia on at least two occasions as set forth in its Resolution 112294-1 of November 22, 1994 and Resolution 032498-6 of March 24, 1998; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has released an "I- 73 Location Study: Alternatives for Future Study" which identifies more specific proposals for the potential corridor location of I-73 through the Roanoke Valley and is in the process of accepting public comments upon these proposed corridors in preparation for the final design work for this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, strongly reiterates its prior recommendation to build I-73 and that the selected corridor for I-73 immediately follows the existing corridor of Route 220 into the City of Roanoke, and then overlaps Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed "Smart -~ and Route 460 to the West Virginia state line near Narrows. This recommended corridor would utilize existing road corridors wherever possible, on routes that are already designated for improvement which would thereby reduce the cost of construction and the expenses associated with additional land expropriation. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that VDOT be requested to hold at least. one additional public information session for the specific purpose of allowing the citizens of Roanoke County an opportunity to comment upon VDOT's proposed corridor locations for I-73 which may directly affect the residences and business locations of Roanoke County citizens. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors directs that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Interstate Route 73 Communications Committee of the General Assembly and the Roanoke Valley Business Council. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison NAYS: Supervisors Nickens, Johnson A COPY TESTE: ~sx~uy.td rc,~.e~,,.i Mary H. Allen, CMC/AAE Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Fred Altizer, District Engineer, VDOT Lorinda Lionberger, Transportation Commonwealth Board Interstate Communications Committee of the General Assembly Roanoke Valley Business Council 2 f AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2000 ~-f RESOLUTION 120544-2 REAFFIRMING AND AMENDING RESOLUTION 094898- 1 SUPPORTING THE I-581 AND ROUTE 220 SOUTH CORRIDOR FOR 1-73 THROUGH THE ROANOKE VALLEY AND OPPOSING OPTION 4 KNOWN AS THE WESTERN ALIGNMENT WHEREAS, the Commonwealth Transportation Board has previously selected Alternative Corridor 6A which generally follows Route 220, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to the. West Virginia state line west of Narrows as the location for the proposed I-73 north-south interstate connecting Detroit to Charleston, SC; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has previously indicated its support of a refined corridor for I-73 which would follow the present location of Route 220 into the City of Roanoke and then overlap the present interstate 581, interstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to West Virginia on at least two occasions as set forth in its Resolution 112294-1 of November 22, 1994 and Resolution 032498-6 of March 24, 1998; and Resolution 090898-1 of September 8, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Virginia DepartmentofTransportation (VDOT) has released an "I-73 Location Study: Alternatives for Future Study" which identifies more specific proposals for the potential corridor location of I-73 through the Roanoke Valley and is in the process of accepting public comments upon these proposed corridors in preparation for the ft na1 design work for this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: (1) That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, strongly reiterates its prior recommendation to build I-73 and that the selected corridor for I-73 immediately follows the existing corridor of Route 220 into the City of Roanoke, and then overlaps Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to the West ~/ Virginia state fine near Narrows. This recommended corridor would utilize existing road corridors wherever possible, on routes that are already designated for improvement which would thereby reduce the cost of construction and the expenses associated with additional land expropriation; and (2) That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, opposes Option 4 known as the "western alignment" that begins in Western Roanoke County; and (3) That VDOT be requested to continue to hold public information sessions for the specific purpose of allowing the citizens of Roanoke County an opportunity to comment upon VDOT's proposed corridor locations for I-73 which may directly affect the residences and business locations of Roanoke County citizens; and (4) That the Board of Supervisors directs that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation, the interstate Route 73 Communications Committee of the General Assembly and the Roanoke Valley Business Council. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to reaffirm Resolution 090898-1 amended to oppose the Western Corridor option, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Minnix, Church, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Fred Altizer, District Engineer, VDOT Lorinda Lionberger, Transportation Commonwealth Board Interstate Communications Committee of the General Assembly Roanoke Valley Business Council Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce O~ poANpr~ a „a.:~: ~~; .~z 1838 B ~ C.ll V'~ ~.J~~ ~~ V 14.7 ®1 ~.l H. Odeli "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman Cave Spring Magisterial District Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Vice-Chairman Catawba Magisterial District P. 0. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 t~--! :June 3, 2001 Bob L. Johnson Hollins Magisteriai District Joseph McNamara Windsor Hil)s Magisterial District Mr. Fred Altizer Narry C. Nickens District Administrator Vinton Magisterial District Virginia Department of Transportation P. O. Box 3017 Salem, VA 24153 Dear ~: ~~~ The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has consistently supported the construction of Interstate 73 and adopted resolutions expressing its support on October 12, 1993, November 12,1994 and December 7, 2000. The Board has expressed support far the I-581 and Route 220 south corridor through the Roanoke Valley and only opposed Option 4, the Western alignment. Attached is our most recent Resolution 120500-2. The Commonwealth Transportation Board has approved the central corridor which will have an impact on the residents in Southeast Roanoke City and Roanoke County. This will be a difFicult adjustment, especially for those who have lived in this area for many years. Many of the residents of Southeast Roanoke County chose to live in that area because of its suburban and rural nature and I-73 will bring major changes to that community On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I am requesting that the Virginia Department of Transportation and The Commonwealth Transportation Board work with the residents who live in the 1-73 corridor in Southeast Roanoke City and Roanoke County to address their concerns and to mitigate any negative impact to them and their property. Thank you for considering the needs of these residents who are very important to the County of Roanoke. Sincerely H. Odel`I `"F~zz "Minnix, Chair Roanoke Cou ty Board of Supervisors CC: Lorinda Lionberger, Commonwealth Transportation Board Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Elmer Hodge, County Administrator ~~-' 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: July 10, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session with MPO and Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission on I-73. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has previously indicated its support of a refined corridor for I-73, which would follow the present location of Route 220 into the City of Roanoke. It will then overlap the present Interstate 581, Interstate 81, the proposed "Smart Highway" and Route 460 to West Virginia on several occasions as set forth in its Resolution 112294-1 of November 22, 1994, Resolution 032498-6 of March 24, 1998, Resolution 090898-1 of September 8, 1998 and Resolution dated December 3, 2000. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board of Supervisors requested a joint work session with the MPO, staff from the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission and VDOT to discuss action of the Commonwealth Transportation Board. Below is preliminary information on the selected corridor and process. On May 17 of this year, the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) voted to build Interstate 73 from Roanoke to North Carolina. The approved location links the following segments,from north to south:374, 376, 287a, 399, 400, 153, 3266, 326, 387, 329, 373, 391, 390, 349, 393 and 398. The CTB selected route is a location that overlaps I-581 in Roanoke to Elm Avenue, veers to the southeast around the east side of Mill Mountain. It then crosses the Roanoke River, south of the Roanoke Industrial Center, and continues toward the Blue Ridge Parkway to 1 E/ the east of Route 116. The corridor continues southeast, turns to the south, and enters Franklin County near Coopers Cove. The corridor continues to travel south, staying west of Route 116 and east of Rocky Mount into Henry County, entering North Carolina near Ridgeway. Also, The CTB elected to build a connector road from existing Route 220, near Route 668 (Yellow Mountain Road) east of Buck Mountain, to the I-73 corridor near Route 657 (Crowell Gap), west of Kennett in Franklin County. In Roanoke County, the selected I-73 corridor is approximately 600 hundred feet wide and approximately 3.5 miles in length. The proposed connector road ,which has been recently added, is approximately 3 miles in length and has a corridor width of approximately 600 feet. The Commonwealth Transportation Board members adopted an alignment that improves safety on existing Route 220 by removing through traffic, such as trucks and doublewide trailers, from local traffic, such as school buses and farm vehicles. The route also provides stronger intermodal linkage to the Roanoke Regional Airport and points south. By veering to the southwest around Mill Mountain, south of Roanoke, the chosen corridor avoids a severe impact to Route 220 near Tanglewood Mall and Clearbrook areas, as well as to Route 419/Starkey Road. The selected path for I-73 allows for a crossing of the Blue Ridge Parkway that is acceptable to the National Park Service. Next step: • Following the Commonwealth Transportation Board's action, VDOT engineers will again look at the selected corridor and finalize the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The FEIS is forwarded to the Federal Highway Administration (FWHA) for approval. The estimated time for review and approval is 12 months. • After approval of the FEIS, a Record of Decision is prepared by FHWA. The Record of Decision will explain the reasons for the project decision, summarize any mitigation measures that will be incorporated in the project and document any required Section 4(f) approval. • If FHWA issues a Record of Decision, Virginia can begin planning the construction of I-73, pending the availability of funds. No decisions have been made about when and where construction could begin. • Environmental evaluation and early planning has not started for any other section of I-73 in Virginia. Staff has attached maps for your review and plan to have larger scale maps at the work session. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 2 -i Staff, if requested, will submit to the Board, in the next 90 days, a study with determined impacts on service delivery and quality of life issues SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Arnold Covey, Director Elmer C. Hodge Department of Community Development County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens 3 T-73: Picking a path Page 1 of 5 ~E_ ~~1~```'; ~~ ~. +~'~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ Related News I-73 plan is missing 3 of 6 states Maps Discussion June 20, 2001 September 17 Photos Ohio and Michigan are out; South Candidates take I-73 Carolina was never in en route to November Contacts Interstate 73 has Fre uentl y It won't be an interstate in West Vir inia. In g overlaid itself on the road map of this fall s Asked Virginia, the section from Bluefield o Roanoke is election campaign, with Questions on the back burner. But the state doing the most several Democrats is North Carolina. lining up against its Where it stands proposed route through News by E-mail By RAY REED Southeast Roanoke THE ROANOKE TIMES - -- _ _ and Roanoke County. More News _ - August 5 Coopers I-73 Home Page Interstate 73 was conceived in Send This Cove refuses to cave federal legislation 10 years ago as a St~o-" / To A in to interstate highway from Detroit to Friend. _ Residents worry the Charleston S.C. road will pave over the , treasures history has left them. That concept won't be carried out, at least not fully. July 8 I-73 fuels joy, grief for those in path Two of the six states along the route have pulled out of I-73, and one never really studied Interstate opponents it say historical sites and . environmental issues are their best means of But the original federal concept is very much defense. alive in the talk about I-73 in Virginia. July 8 Did wetlands) People who want the road built from Roanoke or politeness change to Martinsville point out that it was part of the route? Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 - Henry County residents called ISTEA. I-73 was reaffirmed in 1995 somehow got I-73 rerouted. legislation that Sen. John Warner, R-Va., helped write that designated the U.S. 220 corridor from ~____ __ Roanoke to Greensboro as part of I-73's route. July 8 Agency:lnterstate might harm logperch Transportation officials in Virginia treat the fish legislation as their mandate to fulfill, citing it in The endangered fish, decision-making sessions and in newsletters as farm land and forests they push plans for I-73 toward final approval are concerns that may affect the federal by the Federal Highway Administration. approval of I-73. Critics in Virginia say an interstate isn't needed and that the pullout decisions, by Ohio and June 22 I-73 route tweaked to save http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/future73/6 20a.html 10/1/O1 I-73: Picking a path Page 2 of 5 tweaked to save Michigan, prove their point. Opponents of the I- wetlands ~"':, 73 project in Roanoke go even further, often The new plan through saying at public meetings that West Virginia Henry County will also and North Carolina are not building the road as cost just a little less to an interstate highway. build. Highway engineers in those states say West June 20 I-73 plan is missing 3 of 6 states Vir inia is buildin a noninterstate road and g g ~ It won't be an interstate that North Carolina remains fully committed to in West Virginia. In building I-73. Virginia, the section from Bluefield to Roanoke is on the back Michi an ended its stud of a ossible new g y p burner. But the state freeway from Jackson to the Ohio border last doing the most is North week. All of I-73 in Michigan has slipped into Carolina. inactive status, said Kari Debnar of the state's transportation department, meaning that I-73 is June 20 A sensible an idea without funds on Michigan's planning solution for the books. Interstate 73 mess It will take more than In Ohio, I-73 is in much the same osition as in p an upgrade -but less than anew-terrain Michigan. Traffic volume on existing roads in highway the corridor isn't heavy enough to justify new construction, said Brian Cunningham of the Ohio Department of Transportation. May 26 S.E. residents feel road rage over (- South Carolina "is doin absolutel nothin " on g Y g 73 Most people in I-73, said Pete Poore, communications director Southeast Roanoke or of the state's transportation department. "We Mount Pleasant didn't don't have the money, and it's not on the priority speak up at public list," despite a sign beside a Myrtle Beach ' " " meetings because they thought one of the It s hi hwa that calls it "tem ora I-73. g Y P rY other routes would be permanently temporary," Poore said. chosen.a West Virginia plans to build aroad -called the King Coal Highway instead of I-73 -but not to May 18 interstate standards. It will be an upgraded Transportation Board version of U.S. 52 from Williamson to OKs building I-73 Both Martinsville and Bluefield, with sto li hts or sto si ns at p g P g Henry County officials highway intersections, said Joe DeNault, West preferred the eastern Virginia's state highway engineer. Driveway route because water entrances will be prohibited. and sewer lines are already in place. Although road signs in West Virginia still _ __ mention a "future I-73," U.S. 52 probably can't May 17 be designated an interstate route, said Robert Transportation Board Fonseca-Martinez of the Federal Highway discusses moving (- Administration in Richmond. An interstate 73 to boost shield would tell travelers they don't need to Martinsville Results of the ex ect sto li hts on the road he said. P p g ~ discussion won't be known until today, Construction is under way on an intersection of when the board votes the King Coal Highway at Bluefield that on whether to build connects U.S. 460 and U.S. 52. Design work is Interstate 73 under way for atwo-mile segment adjoining Bluefield, as well as an 18-mile section near May 16 Residents http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/future73/6_20a.html 10/1/O1 I-73: Picking a path Page 3 of 5 Williamson, DeNault said. May 16 Residents -..: a want details on I-73 µ Connector road might ~,,, The state doing the most with I-73 is North pass through Crowell Carolina. Gap in Roanoke County A.L. Avant, a branch manager with the North Carolina Department of Transportation in May 12 Residents Raleigh, said the agency is committed to stare down I-73 route completing Interstate 73 from Virginia to South Transportation Board to Carolina. vote on road Thursday A 15-mile section of I-73 south of Asheboro May 11 Preferred I-73 already has its interstate shield on road signs. route unveiled Another section south of Asheboro is being VDOT selects a route designed to interstate standards. east and south of downtown Roanoke for Also under design is a section of I-73 west of the proposed interstate Greensboro that would carry U.S. 220 traffic to ~__ the airport and Interstate 40 along a route that April 26 EPA gives parallels North Carolina 68. low rating to I-73's environmental impact A relatively new four-lane road already carries statement Although critical of the traffic from the Vir mia border to Greensboro. g state's report, the North Carolina isn't budgeting any money to federal agency's low make this section an interstate, Avant said, but it rating won't stop the was built to the width, grade and access project standards of the interstate system. Wider paving of the shoulders and some new April 15 Environmental issues bridges would qualify the Virginia-to- postpone I-73 plans Greensboro leg of U.S. 220 as an interstate for another month highway, and at some point those improvements Air quality, hazardous will be made, Avant said. materials and history are on the minds of Virginians who want to North Carolina accomplished a coup in the protect the state's 1995 federal Transportation Act when Warner assets and then-Sen. Lauch Faircloth, R-N.C., reached an agreement within their Senate subcommittee, ~- - ----~ which was writing that year's transportation bill. March 15 Public likes U.S. 220 upgrade The agreement gave North Carolina two option Public opinion already interstates, one of which used the route is in, and it shows a lot originally proposed for I-73 from Mount Airy to of support for improving Winston-Salem. That corridor today is called U.S. 220 instead of building a new Interstate 74. interstate Virginia's share of the agreement routed I-73 from Bluefield, W.Va., along the U.S. 460 corridor to Blacksburg. There it picked up the "smart" road to Interstate 81 and shared I-81's route to Roanoke and Interstate 581 through the city. The deal gave Virginia I-73 along the route preferred by Roanoke-area business and March 11 Board to ponder many thoughts about I-73 Commonwealth Transportation Board reviews public comments this week March 4 Decisions http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/future73/6 20a.html 10/1/O1 I-73: Picking a path Page 4 of 5 political leaders. North Carolina got both I-73 March 4 Decisions thi h d f and I-74 a ea or s . region's voice about cN~ I-73 North Carolina has completed the first section When Lorinda of I-74, connecting Interstate 77 to U.S. 52 at Lionberger took her Mount Airy. It was the last link needed in a seat on the Commonwealth truck route intended to keep heavy vehicles off Transportation Board, U.S. 52 on Fancy Gap Mountain, a route known she wanted to be a for brake failures and truck crashes. valuable addition Virginia had been slow to start its planning of I- `- 73 in the early 1990s, and North Carolina and Jan. 7 Some favor West Vir inia had alread ublicized their g Y p building the interstate; others say routes by the time Virginia started looking at the improve U.S. 220 issue. Almost everyone in the area wants a better Vir inia still has not advanced an lans for g Y P road between Roanoke and Martinsville, but developing I-73 through the New River Valley residents disagree on the U.S. 460 corridor. For now, it remains an sharply over what idea without funds on the planning books. constitutes improvement Virginia highway officials say they don't know when that inactive status might change for the Dec. 16 Eastern I-73 Bluefield-to-Roanoke section of I-73. route hits arm of lake An owner of lake property alerted VDOT to the oversight in its draft proposal VDOT says new interstate would reduce air pollution The road's biggest environmental threat is to the area's streams, wetlands and storm water runoff Draft Environmental Impact Statement 8~ Section 4(f) Evaluation Bedford, Botetourt, Franklin, Henry 8~ Roanoke Counties and the cities of Roanoke and Martinsville Read the I-73 study done for Roanoke city Report analyzes economic impact of I- 73 alignments on Roanoke The Process Aril 16) The Players --Part One: Commonwealth Transportation Board (April $0) http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/future73/6_20a.html 10/1 /O 1 I-73: Picking a path Page 5 of 5 A ri130~ The Players --Part -..,. Two: Opponents and supporters (May 1) """" ~~~~ The Corridors --What people think (May 1a) The Corridors -- Possible routes (May 16) What if it alters I-581? Can it go along 220? Real Estate nn( aY 28) Economic Impact_ June 11 An interstate can be a major factor of development. How might it impact the region? The COSt (June 25) The road is expected to cost $1.4 billion. Where is the money coming from? Local content copyright ©2001 The Roanoke Times http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/future73/6_20a.html 10/1/O1 MDOT postpones further studies along I-73 corridor Page 1 of 1 ;~, .,.. r„~y Jiui %~`. ~. ~vX ,~y ~~~. ~ ;!1 ~i, +~t,lq .~i~li ~r~ .! ~.~' J.,t sir, f „'i€ For Immediate Release: June 12, 2001 Contact: Kari Debnar, Office of Communications, 517-780-7510 MDOT postpones further studies along I-73 corridor Remaining funds will be used for safety improvements along US-127 and ZIS-223 The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has announced it will not proceed with the environmental clearance phase of the I-73 corridor study. Instead, the remaining $2.9 million will be used for safety improvements along the US-127 corridor between M-50 and US-12, and along US-223 in Lenawee County. "The department is suspending the study process until we believe adequate funding exists to proceed into design, right-of--way acquisition and construction," said State Transportation Director Gregory J. Rosine. "We will continue to work with local communities and the Ohio Department of Transportation to coordinate future improvements." MDOT recently completed an 18-month feasibility study examining the possibility of a new expressway in southeast Michigan. I-73 would link Jackson, Michigan with Toledo, Ohio. Federal High Priority Project funding was identified for both the feasibility and environmental portion of the study. "At this time, the remaining funds would be better spent on safety improvements to the US-127 and US-223 corridors," said University Region Engineer Thom Davies. "This will allow us to make improvements to address specific areas that were identified within the I-73 feasibility study." The types of projects on which funding will be spent include safety and minor operational improvements. The decision not to proceed with the environmental clearance process was influenced by the knowledge that it would be many years before a project like I-73 would successfully compete for funding to advance past the environmental stage. In the interim, MDOT will continue to address operational and safety issues within the context of the existing statewide program. Any improvements made in the corridor will be constructed so they don't interfere with any of the options that the completed feasibility study identified as worthy of further analysis. The Ohio Department of Transportation faced a similar situation and also delayed the start of its environmental process for its portion of the I-73 study. ### For more information on the I-73 feasibility study, check out MDOT's project Web site at http://www.mdot.state.mi.us/I-73. Metro,University http://www.mdot.state.mi.us/communications/press/files/06-15KD-O1.htm 10/1/O1 NCRoads.com: I-73 Page 1 of 4 ~"~ Future I-73 meets present N. C. 73 in Richmond County < I-840 ~ On-Ramp ~ Home ~ I-74 > See also: N.C. 73 ~ State Map Page contents: Rockingham County ~ Greensboro ~ The 220 Free Richmond County ~ Comments Interstate 73 I-73 is currently signed along the U.S. 220 freeway from the town of Candor in Montgomery County north to I-40 exit 218. In theory, I-73 could one day run due north-south through the state. The road would mostly follow the U.S. 220 corridor, along with the short U.S_ . 1 corridor south of the town of Rockingham into South Carolina (see State Map) I-73 was authorized by the same 1991 Federal bill that laid the foundation for I-74 in North Carolina. I-74's story in N.C. is more interesting than 73's: 74 is longer, it's signed in more places and its number is more controversial. Furthermore, I-73 is more a road for Virginia to play with and South Carolina to complain about than for North Carolina to tout. Still, I-73 has given birth to several future road projects. I. Rockingham County (Do not confuse the county of Rockingham, which is located on the Virginia border, with the city of Rockingham, which is located near South Carolina in Richmond County. A finished I-73 would serve both. See the County Map.) Interstate 73 would, in theory, run through the length of Rockingham County along with or near U.S. 220. Much of 220 through the county is already a 4-lane road with grade crossings. However, the state currently lists no plans of any sort, funded or unfunded, to upgrade U. S. 220 to a freeway. Most of I-74, on the other hand, is covered at least by unfunded projects in the 2002-08 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). But all that is listed in Rockingham County for I-73 are an unfunded welcome center near the Virginia border, and a short stretch of a longer project mostly in Guilford County (below). Perhaps the state is instead focusing on nearby I-785/U.S. 29 instead. II. Guilford County (Greensboro) A $131 million project is underway to improve U. S. 220 in southern Rockingham and northern Guilford counties, and build a new road in northwestern Guilford County to connect to the existing N.C. 68 freeway. This is all one project, 13.5 miles in length. Widening of the existing 220 will start in 2002 at the earliest, and construction of the new road further south will start after 2008. The road will run parallel to, and east of, the existing N.C. 68 in the northern part of the county. It is not clear whether all of this new road will be a freeway. http://www.ncroads.com/interst/ih073.htm 10/3/01 NCRoads.com: I-73 Page 2 of 4 ~~~ N.C. 68 and other existing freeways. In the mid-1990s, a new north-south freeway carrying N.C. 68 was built west of Greensboro. From the north, I-73 would be signed south over this freeway, then east over I-40, then southwest around Greensboro on the upcoming Painter Boulevard beltway. I-40 between Greensboro and W-S is being widened as of early 2001; eventually 40 will be routed on Painter Boulevard along with 73. As of early 2001, there were no I-73 signs of any sort posted on N.C. 68 in northern Guilford County, or anywhere on I-40. I-73 won't amount to much in the way of new roads for Greensboro, especially compared to what I-74 promises W-S. Don't feel sorry for the Gate City, though; it's getting plenty of other stuff. III. The U.S. 220 freeway From I-40 through western Greensboro, I-73 heads south (or will head south) along the U.S. 220 freeway at exit 218. For 55 miles south of I- 40, the 220 freeway currently sports I-73 or Future 73 signs. (Signs on the southernmost 20 miles of the freeway use INTERSTATE, as in Image #1, while those further north use FUTURE.) These signs were first erected in the fall of 1997 -- some I-73 signs in the area have "9- 97" written on the back -- making this road the first in the country to be called I-73. South of the U.S. 311 interchange, the freeway also carries I-74. History. Much of the 220 freeway predates I-73 by many years. The section around Asheboro, from N.C. 134 to the interchange south of U.S. 311_, was completed in the late-1960s (definitely by 1969). By 1973, the freeway was extended north of 311 to the Level Cross exit (Branson Mill Road). In the early 1980s (by 1984), 220 was finished all the way north to the junction of I-85 (exit 122). Also by 1984, the southernmost 14 miles of the current 220 freeway were finished. For a while, then, the freeway existed in two disjointed segments, with modern 220A in southern Randolph and northern Montgomery counties in between. In 1996, this missing link was finished. North of I-85, the 220 freeway was finished to Freeman Mill Road in 1994 and to I-40 a year later. Before this time, half the cloverleaf with I-85 had sat unused. From U.S. 311 south to the town of Rockingham, I-73 follows or will follow I-74. See I-74, parts V and VI for more information, including future projects. In late 2000, new FUTURE 73/74 CORRIDOR signs first appeared on U.S. 220 south of where the 220/73/74 freeway currently ends (Image #2). In one place it is clear that the proposed I-73 will cross N.C. 73 (photo at top). Note that any new freeway would probably not be built directly on the existing U.S. 220 right-of--way; the signs were probably put up more to advertise the future Interstates' existence than to announce its acutal alignment. http://www.ncroads.com/interst/ih073.htm 10/3/01 terminus NCRoads.com: I-73 Page 3 of 4 ~( IV. Richmond County Directly west of the town of Rockingham, I-73, along with 220 and I-74, will be routed over a new freeway bypass (project R-3421; funded; see I- 74, part VI). Near the South Carolina state line, I-73 would theoretically follow U.S. L All of U.S. 1 through Richmond County will be upgraded to a four-lane road as part of a separate project, part of which includes a new bypass of Rockingham to the east. Although this project is funded (22.4 miles, $194 million, construction starting in 2008 at the earliest), only its southernmost section could conceivably carry I-73. The road might not even be built as a freeway. In late 2000, FUTURE 73 CORRIDOR signs were posted along the four-lane U.S. 220 into Rockingham, and also along U.S. 1 from Business U.S. 74 south to the new U.S. 74 freeway. Note that there are no plans to upgrade this particular road to a freeway, and if I-73 and I-74 were ever built, they would not be routed over the current U. S. 220 or 1 through Rockingham. Again, the signs were probably put up mostly for show. Where U.S. 1 hits the new U.S. 74 freeway, a special sign indicating the end of the future I-73 corridor was posted in late 2000 (Image #4). Unresolved is the issue of how I-73 would connect from the Rockingham western bypass to U.S. 1. Regardless of what signs imply, there is no provision, either funded or unfunded, for a direct route. If I-73 were to follow only currently planned freeways, it would loop around Rockingham to the west, but then double back along the future U.S. 1 which will run east of the existing 1 between Rockingham and Hamlet. As of the end of 2000, there were no I-73 signs of any sort on U.S. 1 south of the new U.S. 74 freeway. V. Comments f i f~cw ,, 1 C H M C3 N D",, ,_,, ,,,. ... Fjkl~kEf1C~ faA •..CIP ~~ . _ ~ ~, r -~- '>.*~ -,~ r; ~. ~ 1~. .~ ~~~~,~ , ~~ ~~~ ~~4 ~~ t , a ~ `' iciai. In South Carolina, FUTURE I-73 CORRIDOR signs have been posted along U.S. 501 near Myrtle Beach since at least 1998.[1] There's considerable opposition to 73 in South Carolina, under the rationale that it will destroy precious environmental and historical sites and that South Carolinians don't need it. With the planned upgrades to nearby U.S. 74 in North Carolina, an additional freeway across the border may make little sense. FUTURE I-73 CORRIDOR signs have been spotted near Roanoke, Virginia as well.[2] What exists of I-73 -- the 220 freeway -- is still very much a nascent Interstate. There's not much traffic on it at all, at least compared to other N.C. Interstates, and the exits provide few traveler services outside of the Asheboro area. It's reminiscent of I-40 when that road was first completed all the way to Wilmington. Exit numbering and mile-marker posting on I-73, as of early 2001, is sporadic at best. Starting at the south, the first numbered exit is exit 39, with N.C. 24/27. Mileposts first start appearing in this area too. Near Asheboro, exit numbers and mileposts disappear, and don't reappear again heading north until the I-85 interchange. The section of I-73 around Level Cross is named in honor of NASCAR driver Richard Petty, a native of the area. Signs denoting this fact are similar in design to the Michael http://www.ncroads.com/interst/ih073.htm 10/3/01 function -NCRoads.com: I-73 Jordan signs on I-40. Some 3di suggestions. When the Greensboro beltway is built, it could be signed as I- 273. Similarly, part of the existing I-85, once bypassed, could become I-173. The philosophy is the same as that espoused on in the comments to the I-74 page. Project numbers: U.S. 220 in Guilford County: R-2413 I-40 widening in Guilford: I-2201 U.S. 1 bypass in Richmond County: R-2501 Sources: North Carolina Department of Transportation. Transportation Improvement Plan, 2002-08. From its Web site. All cost and future date information comes from this source. ---------. Map of I-73 and I-74 Corridors. [1] J.N.B. Jr. [2] Scott D. Rhodes Thanks also to Adam Prince for tipping me off to the new I-73/74 signs in late 2000. Last Update: 21 January 2001 I-26 ~ I-40 ~ I-74 ~ I-77 ~ I-85 ~ I95 ~ Interstate On-Ramp ~ U.S. Highways Top ~ NCRoads.com Home Page 4 of 4 http://www.ncroads.com/interst/ih073.htm 10/3/01 I-73 freeway Between Jackson, MI, and Toledo, Uhio . A l t (: k l t li A '~l 1. A `J 1:~ t' S l t i k 1j . , :~ i ~~~~ ,~ i ~°.,' -~ ~~~~ I-73: Proposed New ~~~ ~~~~~`~` ~'~~ ~ Freeway Between ~~~ ~~ _~~ ~~ Jackson, MI, and .<~ ~~ ~ ~~~~°' ~ ~ Toledo, Ohio -;~. u In the fall of 1999, the Michigan Department of Transportation a;' ~ r.f ~ began an 18-month study of a new interstate highway stretching r between Jackson, Michigan, and Toledo, Ohio. Existing U.S. 223 already makes most of this connection. Improving U.S. 223 to ' address safety and congestion issues would save millions of taxpayer dollars. Reinvesting in U.S. 223 also would protect air quality, open space, and wildlife habitat; stop sprawl; and preserve the quality of life for numerous southern Michigan communities. GOVERNMENT/CITIZEN ACTION June 12, 2001 1 State Cancels 1 Billion Plan to Construct 1-73 Institute, citizens actively opposed new soufhern Michigan freeway Citing a lack of funding, the Michigan Department of Transportation pulled the plug on its proposal to build a 60-mile long freeway between Jackson and Toledo. In fact citizens defeated the project through excellent organizing, fact gathering, and communication with the public and politicians. Click here to read MDOT's press release announcing the project's cancellation. Click_here to read Detroit Free Press coverage. Resolution MUCC Chapter Votes Against I-73 On March 5, 2000, a chapter of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs passed a resolution opposing a new I-73 between Jackson, MI, and Toledo, OH. OTHER RESOURCES Stop I-73 Group Citizens Against Urban_Sprawl E_x_pressways Internet site of residents in Southern Michigan working to stop I-73. MDOT web site httn://www.mlui. org/projects/transport/i-73/i-73 intro.html Page 1 0l' 2 _ ~~~ 10/1/2001 ,.. ~_ ~ In ti ~ a ~ r S , -~ ~~~ C~ U {z.Q-w~ ~ 2 0 0 ~ ~ ~' . wl ,.G~vU~s I-73 is an Interstate in name only. I-73 is a National Highway System road and as such, is subject to design flexibility. That means we can use the I-73 project to upgrade U.S. 220 if that is what we want to do. We are not forced to build I-73 as an Interstate. In May, CTB chose a preferred alternative for the 1-73 project that would be an Interstate running through our farmland, mountains, and historical urban and rural neighborhoods. This choice on the part of CTB is not the final decision on I-73. It will be Federal Highway Administration who makes the final decision on I-73. The fact that CTB wants to build a new Interstate highway does not relieve the Federal Highway Administration of its obligation to select an alternative for I-73 that would avoid serious social and environmental impacts to our region. In making their decision, Federal Highway Administration will give very serious consideration to the wishes of local governing bodies such as the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. A resolution passed by Roanoke County Board of Supervisors favoring an upgrade of U.S. 220 as the preferred alternative for I-73 would be valid in the eyes of Federal Highway Administration, regardless of the fact that the CTB has chosen something different. I would urge Roanoke County to continue their support of the 5B11220 alignment for I-73. {would also urge you to include language in your resolution favoring a U.S. 220 upgrade to principa{ arterial standards rather than the full Interstate standards chosen by CTB. o~ PpP'"0~F AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ' ~ '' _ Z J, ,,aZ r83a APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCE ,~ CITIZEN COMMENTS .: ---~ SUBJECT: ;~`1 ~' S ~ ~ c.~ f r ~-vt ~" N ~ I - ~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, / W/LL G/VE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, /AGREE TO AB/DE BY THE GU/DEL/NES L/STED BELOW.- ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the Group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD '~ NAME: ~~b~"~'y~ 1Ccq~~-s ADDRESS: ~ ~ t( `7 /sac ~ ~,r~ ``Cc~ ~ (~c~• v~.~,s ~~, t ( v'c~, :~ `/ c C~ S PHONE: `~~ `~ G ~ 7~ 5 - ~ 2 .~ 2 c-~ Attached Petitioners 9th October 2001. Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors. Dear Member, We are writing to you today out of concern for the safety and future of our community. As you know, the Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) has endorsed a Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) proposal for Interstate 73. We are opposed to the route chosen by VDOT and approved by CTB. We are in favor of a reasoned, logical and economically effective improvement to our roadways, in particular an upgrade to the existing U.S.Rte 220 or a more reasonable and effective routing of I-73. We are concerned that the County Board of Supervisors has not passed a resolution opposing the choice of route by VDOT. The residents of SE Roanoke will be significantly damaged by this proposed Interstate and we urge you as our representatives to support us in the same way as you voted against the Western route. Thank You, Signed by attached petitioners. rv,,~ $ t ~r a m ` ~+f >, A-100901-2 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept and appropriate $370,500 Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant from the U. S. Department of Justice COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend acceptance of this grant. I am pleased that the Police Department is pursuing grants such as this one. We should also express appreciation to Congressman Goodlatte who worked very hard on behalf of the County for these funds. BACKGROUND: The County has been notified that the Police Department has been awarded a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). The grant is under their Making Officer Redeployment Effective (MORE) program and will be used to purchase mobile data terminals and related equipment to be used within the police vehicles. The grant is in the amount of $370,500 and will be matched by planned expenditures of $123,500 to upgrade part of the regional radio system to allow this equipment to function. Congressman Goodlatte held a news conference on October 8 to announce this grant. Roanoke County is one of 10 jurisdictions in Virginia to receive funding under this grant and our monies will be used to purchase 20 mobile data terminals and the required hardware and software. The use of this technology should allow the officer in the field to save two minutes for each Department of Motor Vehicles check and at least one hour per shift in report writing time by using the laptop computer associated with this equipment. The time saved will allow the officer to spend more time in the field providing community based services thus fulfilling the requirement of the redeployment efforts for the scope of this grant program. FISCAL IMPACT: The grant amount of $370, 500 needs to be appropriated for this grant program. The matching funds are already included in the 911 budget for the installation of the base stations at two antenna sites to allow this equipment to function. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends acceptance of this grant and appropriation of the $370,500 to the Police Department for this grant program. i ` t .w ~ M ..r Respectfully submitted, Appr ved by, m ~~.,-~-~ 1./..r..~ e~ 1~ ohn M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator -----------------------------------------=------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to accept Church _ x _ Denied () $370,500 and appropriate funds and that Johnson _ x Received () letter of appreciation be sent to Congress- McNamara- x _ Referred () man Goodlatte Minnix _ x _ To () Nickens _ x cc: File Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Danial Morris, Director, Finance W. Brent Robertson, Director, Budget John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator brcopsgrant.100901 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: John Chambliss ~ j~ SUBJECT: News Conference with Congressman Goodlatte DATE: October 4, 2001 The County of Roanoke has been notified by Congressman Goodlatte's office .that we have been awarded a grant from the U. S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Police Services (COPS) in their Making Officer Redeployment Effective (MORE) program. The amount of our grant is $370,500 to upgrade technology thereby freeing officers to spend more time in the community. The grant will be used to purchase mobile data terminal equipment including laptop computers which can be used in the police vehicles. The use of this computer system should save nearly two minutes for each inquiry into the state information data bases; save up to an hour per person per shift in report writing; reduce the amount of voice transmissions with the dispatchers; and add to the security of our system by allowing much data transfer electronically rather than by voice. As the required match, we will be installing the radio equipment at two antenna sites which will allow this system to work. Monies are already available for this effort. Congressman Goodlatte will be holding a news conference at the Public Safety Building at 3568 Peters Creek Road on Monday, October 8 at 9:00 a.m. We hope to have a demonstration of the laptop computer at that time, however, it will be using a demo software because our system had not been installed. This is a very important announcement for Roanoke County and will allow us to greatly move our police communications system forward and provide state of the art technology which can be shared by other Departments as funds become available in the future. I hope that you may be able to attend this event. cc Elmer Hodge Chief Ray Lavinder Kathi Scearce Mary Allen 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: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading of an Ordinance Authorizing the Vacation of an Existing 20' Drainage Easement and Acceptance of the Relocated 20' Drainage Easement on Property of Leon P. Harris and Beverly Y. Harris, New Lot 3A, Section 26, Hunting Hills (Plat Book 16, Page 165; Plat Book 19, Page 20; Tax Map No. 87.16-4-3) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is the first reading of the proposed ordinance to vacate an existing 20' drainage easement on New Lot 3A, Section 26, Hunting Hills, (Tax Map No. 87.16-4-3) dedicated by subdivision plat of record in the Plat Book 16, page 165, and shown onthe re-subdivision plat recorded in Plat Book 19, page 20, owned by Leon P. Harris and Beverly Y. Harris, and to accept a relocated 20' drainage easement on said lot granted to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. BACKGROUND: Old Heritage Corporation dedicated a 20' drainage easement on Lot 3 to the County of Roanoke by subdivision plat of Section 26, Hunting Hills, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County in Plat Book 16, page 165. By plat dated August 9, 1996, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 19, page 20, Lots 1, 2 and 3 of Section 26, Hunting Hills, were re-subdivided into New Lot lA and New Lot 3A. New Lot 3A is now owned by Leon P. Harris and Beverly Y. Harris. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the time of construction of their residence, the Harris' requested approval to pipe the existing drainage easement due to its close proximity to the structure and the fact that the ~~ drainage channel was a ravine on a steep grade. The County drainage engineering staff worked with the property owners, the owners' contractor and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to relocate the easement in a manner that would alleviate a likely future drainage problem, would adequately address the drainage from Fox Ridge Road, and address the landscaping concerns of the property owners. The County agreed to cover the cost of relocating the easement; VDOT covered the cost of piping within the new drainage easement; and the property owners were responsible for all other physical improvements, including surveying, grading and pipe installation, associated with the relocation. The project has been completed, with the relocation of the easement being the only item remaining. The location of the easement to be vacated is shown as "EXISTING 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO BE VACATED" on the partial copy of the plat recorded in Plat Book 16, page 165, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The relocated easement to be accepted is shown as "NEW 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT" on Exhibit B attached hereto. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs to the County, for recording fees and publication expenses, are estimated to be $210.00, and the funds are available within the budget of the Department of Community Development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the proposed ordinance. BY: Arnold Covey, Director Department of Community Approved Denied Received Referred to Motion by: APPROVED BY: ~,`-~O Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ Johnson McNamara Minnix _ Nickens Ep P RSE ~ TE. ~ ~ N ' ~ ~N I ~~ 1~ O ~J /~ O la- X ~ N N N 55'58'22' E 199.73' Z N ~ ~ ' o F~a ~ F o y ' lal ~1= j_ m O. ~ r~ 11~ ~ I 0 ~ h ^~ n U N m m ' ~ ~ Z b N ~ 1 \\ n ~ i ~ v ~ i ~ ..~ 1 N ~. N I I a m F- O X W Q 1 ~ /N _ O O NN N N N Z Ol =O' ? F~ ~Y°~Q . A~ ~0~ S Q. 04 y ~~ p ~V ~g~ .Op ~~ M og ti s ~ o 0 ~ ~~~ M W ~j ro~aoa ~w~a x~ap O ~ N 6 ~ ~ > ~ O ~` ~ U ; N O ~ ~~ ~ d ' W xW .. Z ~~_ p ~ ~ r ~~O< W = . Z V _ ! H A ~~ D W G Z O' pm W 0 3~~ 1- 0 0 m. '~',~: a~^~ O ~W' H Hm~ ~ ~o~ z z: h ~ W W W. d N Z ~Lj vWi Foy ai^~ F- odor ZZ m 3~~ W W 1 W ~~i J ~pf J =KI a 9oc 3 °i-' t O. ~o~ Y ~ai ~LBIT A G~ ~' ° ~ r~ ~oX 50. R JA~ 5~~~ RT~ 3 • P. /' oF~~ T~ cR6s 5//. EGR/NE• r URCLE nLp~ ;LOT ~A" SEG. 2G !-~un/T~n/4 Nic c s Pe, /9 PU. Zo W N 0 d' R~A° /~.2G ARC O~ ' 3q5• RAC' o ~3'- _~ 5• ,ARC m ~ ~. , 0 om H ~. I ia' /o. I W \~ C Q ~' 2y~. Z9. ERG ~ ~ 0 P~' Q~ /Q~ ,Q~ 1 / / Q~ ~b ~~' ~ ~ ~~ / 'v ~ ~~ ~,~`' ~ ~ / ~~ QW~~~ /~ ~~ / ~ ~ /~ / ~ J ~ ~ ~ , ~ oW V1 Q NEW LOT 3A `,Q, ~ ~ SEC7ioN z G, NUi-/T/NG N/LGS ~~iJ v ~ ~ P. ,6. / 9, PG..ZO .~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ d' ~ ~ K ~ M . ~ OF EX/ST/N4 ~' WATER COURSE LEGAL REFE,eENcE / S ~ of EX/STING P. ~. / q , pG, z o L)RA/NAGS ES M'T. TAX No. B7. /6 - 4 -3 $EE PLAT BooK //, - - . PAGE /3B ~ ~ ~ L,EGEN PROPERTY LINE '~ SURVEV FoR CENTER L/NE ~. EON HAR R / s ~pLTH p~ $NOW/NG A NEW z0' ~RAIIVAGE EASEMENT 70 V/RG/N/A E COUNTY ~~ ` , BE ,DEO/GATED TO RoANOk i ?O 'pC~ S/TUATE aN NEW ,LOT 3A, SEC. Z(v, NUNT/NG /LLS. ~ c A S = I V//2G/N/A t/OKE `oU/~!T Y ROA D V D ~. 6ES v ~ / ~,,~ ~~ ~ ~ 3CAGE / "= ,ZO' ,9EP7EMQER 30, /q98 , A 4 9- 30-~98 ~ ~' JACK G. BESS LAND SURVEYOR AND SURV~~ 5422 STAf4' iCEY RD N B /O / s 9 G Q • 9855/ ROANOKE. VA 24014 ~f VPIITATT R F-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF AN EXISTING 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE RELOCATED 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON PROPERTY OF LEON P. HARRIS AND BEVERLY Y. HARRIS, NEW LOT 3A, SECTION 26, HUNTING HILLS (PLAT BOOK 16, PAGE 165; PLAT BOOK 19, PAGE 20; TAX MAP NO. 87.16-4-3) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by subdivisionplat entitled `SECTIONNO.26, HUNTINGHILLS', dated May 3, 1994, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 16, page 165, a "NEW 20' D.E." [drainage easement] was dedicated and shown across Lot 3; and, WHEREAS, the subject drainage easement is further shown on `r~wLOT 3A' and designated as " 20' D.E., P.B. 16, pg. 165" on re-subdivision plat entitled `PLAT OF SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY OF ROBERT C. LAUGHER AND ANNA JEAN LAUGHER CREATING HEREON NEW LOT lA (1.657 AC.) AND NEW LOT 3A (1.624 AC.) BEING ORIGINAL LOTS 1, 2 & 3, SECTION NO.26 "HUNTING HILLS" (PLAT BOOK 16, page 165),' dated August 9, 1996, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 19, page 20; and WHEREAS, Leon P. Harris and Beverly Y. Harris are the current owners of `New Lot 3A', Section 26, Hunting Hills, designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.16- 4-3; and, WHEREAS, the owners have requested that, pursuant to § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate the above-described existing 20' drainage easement, and accept in exchange a new 20' drainage easement across New Lot 3A, Section 26, Hunting Hills, P. B. 19, Pg. 20; and, WHEREAS, this vacation and acceptance will involve minimal cost to the County and the relocation has been approved by the County's engineering staff; and, ~` .I WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 9, 2001; the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on October 23, 2001. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the existing 20' drainage easement on Lot 3, designated as "NEW 20' D.E."and dedicated by subdivision plat entitled `SECTION NO. 26, HUNTING HILLS', dated May 3, 1994, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 16, page 165, and further shown as " 20' D.E., P.B. 16, pg. 165" on `1vEw LoT 3A' on the above-described re-subdivision plat of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 19, page 20, said easement being shown cross-hatched and designated as "EXISTING 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO BE VACATED" on the partial copy of the plat recorded in Plat Book 16, page 165, attached hereto as Exhibit A, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2. That, in exchange, acquisition and acceptance of a new 20' drainage easement across New Lot 3A, Section 26, Hunting Hills, P.B. 19, Pg. 20, Tax Map No. 87.16-4-3, being designated and shown as "NEW 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT" on Exhibit B attached hereto, be and hereby is, authorized and approved; and, 3. That the publication costs and recordation fees are to be paid from the budget of the Department of Community Development. 4. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy ofthis ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office ofthe Circuit Court ofRoanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2 ~„ , AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE 100901-3 AMENDING ORDINANCE #021098-9, WHICH VACATED AND CLOSED AS PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY A PORTION OF VALLEY AVENUE, ALL OF PINKARD AVENUE, MEADOW VIEW ROAD, BOOKER ROAD, AND SUMMIT AVENUE, AND ALL ALLEYS IN PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 363, AND ORDINANCE #032498-7, WHICH VACATED AND RELEASED PROPERTY INTERESTS CONVEYED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN CONNECTION WITH ROADS, STREETS, ALLEYS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND PUBLIC ACCESS IN AND AROUND PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION, TO DELETE THE CONDITION IN EACH ORDINANCE THAT THE SPECIFIED PROPERTIES BE ACQUIRED IN ONE COMMON OWNERSHIP (LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC.) AND COMBINED INTO ONE TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN FOUR MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ADOPTION OF EACH ORDINANCE, AND TO OTHERWISE RATIFY AND APPROVE EACH OF SAID ORDINANCES. WHEREAS, on February 10, 1998, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance #021098-9 Vacating and Closing as Public Rights-of-Way a Portion of Valley Avenue, All of Pinkard Avenue, Meadow View Road, Booker Road, and Summit Avenue, and All Alleys in Pinkard Court Subdivision Shown in Plat Book 1, page 363, pursuant to §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), said action having been taken upon petition of the residents and Interstate Development, L.L.C., optionee on the properties, in Pinkard Court Subdivision in connection with the proposed development of the Lowe's retail business in the County of Roanoke; and, WHEREAS, on March 24, 1998, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance #032498-7 Vacating and Releasing Property Interests Conveyed to the Board of Supervisors in Connection with Roads, Streets, Alleys, Rights-of-Way, and Public Access in and Around Pinkard Court Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, each of said Ordinances included a condition that the specified properties be acquired in one common ownership (Lowe's) and combined into one tractor parcel of land within four months from the date of adoption of each ordinance, in order to protect against the loss of public access to and from the individual properties or the relinquishment of other public interests, in the event that Lowe's elected not to proceed with its proposed development; and, WHEREAS, Lowe's did proceed with the project and acquired all of the identified properties, together with several additional properties, but was unable to complete the requisite acquisitions within the four-month period specified in the above-referenced Ordinances due to resolution of various title issues pertaining to several properties; and, WHEREAS, in view of the satisfaction of all of the remaining conditions of said Ordinances and the combination of the properties into one tract of land, as shown on plat dated May 27, 1999 and revised through October 26, 2000, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 24, page 1, the four- month condition is deemed unnecessary for the protection of the public interest or the previous individual property owners; and, WHEREAS, notice of the proposed amendment has been given as required by §15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the public hearing and first reading of this ordinance was held on September 25, 2001; the second reading of this ordinance was held on October 9, 2001. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 1.a. of Ordinance #021098-9 be, and hereby is, amended as follows: 1. ****: a. That fee simple title to all of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on Plat Book 1, Page 363 (except Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Block 1 which are not affected by this action), to a parcel of land currently owned by Rowena P. Jernigan (Deed Book 1288, Page 803) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.08-3-1, and to a parcel of land consisting of 21.686 acres, more or less, and being a portion of a tract of land currently owned by Craighead Real Estate (Deed Book 1388, Page 1311; Will Book 44, Page 1447) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 77.20-1-42 and a portion of Tax Map No. 77.20-1-43, shall 2 be acquired by Interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.), in one common ownership and all of said lots or parcels shall be added and combined into one tract or parcel of land, with other parcels added if necessary or desired, 2. That Section 7.a. of Ordinance #032498-7 be, and hereby is, amended as follows: 7. That this ordinance shall be subject to the following conditions: a. That fee simple title to all of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on Plat Book 1, Page 363 (except Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Block 1 which are not affected by this action), to a parcel of land currently owned by Rowena P. Jernigan (Deed Book 1288, Page 803) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.08-3-1, and to a parcel of land consisting of 21.686 acres, more or less, and being a portion of a tract of land currently owned by Craighead Real Estate (Deed Book 1388, Page 1311; Will Book 44, Page 1447) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 77.20-1-42 and a portion of Tax Map No. 77.20-1-43, shall be acquired by Interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.), in one common ownership and all of said lots or parcels shall be added and combined into one tract or parcel of land, with other parcels added if necessary or desired, 3. That all other provisions of Ordinance #021098-9 and Ordinance # 032498-7 are hereby ratified and approved as originally adopted on February 10, 1998, and March 24, 1998, respectively. 4. That the County Administrator, an Assistant County Administrator, or any County Subdivision Agent is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor 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 Vickie L. Huffman, Senior Assistant County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development 4 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: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE #021098-9, WHICH VACATED AND CLO SED ASPUBLICRIGHTS-OF-WAY A PORTION OF VALLEY AVENUE, ALL OF PINKARD AVENUE, MEADOW VIEW ROAD, BOOKER ROAD, AND SUMMIT AVENUE, AND ALL ALLEYS IN PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 363, AND ORDINANCE #032498-7, WHICH VACATED AND RELEASED PROPERTY INTERESTS CONVEYED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN CONNECTION WITH ROADS, STREETS, ALLEYS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND PUBLIC ACCESS IN AND AROUND PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION, TO DELETE THE CONDITION IN EACH ORDINANCE THAT THE SPECIFIED PROPERTIES BE ACQUIRED IN ONE COMMON OWNERSHIP (LOWE' S COMPANIES, INC.) AND COMBINED INTO ONE TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN FOUR MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ADOPTION OF EACH ORDINANCE, AND TO OTHERWISE RATIFY AND APPROVE EACH OF SAID ORDINANCES. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is the second reading of the proposed ordinance to amend Ordinance #021098-9 and Ordinance #032498-7, which vacated certain public rights-of--way and released other public property interests in and around Pinkard Court Subdivision (Plat Book 1, page 363). The prior actions were taken in connection with the Lowe's Project in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke. BACKGROUND: On February 10, 1998, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance #021098-9 to vacate and close the public rights-of--way and alleys in Pinkard Court Subdivision, and also adopted Resolution #021098-8 to abandon the secondary roads in the subdivision. On March 24, 1998, the Board adopted Ordinance #032498-7 to vacate and release, and re-convey where applicable, a number of l~ real estate interests that had been conveyed to the Board by recorded instruments, separate from the subdivision plat, in and around Pinkard Court. Each Ordinance included a condition that Lowe's would acquire the identified properties and combine them into one tract of land within afour-month period from the adoption of the ordinance. The purpose of the condition at that time was to insure that the properties would not be without public access and that the other public interests would not be released in the event that Lowe's subsequently elected not to proceed with the project. The time period was based upon Lowe's estimated project schedule. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This is a housekeeping item to clear any possible title objections or defects resulting from the four-month condition. Lowe's did, in fact, proceed with and complete all of the necessary acquisitions and development of the property. The conditions contained in the above-referenced ordinances, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, have been satisfied except that several ofthe property acquisitions were delayed beyond the four-month period due to title issues that needed to be resolved prior to settlement. This condition is now moot and serves no purpose for the public or the prior property owners. FISCAL IMPACTS: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the proposed ordinance to delete the four-month requirement for the Lowe's acquisitions in Ordinance #021098-9 and Ordinance #032498-7, and to otherwise ratify and approve said Ordinances as originally adopted. Respectful submitted, Vi kie L. Huffman Senior Assistant Coun y Attorney Approved Denied Received Referred to Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens 2 `'~""~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE `~ COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 ORDINANCE 02 098-9 VACATING AND CLOSING AS PUBLIC RIGHTS- OF-WAY A PORTION OF VALLEY AVENUE, ALL OF PINKARD AVENUE, MEADOW VIEW ROAD, BOOKER ROAD, AND SUMMIT AVENUE, AND ALL ALLEYS IN PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 363. WHEREAS, the Petitioners, residents and interstate Development, L.L.C., optionee on the properties, in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on the "Map of Pinkard Court" of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County in Plat Book 1, Page 363, have proposed the sale and acquisition of the lots in said subdivision for development of a Lowe's retail business in the County of Roanoke; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioners have requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate and close as public rights-of-way a portion of Valley Avenue, all of Pinkard Avenue, Meadow View Road, Booker Road and Summit Avenue, and all alleys, in Pinkard Court Subdivision, said roads, streets and alleys having been created and shown on the "Map of Pinkard Court" recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 363; and, WHEREAS, §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended) requires that such action be accomplished by the adoption of an ordinance by the governing body; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by §15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 1998; the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on February 10, 1998. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: ffiIBIT A G-t 1. That the public rights-of--way, situate in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of Roanoke County, shown and cross-hatched on Exhibit A attached hereto, and referenced as a portion of Valley Avenue (Route 862), from .03 miles west from its intersection with Meadow View Road (Route 876}, to its intersection with Washington Avenue, all of Pinkard Avenue (Route 877), Meadow View Road (Route 876), Booker Road (Route 878) and Summit Avenue, and all alleys, created on plat entitled "Map of Pinkard Gourt", recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 1, Page 363, be, and hereby are, vacated and closed pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), subject to the following conditions: a. That fee simple title to all of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on Plat Book 1, Page 363 (except Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Block 1 which are not affected by #his action), to a parcel of {and currently owned by Rowena P. Jernigan (Deed Book 1288, Page 803) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.08-3-1, and to a parcel of fend consisting of 21.686 acres, more or less, and being a portion of a tract of land currently owned by Craighead Real Estate (Deed Book 1388, Page 1311; Wiil Book 44, Page 1447) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 77.20-1-42 and a portion of Tax Map No. 77.20-1-43, shall be acquired by interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.), in one common ownership and all of said lots or parcels shall be added and combined into one tract or parcel of land, with other parcels added if necessary or desired, within four months from the date of adoption of this ordinance. b. That fee simple title to said roads, streets and alleys shall vest in the owners} of the abutting properties within the subdivision as provided in §15.2-2274 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), subject to the condition that the vacated areas of land shall be added and combined, by deed or by plat, to said abutting property, in compliance with the Roanoke County Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances, and other applicable laws and regulations. c. That a new public right-of-way from Franklin Road (Route 220} and extending to Washing#on Avenue be dedicated and the appropriate 2 ~~ guarantee be provided to the County of Roanoke for the construction of the new road to the standards required by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and for VDOT acceptance of the new road into the state secondary road system. d. That abandonment of those portions of Valley Avenue (Route 862), Pinkard Avenue (Route 877), Meadow View Road (Route 876), and Booker Road (Route 878) which are part of the secondary system of state highways be approved by separate procedure and action in accordance with §33.1-151 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). e. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of Interstate Development, L.L.G., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.); and, 2. That the County Administrator, an Assistant County Administrator, or any County Subdivision Agent is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 3. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recarded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: 3 ~~' ~' Mary H. Alien, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: Fiie Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Vickie Huffman, Assistant County Attorney 4 ~~~~~ ' ~~ / ~aoa ~ 1 I 1 ~ ~ 'N•~ i7 ifi a ~a o s 4317 ~ r ab' ~ s' ~•i f\ie ~ ~~~'~` ~• zr '~ ~~a b 12 o~\e . + 42 X41 „' 4 a~ rc ~ c /•~ts ~,y° ~9y'~ r i ~ sssi ~ i ~ ~z~ 45~' • ~ 7 ! (r 35 23 ~ ra ~ g 7 5 N ,../ 9J . 'a a to 34 ' 24 /7' j ' ~Zec 6 O ~~ 4249 ~ 310 4 s 'M! ' /O 9 •` It ~ IA +g~'t'~ _ / + ` /O K6 b5 p •.6g2 ~ x~ 49 '> ' ~ bD (3 \ 33 42! , / / 25 ~ ~ ta` ~ 4 $ •yy ~~ ° / // 32 ~ ~~ JO ~~ ,tzaz2s • /s' W`/ s ~ 51 J • a2 e b c 31 ~ ~ ~zo PJ ~ . 3 ¢ i A J 6 1 ~ ~ a \t~ ~ b° /~ - ' 28 b~b/3 P ~/ 7 e ~~ Il C7 • /' ~ •b bh / 54 ' ~ ~ t .~ } ~ °$ \o~'a/ pO t'Ap T. A. P. 42x2 uo 4J/9 `0 a° ~ ~,~1 4.50Ae 1Q) 2 e~ 9 / ~o ~ + ° ~ 2.38 Ac (Cl 2. F2 Ac p 61 ~ / t ~ eb b° \ 2 r ~ /// ~ ~ ~.. Abp pi.+ '+ ~ J /F 8 4s~s ~ y.320 a° ° ~ r• ~ `~ ~ p 6 ~ 9 4547 Js ~~ ba ~~' 8 ~ 6~ ~ / D a ~. ~~ 'O 7 9 ~~ ~J• ~ s • A° Cemetery ~ "o -p La3Ac titi 10 q~ _ ~ • •w '~;~ ~ STREETS AND ALLEYS TO SE 4488 a~`5 VACATED SHOWN IN HATCHiNC ~~ ~J //,// / r~ ROANOI~E COUNTY VACATION AS A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, A PORTION OF ENGINEERING & VALLEY AVENUE , P INKARD AVENUE , ?~ADOW VIEW ROAD , BOOKER ROAD AND SU~LMIT AVENUE AND ALL ALLEYS. . INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1998 ORDINANCE 032498-7 TO VACATE AND RELEASE PROPERTY INTERESTS CONVEYED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN CONNECTION. WITH ROADS, STREETS, ALLEYS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND PUBLIC ACCESS IN AND AROUND PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, by instruments dated March 19, 1983, and March 1, 1985, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1221, page 1410, and Deed Book 1221, page 1413, respectively, the owners of properties bordering on each side of Washington Road along the southwestern boundary of Pinkard Court Subdivision executed their consent to give unto Roanoke County, without compensation, each as to the lands by him owned, an easement and right-of-way for said road/street to be 40 feet in width, including an additional 10' strip along the southwest side of Washington Road, together with such additional widths as may be necessary for slopes, ditches and drainage facilities, in order for said road to be established as a part of the state secondary road system; and, WHEREAS, by instruments dated March 19, 1983, and March 1, 1985, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's. Office in Deed Book 1221, page 1407, and Deed Book 1221, page 1404, respectively, the owners of properties bordering on each side of the portion of Valley Avenue beginning about .02 miles southwest of Booker Road and extending in a southwesterly direction about .05 mile to Washington Road in Pinkard Court Subdivision, executed their consent to give unto Roanoke County, without compensation, each as to the lands by him owned, an easement and right-of-way for said road/street to EXHIBIT B G-I be 40 feet in width, including an additional 7.5 feet on each side of the designated portion of Valley Avenue, together with such additional widths as may be necessary for slopes, ditches and drainage facilities, in order for said road to be established as a part of the state secondary road system; and, WHEREAS, by instrument dated January 19, 1985, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1221, page 1416, the owners of properties bordering on each side of the portion of Pinkard Street (also known as Pinkard Avenue), extending from Booker Road (Route 878) in a southwesterly direction about .05 mile to a new turn-around, in Pinkard Court Subdivision, executed their consent to give unto Roanoke County, without compensation, each as to the lands by him owned, an easement and right-of-way for said road/street to be 40 feet in width, including an arc of land on each side of Pinkard Street , for the cul-de-sac, together with such additional widths as may.. be necessary for slopes, ditches and drainage facilities, in order for said road to be established as a part of the state secondary road system; and, WHEREAS, by deed dated September 2, 1996, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1531, page 1154, Dennis E. Phelps, et als, conveyed fee simple title to a 0.037 acre of land, being the northwesterly portion of Lot 4, Block 4, Pinkard Court Subdivision, to the Board of Supervisors for right-of-way and easement in connection with the improvement and acceptance of Pinkard Street into the state secondary road system; and, WHEREAS, by deed of easement dated January 15, 1974, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 988, page 811, Thomas M. Davis, Jr., and Carolyn 2 -r C. Davis granted and conveyed for the use of the general public a perpetual easement for foot and vehicle traffic over, across and upon a new 16' alley through Lots 27, 22, and 21, in Block 1, of Pinkard Court Subdivision, together with an easement for such drainage ditches as are necessary to drain any road established across said alley, said easements being to replace the alleys vacated by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by Ordinance adopted on December 11, 1973, all as shown on a plat attached to said deed of easement; and, WHEREAS, by deed dated November 21, 1949, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 429, page 31, W. M. Jernigan, Jr., and Vala Jernigan, husband and wife, conveyed unto the State of Virginia a twelve foot (12') strip of land along the southerly side of Lot 12, Section 1, Pinkard Court, and by deed dated December 8, 1949, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk`s Office in Deed Book 429, page 33, Joseph W. Nackley conveyed unto the Commonwealth of Virginia atwelve-foot (12'} strip of land along the southerly side of Lot 13, Section 1, Pinkard Court, said conveyances being adjacent to, and parallel with Summit Avenue and for purposes of widening Summit Avenue on the northerly side thereof; and, WHEREAS, due to the proposed acquisition and development of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision and surrounding properties, and in view of the vacation of the public rights-of--way shown on the plat of Pinkard Court Subdivision in Plat Book 1, Page 363, by Ordinance #021098-9 adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 10, 1998, and the abandonment of those sections of said rights-of-way in the state secondary road system by Resolution #021098-8, the Board deems the above-described real estate interests no 3 Gf longer necessary for the County or for the public, and the County has no current or future use for these interests. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on March 10, 1998; and a second reading was held on March 24, 1998; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the real estate interests hereinabove described are hereby declared to be surplus, and the nature of said interests render them unacceptable and unavailable for other public uses; and, 3. That, subject to the conditions contained in Paragraph 7, all right, title and interest acquired by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, by instruments dated March 19, 1983, and March 1, 1985, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1221, page 1410, and Deed Book 1221, page 1413, respectively, for Washington Road, by instruments dated March 19, 1983, and March 1, 1985, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1221, page 1407, and Deed Book 1221, page 1404, respectively, for Valley Avenue, and by instrument dated January 19, 1985, and recorded in Deed Book 1221, page 1416, for Pinkard Street (also known as Pinkard Avenue), be, and hereby is, vacated and released; and, 4 ~-t 4. That, subject to the conditions contained in Paragraph 7, the northwesterly portion of Lot 4, Block 4, Pinkard Court, consisting of 0.037 acre, be, and hereby is, vacated and released as a right-of-way and easement for acceptance of Pinkard Street into the secondary road system, and the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to re-convey said parcel to the owner of Lot 4, Block 4, Pinkard Court, as of the time such conveyance is made, said parcel to be added and combined with Lot 4, by deed or by plat, in compliance with the Roanoke County Subdivision Ordinances, and other applicable laws and regulations; and, 5. That, subject to the conditions contained in Paragraph 7, the new 16' alley through Lots 27, 22 and 21, in Block 1, Pinkard Court, conveyed as a perpetual easement for use of the general public by deed of easement dated January 15, 1974, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 988, page 811, be and hereby is, vacated and released; and, 6. That, subject to the conditions contained in Paragraph 7, all right, title and interest of the County or the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, which may have been acquired by virtue of the deeds dated November 21, 1949, and December 8, 1949, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 429, page 31, and Deed Book 429, page 33, respectively, for the widening of Summit Avenue be, and hereby is, vacated and released; and, 7. That this ordinance shall be subject to the following conditions: a. That fee simple title to all of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on Plat Book 1, Page 363 (except Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Block 1 5 ~-1 which are not affected by this action), to a parcel of land currently owned by Rowena P. Jernigan (Deed Book 1288, Page 803) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.08-3-1, and to a parcel of land consisting of 21.686 acres, more or less, and being a portion of a tract of land currently owned by Craighead Real Estate (Deed Book 1388, Page 1311; Will Book 44, Page 1447) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 77.20-1-42 and a portion of Tax Map No. 77.20-1-43, shall be acquired by interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.), in one common ownership and all of said lots or parcels shall be added and combined into one tract or parcel of land, with other parcels added if necessary or desired, within four months from the date of the adoption of this ordinance. b. That a new public right-of-way from Franklin Road (Route 220) and extending to Washington Avenue be dedicated and the appropriate guarantee be provided to the County of Roanoke for the construction of the new road to the standards required by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and for VDOT acceptance of the new road into the state secondary road system. c. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the 6 ~~ responsibility of Interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.); and, 8. That the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such other documents and take such further actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the vacation, release and relinquishment of said property interests, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 9. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holto ,Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: Fife Vickie L. Huffman, Assistant County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections ~~1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE #021098-9, WHICH VACATED AND CLOSED AS PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY A PORTION OF VALLEY AVENUE, ALL OF PINKARD AVENUE, MEADOW VIEW ROAD, BOOKER ROAD, AND SUMMIT AVENUE, AND ALL ALLEYS IN PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 363, AND ORDINANCE #032498-7, WHICH VACATED AND RELEASED PROPERTY INTERESTS CONVEYED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN CONNECTION WITH ROADS, STREETS, ALLEYS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND PUBLIC ACCESS IN AND AROUND PINKARD COURT SUBDIVISION, TO DELETE THE CONDITION IN EACH ORDINANCE THAT THE SPECIFIED PROPERTIES BE ACQUIRED IN ONE COMMON OWNERSHIP (LOWE'S COMPANIES, INC.) AND COMBINED INTO ONE TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN FOUR MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ADOPTION OF EACH ORDINANCE, AND TO OTHERWISE RATIFY AND APPROVE EACH OF SAID ORDINANCES. WHEREAS, on February 10, 1998, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance #021098-9 Vacating and Closing as Public Rights-of--Way a Portion of Valley Avenue, All of Pinkard Avenue, Meadow View Road, Booker Road, and Summit Avenue, and All Alleys in Pinkard Court Subdivision Shown in Plat Book 1, page 363, pursuant to §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), said action having been taken upon petition of the residents and Interstate Development, L.L.C., optionee on the properties, in Pinkard Court Subdivision in connection with the proposed development of the Lowe's retail business in the County of Roanoke; and, WHEREAS, on March 24, 1998, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance #032498-7 Vacating and Releasing Property Interests Conveyed to the Board of Supervisors in Connection with Roads, Streets, Alleys, Rights-of--Way, and Public Access in and Around Pinkard Court Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, each of said Ordinances included a condition that the specified properties be acquired in one common ownership (Lowe's) and combined into one tract or parcel of land within four months from the date of adoption of each ordinance, in order to protect against the loss of public access to and from the individual properties or the relinquishment of other public interests, in the event that Lowe's elected not to proceed with its proposed development; and, WHEREAS, Lowe's did proceed with the project and acquired all of the identified properties, together with several additional properties, but was unable to complete the requisite acquisitions ~' within the four-month period specified in the above-referenced Ordinances due to resolution of various title issues pertaining to several properties; and, WHEREAS, in view of the satisfaction of all of the remaining conditions of said Ordinances and the combination of the properties into one tract of land, as shown on plat dated May 27, 1999 and revised through October 26, 2000, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 24, page 1, the four-month condition is deemed unnecessary for the protection of the public interest or the previous individual property owners; and, WHEREAS, notice of the proposed amendment has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), and the public hearing and first reading of this ordinance was held on September 25, 2001; the second reading of this ordinance was held on October 9, 2001. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That Section l.a. of Ordinance #021098-9 be, and hereby is, amended as follows: ****. a. That fee simple title to all of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on Plat Book 1, Page 363 (except Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Block 1 which are not affected by this action), to a parcel of land currently owned by Rowena P. Jernigan (Deed Book 1288, Page 803) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.08-3-1, and to a parcel of land consisting of 21.686 acres, more or less, and being a portion of a tract of land currently owned by Craighead Real Estate (Deed Book 1388, Page 131 l; Will Book 44, Page 1447) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 77.20-1-42 and a portion of Tax Map No. 77.20-1-43, shall be acquired by Interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.), in one common ownership and all of said lots or parcels shall be added and combined into one tract or parcel of land, with other parcels added if necessary or desired, nrdirtance. 2. That Section 7. a. of Ordinance #032498-7 be, and hereby is, amended as follows: 7. That this ordinance shall be subject to the following conditions: a. That fee simple title to all of the lots in Pinkard Court Subdivision as shown on Plat Book 1, Page 363 (except Lots 1, 2, and 3 in Block 1 which are not affected by this action), to a parcel of land currently owned by Rowena P. Jernigan (Deed Book 1288, Page 803) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 87.08-3-1, and to a parcel of land 2 ~- i consisting of 21.686 acres, more or less, and being a portion of a tract of land currently owned by Craighead Real Estate (Deed Book 13 88, Page 1311; Will Book 44, Page 1447) designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 77.20-1-42 and a portion of Tax Map No. 77.20-1-43, shall be acquired by Interstate Development, L.L.C., or its assignee (Lowe's Companies, Inc.), in one common ownership and all of said lots or parcels shall be added and combined into one tract or parcel of land, with other parcels added if necessary or desired, That all other provisions of Ordinance #021098-9 and Ordinance # 032498-7 are hereby ratified and approved as originally adopted on February 10, 1998, and March 24, 1998, respectively. 4. That the County Administrator, an Assistant County Administrator, or any County Subdivision Agent is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as maybe necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy ofthis ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office ofthe Circuit Court ofRoanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 3 ~" .~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTYADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE 100901-4 AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY ON PALM VALLEY ROAD IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM DOUGLAS W. MCDANIEL, SR., BEING LOTS 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, AND 21, BLOCK 8, AND A 1.905-ACRE PARCEL, MAP OF SECTION 4, BROOKSIDE, (TAX MAP NOS. 38.11-1-43, 38.11-1-45, 38.11-1-46, 38.11-1-47, 38.11-1-48, 38.11-1-49, 38.11-1-50, 38.11-1-51, 38.11-1-52, AND 38.11-1-42), FOR PRESERVATION OF FLOODPLAIN LAND RELATED TO THE CARVIN CREEK HAZARD MITIGATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the purpose of the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Grant is to reduce the number of structures located in the floodplain and subject to flooding damage; and, WHEREAS, Roanoke County has been awarded a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to purchase flood-prone homes in the Sun Valley/Palm Valley area; and, WHEREAS, the unimproved property to be acquired is located in the same area as the property acquired (or to be acquired) with the FEMA grant and is in the Carvin Creek floodplain; and, WHEREAS, staff has negotiated the purchase of said property from the owner, Douglas W. McDaniel, Sr., for the sum of $30,000.00, plus the payment of all delinquent real estate taxes in the amount of approximately $7,000.00; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDaniel and the County have entered into a contract of sale, subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors; and, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition of real estate be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 25, 2001; and the second reading was held on October 9, 2001. 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to acquire from Douglas W. McDaniel, Sr., Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21, Block 8, and a 1.905-acre parcel, Map of Section 4, Brookside, Plat Book 7, page 45, (Tax Map Nos. 38.11-1-43, 38.11-1-45, 38.11-1-46, 38.11-1-47, 38.11-1-48, 38.11-1-49, 38.11-1-50, 38.11-1-51, 38.11-1-52, and 38.11-1-42) for the sum of $30,000.00, plus the approximate sum of $7,000.00 for payment of the delinquent real estate taxes thereon. 2. That the purchase price, delinquent real estate taxes, and closing costs shall be paid out of the Drainage/Flood Control capital account. 3. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of the Board of Supervisors in this matter as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of this property, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. 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 A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File George W. Simpson, III, Assistant Director, Community Development 2 Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Danial Morris, Director, Finance Billy Driver, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 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: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of ordinance authorizing acquisition of flood-prone properties for preservation of floodplain land related to the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project located on Palm Valley Road in the Hollins Magisterial District COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~~~ BACKGROUND: Phase I of the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project included the purchase of eight flood prone homes along Carvin Creek in the Palm Valley area of Roanoke County. Phase II has been approved by the Board and will include the purchase of five additional homes in the same area. This action is being requested to purchase ten flood prone lots in the same area. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management Plan identified the Sun Valley/Palm Valley area along Carvin Creek as having the highest concentration of flood prone homes in Roanoke County. FEMA grant funds were used to acquire Phase I properties and will also be used to purchase Phase II properties, resulting in the removal of thirteen homes from the floodplain. The ten lots being purchased by this action border Phase II and are in the floodway/floodplain on Carvin Creek and highly susceptible to flooding. The purchase of these lots will prevent them from being developed similar to the "stilt house" that received some attention several years ago and will preserve the land for a greenway and open space along the creek. The assessed value of the ten lots is $80,800.00, as noted an the attachment, and contain approximately 4.7 acres. The owner of the lots has agreed to sell them for $30,000.00 and payment of back taxes (approximately $7,000.00). ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACT: Alternative #1: Adopt the attached ordinance Authorizing the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents to acquire the ten lots, as described in the ordinance, with funds coming from the Community Development budget. ~~ Alternative #2: Decline the purchase of these lots at the present time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1 adoption of the attached ordinance SUBMITTED BY: George W. Simpson, III, P.E. Assistant Director of Community Development Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: APPROVED BY: C/~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens 2 ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY ON PALM VALLEY ROAD IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM DOUGLAS W. MCDANIEL, SR., BEING LOTS 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, AND 21, BLOCK 8, AND A 1.905-ACRE PARCEL, MAP OF SECTION 4, BROOKSIDE, (TAX MAP NOS. 38.11-1-43, 38.11-1-45, 38.11-1-46, 38.11-1-47, 38.11-1-48, 38.11-1-49, 38.11-1-50, 38.11-1-51, 38.11-1-52, AND 38.11-1-42), FOR PRESERVATION OF FLOODPLAIN LAND RELATED TO THE CARVIN CREEK HAZARD MITIGATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the purpose of the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Grant is to reduce the number of structures located in the floodplain and subject to flooding damage; and, WHEREAS, Roanoke County has been awarded a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to purchase flood-prone homes in the Sun Valley/Palm Valley area; and, WHEREAS, the unimproved property to be acquired is located in the same area as the property acquired (or to be acquired) with the FEMA grant and is in the Carvin Creek floodplain; and, WHEREAS, staff has negotiated the purchase of said property from the owner, Douglas W. McDaniel, Sr., for the sum of $30,000.00, plus the payment of all delinquent real estate taxes in the amount of approximately $7,000.00; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDaniel and the County have entered into a contract of sale, subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors; and, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition of real estate be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 25, 2001; and the second reading was held on October 9, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to acquire from Douglas W. McDaniel, Sr., Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 21, Block 8, and a 1.905-acre parcel, Map of Section 4, Brookside, Plat Book 7, page 45, (Tax Map Nos. 38.11-1-43, 38.11-1-45, 38.11-1-46, 38.11- ~~ 1-47, 38.11-1-48, 38.11-1-49, 38.11-1-50, 38.11-1-51, 38.11-1-52, and 38.11-1-42) for the sum of $30,000.00, plus the approximate sum of $7,000.00 for payment of the delinquent real estate taxes thereon. 2. That the purchase price, delinquent real estate taxes, and closing costs shall be paid out of the Drainage/Flood Control capital account. 3. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of the Board of Supervisors in this matter as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of this property, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. . , G--~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE 100901-5 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROANOKE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JOINT PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SYSTEM WHEREAS, §15.2-1300, Code of Virginia, authorizes agreements for the joint exercise of powers by political subdivisions of the Commonwealth; and, WHEREAS, the City and the County have determined that it is in their mutual best interest jointly to expand and equip the existing 800 MHZ trunked radio communications system to serve fire, police, emergency and other radio communication needs; and, WHEREAS, it is deemed to be mutually beneficial to the parties hereto to amend the Intergovernmental Agreement previously entered into as of the 17th day of December, 1997; and, WHEREAS, these amendments will continue the County's regional approach to radio communications systems and upgrades capabilities for mobile data communications; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 25, 2001, and the second reading was held on October 9, 2001. BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board hereby ratifies, confirms and approves the amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System in substantially the form as attached to this ordinance, and authorizes the County 1 r t Administrator, or his designee, to execute this Agreement on behalf of Roanoke County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. 2. That the services performed and expenditures made under this Agreement shall be deemed to be for public and governmental purposes and all immunities from liability enjoyed by the County and its personnel within its boundaries shall extend to its participation in this Agreement. 3. That this Ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Nickens 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 John W. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Bill Agee, Department of Information Technology Gardner Smith, Director, Procurement Bob Jernigan, Risk Manager Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 1 • 1" 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: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of an Ordinance Providing Amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The City of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke entered into an agreement on the 17t'' day of December, 1997 concerning the establishment of a joint Public Safety Radio System. Since that time, the City of Roanoke has purchased and installed their share of the 800 Mhz. radio system and the County has installed the additional radio equipment at the various antenna sites to make this a truly regional radio communications system. Our regional Communication System now supports the radio equipment of the Town of Vinton, Roanoke Regional Airport, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, and the 800 Mhz. equipment on the Salem Fire apparatus. Through the technology of this system, we can now effectively communicate to our neighbors during times of emergency or joint operations. On September 25, 2001, you approved the first reading of an ordinance authorizing the amendments to this contract as described below. - Inclusion of the MOSCAD fire alerting equipment used by the City of Roanoke; - Expansion of the mobile data equipment for use by both localities; - Designation of the County as the contracting agent for maintenance agreements for the equipment and as insurer of the equipment (reimbursed by the City); - Change in the designation of the named system manager by the City and the County. These changes to the contract continue our regional approach to radio communications systems and upgrades our capability to enter the realm of mobile data communications. Recently, the County has used four mobile data terminals operated by the City, and now plans to install the hardware necessary for the expanded use of this technology. Initially, these new terminals will be in "t G-3 Police vehicles, but we could expand the coverage to Fire and Rescue, inspections, assessments, etc. as funds or grants become available. This technology reduces the errors of voice communications and offers a more secure dissemination of information to field personnel. The County has just received notification that we have been approved for a technology grant which will allow us to expand our use of the mobile data terminal technology through the use of laptop computers to be installed in more of our police vehicles. The acceptance and approval of this grant will be under a separate Board action. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for equipment, maintenance contracts, etc. are already included in the operating budgets of the using departments and no appropriation of new monies is required for this contract. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the attached second reading of this ordinance, authorizing the signature by the County Administrator on forms approved by the County Attorney. A similar request has being approved by the City of Roanoke. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, nr ~c~~.,~ t~C~s rte' it ohn M. Chambli s, Jr. Elmer C. odge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Attachment ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens cc Bill Agee, Department of Information Technology Gardner Smith, Director of Procurement Bob Jernigan, Risk Manager Elaine Carver, Director of Information Technology Paul Mahoney, County Attorney brradiocontract.100901.doc ~!~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 ORDINANCE APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO AN INTERGOVERN- MENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROANOKE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JOINT PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SYSTEM WHEREAS, § 15.2-1300, Code of Virginia, authorizes agreements for the joint exercise of powers by political subdivisions of the Commonwealth; and, WHEREAS, the City and the County have determined that it is in their mutual best interest jointly to expand and equip the existing 800 MHZ trunked radio communications system to serve fire, police, emergency and other radio communication needs; and, WHEREAS, it is deemed to be mutually beneficial to the parties hereto to amend the Intergovernmental Agreement previously entered into as of the 17th day of December, 1997; and, WHEREAS, these amendments will continue the County's regional approach to radio communications systems and upgrades capabilities for mobile data communications; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 25, 2001, and the second reading was held on October 9, 2001. BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board hereby ratifies, confirms and approves the amendments to the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Establishment of a Joint Public Safety Radio System in substantially the form as attached to this ordinance, and authorizes the County Administrator, or his designee, to execute this Agreement on behalf of Roanoke County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. 2. That the services performed and expenditures made under this Agreement shall be deemed to be for public and governmental purposes and all immunities from liability enj oyed by the County and its personnel within its boundaries shall extend to its participation in this Agreement. 3. That this Ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. G: WTTORNEY~PMMWGENDA~AmendJointPublicSafetyRadioSystem.ord.wpd 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: October 9, 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 expired September 23, 2001. The four year term of J. A. Kendricks, Jr., Alternate, Fire Code Board of Appeals will expire October 28, 2001 2. GRIEVANCE PANEL The three year term of Raymond C. Denny, Alternate will expire October 10, 2001. 3. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (not appointed by District The unexpired four year term of Ronald M. Martin, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, who passed away recently. The term will expire September 26, 2002. 4. LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS ADVISORY COUNCIL The one year term of Steven L. Harrah expired on March 31, 2001. 5. ROANOKE VALLEY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Two citizens have been appointed from Roanoke County and one additional citizen needs to be appointed. r+~-~ 6. SOUTHWEST DEVELOPMENT FINANCING. INC Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, has resigned from this committee which was established by Congressman Rick Boucher to make available low-interest loans for local tourism development purposes. A staff person has traditionally served on this committee, and Mr. Haislip recommends the appointment of Wendy Schultz to complete the unexpired term. The term expires January 12, 2002. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ~~%y!K-~' ~~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE A roved No. Yes Abs pp () Motion by: Church _ _ _ Denied () Johnson _ _ _ Received () McNamara_ _ _ Referred () Minnix _ _ _ To () Nickens __~ ~ °" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION 100901-6 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. that the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for October 9, 2001, designated as Item I -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes -June 26, 2001. 2. Acceptance of donation of telecommunication line easement across property of Lewis-Gibbs Corporation for fiber optic cable between the Hollins Fire and Rescue Station and the Hollins Library. 3. Designation of a Voting Representative at the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Annual Meeting on November 13, 2001. 4. Resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and affirming County appointees. 5. Request from Schools to accept and appropriate $500 Virginia Commission for the Arts grant for art education technical assistance. 6. Request from Schools to accept and appropriate $6,370 grant from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teacher 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. 1 On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the Consent 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 Richard E. Burch, Jr., Chief of Fire & Rescue Diana Rosapepe, Director, Library Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development John W. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Dr. Lorraine Lange, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction Danial Morris, Director, Finance Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Dr. Carol Whitaker, Associate Director of Personnel James R. Lavinder, Chief of Police Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff 2 z _.~ .. June 26, 200 ~ 351 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 June 26, 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 June, 2001. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Minnix called the meeting to order at 3:00 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; Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk to the Board, Dan R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator, Kathi B. Scearce, Community Relations Director IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by The Honorable H. Ode11 Minnix, Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Mahoney added an item to the Closed Meeting pursuant to Section June 26, 2001 353 1. Update on the County of Roanoke's Website redesign. Elaine Carver, Information Technology Director and Kathi Scearce, Communitv Relations Director Mr. Hodge advised that the County staff, along with input from citizens, has been updating the County's website to make it more user friendly. Ms. Carver gave a preview of the site which will be launched on July 2, 2001, and thanked the departmental webmasters, Information Technology staff and citizens for their assistance. She advised that they will continue to refine and update the site regularly with another major redesign planned within eighteen to twenty-four months. Ms. Scearce gave a preview of the Civic Leagues page which can be accessed from the Community Relations page. This is a resource to stimulate renewed interest in the civic leagues, give additional information to citizens and provide a forum for exchange of ideas between groups. Supervisor Nickens complimented the staff and citizens on the new redesign. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to ado t a prioritized list of rima and interstate projects to be presented at the pre-allocation public hearing for the Commonwealth Transportation Board Six-Year Improvement Plan. Arnold Covey" Communitv Development Director R-062601-1 Mr. George Simpson, Assistant Director of Community Development, advised that the staff is requesting that the Board adopt a list of Interstate and Primary June 26, 2001 355 federal and state funds for interstate, primary, and secondary roads. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: and 1. That the following projects identified as "Projects on Plan" are recommended to continue to receive funding for planning and construction Interstate 73 -Roanoke County continues to be very supportive of this project. In a letter dated June 3, 2001, the Board of Supervisors encouraged VDOT to work closely with the impacted citizens to address their concerns and mitigate any negative impacts to them. This is in addition to the resolution 120500-2 passed December 5, 2000 reaffirming the Boards support for I-73. Interstate 81 - Roanoke County continues to support VDOT's proposed plan to widen I-81 from its present four lanes. We look forward to reviewing the prioritized segments of I-81 and want to continue to work with focal VDOT staff to develop regional cooperation for stormwater detention facilities and potential utility crossings. Route 11/460 (West Main Street) -Roanoke County continues to support the ongoing design for improvements in this important commercial and residential development area. Improvements will provide an increase in the level of service bringing it up to standards required for the expected growth. Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) -Roanoke County is requesting continued allocation of funds for this road project. The residential development expected to occur within this area will place additional demands on the road system that is currently providing an inadequate service level. 2 That the following projects identified as "Projects Not on Plan" have been identified by the Board of Supervisors as extremely important to the growth of Roanoke County or for safety improvements and are requested to be included in the Virginia Transportation Development Plan for Fiscal Years 2001-2007. They are listed in Priority Order: 1. Route 11 (Williamson Road) - Need: Now that Route 11 has been widened from Plantation Road to Hollins College, there remains one section of three lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City Limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the alignment of Florist Road with Route 11 creates additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.52 miles, is currently athree-lane with the center lane used for turning movements. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. June 26, 2001 357 Need: The Salem Residency has notified staff that the bridge over Back Creek is in need of repair and we wish to offer our support for improvements to the approaches and bridge replacement. This road is serving the growing commuter traffic from Franklin County and recreational traffic to Smith Mountain Lake. Traffic Counts: From the Roanoke City limits south: approximately 4,000 vehicles per day. Recommended Improvements: Improve approaches and replace existing bridge. Cost: $3,000,000-$4,000,000 5. Route 311 (Catawba Valley Road) -Intersection Improvements Need: This area has experienced steady growth over the last several years and the congestion at this intersection has increased. Traffic Counts: Rte. 311 has an average daily traffic of 11,000 vpd and Bradshaw Road (Rte. 864) carries approximately 3,200 vpd. Recommended Improvements: Construct a right hand passing lane (left turn lane). Other primary roads in Roanoke County which deserve consideration for spot improvements: 6. Route 419 (Electric Road) Intersection improvements, Route 118 (Airport Road), Route 24, (Washington Ave.) improvements at the intersection of William Byrd High School, Route 460 (Challenger Ave.), left and right turn lanes at several existing secondary roads. On motion of Supervisor McNamara amended by Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution and add spot improvements to Hardy Road, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 2. Request from .Norfolk Southern to negotiate a settlement agreement concerning increased wayside noise in Roanoke Co. unto. Elmer Hodge• County Administrator) A-062601-2 June 26, 2001 359 a lump-sum payment to the community based on the number of STB identified structures, up to $10,000 per structure. Mr Hodge advised that the Board could authorize the County Administrator to contact the property owners who meet the-noise threshold to see if they wish the County to negotiate a settlement on their behalf, or authorize the County Administrator to negotiate a settlement with NS, with the settlement funds being used to benefit the entire County. He advised that four of the 23 localities that quality for the noise abatement program have chosen for NS to work directly with the property owners. Supervisor Minnix moved to approve Alternative #1 which was to authorize the County Administrator to contact the property owners who meet the noise threshold to see if they wish the County to negotiate a settlement on their behalf. The motion was amended by Supervisor Nickens as follows: authorize the County Administrator to contact the property owners who meet the noise threshold to see if they wish the County to help the citizens facilitate the noise abatement caused by the rail traffic. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 3. Acceptance of Infopowering Grants for 40 620 awarded ~ the Li rare of Vir inia and appropriation of grant funds to the Public Library Budget• Diana Rosapepe, Library Director A-062601-3 Ms. Rosapepe advised that the Roanoke County Public Library has been awarded two infopowering partnership grants by the Library of Virginia for a total of June 26, 2001 361 state and from the City of Salem for the Sheriff's Department for FY00-01, revenues in excess of budget for these categories should total approximately $300,000. Staff is recommending an appropriation adjustment to recognize an additional $197,377 of state revenue for personnel and operations reimbursement and increasing the Care and Confinement budget within the Sheriffs department by $197,377 to cover increased operational costs of the jail. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the appropriation of the funds. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 5. Request for acceptance of 534 538 Hazard Mitigation Grant for Carvin Creek, Phase II. Arnold Covey, Community Development Director A-062601-5 Mr. Simpson advised that as a result of the Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management Plan, the Sun Valley/Palm Valley community was identified as having the largest concentration of homes in the County with flooding depths of 3 feet or greater. Twenty-three homes in this area were identified in the Regional Stormwater Management Plan as candidates for acquisition based on severity of flooding. The five homes selected were based on a ranking within the floodway and the flooding depths. The grant is awarded by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and is administered by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management. Hazard Mitigation Grant Project, Carvin Creek, Phase I, was completed June 26, 2001 363 develop a golf course on 364 acres located on 3608 Pitzer Road, SE, Vinton Magisterial District, u on the etp ition of Nathaniel C. Haile. Supervisor Nickens requested that staff provide copies of both plans for golf course and hold a work session in the future. Supervisor Johnson asked that the Planning Commission look at the impact of I-73. 3. First reading 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 existing building and ex and the ap rking lot on .5 acres located at 3716 Colonial Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the etition of Paychecks Plus. Supervisor Nickens requested the staff provide the previous restrictions placed on the property. Supervisor Johnson asked for a copy of the original petition. 4. First reading of ordinance to obtain a S ecial Use Permit for a new convenience store and gasoline station on .873 acres located at 5944 Catawba Valley Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, u on the etition of Craw-Mart, Inc. 5. First reading of ordinance to obtain a S ecial 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 etition of Caldwell White Associates. 6. First reading of ordinance to obtain a S ecial Use Permit for a retail store on .601 acres located at 4347 Va11ey Avenue, Cave S rin Windsor Hills Magisterial District, u on the etp ition of Plav It Again Sports. IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance authorizing conveyance of an easement to Appalachian Power Company for electric service to Starkey Park owned ~ the Board of Supervisors. Jeff Balon, Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department) June 26, 2001 365 improvements across Starkey Park to provide electric service for lighting the ball fields, as shown on APCO Drawing No. V-1183, dated May 1, 2001, to Appalachian Power Company is hereby authorized. 4. That the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be in a form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. 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: APPOINTMENTS 1. Roanoke County Cable Television Committee Supervisor Nickens nominated James Dickey to serve another three year term which will expire June 13, 2004 2. Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee Supervisor Nickens nominated James Dickey to serve another three year term which will expire June 30, 2004 IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-062601-7; R-062601-7.c; R-062601-7.d; R-062601-7.e Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLUTION 062601-7 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA June 26, 2001 ~~~ WHEREAS, the Virginia Office of EMS has advised that the new regulations shall be effective as of January 1, 2002; and WHEREAS, it is the responsibility of county and local governments to provide emergency medical services to its citizens; and WHEREAS, many of the proposed rules and regulations are more applicable to urban areas that have more resources from which to draw and are often more compact geographic areas; and WHEREAS, small and rural jurisdictions may be unaware of the changes proposed in the newest version of the draft regulations and may not have sufficient time to address the required changes and any budgetary adjustments by January 1, 2002. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1. That the Board appreciates the efforts by the Virginia Office of EMS to keep emergency medical services systems modern, effective and efficient; and. 2. That the Board joins the Virginia Association of Counties in requesting the Virginia Department of EMS to delay the implementation of the new EMS regulations until January 1, 2003, to allow adequate time for all localities to prepare for any financial implications as a result of the new regulations. 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 RESOLUTION 062601-7.d ESTABLISHING SALARIES FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby establishes the salaries for the County Administrator and the County Attorney for Fiscal Year 2000-2001. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the annual salary for the County Administrator shall be increased from $119,128.47 to $123,893.61. 2. That the annual salary for the County Attorney shall be increased from $101.433.91 to $105,491.27. 3. That the effective date for the establishment of these salaries shall be July 1, 2000. 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 RESOLUTION 062601-7.e ENDORSING THE BLUE RIDGE- SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA FILM OFFICE, INC. AS THE OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED AGENCY TO RECRUIT FILM PRODUCTION IN June 26, 2001 369 3. Request for work session on July 24, 2001 regarding implementation of ambulance fees for service. It was the consensus of the Board to schedule a work session for July 24, 2001. Supervisor Nickens asked for details of this work session in advance and that issues brought up by rescue squads be addressed such a holding the rescue squads harmless for fund raising and paperwork issues. 4. Request for work session with Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, Metropolitan Planning Organization, and VDOT to relate current tans for I-73. Supervisor Nickens requested a work session and it was the consensus of the Board to schedule it for July 10, 2001. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Nickens moved to received and file the reports after discussion of Item 2 and removal of Item 9 for discussion at the evening session. 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 Supervisor Johnson suggested removing the note from this report concerning any reimbursement from the Virginia Gas Pipeline. June 26, 2001 371 The Closed Meeting was held from 4:30 p.m. until 6:00 p.m. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-062601-8 At 7:00 p.m., Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLUTION 062601-8 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 Minnix to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain Special Use Permits for 48 acres for a church and d~C care facilities, located on the 5400 block of Indian Grave Road, Cave S rin Magisterial June 26, 2001 373 There was some discussion concerning water and sewer, and Mr. Kinder advised that he was unaware that a previously approved condition regarding extension of public water and sewer had been left out of this request. He advised that the petitioner agreed to add this condition at this time. Supervisor McNamara advised that he thought it was a mistake to soften the ingress, egress and safety requirements in the ordinance and suggested a delay of action. Supervisor Minnix advised of his concerns about safety and that he cannot support approval because he feels that a traffic signal must be installed at this intersection. The question was raised as to whether work had been started, and Randy Kingery clarified that no work has begun but they had cleared a path on the site to drill test holes in two weeks so that the building can be placed on the site. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the ordinance with revision to the wording in condition #5 concerning road improvements and Virginia Department of Transportation. After Supervisor Minnix voiced his strong support for a traffic signal, Supervisor Nickens added the following to his motion: add a paragraph to the ordinance stating that it is the strong recommendation of the Board that a traffic signal be installed at the intersection of Indian Grave Road. Supervisor McNamara moved, to call for the question which would end the debate. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: Supervisor Johnson Supervisor Johnson asked for point of information and inquired if he could ask a question of Mr. Mahoney not pertaining to the vote on this item but clarification of June 26, 2001 375 petition for a special use permit for the master plan of a religious assembly and a special use permit for a day care center on 48 acres of AR-zoned property with access from the 5400 block of Indian Grave Road (Tax Map No. 98.02-2-16) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on May 1, 2001 and continued to June 5, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on April 24, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on June 26, 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 Trustees of Evangel Foursquare Church for the master plan of a religious assembly and a special use permit for a day care center on 48 acres of AR-zoned property will access from the 5400 block of Indian Grave Road (Tax Map No. 98.02-2-16) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The site shall be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan prepared by LMW Engineering & Surveying, dated April 28, 2000. If final engineering of the site requires extra grading beyond the immediate area for the church, it shall be necessary for the applicant to reapply for a Special Use Permit. (2) The buildings shall be constructed in substantial conformity with the building elevations prepared by Pierson Engineering & Surveying, dated October 20, 1999. (3) The exterior of the buildings and equipment shall be constructed with non-reflective materials and brown and gray colors to reduce the visibility potential from the Parkway and surrounding views. (4) As the site is graded and/or developed, no trees on the site may be removed except for the trees in the immediate path of the driveway to the site from Indian Grave Road, the area for the storm water management facility, the area for the church facilities, day care facilities and parking, playground area and area for the septic drain fields, as shown on the concept plan prepared by LMW Engineering & Surveying dated April 28, 2000. (5) The church shall undertake all transportation and road improvements along Indian Grave Road between Route 220 and the entrance to the church and at the intersection of Indian Grave Road and Route 220 resulting from the increased traffic generated from the church and day care development and deemed necessary to insure adequate and safe access to the site as required by VDOT. (6) No access shall be permitted from Franklin Road to the property. (7) The church shall be required to extend public water and sewer to the site and the location of these utilities shall generally be located within the right-of-way of Indian Grave Road. The church shall be authorized for cost reimbursements in accordance with the off-site and oversized.. utility facilities policy contained in section 18-168(D) 3 and 4, and 22-82 (b) (a) (c) and (d) of the Roanoke County Code. June 26, 2001 377 NAYS: None ORDINANCE 062601-10 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 7.94-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON PEACEFUL DRIVE (ROUTE 821) (A PORTION OF TAX MAP NO. 72.02-2-3.2) IN THE CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF I-2 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AR WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF RICHARD A. HALL WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 22, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 26, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 5, 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 portion of a 12.56-acre tract of real estate, containing 7.94 acres and as described herein, and located on Peaceful Drive (Route 821) (a portion of Tax Map Number 72.02-2-3.2) in the Catawba Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of I-2, Industrial District, to the zoning classification of AR, Agriculture/Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Richard A. Hall. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the fallowing condition which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) The development will be limited to two (2) residential building lots. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Beginning at Point No. 1 on the north side of Peaceful Drive (Rte. 821); said point being approximately 500 feet east of the intersection of Rte. 821 with Rte. 813; said point being corner to the property of Randall B. and Connie G. Thomas and the property herein described; thence leaving Point No. 1 with a line between the Thomas property and the property herein described N. 17 deg. 59' 00" W. 214.52 feet to Point No. 2; thence continuing with the Thomas property and the property herein described S. 59 deg. 04' 35" W. 216.19 feet to Point No. 3 on the line of the Effie Maude St.Clair property; thence with the line between the St.Clair property and the Richard A. Hall property and the property described herein N. 19 deg. 25' 40" W. 857.47 feet to Point No. 4, corner to the property of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors; thence with a line between the property of the Board of Supervisors and the property herein described S. 72 deg. 35' 25" E. 622.34 feet to Point No. 5; thence with a proposed zoning line S. 12 deg. 11' 05' E. 611.74 feet to Point No. 7 on the north side of Peaceful Drive; thence with the north side of Peaceful Drive S. 57 deg. 44' 30" W. 220.00 feet to Point No. 1, the Point of Beginning, and being the westerly portion of a 12.564 acre tract and containing 7.964 June 26, 2001 379 LOCATED AT 4390 HARBORWOOD ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 74.00-1- 8.4), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, James and Sandra Worley have filed a petition for a special use permit for a private stable to be located at 4390 Harborwood Road (Tax Map No. 74.00-1-8.4) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 5, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on May 22, 2001; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on June 26, 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 James and Sandra Worley for a private stable to be located at 4390 Harborwood Road (Tax Map No. 74.00-1-8.4) in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following condition: (1) There will be a maximum of three (3) horses on the property. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 4. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a S ecial Use Permit to construct a new school on 21.12 acres located on the north side of Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the etition of Faith Christian School. Janet Scheid, Senior Planner 0-062601-12 This is a request for a special use permit to construct a new school on 21 acres. The school is currently located in Roanoke City and is an independent, non- June 26, 2001 381 athletic fields, Mr. Savitz advised that they would like to have the option of night time sports and are willing to accept conditions that keep the lights from reflecting to the Parkway viewshed or disturbing their neighbors. Supervisor Minnix advised that they could come back to the Board in a year and ask for sports lighting. The following citizens spoke in support of approving the special use permit: (1) D. Michael Savitz, Jr., 265 Lakewood Court; (3) Kathy Robertson, 5444 Stonebrook Drive; and {3) Timothy Martin, 2617 Cenderhurst Avenue. Jeff Straugn from Spectrum Design responded to Supervisor Minnix's questions concerning Mr. Straugn's preliminary discussions with VDOT about a deceleration lane, turning lane, and school warning signs. Supervisor Minnix suggested several things that he wanted to be covered in the ordinance: (1) school zone signs to warn motorist; (2) colors used that are in the Community Plan Clearbrook Overlay; (3) a turning lane; and (4) establish one year to return and ask for outside lighting for sports. In response to Supervisor Nickens' concerns about the petitioner having to incur additional cost to come back for approval of sports lighting, Mr. Mahoney suggested that the petitioner could present their sports lighting plan to the staff for review and only if there was disagreement, it would be brought to the Board for approval. Supervisor Minnix advised that he would like to see the plan when presented to staff. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance and add condition #2 and condition #3 to the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None After the vote, Chairman Minnix advised that another citizen had arrived June 26, 2001 383 representation in the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County" Virginia, ~ a(tering the boundaries of the election districts ~ establishing voting precincts therefor, incorporating a map showing the boundaries of said districts and precincts, changing olp ling laces and providing for an effective date of this ordinance. Paul Mahonev, Countv Attorne 0-062601-13 Mr. Mahoney advised this is the second reading of the redistricting ordinance. There are no changes from the first reading but because this is a public hearing, he summarized the three major revisions of the districts as follows: (1) between the Hollins and Catawba Districts, the change divides the Woodland Precinct at Woodhaven Road and moves that portion to Catawba District with the remainder in the Hollins District; (2) between the Vinton and Hollins Districts, the boundary moves from Stuart Knob up to Challenger Drive; and (3) the Vinton District is expanded to a new boundary with Crowell Gap Road and the southern portion of Bandy Road. The Windsor Hills District would remain unchanged. These election district changes, as well as new General Assembly House and Senate Boundary changes, required numerous precinct changes. Two significant changes to precinct boundaries are: (1) Peters Creek #105 will be split at Forest Acre Trail between Mason Valley Precinct #102 and Glenvar Precinct #103, due to changes between the 21th and 22nd Senate District. (2) Lindenwood Precinct #405 which is divided at Mountain View Road, Sunflower Drive, Ivey Land and Wolf Creek and added to North Vinton Precinct #403 due to changes in the 11th and 17th House of Delegates District. The main goal of this redistricting is to June 26, 2001 ~~C ORDINANCE 062601-13 REAPPORTIONING THE REPRESENTATION IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, BY ALTERING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ELECTION DISTRICTS, BY ESTABLISHING VOTING PRECINCTS THEREFOR, INCORPORATING A MAP SHOWING THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID DISTRICTS AND PRECINCTS, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE WHEREAS, on February 27, 2001, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County held a public hearing to receive comments on developing guidelines for the redistricting of Roanoke County in accordance with the decennial census; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2002, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Guidelines for the 2001 Redistricting of Roanoke County. WHEREAS, legal notice of a public hearing concerning the adoption of an ordinance establishing magisterial districts for the County of Roanoke was provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was held June 12, 2001; and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 26, 2001; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of SUPERVISORS of Roanoke County, as follows: 1. That there shall be established in Roanoke County five magisterial or election districts to be known and designated as follows: Catawba Magisterial District Hollins Magisterial District Vinton Magisterial District Cave Spring Magisterial District Windsor Hills Magisterial District from each of which there shall be elected one member of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County; and 2. That the outside boundaries of the five magisterial districts shall be as follows: Catawba Magisterial District Beginning at the common corner between Craig, Montgomery, and Roanoke counties; thence with the line between Craig and Roanoke counties along the crest of North and Brush Mountains in a northeastern direction to the common corner in the line between Roanoke, Craig, and Botetourt counties; thence with the line between Roanoke and Botetourt counties in a southeasterly direction to the southerly right-of-way line of Interstate 81; thence with the southerly right-of-way of Interstate 81 and in a westerly direction to its intersection with Interstate 581; thence in a southerly direction with Interstate 581 to its intersection with Woodhaven Road Route 628 i thence in a southeasterl direction with Woodhaven Road Route 628 to its intersection with Peters Creek Road (Route 117), said point being on the northerly boundary of the City of Roanoke and the northerly right-of-way of Peters Creek Road (Route 117); thence in the southwesterly direction of Peters Creek Road.( Route 117) and with the City of Roanoke corporate lines to their intersection with Cove Road (Route 116); thence with June 26, 2001 387 Roanoke/Floyd County line; thence with the Roanoke/Floyd County line westerly to its intersection with the common corner of the Roanoke/Montgomery/Floyd county line; thence with the Roanoke/Montgomery County line in a northerly direction to the crest of Poor Mountain at its intersection with Honeysuckle Road (State Secondary Route 916); thence along the crest of Poor Mountain in a generally northeasterly direction thence continuing along the crest of Poor Mountain and Twelve O'Clock Knob to a point where a gas transmission line crosses the crest of Twelve O'Clock Knob (elevation 2683) at Twelve O=Clock Knob Road; thence with Twelve O=Clock Knob Road in a northerly direction to its intersection with the corporate line of the City of Salem; thence with the corporate line of the City of Salem in an easterly and northerly direction to Keagy Road (Virginia Secondary Highway 685); thence in a northerly and easterly direction with Keagy Road (Virginia Secondary Highway 685) to its intersection with Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) to place of beginning. Cave Spring Magisterial District Beginning at a point where Yellow Mountain Road (Virginia Secondary Route 668) crosses the Blue Ridge Parkway; thence in a southerly direction until Yellow Mountain Road (Virginia Secondary Route 668) intersects Mayland Road (Route 667); thence in a southeasterly direction with Mayland Road (Secondary Route 667) to its intersection with Bandy Road (State Route 666); thence in a southerly direction with Bandy Road Route 666 to its intersection with Crowell Gap Road Route 657 ~ thence in an eas~_wte~ direction with Crowell Gap Road to the Roanoke/Franklin County line; #-~renree thence with the RoanokelFranklin County line in a southwest to northwest direction as it meanders along the crest of the Blue Ridge Mountains to a point where Dawnwood Road (State Secondary Route 691) crosses said Roanoke/Franklin County line; thence in a northerly direction with the Dawnwood Road (State Secondary Route 691) to its point of intersection with Poage Valley Road Extension (State Secondary Route 690); thence with Poage Valley Road Extension (State Secondary Route 690) in a northerly direction to its intersection with Bent Mountain Road (U. S. Highway 221); thence in a northeasterly direction with Bent Mountain Road (U.S. Highway 221) to a point where said route enters the City of Roanoke; thence with the corporate line of the City of Roanoke in a southeasterly and easterly direction until it intersects with the western side of Yellow Mountain Road (Virginia Secondary Route 668) at the place of beginning. Hollins Magisterial District Beginning at a point of intersection of the southerly right-of-way of Interstate 81 and the Roanoke/Botetourt County line; thence with the southerly right-of-way of Interstate 81 in a westerly direction to its intersection with Interstate 581; thence in a southerly direction with Interstate 581 to Woodhaven Road Route 6281 thence in a southerly direction with_ Woodhaven Road Route 628 to its intersection with Peters Creek Road (Virginia Route 117) and the corporate line of the City of Roanoke; thence in an easterly and southerly direction with the corporate line of the City of Roanoke to a point of intersection - _ June 26, 2001 389 topographic crest of Brushy Mountain; thence with the crest of Brushy Mountain in a southwesterly direction crossing Mason's Creek to the intersection of Catawba Valley Drive (Virginia Route 311) at its intersection with Dutch Oven Road (State Secondary Route 863); thence north with Virginia Route 311 to Plunkett Road (State Route 874); thence west with Plunkett Road (State Route 874), to a point where Mason's Creek crosses under Plunkett Road (State Route 874); thence in anorth-northwesterly direction with Mason's Creek to its intersection with Old Catawba Road (Route 864); thence south with Old Catawba Road (Route 864) to its intersection with Bradshaw Road (State Secondary Route 622); thence with Bradshaw Road (State Secondary Route 622) in a westerly direction to the Roanoke/ Montgomery County line; thence with the Roanoke/Montgomery County line in a northwesterly direction to the place of beginning. Catawba Magisterial District Roanoke Moose Lodge #284 -Voting Place BENT MOUNTAIN PRECINCT - 301 Beginning on the Roanoke/Montgomery County line at the top of Poor Mountain at the intersection of Honeysuckle Road (State Secondary Route 916); thence following the ridge line of Poor Mountain in a generally northeasterly direction to its intersection with Poor Mountain Road (Route 612); thence continuing in a generally e~s~er+p southwesterly direction with Poor Mountain Road (Route 612), down the slope of Poor Mountain to an elevation of 2800 feet; thence following the 2800 feet contour elevation of Poor and Bent Mountains in a generally southern direction to the contours point of intersection with the AEP Company high tension Roanoke-Claytor transmission line; thence easterly with the AEP Company high tension Roanoke-Claytor transmission line down the slope of Bent Mountain to the topographic elevation 2000 feet at a branch of Back Creek; thence with the topographic elevation 2000 feet in a southeasterly direction with the base of Bent Mountain to Dividing Spring Branch; thence southerly with Dividing Spring Branch as it meanders to the Roanoke/Franklin County line at Slings Gap; thence with the Roanoke/Franklin County line in a westerly-southwesterly direction to the Roanoke/Floyd County line; thence with the Roanoke/Floyd County line westerly to the Roanoke/Floyd/Montgomery County line; thence with the Roanoke/Montgomery County line in a northerly direction to the place of beginning. Windsor Hills Magisterial District Bent Mountain Fire Station -Voting Place a^~yr~~-^~~' ORCHARDS PRECINCT -205 Beginning at a point of intersection of the Roanoke/Botetourt County line and Challenger Avenue ~U.S. Route 460; thence in a southwesterly direction with Challenger Avenue U.S. Route 460 ~~ ~' ~ ^~ v V to a point on the east corporate line of the City of Roanoke; thence with the east corporate line of the City of Roanoke in a north- northwesterly direction to its intersection with Read Mountain Road (State Secondary Route 611); thence in a westerly direction with Read Mountain Road (Secondary Route June 26, 2001 391 Hollins Magisterial District Burlington Elementary School -Voting Place CASTLE ROCK PRECINCT -305 Beginning at a point in the intersection of Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) and Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221); thence southwesterly with Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221) to its intersection with Ran Lynn f2~aaet Drive (Route 745); thence in a northwesterly direction with Ran Lynn f~aei Drive (Route 745) to its intersection with South Roselawn Road (State Route 690); thence with South Roselawn Road (State Secondary Route 690) in a northeasterly direction to its intersection with Roselawn Road (State Route 689); thence in a northerly direction with Roselawn Road (State Route 689) to the crossing location of the AEP Company high tension Glen Lynn- Hancock Electric Transmission line; thence with Appalachian Power Company high tension Glen Lyn-Hancock Electric Transmission line in a northeasterly direction to its intersection with Brahma Road (State Secondary Route 1687); thence northwest with Brahma Road (State Secondary Route 1687) to Longhorn Road (State Secondary Route 1687 ); thence north with Longhorn Road (State Secondary Route 1687 ~8) to Castle Rock Road (State Secondary Route 702); thence in a westerly direction with Castle Rock Road (State Secondary Route 702) to Stoneybrook Drive (State Secondary Route 1316); thence north/northeasterly with Stoneybrook Drive (State Secondary Route 1316) to Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419); thence in a southeasterly/easterly direction with Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) to its intersection with Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221) being the place of beginning. Windsor Hills Magisterial District Cave Spring Junior High School Etrierr -Voting Place CATAWBA PRECINCT -101 Beginning at the top of Brush Mountain at the Montgomery/Roanoke/Craig County line; thence with the Roanoke/Craig County line in a northeasterly direction to the Roanoke/Craig/Botetourt County line; thence with the Roanoke/Botetourt County line in a southerly direction to the crest of Tinker Mountain; thence with the crest of Tinker Mountain in a westerly direction to the top of McAfee Knob on Catawba Mountain; thence continuing in a westerly direction with the crest of Catawba Mountain to the Roanoke/Montgomery County line; thence with the Roanoke/Montgomery County line in a northerly direction to the place of beginning. Catawba Magisterial District Catawba Fire Station -Voting Place CAVE SPRING PRECINCT - 503 Beginning at a point at the intersection of Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221) and Colonial Avenue (State Secondary Route 720); thence east with Colonial Avenue (State Secondary Route 720) to Penn Forest Boulevard (State Secondary Route 687); thence continuing east with Penn Forest Boulevard (State Secondary Route 687) to Chaparral Drive (State Secondary Route 800); thence southwest with Chaparral Drive (State Secondary Route 800) to Merriman Road (State Secondary Route 613); thence with Merriman Road (State Secondary Route 613) southeasterly to Cartwright Drive (State June 26, 2001 393 GARST MILL PRECINCT - 306 Beginning at a point on Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) where the west fork of Mud Lick Creek crosses Electric Road (Route 419); thence with the west fork of Mud Lick Creek as it meanders in a northeasterly direction to the southerly corporate line of the City of Roanoke; thence with the corporate line of the City of Roanoke in a northeasterly and southeasterly direction to a point where it crosses Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221); thence with Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221) in a southwesterly direction to its intersection with Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419); thence with Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) in a northwesterly direction to the place of beginning. Windsor Hills Magisterial District Library Headquarters -Voting Place GLENVAR PRECINCT -103 Beginning at a point on the Roanoke/Montgomery County line where U. S. Interstate 81 intersects that line; thence with the said U. S. Interstate 81 in a northeasterly direction to its intersection with , ' the western most corner of the City of Salem corporate line; thence in a generally northeasterly direction with the said City of Salem corporate line to a point where Dry Branch forks into an easterly and westerly fork; thence with the easterly fork of the said Dry Branch as it meanders in generally a northwesterly direction to where this branch or hollow intersects with the AEP power line: thence foll~, owin,~ the AEP power line in an easterly direction to intersection with Catawba Valley Drive Route 3111 thence in a northerly direction with Catawba Vallev Drive Route 311 to its intersection with the topographic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain, #~re-saiet ;thence west with the topo ra hic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain to its intersection with Forest Acre Trail Route 700 thence with Forest Acre Trail Route 700 back to the topographic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain; thence with the topographic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain to its intersection with the Roanoke/Montgomery County line; thence with the Roanoke/Mont omer-County line to the point of beginning_ Catawba Magisterial District Glenvar Elementary School -Voting Place GREEN HILL PRECINCT -106 Beginning at a point on U.S. Interstate 81 at its intersection ' with the City of Salem corporate limits; ' ,thence with the west corporate line of the City of Salem in a southerly direction and with the south corporate line of the City of Salem in an easterly and southerly direction to its intersection with Twelve O'Clock Knob Road (Route 694); thence with Twelve O'Clock Knob Road (Route 694) in a southerly direction to a point where it intersects with a gas transmission line at the crest of 12 Twelve O'Clock Knob {etev~ioi°r~83-j; thence with the crest of 12 Twelve O'Clock Knob and with the crest of Poor Mountain, the dividing line between Catawba and the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, in a westerly and southwesterly direction to the intersection of Poor Mountain Road (State Secondary Route 612); thence following the June 26, 2001 395 Botetourt/Bedford/Roanoke County line; thence with the Bedford/Roanoke County line in a southerly direction to the Roanoke River; thence west with the Roanoke River to Wolf Creek at the east corporate limit of the Town of Vinton; thence north with Wolf Creek and the east corporate limit of the Town of Vinton to a oint where Wolf Creek exists from the east corporate limit of the Town of Vinton; thence northeasterly with Wolf Creek to its intersection with an imaginary line extending from the end of I~ Lane Route 10231; thence with I~ Lane to its intersection with Sunflower Drive Route 10~ 19~ thence with Sunflower Drive Route 1019 to its intersection with Mountain View Road Route 6511 thence in a westerly direction with Mountain View Road Route 651 until its intersection with the east corporate limit of the Town of Vinton: thence with the east corporate limit of the Town of Vinton to the place of beginning. Vinton Magisterial District William Byrd High School _ Voting Place MASON VALLEY PRECINCT -102 Beginning at a point on the Roanoke/Montgomery County line at its intersection with Bradshaw Road (Route 622); thence in an easterly direction with Bradshaw Road (Route 622) to its intersection with Old Catawba Road (Route 864); thence north with Old Catawba Road (Route 864) to its intersection with Mason's Creek; thence with Mason's Creek in a southerly direction to its intersection with Plunkett Road (Route 874); thence in an easterly direction with Plunkett Road (Route 874) to its intersection with Catawba Valley Road (Virginia Route 311); thence in a southerly direction with Catawba Valley Road (Virginia Route 311) to the topographic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain; thence leaving Road (Virginia Route 311) with the topographic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain to its intersection with Forest Acre Trail Route 700 thence with Forest Acre Trail Route 700 back to its intersection with the topographic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain; thence with to~o_ raphic crest of Fort Lewis Mountain in a westerly direction to the Roanoke/Montgomery County line; thence with the Roanoke/Montgomery County line in a northwesterly direction to the place of beginning. Catawba Magisterial District Mason Cove Elementary School -Voting Place MOUNTAIN VIEW PRECINCT - 203 Beginning at a point on the Roanoke/Botetourt County line at its intersection with Williamson Road (U. S. Primary Route 11); thence in a westerly direction with Williamson Road (U. S. Primary Route 11) to its intersection with Plantation Road (Virginia Primary Route 115); thence in a southerly direction with Plantation Road (Virginia Primary Route 115) to a point where it intersects with the north corporate line of the City of Roanoke; thence northeasterly with the corporate line of the City of Roanoke as it meanders until it intersects with Read Mountain Road (Secondary Route 611); thence in an easterly direction with Read Mountain Road (Secondary Route 611) until it intersects with the crest of Read Mountain Extended; thence northeasterly with the crest of Read Mountain until it intersects with the Roanoke/Botetourt County line; thence northwesterly with the said Roanoke/Botetourt County line to the place of beginning. Hollins Magisterial District Mountain View Elementary School -Voting Place June 26, 2001 397 Northside High School -Voting Place NORTH VINTON PRECINCT - 403 Beginning at the east corporate line of the City of Roanoke and the west corporate line of the Town of Vinton at Virginia Avenue; thence with the corporate line of the Town of Vinton in a northeasterly and easterly direction to its intersection with Mountain View Road Route 65~i thence in an easterly direction til its intersection with Sunflower Drive Route 1019); thence with Sunflower Drive Route 1019) in a southerly direction to its intersection with I~ Lane Route 1023 ~ thence following I~ Lane Route 1023 along an rna inary line to Wolf Creek; thence with Wolf Creek to the east corporate line of the Town of Vinton and with east corporate line of the Town of Vinton in a southerly direction to Washington Avenue; thence with Washington Avenue in a westerly direction to South Pollard Street; thence with South Pollard Street in a southerly direction to Virginia Avenue at First Street; thence with Virginia Avenue in a westerly direction to the place of beginning. Vinton Magisterial District Vinton Baptist Church -Voting Place OAK GROVE PRECINCT - 304 Beginning at a point on the east side of Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) and on the north side of Keagy Road (Virginia Secondary Highway 685) being a point on the City of Salem/City of Roanoke/Roanoke County boundary; thence with the west corporate line of the City of Roanoke and the east side of Electric Road (Virginia Primary Route 419) in a south-southeasterly direction to the intersection with Stoneybrook Drive (State Secondary Route 1316); thence in a southwesterly direction with Stoneybrook Drive (State Secondary Route 1316) to Castle Rock Road (State Secondary Route 702); thence in an easterly direction with Castle Rock Road (State Secondary Route 702) to Longhorn Road (State Secondary Route 1688); thence south with Longhorn Road (State Secondary Route 4.6$8 1687) to Brahma Road (State Secondary Route ~-68-~ 1689); thence southeast with Brahma Road (State Secondary Route 4~68,~ 1689) to the crossing of the AEP Company high tension Glen Lyn-Hancock electric transmission line; thence with the AEP Company high tension Glen Lyn- Hancock electric transmission line in a southwesterly direction to Roselawn Road (State Secondary Route 689); thence northwest with Roselawn Road (State Secondary Route 689) to Mount Chestnut Road (State Secondary Route 692); thence west with Mount Chestnut Road (State Secondary Route 692} to the crossing location of a gas pipeline; thence with this gas pipeline in a northerly and then westerly direction to its intersection with the crest of 12 O'Clock Knob ~ at Twelve O'Clock Knob Road (Route 694); thence with Twelve O'Clock Knob Road (Route 694) in a northerly direction to the corporate line of the City of Salem; thence with the corporate line of the City of Salem in an easterly direction to the place of beginning. Windsor Hills Magisterial District Oak Grove Elementary School -Voting Place OGDEN PRECINCT - 504 June 26, 2001 ~~~ thence in a wester direction with the AEP ower line to its intersection ii°rtel-s~eettr~ with -~-ffie~lernt v~rief~-is the east fork of Dry Branch ' ; thence with the hollow which is the east fork of Dry Branch in a southerly direction as it meanders to a point where Dry Branch divides into an east and west fork at the north corporate line of the City of Salem; thence with the north corporate line of the City of Salem and in a generally northeasterly direction to its intersection with Electric Road (State Route 419); thence with the east corporate line of the City of Salem in asouth-northeasterly direction to a point on the City of Salem, Roanoke County, and City of Roanoke line at Green Ridge Road Route 629 ;thence in a sir northeasterly direction with Green Ridge Road Route 629) to its intersection with Cove Road Route 7801; thence in an easterly direction with Cove Road Route 7801 to its intersection with Peters Creek Road Route 11~: thence in a northeasterly direction with Peters Creek Road Route 11~ to its intersection with North Lake Drive Route 1524); thence in a northwesterly direction with North Lake Drive Route 1524) to its intersection with Twilight Road Route 1577); thence in a westerly direction with Twilight Road Route 1577) to its intersection with Green Ridge Road Route 629 ;thence north with Green Ridge Road Route 6_29) to its intersection with Wood Haven Road Route 628 ;thence east with Wood Haven Road Route 628) to the place of beginning. Catawba Magisterial District Glen Cove Elementary School -Voting Place PLANTATION PRECINCT - 201 Beginning at a point where Williamson Road (Route 11) intersects Clubhouse Drive (Route 1821); thence southeasterly with Williamson Road (Route 11) until it intersects Florist Road (Secondary Route 623); thence in a southeasterly direction with Florist Road (Secondary Route 623) until it intersects the north corporate line of the City of Roanoke; thence in an easterly direction with the north corporate line of the City of Roanoke until it intersects Plantation Road (Virginia Primary Route 115); thence in a northwesterly direction with Plantation Road (Virginia Primary Route 115) to a point where the said road intersects the east fork of Carvins Creek; thence with the east fork of CaNins Creek in a southwesterly direction as it meanders to a point opposite the center line extended of Clubhouse Drive (Secondary Route 1821); thence northwesterly with the center line of Clubhouse Drive (Secondary Route 1821) to its intersection with Williamson Road (U. S. Route 11) the place of beginning. Hollins Magisterial District Roanoke Valley Christian Schools -Voting Place POAGES MILL PRECINCT - 302 Beginning at a point on the western right-of-way of Brambleton Avenue (U. S. Highway 221) and its intersection with Ran Lynn Drive (Route 745); thence in a northwesterly direction with Ran Lynn Drive (Route 745) to its intersection with South Roselawn Road (State Route 690); thence with South Roselawn Road (State Secondary Route 690) in a northeasterly direction to its intersection with Roselawn Road (State Route 689); thence in a northerly direction with Roselawn Road (State Route 689) to Mount Chestnut Drive (State Secondary Route 692); thence west with Mount Chestnut Drive (State Secondary Route 692) to the crossing location of a gas pipeline; thence with this June 26, 2001 401 1 1 4. That certified copies of this ordinance shall be mailed by the Clerk to the local electoral board, the Secretary of the Commonwealth, the State Board of Elections, and the Division of Legislative Services. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Nickens 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. Robert Edwards, 755 Summerdean Avenue, expressed concerns about the proliferation of signs along Plantation Road; the expenses of having two primary elections; duplication of Roanoke City and County services; and Emergency Medical Services protocol. 2. Annie Krochatis, 9428 Patterson Drive, reported on the concerns brought up at the recent Bent Mountain Civic League meeting which included increasing fire and rescue staff, increased library resources, carbon water filter at the school, and community participation in local government. She also expressed concern about the Board's approval of the first reading of ordinance at this meeting to place another tower L4...~.. ...~lV 11_ __._i _._ 1• _ ~ .w.. • ..~. _ f June 26, 2001 403 property along Carvins Cove Road. The parking lot does not include lighting, restroom facilities or a gate to control access. The Planning Commission heard from many users of the trail that the proposed parking iot is not the perfect solution but was acceptable and a workable solution. The Planning Commission saw this issue as a regional issue because the majority of the users of the parking lots are Roanoke County citizens, and facility is being built by Roanoke City in Roanoke County. In response to Chairman Minnix, Mr. Mahoney advised that this item only requires action if the Board decides to overrule the decision of the Planning Commission that the parking lot is in compliance with the Community Plan. The following citizens spoke on this issue: (1) Ian Webb, 2724 Kings Street, advised that this is not the best solution but will alleviate the problem of citizens parking along the shoulder of the road in an uncontrolled manner, and advised that there were many citizens present who supported the parking lot. (2) Steve McGonigal, 5474 Highfields Road, spoke in support of the parking lot. (3) Kyle Inman, 2719 Summit Ridge Road, spoke in support of the parking lot. (4} Robert Issem, 10812 Green Hollow Drive, spoke in support of the parking lot. (5) Don Breedlove, 4617 Carvins Cove Road, agreed that the parking lot is needed but it should be moved inside a gated area because of safety and security concerns. (6) Judy Newman, 4575 Carvins Cove Road, advised that the neighbors June 26, 2001 4~5 connector trail. Supervisor Johnson moved to receive and file the report. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church: (1) He advised that he attended the dedication of Camp Roanoke and that he appreciated the good coverage received from the media, especially the Roanoke Times, and thanked everyone involved. (2) He asked Mr. Hodge to check on the situation where a citizen received three mailings after sending one check for personal property taxes. Mr. Hodge will review with Treasurer's Office. Supervisor Johnson: (1) He advised that he was unable to attend the dedication of Camp Roanoke due to the death of his father-in-law and expressed his appreciation for the respects shown to his family by Chairman Minnix, and Vice Chairman Church on behalf of the Board and Mr. Hodge on behalf of staff. (2) He commented on the redistricting concerns of the Hollins School Board member but did not think it was manageable because it would split the communities of interest. Supervisor McNamara: (1) He asked that the investment policy be amended to eliminate commercial paper being invested in individual companies. Mr. Mahoney advised that he will bring the policy back for discussion and possible changes. (2) He inquired when the BPOL taxes and strategies would be discussed by the Board. MR. Hodge advised that a work session is being planned for July 10, 2001. Supervisor Minnix: (1) He advised that he had received many calls r f. , A-100901-6•a ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~' *~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 SUBJECT: Request to Accept Donation of Telecommunication Line Easement across Property of Lewis-Gibbs Corporation (Tax Map No. 27.13-4-2) in the Hollins Magisterial District COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ayl SUNIlVIARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves acceptance of the following easement for fiber optic cable purposes in connection with the networking connectivity between the Hollins Fire and Rescue Station and the Hollins Library. First Team Auto Mall -Fiber Optic Cable Line Easement Donation of a 15-foot wide telecommunication easement from Lewis-Gibb Corporation, (Deed Book 1273, page 1681; Tax Map No. 27.13-4-2), as shown on a plat dated July 9, 2001, which was prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. A copy of the plat is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". The telecommunication easement is located along the northern end and eastern edge of the back lot of First Team Auto Mall located in the Hollins Magisterial District. FISCAL IMPACT: The easement is being donated by the property owner and will have no fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the donation of this easement and authorize the County Administrator to execute the subject deed of easement. ,r ..•~ I~ w ~ . . SUBMITTED BY: Richard E. Burch, Jr. Chief of Fire and Rescue APPROVED: ~!'~'fs.+~' Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to approve Church _ x _ Denied () Johnson _ x Received () McNamara- x _ Referred () Minnix _ x _ To () Nickens _ x cc: File Richard E. Burch, Jr., Chief of Fire & Rescue Diana Rosapepe, Director, Library Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development 2 r LEGEND PERrORMEO VNO R P A t ~ R ~ ' . MY SV ERJI$ION; 1Nn ALL I MPROVEMENiS AND NSIBLE IOENOE Of EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN HEREON AND THAI TH R _ `i O IRON PIN $ET , E E ARE NO ENCROnCHMENLS DY MPROVENENTS EITHER rRON ADJO+NING PREMISES OR TROM SVDJECi pREM+SES OTHER THAN SHOWN HEREON. 1H15 $VRVEY MA$ PERFORMED ~ • IRON pIN FNIJNN W+IHOVT THE BENEnT OE A 1171E REPORT ANp I$ SVRJECT 10 INFORMATION wMCH MAY BE D15ClOSED BY r SVCH. PROPERTY I$ IN F.E.MA OE/INFO 20NE % UNSHADED I TAX MAP f/ I I TAX MAP ~ ~ I o i a 27.09-2-28.1 127.09-2-28.Z I I a N I- To ~ CLIRISTIAN & _ WILLIAM D. BAILEY a, Q Q ~m MISSIONARY 02' DB. 1200 PG. 1893 545'01'30"W 415 X ~ JN J ALLIANCE - . wmo a ^ c v3 DB. 1200 PG. 1 896 ~ APPROX. LOC i°, DILLARD ~ TAX MAP /f 27.09- 2-30 Q, CEMETERY y -- EUGENE S. II & JOYCE S. ~~ N45'O1'30"E 296 80' N HONAKER . --------- _ DB. 1318 PG. 712 \ 0 --- ----.----- w ~ U' C/L PROP. 15' PRIVATE ~ \ \ o ~~'` ~; TELECOMUNICATION ~;\ \ ~ '~ °. EASEfv4ENT ~ \\ \ y QC' ~ W \ \ ~ /f ~~ TAX MAP ~f 27.13-4-1 ~' ~=\ \ ~ N '~~" ROAN01(E COUNTY BOARD r' OF SUPERVISORS ~ ~ E \ \ n ~ o w ~ \ O \ \ \ t0.\\\ N=C7 \ \ ~w CL 1 62 y \ EASEMENT AREA d J TA Q w n $ 0 E 0.299 AC, ~ z 9 04 3 13015 S0. FT. I Q o m N I I _ I-~° N ~ I ~~o. ~~-~°In Q ~~ ~ rn ~ ~ 14 I (~ ~ 3 ~~ooo /~ N ~ o~ N ^ Q z m ~~, AFrFR~ c s,3? ` R FF/r ° w TAX MAP ~ 27.13-4-2 OB. 1273 PG. 168t 9.439 ACRES Nj ~~ ~ a ~a/ ~ ~, To ~I~lo rnlll Oo .I I ~I I ~ ~ ~'I I a w I I o cn `r' z I i rn ~I I II i o I v`Ei I I ~ o g ro I I o ~r I I Nwc~ 30.57' Boa ~~ 45' 13 00"E 182.60' ~ ~ N ° X ~~ TAX MAP ~ 27.14-1-3 ~~° ROANOKE COUNTY OARD OF SUPERVISORS DB. 872 PG. 368 NUMBER DIRECTION DISTANCE L1 573'13'20"W 62.10' L2 N20'06'S0"W 5.49' L3 N68' 1 1'09"W 68.41' L4 557'52'00"W 6.00' /~ V'r~'~05~67, ~ / ~~_TAX MAP ~( 27.14-1-Z EDWARD W. & /T'jFS RT I JEAN N. STRITESKY j j) ~ ~ OB. 1 100 PG. 340 TAX MAP 27.14- 1 - 1 100 0 100 200 300 EDWARD & DElORES __ - STRITESKY DB. 1117 PG. 67 Scale 1 " = 1 00' NUMBE DELTA RADIUS ARC TANGENT CHORD BEARING C1 23'20'58" 357.58 145.72 73.89 144.72. 543'48'29"E NOTES: EASEMENT PLA7 SURVEY FOR 1. OWNERS OF RECORD: LEWIS-GIBBS coRP. ROA/VOlKE COUNTY BOARD 2. LEGAL REFERENCE: DEED 8001< 1273, PAGE 1681 3. TAX MAP NUMBER: 27.13-4-2 OF SUPERI/ISORS 4:. UNDERGROUND UTILITY SERVICE ONES ~ 6520 PETERS. CREEK ROAD BEING THE PROPERTY OF k~~N~~~N~H LEYVIS GLEES CORPORATION ~~~PLTH OF ~/~ DOLLINBOMAGSTERIAL DISTRICT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ,E R•~'I~~ ' SURVEYED JULY 9, 2001 ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ JOHN R. McADE JOD #80110211.00 B~~~ll/ 11 1LrG. No. 002002 SCALE: 1" = 100' No ,.aso~,,,E^,,.N 'j .- 9 _ p ~ ~ ~•~ % ~ /' ~ 1/iI. ~7 REVISED 08-17-01 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT , w c TEL: 540-772-9580 FAX: 540-772-8050 AE°«=~~~~ .o..oaA w JRN:DWP PLANNERS ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS °aAlARRS .A4pRIE[+S ~HK:MAC Balzer & Associates, Inc. 1208 Corporate Circle Roanoke Vo. 24018 •[NeIM[RS °swvETws Exhibit A LE G E hI S/ TH15 IS TO CERTIFY THAT AN ACTVAL FIELD SURVEY OF THE PREMISES SHOWN HEREON HAS BEEN PERFORMED VNDER MY SUPERVISION; THAT ALL IMPROVEMENTS ANO VISIBLE EVIDENCE OF EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN HEREON, AND THAT (HERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS BY IMPROVEMENTS EITHER FROM ADJOINING O~ IRON PIN SET PREMISES OR FROM SUBJECT PREMISES OTHER THAN SHOWN HEREON. THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED • IRON PIN FOUND WITF{OUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE REPORT AND I$ SUBJECT 70 INFORMATION WHICH MAY BE DI$ClO5E0 BY SUCH. PROPERTY IS IN F.E.M.A. DEFINED ZONE X VNSHADED. TAX MAP ~f ~ I TAX MAP 2 7.09 - 2 - 28.1 __---------- 12 7.09 - 2 - 2 8.2 CFIRISTIAN & I _ WILLIAM D. BAILEY MISSIONARY I S45'O1'30"W 415.02' DB. 1200 PG. 18931 ALLIANCE - - - DB. 17.00 PG. 1896 TAX MAP ~~ 2.7.09-2-30 EUGENE S. II & JOYCE S. HONAI<ER DB. 1318 PG. 712 ~~~ Qv. 1~ 1~' O~ TAX MAP ~ 27.13-4- 1 ROANOKE COUNTY BOAR OF SUPERVISORS DB. 1115 PG. 36. N ~ ~~~0, ~(.vo"'~ ~~~1 O N I O ~q~ rn ~ ~ L4 ~ ~ 3 W ~ ° o° I ~ N ~ a d. ~ ^ ~~ 2 ~ ~~APPROX. LOC ~ `° DIIIARD w rn CEMETERY ~ °- N45'Oi'30"E 296.80' c~v w o --- - ---- -1 \ U' C/L PROP. 15' PRIVATE ~ \ \ o0 ~; TELECOMUNICATION 6'~; \ \ o °. EASEMENT ~ \\ \ d. `L L,I \ \ c~iT ~' ~': \ \ D N ~\\ f ~\ \ ~\ \ ~-\\\ \ \ ~ \ 6Z ~ EASEMENT AREA` J V 0.299 AC. ~I 13015 S0. FT. I i II :VIII °' I I ~I I ~'I I :L`'I I ~I I TAX MAP ~ 27.13-4-2 VIII DB. 1273 PG. 1681 :-I I 9.439 ACRES veil I II II 30.57' N45' 13'00"E 182.60' r ~r~~ ~ lo= a CL N I- ~ Q I ~~~Lp ~rnQQwrn O JT~I J IQ-c^v~wmo N Iz~ oow~r ~ ao ~_ N ~ wa ~w a~rn Q w ~ ~z~ z Qom I- ~ v TAX MAP # 27.1 4 - 1 -3 ROANOKE COUNTY OARD '. ~ OF SUPERVISORS 0B. 872 PG. 368 c~ z •- o I I p Lp O g ~ o ~r N ~ ~ Boa N F7 a w In ~~o X ~~ Q ~ D r~ I~ W NUMBER DIRECTION DISTANCE A N~U2sg4• ~ Li 573'13'20"W 62.10' FrFRC` c, ~o> ~ ~\0'~ `~ U'- L2 N20'06:50;:W 5_49' ~ ~ r A-100901-6 . b ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ " AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Designation of a Voting Representative at the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Annual Meeting on November 13, 2001 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Virginia Association of Counties has scheduled their Annual Conference for November 11 - 13, 2001. They have requested that each county designate a representative of its Board of Supervisors to cast its votes at the Annual Business Meeting on Tuesday, November 13. The voting credentials form must be submitted to VACo by November 1, 2001. Supervisor Nickens, Regional Director for Region 9, has indicated that he will be attending the VACo Conference and would be willing to serve as the voting representative. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors designate Supervisor Harry C. Nickens to serve as voting representative at the Annual Business Meeting on Tuesday, November 13, 2001. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator . .~ '_ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTfON VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to approve Church _ x _ Denied () Johnson _ x _ Received () McNamara_ x _ Referred () Minnix _ x _ To () Nickens x cc: File Virginia Association of Counties The Honorable Harry C. Nickens VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES ~-3 ~.r President TO: Chairs, County Board of Supervisors CONNECTING COUNTY GOVERNMEN'PS SINCEI)34 Jacks°° T. Ward Hanover County County Chief Administrative Officers President-Elect Gerald W. Hyland FROM: James D. Campbell, Executive Director Fairfax County First Vice President RE: Voting Credentials for the Annual Business Meeting Oliver H. Bennett Northampton county DATE: September 24, 2001 Second Vice President Wayne A. Acorn Caroline County The 2001 Annual Business Meetin of the Vir mia Association of Counties g g~ Secretary-Treasurer will be held on Tuesday, November 13, from 10:30 a.m. to Noon at The Homestead in Mary Lee carter Bath County. Spotsylvania County Immediate Past Article VI of the VACo Bylaws state that each county shall designate a President Ferris M. Belman, Sr. representative of its board of supervisors to cast its vote(s) at the Annual Business Stafford county Meeting. However, if a member of the board of supervisors cannot be present for this Executive Director meeting, the Association's Bylaws allow a county to designate anon-elected official James D. Campbell, CAE from your county or a member of a board of supervisors from another county to cast a General Counsel proxy vote(s) for your county. C. Flippo Hicks For your county to be certified to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, (1) your annual dues must be paid in full and (2) either a completed Voting Credentials Form or a Proxy Statement must be submitted to VACo by November 1, 2001. Alternatively, this information may be submitted to the Credentials Committee at its meeting on Monday, November 12, at 4:30 p.m. in the Monroe Room or to the conference registration desk before this meeting. NOMINATING COMMITTEE The Nominating Committee will meet at 4:45 p.m. in the Wilson Room on Monday, November 12th during VACo's Annual Conference at the Homestead. The committee is charged to nominate a candidate for President-Elect, First Vice President, 1001 East Broad Street Secc::d Vice President, and Secretar,~-Treasurer to be elected at the A_n_m~al Business Suite LL 20 Meeting. Please send your expressions of interest and nominations to the Committee Richmond, Virginia or to VACo's Executive Director. 23219-1928 REGIONAL DIRECTORS (804) 788-6652 Pursuant to VACo's By-Laws, "regional directors shall be selected at the FAX (804) 788-0083 Annual Meeting by the member counties located within the region which the director will represent." Regional caucuses will be scheduled during the Annual Meeting to E-mail: mailC~vaco.org select directors. Incumbent regional directors should chair the caucuses. Reports Web site: www.vaco.org should be given to VACo's Executive Director by 6:00 p.m. on Monday, November 12th. The attached list shows the regional directors that must be selected. JDC: bjp [vote credentials memo 2001.doc] Attachments cc: VACo Board of Directors Nominations Committee VACo 2001 Annual Meeting Voting Credentials Form Voting Delegate: (Supervisor) Name Barry C. Nickens Title~~ ryi or, Roanoke o in v Boai•d'of Supervisors Locality County of Roanoke Alternate Delegate: (Supervisor) Name Title Locality Certified by: (Clerk of the Board) Name Marv H. Allen Title Clerk to the Board Locality County of Roanoke VACo 2001 Annual Meeting Proxy Statement County authorizes the following person to cast its vote at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the Vir4inia Association of Counties on November 13, 2001. a non-elected official of this county. -OR- a supei-~~isor from County. This authorization is: Uninstructed. The proxy may use his/her discretion to cast County's votes on any issue to come before the annual meeting. Insriucted. The proxy is limited in how he/she may cast County's votes. The issues on which he/she may cast those votes and how lle/she should vote are: (List issues and instructions on the back of this form) Certified by: Name Title Locality Regional Directors to be selected in 2001 We need a director from Term to Expire Incumbent Room Region 2 2003 Altemus Dominion Region 3 2003 Humphrey Chesapeake Region 3 2003 Ringley Chesapeake Region 4 2003 (Vacant) Shenandoah Region 7 2003 Wolfe Allegheny Region 8 2003 Barg Piedmont Region 8 2003 Caddigan Piedmont Region 8 2003 Gross Piedmont Region 8 2003 Mendelsohn Piedmont Region 8 2002 (Vacant) Piedmont Region 9 2003 Kyger Wilson Region 10 2003 Burnette Appalachian Region 13 2003 Hensley Blue Ridge Nominating Committee - 2001 j' ~- REGION MEMBER COUNTY TITLE 1 Laura Belle Gordy Accomack Supervisor 2 J. Grady Martin Brunswick Supervisor 3 Margaret Harris•Manning Powhatan Supervisor 4 Charlotte Y. Humphris Albemarle Supervisor 5 &&& Don "Robin" Sullenberger Highland Supervisor 6 Joanne G. Burkholder Greene Supervisor 7 Robert W. Farmer Caroline Supervisor 8 Katherine K. Hanley Fairfax Supervisor 9 William G. Loope Botetourt Supervisor 10 Joseph Shelley Pulaski Supervisor 11** James H. Jones Tazewell Supervisor 12 Kenneth D. Hensley Scott Supervisor James Campbell • VACo Staff &&& indicates chair *~ indicates vice chair 12/00 Revised 09/21/2001 O ..~ b~ . ^., O U 4~ O ~-~ ~~ 0 .,..., c~ . ~.., 0 c~ .~ .~ .~ v ~+ ~ o v F ^f~ 7 "'~ C .,~ O C3 U 0 z ~'~ ;'~ .-`,-~.~ ~? c-,; Z ~ .~ , r 0 5 ~ ~ o G ~ ;r ~+ bA O an ~. N y .~ N i -1- -~. j AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION 100901-6.c RECONSTITUTING THE REGIONAL COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD FORTHE COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROGRAM AND CONFIRMATION OF COUNTY APPOINTEE A RESOLUTION of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, establishing, by joint action of the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem, the membership of the Court-Community Corrections Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to serve the region composed of those Counties and Cities. WHEREAS, the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem have established and operate the Court- Community Corrections Program, a local pretrial services and community-based probation program established and operated pursuant to the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 1 of Title 9.1 and Article 5 of Chapter 9 of Title 19.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Comprehensive Community-Corrections Act for Local- Responsible Offenders (Virginia Code § 9.1-173 et seq.) and the Virginia Pretrial Services Act (Virginia Code §19.2-152.2 et seq.) require the establishment and appointment of a Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program; and WHEREAS, a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the participating jurisdictions previously has been established in accordance with law, and this Board, in 1 conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which participate in this multijurisdictional program, deems it appropriate to reconstitute the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program, pursuant to the authority granted to local governing bodies under Virginia Code §15.2-1411. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted to this Board by Virginia Code §§15.2-1411, 19.2-152.5, 9.1-178 and the Charter of this City, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program is established. 2. The Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the Cities of Buena Vista, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem are the jurisdictions which participate in the Court-Community Corrections Program. Each of these jurisdictions shall be represented on the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board. The Regional Community Criminal Justice Board shall consist of up to 20 persons, a number established by Virginia Code §9.1-178 and this resolution and by similar resolutions of the governing bodies of each of the other participating jurisdictions. The composition of the Regional Community Justice Board shall at all times comply with all applicable statutes and regulations. Each participating city or county shall have an equal number of appointments. 3. In conjunction with resolutions of appointment adopted or to be adopted by the governing bodies of all participating jurisdictions, this Board, jointly with the other participating jurisdictions, appoints the following persons to the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to represent this governing body, for the terms of years set forth below. Each appointment shall be effective as of July 1, 2001. Subsequent appointments shall be filled according to the bylaws of the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board and in joint 2 concurrence with the participating governing bodies. Because §9.1-178 provides that the Board's membership shall include persons who hold certain positions, this resolution sets out, beside the name of each person, a descriptive title for that person's position or occupation. Name and Title Term Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein 2 Years Judge, Circuit Court Twenty-third Judicial Circuit Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr. 1 Year Judge, General District Court Twenty-third Judicial District Honorable John B. Ferguson 1 Year Judge, Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court Twenty-third Judicial District James C. "Chris" Alderson, Esquire 2 Years Commonwealth Attorney Alleghany County/City of Covington Sheriff George McMillan 3 Years Roanoke City Sheriff's Office Sheriff Gerald Holt 2 Years Roanoke County Sheriffs Office Sheriff Ronnie Sprinkle 1 Year Botetourt County Sheriff's Office Sheriff Roger Surber 3 years City of Salem William H. Cleaveland, Esquire 3 Years Attorney-at-Law Roanoke, Virginia 3 Chief Atlas "Joe" Gaskins 3 Years Chief of Police City of Roanoke Mr. John Higgins 3 Years Superintendent Rockbridge Regional Jail Mrs. Tammy D. Stephenson 3 years County Administrator County of Alleghany Mr. Ned McElwaine 3 years Deputy County Administrator County of Botetourt Mr. John Chambliss 3 years Deputy County Administrator County of Roanoke Mr. Ray Burton Fitzgerald 2 Years Chief Magistrate Twenty-fifth Judicial District Dr. David Smith 1 year Superintendent Bath County Public Schools Ms. Gail Burrus 2 years Director, Counseling Services Blue Ridge Behavioral Health Care Roanoke, Virginia Ms. Nancy Stagner 3 years County of Rockbridge Deputy Mitch Deskins 3 years Craig County Sheriff's Office Patrolman A. J. Panebianco 3 years Buena Vista Police Department 4. This Board, in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which have established the Court-Community Corrections Program, hereby designates and 4 appoints the City of Salem as the administrative and fiscal agent for the program. 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 James T. Phipps, Director, Court-Community Corrections Program John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator James R. t_avinder, Chief of Police Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff 5 ~ ~ 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: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve resolution reconstituting the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program and affirming the County of Roanoke appointees. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,~.~.•,-..-~~~--r SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Mr. Jim Phipps has advised that the General Assembly made changes to the Code of Virginia concerning the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board (RCCJB) which was established in 1995, and is requesting that the Board adopt a resolution to reconstitute the Board and affirm our appointments from Roanoke County. Sheriff Gerald Holt is currently serving atwo-year term as a member of this Board, and Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss is serving athree-year term. STAFF RECOMMENTATION: Staff recommends that the board adopt the resolution reconstituting the RCCJB and affirming our appointees. Respectfully submitted, ~m ~ ~' ohn M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Approved by, .~,w /~~ ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator '~ 1 " ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved ( )Motion by: Denied ( 1 Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) cc: Jim Phipps Church Johnson _ McNamara Minnix _ Nickens U:\My DocumentsUanetUMC\BDREPORT\2001\Bard Report 100901.doc ~~~. .~-~i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION RECONSTITUTING THE REGIONAL COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD FOR THE COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROGRAM AND CONFIRMATION OF ROANOKE COUNTY APPOINTEES A RESOLUTION of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, establishing, by joint action of the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem, the membership of the Court-Community Corrections Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to serve the region composed of those Counties and Cities. WHEREAS, the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the City Councils of the Cities of Buena Vista, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem have established and operate the Court-Community Corrections Program, a local pretrial services and community-based probation program established and operated pursuant to the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 1 of Title 9.1 and Article 5 of Chapter 9 of Title 19.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Comprehensive Community-Corrections Act for Local- Responsible Offenders (Virginia Code § 9.1-173 et seq.) and the Virginia Pretrial Services Act (Virginia Code §19.2-152.2 et seq.) require the establishment and appointment of a Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program; and 1 i ~ ~~ ~~ . .r..` ~~~~ WHEREAS, a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the participating jurisdictions previously has been established in accordance with law, and this Board, in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which participate in this multijurisdictional program, deems it appropriate to reconstitute the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program, pursuant to the authority granted to local governing bodies under Virginia Code §15.2-1411. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted to this Board by Virginia Code §§ 15.2-1411, 19.2-152.5, 9.1-178 and the Charter of this City, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That a Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court-Community Corrections Program is established. 2. The Counties of Alleghany, Bath, Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Rockbridge, and the Cities of Buena Vista, Covington, Lexington, Roanoke and Salem are the jurisdictions which participate in the Court-Community Corrections Program. Each of these jurisdictions shall be represented on the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board. The Regional Community Criminal Justice Board shall consist of up to 20 persons, a number established by Virginia Code §9.1-178 and this resolution and by similar resolutions of the governing bodies of each of the other participating jurisdictions. The composition of the Regional Community Justice Board shall at all times comply with all applicable statutes and regulations. Each participating city or county shall have an equal number of appointments. 3. In conjunction with resolutions of appointment adopted or to be adopted by the governing bodies of all participating jurisdictions, this Board, jointly with the other participating jurisdictions, appoints the following persons to the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board to represent this governing body, for the terms of years set forth below. Each appointment shall be effective as of July 1, 2001. Subsequent appointments shall be filled according to the bylaws of 2 i . ~... r .~-~ the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board and in joint concurrence with the participating governing bodies. Because §9.1-178 provides that the Board's membership shall include persons who hold certain positions, this resolution sets out, beside the name of each person, a descriptive title for that person's position or occupation. Name and Title Term Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein 2 Years Judge, Circuit Court Twenty-third Judicial Circuit Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr. 1 Year Judge, General District Court Twenty-third Judicial District Honorable John B. Ferguson 1 Year Judge, Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court Twenty-third Judicial District James C. "Chris" Alderson, Esquire 2 Years Commonwealth Attorney Alleghany County/City of Covington Sheriff George McMillan 3 Years Roanoke City Sheriff's Office Sheriff Gerald Holt 2 Years Roanoke County Sheriff's Office Sheriff Ronnie Sprinkle 1 Year Botetourt County Sheriff s Office Sheriff Roger Surber 3 years City of Salem William H. Cleaveland, Esquire 3 Years Attorney-at-Law Roanoke, Virginia 3 ~".'~ Chief Atlas "Joe" Gaskins 3 Years Chief of Police City of Roanoke Mr. John Higgins 3 Years Superintendent Rockbridge Regional Jail Mrs. Tammy D. Stephenson 3 years County Administrator County of Alleghany Mr. Ned McElwaine 3 years Deputy County Administrator County of Botetourt Mr. John Chambliss 3 years Assistant County Administrator County of Roanoke Mr. Ray Burton Fitzgerald 2 Years Chief Magistrate Twenty-fifth Judicial District Dr. David Smith 1 vear Superintendent Bath County Public Schools Ms. Gail Burrus 2 years Director, Counseling Services Blue Ridge Behavioral Health Care Roanoke, Virginia Ms. Nancy Stagner 3 years County of Rockbridge Deputy Mitch Deskins 3 years Craig County Sheriff's Office Patrolman A. J. Panebianco 3 years Buena Vista Police Department 4. This Board, in conjunction with the governing bodies of the other jurisdictions which have established the Court-Community Corrections Program, hereby designates and appoints the City of Salem as the administrative and fiscal agent for the program. 4 A-100901-6.d ACTIONF# ~-~ ITEM NUMBER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM Appropriation of a Virginia Commission for the Arts Art Education Technical Assistance Grant COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Virginia Commission for the Arts approved a grant in the amount of $500 for Roanoke County Schools. The grant will be applied towards art educators' professional development conference expenses. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: A check in the amount of $500 will be forwarded to the Roanoke County School System upon completion of the educators' professional development conference. FISCAL IMPACT: None, no local matching required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of the $500 Virginia Commission for the Arts Grant to the Grant Fund. t~,~xs.; xe ~ G, nee Signature Signature Dr. Lorraine Lange Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Superintendent County Administrator Of Instruction ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C Nickens to approve Church _ x Denied ( ) Johnson _ x Received ( ) McNamara- x Referred ( ) Minnix - x - To ( ) Nickens _ x - cc: File Dr. Lorraine Lange, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction Danial Morris, Director, Finance Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board A-100901-6 . e ACTI° # ITEM NUMBER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Appropriation of the 2001-2002 Mentor Teacher Grant COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Virginia Department of Education has awarded $6,370 to Roanoke County Schools to support the mentor teacher program. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The General Assembly appropriated funds to support mentor teacher programs. Funds are allocated on a per new teacher basis with a local resource commitment of 50 percent. FISCAL IMPACT: A local match of 50 percent ($3,185) will be funded within the current operating budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of the $6,370 mentor teacher grant to the school mentor grant fund to be utilized as stated. Signature Dr. Carol Whitaker Associate Director Of Personnel ~~ E~~rN""~ 179 Signature Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to approve Church _ x Denied ( ) Johnson _ x _ Received ( ) McNamara- x Referred ( ) Minnix _ x _ To ( ) Nickens _ x _ cc: File Dr. Carol Whitaker, Associate Director of Personnel Dania) Morris, Director, Finance Dr. Linda Weber, School Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board o~ AOANp,Y~ AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ r :' ~ z v :< ,,a? 1838 APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~ ~~~~J'/!iY 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 NAM E: --~ ~' c. ''t ~c: ~~ l~ ~ ~' ADDRESS: ~y ~ l ~~~~ l ~ e ~ ~~ ~~ , ~ ~:.-~ ~ ~~ ~~ > y~~~ ~ z/C~' S~ PHONE: J Z ~ " ~`~~ ~~~ o~ pOANpK~ AGENDA ITEM NO. ~- ti .r Z o v a ,838 APPEARANCE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE `J'"~~~CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to 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. nize me during the PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ADDRESS: ~(J ~~ ' ~a ~~, ~ PHONE: ~O~~/ ~5 ~' ~3 ~.." GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Unaudited Balance at June 30, 2001 July 24, 2001 Appropriation to the VRFA -Explore Park July 24, 2001 Loan to VRFA -Explore Park Unaudited Balance at October 9, 2001 Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above of General Amount Fund Revenues $7,931,381 6.29% ($100,000) (250,000) $7,581,381 $7,581,381 6.02 $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 Morns Director of Finance Approved B ~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator f-.° ~~ RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2001-2002 Original Budget $100,000. August 28, 2001 Citizen Satisfaction Survey (12,000 September 25, 2001 RV Employers of People with Disabilities Awards (1,000. Balance at October 9, 2001 $87,000. Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance Approved By / ~~~ ~fi~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator FUTURE SCHOOL CAPITAL RESERVE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation ine 23, 1998 Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service ovember 9, 1999 Savings from 1998-1999 debt fund FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service FY 2001-2002 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service Unaudited Balance at October 9, 2001 rued for Future School Operations 2,000,000 (1,219,855) 2,000,000 $670,000.00 1,113,043.00 2,000,000.00 321,772.00 2,000,000.00 780,145.00 495,363.00 (1,804,427) 195,573.00 2,000,000 (465,400) 1,534,600.00 $9,110,496.00 FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation 11, 2000 S W Co Regional Stormwater FY2001-2002 Original budget appropriation 1, 2001 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle Unaudited Balance at October 9, 2001 $1,500,000.00 (290,000.00) 1,500,000.00 (1,858,135.00) 851,865.00 * Of this amount $486,680 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 Appr ved By, ~~~/~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator C~.a~xxt~~ .a~ ~.a~t~.a.~.e OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THItASHER MEMORIAL UNITED METHODIST CHURCH UPON ITS 200' ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, Thrasher Memorial United Methodist Church is celebrating their bicentennial during 2001; and WHEREAS, Thrasher Memorial was begun in the early nineteenth century by Paul and Sallie Thrasher, pioneer Methodists of the Roanoke Valley, who began holding services in their home in 1801; and W1~REAS, Thrasher Memorial is acommunity-minded church with many activities; is an original host church in the Roanoke Valley's Interfaith Hospitality Network, was recently involved in its first Habitat for Humanity house; and sponsors many mission trips; and WHF.ItEAS, Thrasher Memorial held a groundbreaking ceremony in June 2001 for an extensive renovation and expansion as part of its 200` anniversary celebration; and W1~REAS, Thrasher Memorial looks forward to another 200 years of ministry and outreach in the Roanoke Valley and around the world. NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT PROCLAIMED that WE, H. Odell "Fuzzy " Minnix, Chairman, and Supervisor Harry C. Nickens, of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, Roanoke, Virginia, offer congratulations to the congregation and ministers of THRASHER MEMORIAL UNTIED METHODIST CHURCH as they celebrate their 200`s anniversary; and FURTHER express our best wishes for continued service to the people of the Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valle ~~ ,,~ , H. Odell "Fuzzy" ,Chairman ~~ ~~ HaCrry~ .Nickens Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator ,, I , ""~ ..~ !~ C~.a~xxt#~ .~~ ~Z.a~xxta.~.e ~ r~ O~ ROAIVO~F ~ ,~ h y Z G1 1838 DECLARING OCTOBER 11, 2001 AS LIGHTS ON AFTER SCHOOL DAY IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the citizens of the County of Roanoke stand firmly committed to quality After School programs because they: ^ Stimulate children's imaginations and enrich our students' lives; and ^ Provide a safe, friendly learning environment for our kids that boosts their academic achievement; and ^ Support working families by ensuring that their children are safe and productive after the regular school day ends; and ^ Encourage families to become more effective partners in their children's education; and ^ Build stronger communities by involving our students, parents, business leaders, and adult volunteers in the lives of our young people; and WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke has provided significant leadership promoting community involvement in the education and well-being of our youth, grounded in the principle that quality After School programs are a critical link to helping our children become successful adults; and WHEREAS, Lights On After School ; a national celebration of after school programs on October 11, 2001, promotes the critical importance of quality after school programs in the lives of children, their families, and their communities. NOW THEREFORE I, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim October 11, 2001, as LIGHTS ON AFTER SCHOOL DAY and call upon the citizens of the County of Roanoke to assure that every child has access to a safe, friendly place where the lights are on after school; and FURTHER, Roanoke County enthusiastically endorses Lights On After School- and commits our community to engage in innovative after school programs and activities that ensure children are safe and productive when the school day ends. Mary H. Allen, Clerk H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Cna~x~#~ .a~ ~..a~xxta.~.e ,- /'1?- ~ ~ ~~ O~ ROANO~F ~, , L ti ~ Z ~ 7 1838 DECLARING SEPTEMBER 28, 2001 AS VIRGINIA COURT CLERKS' ASSOCIATION DAY IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the Virginia Court Clerks' Association (UCCA) has a membership of 120 Clerks of Circuit Court, together with many Deputy Clerks, throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the VCCA assists in the education and training of its membership throughout the year as well as serving as a lobbying vehicle each year in the Virginia General Assembly; and WI-~REAS, the VCCA is holding its 91S` Annual Convention at the Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center during the weekend of September 28 through 30, 2001; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk Steven A. McGraw is serving as President of the VCCA through September 30, 2001, an office held only once before by a Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk, Mr. C. D. Denit, who served as President of the VCCA from 1916 to 1920. NOW THEREFORE, I, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim September 28, 2001 as VIRGINIA COURT CLERKS' ASSOCIATION DAY in Roanoke County; and FURTHER, on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke County, offer a warm and sincere welcome to the participants of the 91st Annual VCCA Conference, and invite them to take the opportunity to enjoy some of the exciting attractions that our area has to offer. Mary H. Allen, Clerk H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman I~ Ehnen C. Hodge, County Administrator 7 ""~ DAY REPORTING PROGRAM 5929 Cove Road Roanoke, Virginia 24019 (540) 563-4475 (540) 563-4479 -FAX MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia FROM: Sandi Worley, Program Supervisor DATE: September 28, 2001 RE: Quarterly Report for Day Reporting Program for October 9, 2001 meeting PROGRAM PARTICIPATION Month of July Minimum Maximum Average Utilization %* Summer Program 5 6 City of Roanoke County Salem 5.66 Roanoke City 56% Other # of Admissions 0 0 0 0 Daily Avg. # of Participants 4.66 0 1 0 Mont h of August Minimum Maximum Average Utilization %* Day Program 2 5 3.19 64% Evening Program 0 0 0 0% Totals 2 Roanoke County 5 City of Salem 3.19 Roanoke City 32% Other # of Admissions 2 0 0 0 AM/PM 2/0 0 0 0 Daily Avg. # of Participants 3.19 0 .52 0 /11-4 Month of September Minimum Maximum Average Utilization %* Day Program 4 6 4.89 98% Evening Program 0 0 0 0% Totals 4 Roanoke County 6 City of Salem 4.89 Roanoke City 49% Other # of Admissions 2 1 0 0 AM/PM 2/0 1 /0 0/0 0 Daily Avg. # of Participants 4.58 .31 0 0 *100% Utilization equals 10 participants per day (5 in AM and 5 in PM Program) as program budget was determined by needing an average of 9.5 total daily participants. PROGRAM REVENUE CSU July August September Total Roanoke County $ 7,840.00 $ 5,040.00 $ 6,960.00 $ 19,840.00 Roanoke County CSU will not be billed for any services as they made a $231,852.00 contribution to the Program Budget from their VJCCCA grant City of Salem $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 480.00 $ 480.00 Roanoke City $ 1,680.00 $ 880.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,560.00 Other $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Total (wiout c°~r,ty) $ 1,680.00 $ 880.00 $ 480.00 $ 3,040.00 Total (with County) $ 9,520.00 $ 5,920.00 $ 7,440.00 $ 22,880.00 Respectfully Submitted by Sandi Worley Day Reporting Program Supervisor ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~- I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9,-2001 AGENDA ITEM: Joint Work Session with the Library Board to Discuss Bent Mountain Library Renovations COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: I recommend that this request from Bent Mountain go through tht Capital Improvements budget process. There are other library improvements that are far more necessary than this one. BACKGROUND: At the August 14, 2001 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, you asked that we set up a work session with the Library Board to discuss the proposed improvements to the Bent Mountain Library that the community has requested. The work session was originally scheduled for the September 11th meeting, but was postponed due to the events of the day. The Library Board has been invited to come to your Work Session beginning at approximately 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 9th. The Bent Mountain Library expansion project included in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) proposes to add approximately 550 square feet of space to the existing facility. This branch library is attached to the Bent Mountain Elementary School and contains 700 square feet of space. The site is limited in the additional space that can be dedicated and used for non-school purposes to maintain certification for school use. The planned improvement would be within the existing paved traffic pattern and would not be disruptive to the school operation. The CIP includes the projected capital facilities and major equipment needed by the various departments and programs for the next five years. The departmental requests are prioritized by a committee from the County Administration and the document becomes part of our budget process. Based on availability of monies, the Board of Supervisors may choose to fund certain projects from the General Fund, the Capital Fund, the Utility Fund, or from the sale of bonds or other financing mechanisms. It should be remembered that the CIP is only a plan. The fact that a project is listed in a particular fiscal year in the CIP is not a guarantee that funds will be available during that time frame to complete the project. One way to fund projects, new facilities or ones that may need improvements that have been included in the CIP would be to package a bond referendum for the sale of general obligation bonds. Our ,,,, last such bond sale for general government improvements was in 1992 and included $17,990,000 for improvements to schools, Dixie Caverns Landfill, Roads, Parks and Recreation, the Hollins Library, Valleytech Park, Drainage, Stormwater Management, Fire Hydrants, and the purchase of land for a High School Site. The Bent Mountain Library Expansion project is shown in the CIP as priority number five of the seven projects shown for the library (number 39 of 57 overall). An estimate of $89,200 had been included in the FY 2005-06 period, however, none of the library projects are funded at this time. Mr. Harwood from Hill Studio P.C. met with representatives from the Library and the community and developed a concept plan which he estimates could cost $135,000 - $160,000 plus 7% for A/E work. Other funding alternatives have been discussed informally in the past including fund drives within the community, matching grants, etc. Our Parks and Recreation Department has administered their Capital Improvement Incentive Fund which allows community groups to apply for shared funding of up to 500 of the project and a maximum of $10,000 to attain needed equipment. This fund uses approximately $50,000 per year. We have not, however, chosen to use this model for major improvements because some communities or groups have significantly better opportunities for raising large sums of money. The budgetary process seems to provide the most equity in planning for these improvements. The Library Board is responsible for working with the Library Director to establish policy, oversee the provision of public library services, and to plan for the types of programs, facilities, and services that are needed within the communities. They recommend budgets to the Governing Body, but do not have the ability to generate revenues for capital projects or operations. The Governing Body has the ultimate authority for approving budgets, authorizing bonds or other financial means for funding facilities, and determining the level of service that can be afforded by the community. Together, these boards are able to see the needs at the technical and local level as well as the broad perspective of the whole community including the diverse level of services that we provide as a County. The following series of attachments should help in understanding the steps that have already been taken to recognize the specific project of the Bent Mountain Library expansion: Attachment A Information from Paul Mahoney from the August 14 Board of Supervisors meeting. Attachment B-1 Summary of the Capital Improvement Program approved as part of the FY 2001-02 Budget. Attachment B-2 Details of the Library projects from the CIP. Attachment B-3 General Instructions for preparing CIP request. Attachment B-4 Ranking of all projects in the FY 2001-02 CIP. ~-- I Attachment C Library Statistics. Attachment D Parks and Recreation Capital Incentive Program. Attachment E Outline of the 1992 Bond Referendum. Attachment F Rendering and floor plan for the Bent Mountain Library as designed by-Hill Studio. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff suggests that this work session be used by the two Boards to discuss the needs of the entire library system. Staff further suggests that consideration could be given to authorizing a bond referendum to finance capital improvements not otherwise funded within the budget process. Respectfully submitted, Approv d by, _' ~~~ ~ ohn M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Attachments ACTION Motion by: cc Diana Rosapepe, Library Board Ms. Joan Carver Brent Robertson, Library Director Budget Director VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens brlibwksess.100901.doc Attachment A ACTION N0. i/'"r ITEM N0. 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: REPORT ON BENT MOUNTAIN LIBRARY ADDITION, CITIZEN FUND RAISING INITIATIVE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Supervisor McNamara requeste initiated fund-raising efforts for library. This report discusses actions. d a report on the status of citizen- the expansion of the Bent Mountain this initiative and further County BACKGROUND: Earlier this year County staff was approached by Mrs. 3oan Carver, a citizen residing on Bent Mountain, who proposed a ,plan for the construction of a 550 sq. ft. addition to the Bent Mountain Library to be funded by community fund-raising efforts. Ms. Carver requested a letter from the County Attorney's office that could be given to prospective donors stating that any donation would be deductible from the donor's individual income tax return as a charitable deduction. Before issuing such a letter I suggested several preliminary actions. Attached is a copy of my letter dated March 22, 2001 to Ms. Carver. This report summarizes those. actions. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: First I recommended that Ms. Carver meet with the School Board Construction Committee to secure its approval of this concept. Since the proposed expansion is located on property of the School Board, its approval is necessary. I am advised that the School Board Construction Committee reviewed this proposal in April, 2001, and generally approved the concept, but indicated that the School Board would not provide any capital or operational funding. Next I recommended that the Library Board be given an opportunity to review and comment upon these plans. The Library Board supports active citizen involvement in the library system and wants to encourage these efforts. However, it expressed two concerns: (i) the overall needs of the system, and how this expansion meshes with the priorities identified in the approved Capital Improvements Plan (CIP), and (ii) that G:\ATTORNEY\PMM\AGENDA\BentMtnLibrary.rpt.dat l of ~~~ any donation of funds be unencumbered (i.e, restrictions or limitations on the use of donated funds may unduly restrict flexibility or cause unnecessary and costly administrative or management problems). With respect to fund-raising and donations, I recommended that her group create a tax exempt organization under Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, and that any donations be given to the Treasurer of Roanoke County. She had advised me that she had been collecting donations and depositing them in an account with the Bank of Floyd. I had expressed concerns that these actions may result in tax deductibility problems for the donors. Finally I recommended that she seek the approval of the Board of Supervisors before commencing fund-raising activities. In consideration of the significant cost estimates for this expansion ($89,200 in the CIP, $135,000-$160,000 plus 7~ A&E estimates from Hill & Associates), the lack of any matching fund program, the relative low ranking of this project in the CIP, and the long lead time for approval, procurement, design and construction, Board concurrence should be secured before proceeding. The County welcomes citizen initiatives to assist it in the development of capital assets. The Board would gladly accept this project if 100 of the construction costs were collected and donated. The success of the sports booster club projects in expanding facilities in County parks is a testament to our citizens and the sense of community in Roanoke County. Absent full funding the Board will have to balance competing demands for services and capital projects among the CIP priorities with limited budget resources. I recommend that the Board review this proposal in the context of its adopted CIP and capital budget; review the recommendations of the School Board Construction Committee and Library Board; and consider approval of this expansion before Ms. Carver commences her fund raising efforts. Respectfully submitted, ~~- rn. 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\HentMtnLibrary.rpt.dat 2 ` PORN k F ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ _o - i 7838 PAUL M. MAHONEY COUNTY A7.1'ORNEY (540) 772-2067 t ~ ' °' ~or~xxt~ zx~ ~xx~aa.~.ae OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY . P.O. BOX 29800. 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 JOSEPH B. OBENSHAIN FAX ($40) 772-2089 SENIOR ASSI5TANT COUNTY ATTORNEY VICKIE L. F~'UFFMAN SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY March 22, 2001 (s4o) 772-2o7T Mrs. Joan Carver 8469 Willett Lane Bent Mountain, Virginia 24059 Re: Bent Mountain Library addition Dear Mrs. Carver: On Tuesday, March 20, 2001, Roanoke County and Roanoke Count~~ School Board representatives (John Chambliss, Diana Rosapepe, John Murphy, Richard Flora and n met with you to discuss your construction and fund-raising plans for an addition to the Bent,Mountain Library, which is located in the Bent Mountain Elementary School. On behalf of the Bent Mountain tiVo~en's Club, you propose to e~~pand the Bent Mountain Library Branch approximately 6 SO square feet. This expansion is included in the County's adopted CIP, and total cost in FY 2004-0~ is estimated to be $89,200. Mr. Harwood of Hill & Associates estimates these costs to be in the range of S13~,000- 160,000, plus 7% for A&E. I recommended that your organization meet with the School B oard Construction Committee on April 10, 2001 to secure its approval of this concept. As you are aware, this library branch is located on School Board property. There can be no adverse impact on school uses or operations. Mr. Flora emphasized that there be no expectations that the School Board provide any funds (capital or operation) for thisiproject. Next I recommend that your organization meet with the Library Board on April ? ~, 2001 to discuss these plans with it, and seek its approval. . Finally, I recommend that after these bodies approve these plans, then your organization seek the approval of the Board of Supervisors for this project. I recommend that these approvals in concept occur prior to the commencement.of any fund-raising. I believe that the Board would be willing to accept and approve this project if 100% of the construction costs were collected. Virithout full funding the Board will have to balance competing demands for limited budget resources, and to determine priorities among various CIP projects. Mrs. Joan Carver ` March 22, 2001 Page 2 i d, Assuming that these various approvals are accomplished, then I could provide you with a letter to assist your organization in its fund-raising efforts. This letter will address the County's tax exempt status and the opportunity for donations to the County for this project to be eligible for individual income tax deductions. My office has issued similar letters in the past, most recently for the greenway project. Generally these donations must be made directly to the County to be eligible for any deduction. . I encouraged you to establish a tax exempt organization under Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code to accept and control these donations, and to explore the tax exempt status of the tit'omen's Club to determine if it can serve as a vehicle for accepting these donations. I caution you that collecting donations through the Bank of Floyd will not make these amounts eligible for income tax deductibility. The County cannot waive either State or local licensing fees or building permit fees for this project. If your organization is considering a ra$le as p art of your fund-raising, then I recommend that you secure the appropriate permits from the Commonwealth of Virginia. Finally I believe that it will be necessary to consider the possibility that your organization will be unable to collect the estimated construction costs for this addition. Will the expectations of the citizens or donors be frustrated if sufSicient funds are notcollected? The School Board (through the P.T.A.s) and the County (through its Parks and Recreation Department) have matching fund programs; however, these are Limited in their size and scope, and are subject to uniform, consistent policies. Neither program has been used to fund a capital project of this size and cost, nor to circumvent existing public priorities. I look forward to working with you on this project. ~ our organization has made a generous of er, and on behalf of Roanoke County, I wish to express my appreciation for your hard work and interest in this project.. Very truly yours, ~~ Paul M. Mahoney Roanoke County Attorney Cc: Board of Supervisors Eimer C. Hodge Richard Flora 4 John Chambliss Diana Rosapepe July 16, 2001 "" Joan Carver 8469 Willett Lane Bent Mountain, VA 24059 Dear Mrs. Carver: On behalf of the members of the Board of Trustees, I would h~ce to thank you and your colleagues, Ms. Nance and Ms. Kroschalis, for meeting with us to explain your plans for a fund raising campaign on behalf of the Bent Mountain Library. It is always encouraging to find citizens who value their library and who aze willing to invest both time and effort on its behalf. As Board members, we too, shaze your interest in the welfare of the library. As we explained in our meeting, we have given extensive and repeated consideration to the needs of the entire system, including an expansion at Bent Mountain. We have expressed our support for it and other construction or renovation needs by endorsing the library's Capital Improvements Projects [CIP]. We believe that the endorsement of the CIP is the proper course of action for the Boazd of Trustees to take. It is not within our jurisdiction to approve, endorse, or promote a fund raising campaign by any outside individual or group. Such a decision and all related questions more rightly remain with the Board of Supervisors and should be directed to them. We have u.,a,,;,,,ously decided, therefore, that it would be inappropriate for our Boazd to involve itself in any citizen's plans for raising funds for, the library, beyond reiterating our position that any donations or bequests made to the library should be free from contingencies that preempt the responsibilities of the Library Director and/or staff. Again, I would Iike to express the Board's appreciation for your presentation and our best wishes for your fund raising efforts. . Sincerely, Norma Jean Petezs Chair Attachment B-1 ' ~ I ~ ° ° ° 1 >: ~ ° ~ ° p i G O N N i i o 0 io jo i ° lo io ' ~ io ° io o ' 0 o ° ° Io ° 0 0 o 0 ° g 0 o 'o 0 0 0 ~ g 0 ° ~o o o o o j o o o o o i o o o g 0 0 0 o h p 0 u1 0 O _ 0 ~ 0 O 0 O 0 'n _ ~G co O ~n O _ `C r ~ v _ O O n 0 • O 0 O O • vi O~ ~ O O O O O O b F V ~ .-. V1 N M O N -- M , cD h vl n O t` - n n t O V1 v1 00 v1 V1 O 1+1 O O O: O O O^ N ~y N I 1~ O b n .-. b ~ O O O O D ~ O O C O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O O O O ~ O O -- '~ N N ~y i N N ^ ~. O O O O pO S O O O O ~ pp O O O O 0 ^ O 0~ O O O ~j O O O O O ^ O ~ -- '~ N n a N N ^ ~, O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O ~ O O O O O O V1 y ~O O O O O O O O O O O O v G1 >. •.:7+ ° C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 p o ~ O N 0 O 0 p 0 ~ 0 p 0 ^ ^ it c I I C W °o Io °o ° °o ° ~ g o ~ o ° ° ° > •o .°'• ~n 4 o o f 0 Io 0 o o 0 0 o 0 0l 0 0 oIo o 0 0 o 0 0 o o 0 S o o c y „ ~ ~ ~ ~ o v-, o , _. o o j o o ~ o o o a N N ^ ~ •.. W x~ I I o C/~ ,D ° ' o~ ° t o °° ' o i o I 0 o ~ 0 0 ofo ° g ° o ° ~ o 0 0 ° 0 ° ~~. o ° ~ o_ I _ o l ~ o ' o o _ j i o S g i o_ o p ~ ~.,~ ~ C O hI O O 1 0 v1 O C v f n ~ v O O ~ O O O O O O O v1 O O a ~ N O O O N i I I r• ^ ~; N ^ N m O i ?~ N a ~ t ~ r.+ ~ „ o C o o I o o lo ;oi o o g 0 o 0 lo~ 0 0 o o g 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U M ~? o o~ o 0 . o 0 oI 0 o 0 o I = o o 0 0 0 •~: o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 i 0 a 0 o 0 N o i v, oI o ~n i .- ~n , ~o o ! 0 0 0 0 -- v r ~ o tr v ~ O N M i i!1 N •--~ i ^ _ op ^ ry n n try n ~. °o °o °o °o '-r 4 ~ o! o 0 0 eC o ~ °o vii h N ~ ~ n ti a ea I U ~ S1 o S~ o S ° o ° OD C O O O O p O~ N p O o O L ~p O t~ M r~ Q~ ^~ °' L v ~ M d: G ~ d C I tl Q O C O p E ¢~ ~ C Y ~ y a S •o S ,o S .o 2 `I ~ ~ x a m € y c H c :o 0o c s u o ~ m c ~ x o • ° o ~ d = • _ ~ •° ~ U ~ = a ~ ~ ~ O c E d ~ - c ~ d E ~ ~ ~ m W l a m i v p e ~ ~ CD m c i° ' 4 ` A (~ ~ v w ~ E y ~ ~ ; ~ Q ~ ~ ~ L ~ u a U c ~ 3 etl ~ d u 3 c r . ~ F ~ CL~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ H >. C rn A a y c rn ~ N1 L E ~ ~ v~ o .. :; c ~ m E S U ~ ~ E ~ ~ N ~ .u ~ c o •o ~ v ~ o d ~ v ~ I 3 d C7 °' o ~ E c c o ~ •c ~° ~ o Ueo c~i~ ~ ~ •o L > i N ~ Y, c I ~ j •E G x ~ o a °~ ~' ~ °' E d m a ° U u 'E •° ¢ c • °~ w A- A d ~ I c ° ~ R >_ . . •o V > al a / ° ~ ~ o ~ ~ u •o I _ , C ~ E-n V I L I C t~ol Y ,~ O V ~ I y~>7 y W a Y ~ G3. x ~ ~ ~ m ~ i m E a°I ' p = ~ •~ ~ ~ o ~ N n. ° c ~ -- o e 3 d ~ ~ c ~ c ~ ~ c o a ~, E c o .- > ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ cL C7 V ~ ~n I cn ~ d> ~, ,. z ~ m ~n > a a c m a x m ~ x D U ~ I I, ~ I ~ ~ I ~~ j '^ ° 8 '>7 N O O N nl O p ~ ~' e a p O~ 00 a ~ U~ I I I G ~ r o0 °o j o y °o ~ °o ~ °o I °o o o $ °O o 00 D o n °o °0 0 0 °o °o o S g ~ ~ N ~D O V; N ~ V' N U O^ O O O N v^ - N -~ O O O vl 0? V1 O C O O CQ y ~ 0~ 1 00 ct ~ 00 ! I~ i Vl I ~ O ~ I 00 ~ V1 V} vl ^1 V1 O~ N V'1 M ~ 00 N D\ 00 '~Y Vj D\ O r V'1 D\ 7 N U M Ki V D\ vl D; V1 O C V'1 O O 00 O O b a ~ F V ~ N ~ I W N ( •°, ~ ~ ••• N •~• Vl M ~D N - - M ~C M C N ~D O n Li. p I I O U O a ~ , N p I Vl V1 ~o ~1 M1 b ~ h w 00 'I O O O O O O OQ " O O O N W N O vi ~ O N ~ O "~ ~ b 1 V 1 N ~ C O ~ ~ I 1 0 0 0 O ~ L ~ ~ ~ N i W vl `O v'~ ~ O N O ~i ^' 7 ar V1 p V1 I ~O N V '1 N W 'O N ry C. c x W ~o ~n °o o °o n~ °o rn o e °o 0 °o 0 ° g °o o °0 0 0 0 °o 0 a+ ~ C I ~~ hl: ..+ R ~ l ~~ v1 N ~ N '7 N QO C N pi i Mi h ti N ` N W i O; O. O~ 0 0 o O O O o g O ol O o OI OI O ~n O 8 O ° O o O ° O o O 0 O oI O o O o O ! ~n l v l ~ v ~, o o ~n o o l r o c _ I~ ri I'v1i 00 O! M i ( ^"i h N N' v1 M 1 _I [~ 00 C+ O O+ ~O • a 00 O O - I~ N D\ N m d' M Vl N O O1 N O 1 M 1 M O N O V1 N N "~1 `O p ~ Vl , v1 j .--. i I N - ," N .- M ~ ^i N I i i I ~I I '~I p O I ~~ O O O ve O O i 0 ~n O O N r O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O D O O M i I, ~~ O ~ O n v'^ - vi O O O O O~ v~ 0 0 0 h O N I I ~p I C ! I j I b ~ O M W O~ N I v1 O l O r O r ~ N O •-~ ~ V' '7 M O~ Vl vi O O N O O ~ h p I W ~t M M r M ' p N I I ro ' N o I it I' ~ , i ~ N I I I ~ I I 00 I i O O pO O I O O O O L C ,0 C yj r !n M 1I'1 r h ao a ri I i j ~ a ~ c ,q = •C h c o . y f , I ~ O ~' ~ c w • G a I ~ G ~ ~ p o ~ ••LDr >< y Y OCI m ~ s A K . Z n ` ~ a ~ I c ~ u ~ ~ pa G ~ d ' J I i I . ~o r, x 1 ao ~ y ~ ~ ~ cc ~~ ~ ~ ~ j G o ~ > U ~ ca ~ 1~ ~ 1 0. I U ~ t _p ? u a ~ v c 1 ~ 0. t o o U . d •~ ` ~ H iy v h u u • o ~ l m ; ' -~ ' .L ~ ~! I I ~ m ~ L ~ ~ ' m O '~ a d a~ O cn a~ 'E ~' . a, X U U `o `'-' y ~ C ~ Y ~ c s 0. ~ x O. ~ .C °' Q+ ~ c y ~ a , y ~ d a. U U ~ v 0~ tl 4 i RB I c i A 7 > V O O Q ~ d ~ a• ~ ~ ~ Y Y ~ U O ~L ~ ~ id CL ~ y I ca ~ `' ~ c v 1 o d c c ~ , 0. ~ c m 0. w ~ c c . .. R' c ~ + a o+ l ~ ! $ ; > i ~ o c I f ' c ~~ ~ o ~ a o ~ n . s o U 3 ~ ~ ~ o ~ o E y_ y A •~ ~ -m > . c , x ~ ,~ ~ E ~° c •a c Y ~ 6 I o ~ ` a v i~ !V , > i a 'm ? la ~ . ~ U Z vi C7 ~m .., ~~ C7 ~ 3 > vi U m rn a ~ a w U o ~ j i I I ~° 7 I I ' 1 + 7 N • C o ~ I Q , ~ ~ H i o ig o ~ : ~ ~ ° Is ° ° s ~o o a ~p ~, ! o ~, 0 0 0 o I o 0 0 0 0 0 n i y C N h I vi I r~7 ~ O a0 ~ C U) Q ~p 0 v7 0 v1 0 h 0 O 0 O 0 X17 v1 00 b ~p C V ~ F b b ~D W b N ~ 7 e+7 N O~ a N tit 1/' ~ !f N b N 1 ~ b ' 1017 O .--~ ~. v n O^ Q 00 69 ~ 00 47 pp ~ ~ ~ `~ n n I O O T I ~ ~ M I - ~ ~ sri ~ ~ °o 00 00 0~0 i `o v i ~ ~ m vOi ° vn7 I C N ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ a x ~ ~ ~ ~ °o o °o °o ono i ~ O 0 0 0 o e~ ~ ~ I • N 1 O " W ~ u5 ' ~ ~ O 0 0 0 0 aD C M M O O ) O O O tq ' O ~ ~p b n l N I~ O ~ h O N I '_ ~, O _ i9 O O O O et O h b O O pOp ; O O \O ~ ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ 0 0 O 0 0 V O 0 N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ N O O ~ 0 G 'V b '/1 h N ~ ~ O fA N ' ' I O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O ~n ~ o v7 0 0 0 0 0 n O N N n N~ Vl 00 V'1 ~ n O . r N i \ Nj V1 ~ O p O S O O O O L C O O O O O O N p ;,p 0 0 O ~ N O ~ N N L = t~7 vl ~. y7 y O Q y ~D -0 .p ~ ~ i y % I ~ ~" `-~ \l /+ 4 i ~ d • f 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' c a a I ~ ca a c '~ _ == U U o ~ c ~ ~ ,y Q ci C ~ ~ E °7 :~ T U E ~ L u L Y c i 'O C R'~ of ~ 3 ~I ~~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ i :o °' o ~ ~ ~ S ~ F. y , 'c ~ ~ y H ... ~ ~ O d ~pI ~ j W rl ~ - U U W C7 Z c% ~ A a i ~ a D- I Attachment B-2 o- _~ ~°~ ,. _ .. ~ ~ yL~ N sNa" ~k ~~~ i Library 419 Library Renovation and Expansion Bent Mountain Branch Renovation Glenvar Branch Expansion Masons Cove Branch Library Mount Pleasant Branch Library Library Security System Vinton Branch & Parking Lot Improvement -- -~ 419 Library Renovation and Expansion Prior Estimated Ex enditures by Fiscal Year Total Cost Approved Funding 200]-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Cost FY 02-06 Beyond 2006 $1,074,000 $1,515,00 $2,589,000 O crating Costs $16,800 $34,600 $35,300 $86,700 Description: A renovated and expanded 419 Library will serve as the regional research library for the majority of the residents of the Cave Spring and Windsor Hills Districts. The redesign of the existing facility will be extensive and include up to 11,500 square feet of expansion. This project will provide additional readers' and work/study seats, update technological infrastructure, and improve the functional layout of the current building. Instructional and programming space, as well as facilities for intensive research, will be improved and expanded. New space will be included to support larger scale lectures, performances, and cultural activities. The project will also feature added parking space and improvements for vehicular access and parking lot circulation. Areas that support system wide automation and technical processing functions will be enlarged and extensively redesigned. Justification: Over 66% of the 419 Library is now over 25 years old and has never been substantially improved. Neither the original structure, nor the 1988 addition and renovation, are adequate to meet today's traffic levels and growing business demands. Rlanned auditorium and arts display space will provide a suitable venue for cultural and artistic programs and activities within the county; it will also permit the library to overcome seating and stage limitations for lectures and children's programs. This facility also has increasing difficulties with safety issues related to parking lot traffic and the means of entrance and egress to the lot. The current level of facility use, with over 315,000 visitors, and more than 380,000 circulation transactions per year, has placed considerable stress on the building. The 419 Library is one of the most heavily used library facilities in Southwest Virginia, but it is substantially smaller than similar libraries in Bedford, Lynchburg, and Roanoke City. The building fails to meet state guidelines for gross square footage, particularly in the children's area. This project, if completed within a reasonable time, will delay the need for the construction of a community branch elsewhere in the southwest area of the county. The addition of a new community branch would require support of up to $200,000 per year in operating costs, while increased costs for the 419 expansion will be less than $40,000 per year. This plan is also presented as an alternative to the replacement of the current structure with a completely new building. Such a project would cost over $4 million. The recent acquisition of additional property contiguous with the current site allows the expansion and renovation of the existing building to be designed on a basis that will permit acost- effective resolution of numerous functional and spatial deployment problems. Funding Sources: Bond issue or general operating. revenues. Operating Budget Impact: Increased maintenance and utility costs, as well as some small increases in part-time staffing. Total increases would average approximately $35,000 per year. 34 Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations: The Community Plan, p. 51-52, 168, supports this project. It is also included in the Library's Five Year Plan, and it is a top priority selected by the Citizens Review Team (1997). It is also needed to meet the Library of Virginia's standards for facilities. Bent Mountain Branch Expansion Prior Estimated Ex enditures by Fiscal Year Total Cost Approved Funding 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-OS 2005-06 Cost FY 02-06 Beyond 2006 $89,200 $89,200 Operating Costs $825 $850 $1,675 Description: This project will expand the current Bent Mountain Branch with an addition of up to 550 square feet, and include some minor renovations. The new space will house children's materials, allow more open space for programs, and provide additional seating. Justification: The Bent Mountain Branch has a collection that is rapidly approaching the shelving limits of the current building, and additional space is needed to house these materials. Well-attended programs are conducted in restricted, inadequate space. A shortage of seating has become more critical with the introduction of access to remote resources. There is room for only one public web access station, and an expanded facility would be designed to increase the number of access units for the public. The current building, with less than 1,000 sq. ft. of total space, is too small given the growth in service activity levels over the past decade, with circulation growing from 6,685 items in 1990 to 10,432 items in FY 99/00. Funding Sources: General operating revenues. Operating Budget Impact: Increased maintenance and utility costs should total less than $900 per year. Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations: This project is listed on page 133 of the Community Plan. 35 Glenvar Branch Expansion. Prior Estimated Expenditures b Fiscal Year Total Cost Approved Fundin 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-OS 2005-06 Cost FY 02-06 Beyond 2006 $503,500 $353,700 $857,200 Operatin Costs $3,225 $11,250 $16,050 $16,370 $46,895 Description: This project will transform the Glenvar Branch from a community library into a regional reference library, placing it in the same size and capability range with the county's other regional libraries at Hollins, Vinton, and 419. The expanded facility will also include system wide archival storage space and a processing center for donated materials. The project includes the addition of 4,300 square feet and the renovation of the existing 5,100 square feet of space. The expanded library will offer an enlarged general stack area, an enhanced reference area, increased work/study seating, and suitable space for access to electronic services. Improved meeting space and a better designed, more open children's services area will also be included in this project. Worn and outdated finishes and fixtures will be upgraded in the renovation of the current public areas of the building. Justification: After over twenty years of steady use, substantial improvements and expansion are warranted at the Glenvar Branch. With ~an average of over 50,000 visitors per year this facility needs to be enlarged. Use of the facility has outgrown its current space, and the stack areas are filled to capacity with books often being stored on the floor or in boxes. The cramped and crowded public areas of the building do not effectively support the service demands currently placed on them. Growing demand for reference and electronic services are difficult to meet due to the physical limitations of the facility. Lighting fails to meet current standards, and electrical and automation infrastructure upgrades are needed to support current equipment as well as future needs. The Glenvar expansion will also provide space to help meet some important system wide needs by including an appropriately designed controlled archival storage center and processing and treatment work space for donated materials. Funding Sources: Bond issue or general operating revenues. Operating Budget Impact: The enlarged building will need increased support for utility and maintenance costs at approximately $6,450 per year. Also, ideally, additional part-time staff would be added at $9,600 annually, to assist in delivering services and maintaining security for the larger public service area. Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations: A The Community Plan, p. 52 and 148, supports this project. Expansion of the Glenvar Branch is also supported by the Library of Virginia's standards for library facilities, and it is one of the primary capital priorities of the Citizens Review Team (1997) 36 Library Security System d-f Prior E stimated Ex endituces by Fiscal Year Total Cost Approved Fundin 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Cost FY 02-06 Beyond 2006 $115,900 $115,900 Operating Costs $12,800 $13,200 $13,600 $39,600 Description: An electronic article surveillance (EAS) system would be installed at Hollins, Glenvar, Vinton, and 419 to protect against theft of materials from library collections.. These systems provide an audio warning when someone attempts to exit a building or area with items that have not been properly scanned and cleared for checkout. An EAS system would also be incorporated into a customer self- charging program, providing the Library with the protective measures needed to offer and operate this service. Justification: EAS systems are needed in the larger facilities to reduce collection loss levels. The rate of loss appears to have been increasing in recent years, and long-range tracking studies will provide additional data and annual cost assessments. EAS systems offer limited protection against collection loss, but they generally do have some impact in reducing theft. In addition to protecting against general losses, an EAS system is a prerequisite for a properly functioning customer self-charging system. Without an EAS system it is difficult to regulate aself-charging system, and unaccounted charges would escalate to disturbing levels. Self-charging systems offer customers many of the same conveniences associated with ATMs and similar retail self-service operations. These systems would also free library staff from some of their circulation desk work and allow them to spend more time helping customers with reference and research inquiries. Funding Sources: General operating revenue. Operating Budget Impact: Continuing operational costs will include $6,300 per year for magnetic detection strips and maintenance; and $6,500 per year for strip/item processing. Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations: This project is supported by page 52 of the Community Plan and is included in the Library's Five Year Plan. 37 e Masons Cove Branch Library Prior Estimated Expenditures by Fiscal Year Total Cost Cost Beyond Approved 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-OS 2005-06 FY 02-06 2006 Funding $655,900 $655,900 Operating Costs $43,450 $43,450 Description: This project will provide a community branch library of 3,500 square feet with 15 parking spaces. It will bring county library services to a number of citizens who are currently underserved or who use the Salem Library, and it will also replace the book station now located in the Catawba Community Center. The branch will include stack space, a reading area, and 12 to 15 work/study seats. A programming area for groups of up to 20 will also be included. This library will be designed to meet the popular reading, ready reference, and elementary level homework and research needs of the citizens who live in the areas served by Mason's Cove School. Justification: Many of the residents of the Mason's Cove area must rely on the Salem Library for library services, and services offered at the Catawba Book Station are rudimentary and irregular. The book station is a largely voluntary operation and it does not have a phone and is not linked to the automated system; it has substandard shelving and a collection of donated books. The proposed prof ect would provide basic library services to residents of the area and make those services readily accessible. Funding Sources: Bond issue or general operating revenues. Operating Budget Impact: Operation of a new branch would require additional funding of $25,700 for personnel and $17,750 for maintenance, utilities, and general operating costs. Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations: This project is consistent with the Community Plan, page 52. Mount Pleasant Branch Library Prior Estimated Ex enditures b Fiscal Year Total Cost Approved Fundin 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Cost FY 02-06 Beyond 2006 $584,400 $584,400 Operating Costs $23,850 $24,330 $24,800 $25,300 $98,280 Description: The current 529 square foot Mt. Pleasant Branch is a one-room operation located inside of the Mount Pleasant Elementary School. This project would replace the current facility with a 3,500 square foot building. There are several options regarding the location of a new facility. It could be located as an independent detached building on the school grounds, or it could be attached to the school building in 38 «pY (}'r a manner similar to the Bent Mountain Branch. Staff, however, recommend that the new building be located at a site on, or visible from, Route 116. The new branch library will include stack space to accommodate general reading, adult nonfiction, and juvenile collections. It would include approximately 12 to 15 work/study seats and areas designed for the access and use of modern technology. A programming and meeting area for small groups would also be offered. Justification: Crowded conditions at Mt. Pleasant School have resulted in a situation where the school utilizes the library as an instructional space during the school day, thereby limiting the schedule of library operations. Additional problems, such as conflicting furnishings needs and security issues, have compromised library operations. The current space is too restricted to support the size and type of collection, as well as the basic library services, which the community needs. State standards indicate the current branch is too small by a measure of 1,845 sq. ft., and projected population growth indicates a 2,000 sq. ft. deficit by the year 2010. Mt. Pleasant is an area experiencing considerable residential growth and library services and facilities need to be upgraded to meet the needs of this growing population. Selection of a site for a new and enlarged facility will be an issue. The staff, as noted above, would prefer a site located on Route 116. Such a location would improve access and visibility, and promote increased use of the branch. Anew site would also avoid some of the security and control issues which arise when public library operations are located on school grounds. A branch library located on Route 116 could also be a possible candidate for a joint project with Franklin County. Funding Sources: Bond issue. Operating Budget Impact: Budget impact would include increased personnel costs of $16,100 per year, and increased operational, maintenance, and utilities costs of $7,750 annually. Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations.: Supported in the Roanoke County Community Plan, pages 52, 159, and 160. The current building fails to meet the Library of Virginia's standards for a public library facility. Expansion and replacement of the Mt. Pleasant Branch was a top priority of the Library's Citizen Review Team (1997). Vinton Branch & Parking Lot Improvement Prior Estimated Ex enditures b Fiscal Year Total Cost Approved Fundin 2001-2002 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Cost FY OZ-06 Beyond 2006 $66,000 $135,400 $201,400 Operatin Costs $1,260 $1,260 $1,300 $1,300 $5,120 Description: This prof ect will expand the number of parking spaces at Vinton Library to a total of 30 spaces. Although State Library standards indica#e a need for a minimum of 45 spaces, only a limited amount of land is available for the needed expansion. An agreement with the Town of Vinton must be reached on the use of the needed land. This project will place the parking expansion adjacent to current parking parallel to Meadow Street, and a currently placed exit from the War Memorial 39 r roe would bisect the parking area. The project would also provide for some minor renovations P P m' and refurbishment of the Vinton Branch's interior as well as the addition of a modest-sized instructional area. This would be the first major refurbishment of the branch in seventeen years. Justification: The 15 parking spaces at Vinton do not meet the County's minimum requirements for this type of facility (one space/300 sq. ft.). It also fails to meet state standards. Usage levels, with over 115,000 visitors per year, have increased substantially in the recent past. Inadequate parking represents a substantial barrier to access and prevents the County and the community from realizing the full potential of the Vinton Library" building, collection, and services. Action is needed to correct this situation and make it easier for the community to use the library. The minor renovations and refurbishment are needed to replace worn finishes and furnishings, particularly in the reading area and the meeting room. A small expansion and renovation of some current space would allow the library to offer expanded instructional activities and educational programs. Funding Sources: General operating revenue. Operating Budget Impact: Funding of up to $1,300 per year will be required to operate additional lighting in the expanded parking lot and to maintain improvements to the building. Conformance With Plans, Policies, and Legal Obligations: This project is supported on page 164 of the Community Plan. Improvements are also needed to met the Library of Virginia's standards for facilities. 40 Attachment B-3 ~-M General CIP Information Over the next few months, the previous year's CIP will be updated for the five-year period beginning in FY 2001-2002. Using the instructions contained in this packet, and the forms provided via Intranet, departments are asked to prepare the project submissions for potential funding. Submissions are due to the budget department by December 1, 2000. After an initial review of the projects, budget staff will work with individual departments to ensure that projects are in final format before they are submitted to the ranking committee for prioritization in January of 2001. What qualifies as a capital project for the CIP? For the purposes of the CIP, a capital project is defined as: • A tangible asset that has a useful life of at least 5 years. • A tangible asset that costs at least $25,000. This can include items such as: • Major repairs • Reconstruction or replacement of capital items such as buildings or equipment • New construction or development • Property acquisition • Equipment acquisition Any item/project that individually meets these two criteria maybe submitted as a capital project for inclusion in the CIP. What DOES NoT qualify as a capital project for the CIP? Some items will not be considered for inclusion in the CIP: • Costs from two or more projects/items that individually cost less than $25,000 may not be aggregated to produce a single project. • Vehicles are no longer considered CIP capital projects. Vehicles are to be included in the addback process and as part of the vehicle replacement policy. • Normal operating expenditures (salaries, routine operational needs). • Routine maintenance and repair. Items that do not meet the criteria of a capital project should be submitted during the Annual Operating Budget process as additional funding requests. Attachment B-4 Roanoke County CIP Prioritization Committee Preliminary Project Ranking for FY 2002-2006 Total Project Score Regional Stormwater Management/NPDES 343 Roanoke County/Salem Jail Renovations 250 Center for Research and Technology 246 Sewer Repair/Replacement 244 GIS Phase II Integration 242 Cresthill I 233 VDOT Revenue Sharing -Road Improvements 224 Network Fire and Rescue Facilities 219 419 Library Renovation/Expansion 214 Castle Rock Lower 214 Top 10 Mobile Data Terminals 211 North Water Transmission Line 210 Site Development -McDonald Farm 207 Hanging Rock Public Safety Center 204 Upgrade/Replace Paging Capabilities 200 Exit 146 North County 200 Green Hill Park Phase III 193 VDOT Projects 185 Mudlick Creek Greenway 184 SW County District Park ~ 183 20 Vinton Rescue Public Safety Building 177 Vinton Branch & Parking Lot Improvement 177 Voter Equipment Replacement 171 Roanoke River Greenway -Green Hill Park 168 Read Mountain Station Addition 168 Hollins Road Public Safety Building 165 Family Aquatic Center 165 Bunk Room Additions 160 Glenvar Branch Expansion 160 Information System Upgrades 156 30 Spring Hollow Park 155 Garst Mill Park Improvements 154 Grouting Clifford C. Craig Dam 1.53 Mount Pleasant Branch Library 151 Burton Athletic Complex 150 GIS Phase III - Reflight and Orthophotos 149 Mason's Cove Branch Library 149 Walrond Park Phase 111 146 Bent Mountain Branch Expansion 145 Evidence Vaults 142 40 Whispering Pines Phase III 139 Camp Roanoke Pool 135 North Roanoke Soccer Complex 134 GPS Ground Monumentation 132 Brambleton Center 131 '~ M:\Budget\01-02\CIP\CIP\Ranking_ReportlAll Printed 09/07/2001 1 of 2 '~'- Preliminary Projecf Ranking for FY 2002-2006 ~"' Total Project Score Improvements for Parking Areas 131 Merriman Soccer Complex 126 Station Fuel Control System 125 Bay Heater Upgrades 123 Parks and Recreation Land Bank 123 50 Picnic Shelters 120 Vinyard Park Phase III 115 Starkey Park Phase III 114 Library Security System 112 Craig Avenue Recreation Center 108 Drainage Maintenance Building 98 Community Recreation Center 82 57 M:\Budget\01-02\CI P\CI P\Ranking_ReportlAll Printed 09/07/2001 2 of 2 -~~. V ~ M N M N U x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-, ~ M N ~' ~-+ , ~ ~ U ~ ~A O M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N O V W N ~ N '-' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O M ~"~ O O [r ~ ~ ,~ .-~ N .-+ O\ M oo ~ 01 ~n d~ .-, o~ O ~ ,-, oo [ ~ r-, N try O ~I zo a~ ~ Q M M ~ "_' ~, ~ N r ~ `/ M W ~ 01 o M 0 O 0 '--~ 0 M o d' C O ~ ~ [., ~ ~ .-, oo O ~h O O h E-+ c C/1 N o ~ a ~ ~~ ~ N O \D ~ O~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ M r-I U ~ ~ o Q o d' ,--~ ~ O r l~ ~o N N o0 N ~--~ ~1 O O V N~ z ~ o ~ o ~ ~ N o ~ ww o ~ ~ ~, a O U~ U ~ v ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c w ~ ~ w ~ ~ 4, Attachment C ~_i .~,~~ - ,,. ~ _ ~ ...... w.... ,. _ .,_. _.._a. . ~.. ....., ~....... _ _, ,__... Diana Rosa e e- App01-02.doc T Pa e 1 Attachment D ;~~ _. i ROANOKE COUNTY PARKS, RECREATION, AND TOURISM DEPARTMENT 2001-2002 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE FUND APPLICATION PACKAGE ,, .. ~ N ~, _ ...~ -- --,,,...-k.,... - ,~_ _ ~„ , .~. -- ~ . Md. -,,~•.. Page 2~ t Diana Rosape e - A 01-02.doc ~ - ~- - r ~ ROANOKE COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 2001-2002 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INCENTIVE FUND PURPOSE: To provide matching funds to non-profit community service groups, individuals, or corporations wishing to make capital improvements to county owned park and recreation facilities. FUNDS AVAILABLE IN 2000-2001: 50 000 FUNDING LIMITS: A maximum of fifty percent (50%) of the project or $10,000. APPLICATION PROCEDURES: For the 2001-2002 program, applicants must complete an on final application with site plan and (attaching additional pages if needed) and submit it, along with eight (8) copies to the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism by Friday, June 8, 2001. Applications received after June 8th will not be considered. GENERAL POLICIES AND PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY: A. Proposed projects must be located on publicly owned property and must be consistent with the master plan of the proposed site. Projects on Parks and Recreation property must be pre-approved in writing by the Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism department. The Roanoke County School Construction committee must also approve any project on school property and a letter of their approval must accompany the grant application; B. Projects submitted for County-owned leased property or school property must benefit the general public or those programs sanctioned or sponsored by the Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Department; C. Matching fund grants are subject to all Roanoke -County Procurement policies and Building and Zoning requirements; D. Projects must be a fixed capital addition or improvement and cannot include personal or team type equipment, consumable items, or maintenance of existing facilities; E. Individual organizations may submit more than one (1) request per year, but requests shall be prioritized; F. No organization may submit an application on a previously approved project that is still under construction; G. All projects completed on non Parks and Recreation land shall have a sign (in an appropriate location) recognizing Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism contribution to the project; the sign will be provided by Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism; ,..w..~, - ..~. _ _ . ...._ r-,-~--,~--~---- - - ..... ... - .__.e.e . pa.~e 3 ~ ;Diana Rosapepe - App01-02.doc____~~_~~~.,.- ..<,g, ~~ ,_ .. ,.~,.~ ~~ .~ H. Playgrounds constructed on school sites shall be maintained by the requesting group or school and shall meet standards adopted by the State Department of Social Services and the Consumer Product Safety Commission. I. Requesting groups, schools, etc. are responsible for the maintenance of their project unless an alternate written agreement is made and approved by the Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Department; J. All projects must meet standards in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA: A. Projects that correct and/or improve the safety and security of a field or facility; B. Projects that reduce maintenance and/or operating costs; C. Projects that add, enhance or expand a needed service; D. Projects that serve the greatest number of people and benefit an entire community or (organized) athletic group as opposed to a limited user group; E. Financial status of the applicant group -- i.e., matching share must be on hand and committed to the project. Quantified donated materials and services up to twenty-five percent (25%) of total project will be considered; F. Feasibility of the schedule and completion dates of the project and the past project performance of the requesting organization; G. Projects on Roanoke County Parks and Recreation property will receive priority consideration. SOME EXAMPLES OF PROJECTS: A. Facility renovations B. Field fencing and lighting C. Trail construction D. Field renovations E. Basketball or tennis court renovations F. Playgrounds, renovations, and enhancements SELECTION COMMITTEE: The Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Advisory Commission shall appoint a selection committee yearly. The committee shall consist of one (1) commission member from each district, one (1) representative from the Parks division, one (1) representative from the Recreation division for a total of seven (7) members. The director of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism department serves as an advisor to the selection committee. SELECTION PROCESS: ~ 1. Applications will be taken through June 8, 2001. I ..~ «, ......, ..:., .. ,~ Pa e 4 i Diana Rosa e e - A 01-02.aoc , N - ,, ~t 2. The applications will be reviewed during the month of June. During this period, the selection committee may ask applicants to provide additional information and/or clarifications to assist the committee in the selection process. 3. The committee will make their selections based on the individual projects' merits as they relate to the project selection criteria. Projects will be approved in June and forwarded to the Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Director for processing by July 10, 2001. Projects not selected may be re-submitted during the next funding cycle. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION A. Each organization is responsible for the overall planning, management, and construction of their approved project. However, projects must be scheduled so as not to impact activities and/or facility programming. B. An organization receiving a grant shall appoint a representative to serve as the project coordinator. The coordinator shall have full authority to act on behalf of the organization. C. The Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Department will provide technical assistance- and help in the coordination of all projects. Upon completion, each project must be inspected and approved by the Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Department. D. Cost overruns, delays, and incomplete projects are the responsibility of the requesting organization. Projects should be targeted for completion within 12 months from award date. Any delays must be reported to the Parks and Recreation Project Coordinator as soon as noted, with suggested corrective action. E. Grants will be forfeited back to the CIIF fund if significant progress is not made on approved projects within the fiscal year funded. ROANOKE COUNTY PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES: For purchases under $500, a receipt or invoice is required for reimbursement; For purchases from $500 to $5,000 you must get a minimum of three competitive telephone quotes, fully documented on the Roanoke County Telephone Quote Sheet provided to all grant recipients. The low bidder must be awarded the contract, unless you have the appropriate justification and County approval to select another vendor; For purchases over $5,000 you must receive quotes from a minimum of three vendors, in writing, on vendor letterhead. You must accept the lowest quote unless you have the appropriate justification and County approval to select another vendor. These are basic guidelines. For more information on Roanoke County Procurement procedures please call Don Karnes at 772-2062. . ...~ ~ . , _ ~ . _ .w . .... ... ._ ..._ ~ ., ~~ ..W . .,.~.. ~ . ._ . _._... Diana Rosa epe - A 01-02.doc Pa e 5, ~' ~~ _~ ROANOKE COUNTY PARKS, RECREATION, AND TOURISM 2001-2002 CAPITAL IlvIPROVEMENT PROJECT APPLICATION To be completed & submitted (along with 8 copies) to: Director, Roanoke County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism 1206 Kessler Mill Road Salem, VA 24153 DATE OF SUBMISSION: NAME OF PROJECT: LOCATION OF PROJECT: (Please include site plan, map, and other necessary attachments and approvals) NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT ORGANIZATION: NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT COORDINATOR: COORDINATOR'S PHONE: DAY EVENING PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (Be Specific and add attachments if necessary) WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE? 'Diana Rosa epe - A 01-02.doc .~~,~. --------- •~~-~-~ ~.~~k• PLEASE CHECK ITEMS BELOW: Concept Plan Included Yes_ Cost Estimate attached Yes_ Projects meets ADA Requirements Yes. School Board letter of approval attached Yes Parks and Recreation letter of approval attached HOW WILL THIS PROJECT BENEFIT THE Ct serve, if applicable) No_ No_ No_ No_ Yes IMMUNITY? N/A N/A N/A. N/A No N/A (Include specific groups it will WILL THE PROJECT BE AVAILABLE FOR USE BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC? ESTIMATED PROJECT START DATE: / / REQUIRED COMPLETION DATE: / /. ESTIMATED COST: $ MATCHING FUND REQUEST: $ (Please attach estimate breakdown} APPLICANT'S FINANCIAL COMMITMENT: (Please describe the scope of your group's financial commitment and how you will meet this commitment, including {if applicable} quantified donated materials and services up to twenty-five percent (25%) of total project) A signed application will be considered the applicant's commitment to fulfill all of its obligations, financial and other, under the terms of this program, and will confirm the group has the financial resources on hand to complete this project. The above named project manager shall have full authority to act on behalf of the requesting organization. SIGNATURE: DATE: Print Name: Title: . ,~ ~ __~._ G~ Page 7 ~: <~Diana Rosa,pepe - A 01-02.doc ~~~ ~~`~ ~~" ~'_j TO: Potential CIIF Applicants FROM: Pete Haislip RE: 2001-2002 CIIF Application DATE: April 20, 2001 Attached is the 2000-2001 Capital Improvement Incentive Fund Application package. Please note that this application is due June 8. 2001. Thank you for your interest in this program. If you need assistance or have any questions, please call Jeff Balon, Project Coordinator, at 387-6078 ext. 271. o-~ Attachment E Outline of the 1992 Bond Referendum The Board of Supervisors authorized a bond referendum for November, 1992 for the issuance of General Obligation Bonds for a number of capital projects. Outlined below are the major categories and amounts designated for each. School Improvements $ 8,506,000 North County Library (Hollins) 1,500,000 Dixie Caverns Landfill Clean-up 2,750,000 Drainage 300,000 Stormwater Management 300,000 Parks and Recreation 1,750,000 Road Improvements 1,000,000 Economic Development (Valleytech Park) 750,000 Installation of Fire Hydrants 184,000 Purchase Land for new High School 750,000 Total $17,790,000 ~ -~ MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS SUGGESTED BY CITIZENS March/April, 1997 1) Glenvar Library: renovate and expand; relocate some systemwide functions to expanded building; add total of 6, 850 new sf of area to accommodate community needs (5,000 sf) and systemwide functional needs, such as technical processing and automation (1,850 sf). 2) 419 Library: renovate as soon as possible; improve parking and vehicular access if at all possible; redesign space to increase building's capacity and functional efficiency; include minor additions if possible or replace building with suitable, larger facility on a visible/accessible site near the 419 corridor 3) Back CreeklCotton Hill or Buck Mtn./220 Corridor Branch: build a new full-service branch (8,000 to 10,000 sf) in one of these areas within the next 5 years if substantial goals related to the 419 Library are not achieved, or within the next 10 years if they are. 4) Mt. Pleasant: build a community branch of 2,000 to 3,000 sf on the 116 corridor 5) Vinton: minor renovations/refurbishment and expand current parking lot. 6) Bent Mountain: 400 sq. ft. expansion of current facility 7) All libraries to include suitable spaces for automation, instruction, research, and reading -this includes the concept of the community computing centers. ~. ~ ~ r ~ ~ c-I e. ~ APPLICANT ~ ~ ~ e 1 LOCATION DESCRIPTION ~ -- ~ AWARD VALUE FY 1999/2000 Cave Spring American L.L. Hidden Valley Junior High Dugout enclosure 3,750 10,000 Cave Spring National L.L. Starkey Park Pave parking lot 10,000 20,910 Back Creek Elementary Picnic shelter 7,205 17,610 Fort Lewis Elementary Nature trail 4,975 13,900 Hidden Valley Junior High Relocate field 10,000 30,000 Glenvar Elementary Playground 5,000 25,000 Northside Middle Spectator stands 5,000 10,000 Green Hill Equestrian Sound system 1,841 3,682 Green Hill Equestrian Bleachers 1,358 2,715 _ ~c~c,~ Youth Haven 1 ~rro~ec~.s Swing set ~ /r ppZ~ 0' ~ l~ G D ~ / 7 FY 2000/2001 y ~ , {~ Z Cave Spring Softball League Shell Park Restroom/concession bldg. 10,000 108,610 Glenvar Youth Boosters Green Hill Park Picnic Shelter/cage 7,125 14,240 Glenvar Youth Boosters Ft Letvis Elementary Scoreboard 1,375 2,751 Cave Spring American South Park Dugouts, fencing 10,000 26,500 North Roanoke Recreation Club Walrond Park Batting cage 8,000 16,000 Wolf Creek Bridge 4,000 8,000 Mt. Pleasant Elementary Playground 4,800 28,000 Equestrian Committee Ring fence 3,850 7,700 Oak Grove Park Trail in Park 4 800 19,973 ~ pr°~ec 5 ~ ~, j~ 95 v ~ L3~i /~'~ 7 y~.~~s CvGch~•~ invcSFyne~~ y~ild~~~, aver 1'1'18. f~Q:s ~~,P 5 ~. h ~, -~^ ~ a CS,Se, 3 ~r~s, ~t>~~er W •~~L- ~~, e C~Yrpc ~~ p,v--.vu,n~ ~~~~ ~.• L CIIF PROJECT HISTORY ,~'PLICANT LOCATION DESCRIPTION AWARD VALUE FY 1994/1995 Cave Spring Softball League Shell Park Fields 1 & 3 New backstops and sideline fence 8,500 17,000 Glenvar Youth Boosters Green Hill Field 2 Sideline fence & gates 1,600 3,200 North Roanoke Recreation Club Walrond fields 3 & 4 Dugouts, sideline & outfield fence 5,000 10,000 Cave Spring National L.L. Starkey Park Concession/restroom 9,223 50,000 William Byrd Softball Boosters William Byrd High Restroom on field 4,633 9,267 Roland Cook Elementary Playground 10,000 28,000 Green Hill Equestrian Judges stand, picnic shelter 3,759 7,159 Green Hill Equestrian Riding Ring (near road) 4 0~ ~$A8- FY1995/1997 TchR~ ~ ~~~lc'c~5 ~ j y~,irJ4 ,~ i3y,y3y Cave Spring National L.L Shell Park fields Water hydrants & fountains 4,220 8,440 Cave Spring National L.L Starkey Field 3 Water service to field 2,543 5,085 Cave Spring American L.L. Oak Grove Field New concrete dugouts 2,217 4,433 Vinton Sandlot Booster Club Goode park Restrooms/concession 6,148 32,910 Southwest Soccer Club Merriman Fields Barrier and wheel stops 6,503 13,006 Burlington Elementary V~'alk track 800 8,300 Bent Mt. Elementary Trail 1,538 3,075 Clearbrook Elementary Playground (near teimis) 5,037 10,074 FY 1996/1997 101 ~I Mt. View Elementary ~ P-cs~~tS Paved track 1~„QQB- ~ 3g,ovG ~' 4•~1II4 JZ r~ 3z3 North Roanoke Recreation Club Northside Fields Concrete dugouts/plaza 10,000 24,000 Cave Spring National L.L Starkey fields 1 & 2 Dugout concrete, fence, benches 7,800 15,600 Cave Spring American Baseball Shell fields 1 & 3 Concrete dugouts, new fencing 3,000 7,500 Glenvar Youth Boosters Green Hill field 3 New scoreboard 1,900 3,800 Bent Mt. Elementary Marsh boardwalk 3 I S 841 Green Valley Elementary New Playground 7,000 32,000 Mason Cove Elementary New Playground 9,000 18,000 Green Hill Equestrian Judges stand 700 1,400 7 County Parks Tree plantings 5,000 10,000 t mt nl Camp Roanoke J p { S r~ Renovate cabin _ 3 (~_ ~ ~ FY 1997/1998 , ~ z c P ,~ ~/,7~5 , / JL/. JI North Roanoke Recreation Club Northside Fields Concession/restroom 10,000 60,000 Cave Spring National L.L Starkey field I outfield fence 2,875 5,750 Cave Spring Softball League Clearbrook Fields Concrete dugouts, fencing 6,150 12,300 Vinton Sandlot Booster Club Goode Fields Outfield fence, dugouts 5,300 10,600 Glenvar Youth Boosters Green Hill Fields Field house enlargement 7,140 14,280 Glenvar Youth Boosters Green Hill Fields Concrete dugout pads, fencing 4,375 8,750 Burlington Elementary Paved walk trail 5,685 11,370 Back Creek Elementary Walk trail 2,000 4,935 Herman Horn Elementary New Playground 10,000 29,000 Green Valley Elementary Parking/ picnic area 962 1,925 Green Hill Equestrian Arena fencing 2,250 4,500 ?`~~~ Freedom Playground C Playground Surfacing 7~_ ( 14,1,4,3-_ ~ FY 1998/1999 l2 prcjec S /f ' ~~ ~,pg ~ 1 ~~~ y ~ f Cave Spring National L.L. Starkey field 2 Outfield fence ~ f 3,600 7,200 Cundiff Elementary Play structure 10,000 22,020 Bent Mt. Elementary Playground 6,929 13,858 Back Creek Elementary Playground 10,000 20,000 Oak Grove Elementary Playground 6,812 39,457 Mason Cove Elementary Picnic shelter 4,750 7,500 M. A. Banks Park Picnic shelter 8,000 16,000 t i t ~1 7~ rc) ~e e~ 5 S o,cx; - ~ ._~- iZG~ n3 s Q % t' CIIF PROJECT HISTORY ~ r~,,,-~ Location Description FY Award Value Green Hill Equestrian Back Creek Elem Fort Lewis Elem CSA @ Hid. Val Hidden Valley Jr Youth Haven CSN @ Starkey Park Glenvar Elem Northside Middle Equestrian Committee Youth Boosters @ Gr Hill Park Youth Boosters @ Ft Lewis Oak Grove PTA CSA @ South Park NRRC @ Walrond Park Pathfinders @ Wolf Creek Mt. Pleasant PTA Equestrian Committee CSSL @ Shell Park Sound system 99/00 1,841 3,682 Picnic shelter ~ 99/00 7,205 17,610 Nature trail 99/00 4,975 13,900 Dugout enclosure 99/00 3,750 10,000 Relocate field 99/00 10,000 30,000 Swing set 99/00 900 1,800 Pave parking lot 99/00 10,000 20,910 Playground 99/00 5,000 25,000 Spectator stands 99/00 5,000 10,000 Bleachers 99/00 1,358 2,715 Picnic Shelter/cage 00/01 7,125 14,240 Scoreboard 00/O1 1,375 2,751 Trail in park 00/O1 4,800 19,973 Dugouts, fencing 00/O1 10,000 26,500 Batting cage 7 00/O1 18,000 16,000 Bridge 00/O1 4,000 8,000 Playground 00/O1 4,800 28,000 Ring fence 00/O1 3,850 7,700 Restroom/concession bldg. 00/O1 10,000 108,610 S ~ n_L ~ d Yy- ~ i~ ~-' L / ~y fL~ I _ f J; L /~ /~ '~. ~ r ~ ~~ .... ~-~D C ~ c % /~ ~ p l1 ~ Y1 a J` ~.. d l~J U ~ (J ~') E 'f - j -~ O ~7 :. U.~ ~ u r~ I t i , l .J ~ 1 t, -I ~, ~ t:/ ~ i ~ ..~ C'J ~ ~ '~. V'~) U to C ~ ~.< .~ ~, r: ~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~ '~:._~ / m ly'1 'e. C: 1 Gi, ~ 'E~ .~~ /~tlr ', i `~ rn o r ~ 5 p ~• c ~e. ~ {~ o t 1, Sr 1 ov r ~F- 5 ~. ~, 14-~ a. n ~ ra r ~ / cZ C+ ~; ~~r y A~'$ U w~.p ~~ Vu-ant. ~ ~~i .. .; • ;-,; ~' ~ -~d w.~S~u-S ;, ~~ ~, . ~. t~- ~vuv~ ~v ~ev~eu~ s o~pv 24 cos .~-----.. ~~ o00 °' ~. ~~ ~dQu.k~~ a~u.d a1~~1~ ~ cw~~S o,-~ rl.~k- vuo5 ~lS~ voow 3 • ~~~3 '~ ~u~ld~c.~.S _ T3~o~5 ~~~. i, cc~vu~ {~tv-~ptJ-t'S ~ sc~ .l errs ;, ~ - ~U <<dtt.~S uv~d~.v;l~.~S crud ~ t(1-~ l tuUs --------- 1~5Up. c~ ;,, _ I r LL-~ '~ ~''.' cMd~anS ~o/ P~,~tdt~.~ "lie ~cpS ,i ._ .. c wu.v~~ku~~~'h ~vou~. ~vad~S ~ cc~r-S~vc'hc~ ~i $ 'sere! lc~S -- l gj u~o S _ 'l~Soo.c~c~ ~,, ,,, ,;. , __ ::, ~ j ~ sew« p s ~ 1~ o~ ~o c~oc~'~ - 2.' ioo w i ;,~ ~ .. '' _ ~ " `~' ~~ C~ l~ '~~ 000 _._ ,;1 ._ ;, ;;~ ,,; ~' I~cS~~ ~s~~: n~e~ .. ~; ~ 1~~. J~a,r ~ u1a.r d. ~,~.s a. r~~~ ~~~ d~ oh ~~ ~o m rti,'~ ~ t ~. ~., ~o ac~~~-~, pl is ~, ;1 ~ ~ move, ~~~~ ~~ i S ~,~Jpr~~~q o~~ ~~. rJrv~ee~ U~~~~ ~r?ctv,~~~'~ ('~~~ J r 0 h ~'~ ~ ~ ~ d u, h ~ ~. ~ v~ , u, 5 ~ h ~ ~,1~ ~ ~ r~ yti. ~.. a Q, ~ ~ ~a ~ q, h , ~' Ct,r`~. ~ c, I ~ -t Built by police officers and inmates New:police firing range opens in Roanoke County Tlie firearms training center was a jointproject of Roanoke and Roanoke County and used public funds and private donations. By lOMBERLY O'BRIEN THEROANOKE TIMES Regional cooperation .scored again Thursday as government officials dedicated the Roanoke Regional Firearms Training Center. The center, near Dixie Cav- erns, is a joint effort between Roanoke and Roanoke County law enforcement and will be used pri- marily by the city's and county's police departments and sheriff's offices. Previously, law officers had borrowed the Norfolk South- ern Corp.'s Bring range off Shenandoah Avenue. The riew center, in the sprawling Bills of West Roanoke County, features two pistol-firing ranges, a rifle range and a class- room building. Government lead- ers said Thursday that they hope other localities will also use the center. ~ ' "For those .people who think regional cooperation will only come at gunpoint, this range is for you," Roanoke Mayor Ralph Smith joked duffing the dedication cere- mony, which .drew about 100 people. Thursday was the second time in the past year that a regional training center has opened in the Roanoke area. In September, the Roanoke Valley Regional Fire-EMS Training Center opened on Kessler. Mill Road in Roanoke County as a venture among Roanoke,,Roanoke, County, Salem and Vinton. For the firearms center, Roanoke and Roanoke County contributed. a total of about $2b0,000, and relied heavily on donations from- the community:' Many businesses and ,agencies, including American Electric Power Co., Norfolk Southern, the Virginia Department of Transportation, and construction and equipment companies, donated the use of equipment for the project. Much of the work itself was done by law enforcement officers, along with jail inmates. "Good things happen when local governing bodies come together," .said Butch Church,. supervisor of Roanoke County's Cat9wba District. "I can't imagine a better joint effort for .regional cooperation." The keynote address was given by Sylvester Daughtry, executive director of ~ the Fairfax-based Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, who reminded' those gathered of the importance of police firearms training. In these violent .times, Daughtry said, police need to be equipped to defend themselves and community members. "This is not a luxury," he said of the training center. "This is something that is very basic and fundamental.° .Kimberly O'Brien can be reached at 981-3334 or kimoQroanoke.com r:~:.~. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~.J` a~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 9, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session -Fee For Ambulance Transport Update COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Although I am very pleased with how smoothly the implementation of fee for transport is progressing I have asked the staff to bring these topics to you in Work Session format. You will note from the attached material that only 12 people have responded to the brochure mailed to each household. Chief Burch will explain the coordination that has taken place with the volunteer units on the procedures which are also attached. These procedures have been simplified from versions that we have collected from other localities. We particularly want to be sure that you understand how the collection of fees will affect other localities. This is very complicated as is shown on one of the attached charts, and we think we have good solutions. We do not have full closure on the sharing of fees with Vinton and Botetourt County and we need your guidance on this matter. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The implementation of the Fee for Ambulance Transport is now less than three weeks away. Therefore staff would like to take the opportunity to present a status report on the implementation process and allow the Board of Supervisors input on how to proceed with regional cooperation efforts with Vinton and Botetourt County pertaining to the Ambulance Fee program. The work session will be organized in three sections as follows; A) Status Report on Public Information - We will share with the Board the video that has been produced by RVTV and feedback we have received from the informational brochure sent out to approximately 31,000 households. Preliminary reports are that the brochure was well received by the vast majority of the residents of the County. B) Regional Cooperation - We have developed a chart to be used as a discussion tool which details how fees may be allocated based on the station responding Lr/ ". and the jurisdiction where the patient is picked up. We still have some outstanding issues involving the Town of Vinton and Read Mountain that we will work with the Board to address in the work session. The chart is attached to the Board Report. C) Status Report on the Permit Process -Under the Fee for Transport Ordinance, Volunteer rescue squads within the County system and private independent ambulance companies operating from within the County will be permitted by the Fire and Rescue Department. Joe Obenshain and Steve Simon will be available to answer any questions you may have on the permit process. Copies of the application and permit forms are provided in your packet. In closing, staff feels that the Fee For Ambulance Transport program is on schedule and being properly implemented and the few remaining issues will be resolved prior to November 1. Respectfully Submitted by: Daniel R. O'Donnell Assistant County Administrator ACTION Approved by: ~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara- Referred () Minnix To () Nickens d- ~ 4) 4~ O ^~ U C N ~ N L ~ M N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ pp r. r 0 O ~ O ~ L r L ~F- ~ O ^ W U c~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~ ~, - ~' o a~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ U - -~ U N O N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U O ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ O O U ~ N ~ ~ to ~ C~• O J N Q (~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > c~ N (~ (~. N N U ~ O U ~ J i m -~ C ~ O ~ C L ~ N N ~ ~ ~ to ~ O ~ ~ ~ (i3 L ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ (0 O L ~ ~ O ~ N ~ N O L N ~ ~ ~ .~ U ~ N U ~ N O ~ O O ~ L V ~ ~ Rf U F O N O V O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L N ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ C (~ C C . ~ N O ~ O ~ ~ ~ O O N 4- '~ ~ ~ ~ U N ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ X ~ ~ O Q O ~ _ (~ L- (n ~ cn ~ N N ~ O ~ N N ,~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O +~ ~ N L L ~ ~ ~ +~ N L ~ L n. ~ _ ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ ~ w w N .O U N (~ U (6 .~ 0 ~' r~ ~• .~ `1v .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ O ~ O (0 O '~1 • rv 0 S. ~1 O ~ • -~ ~ ~ -~ O O N p p N ai o m a i ~ a i (~ ~, ~, > c N ~, ~ ~ N ~, LL (n ~ ~ ~' p v p p Z ~ p ~ ~ ~' m ~ U p u. ~ ~' ~~ p '~ ~ ~ c ~ j '~ j 'm U ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~' o ~ " °~ m ,,,_, ~ U U a i ~ ~ ~ U p ~ c a~ ~ a~ ~ ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~' '~"~ ~ O .~ ~ LL p ~ p O o U C (l5 U ~ ~ z U Q) U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N > O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ p ~,u.. O C C ~ ~ U ~ ~ LL p to ~ a) ~ cn } ~ ~ p m p ~ a~ U u.. ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ j '~ ~ u- c c~ o '~ E z C j 'a~ ' o (~ ~ ~' o ~ m p ~ _ m p~ p p a i '~ ~ U U ~ ~ ~ O p cn c N ~ p U O ~ ~ ~..L m > o ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~' L m >.~ \/ p p p o i a ~ o ~ a i a, i a ~c ~ ~, ~ . > c m ~, ~ ~ a~ ~, u- c ~ ~ ~ ~ a Z ~ ~ ~ U m tL ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ o . ~ ~ . ~ . O .. U ~ ~ m ~' ~ ~ ~ U ~ z U ~ ~ o cn a~ a~ ~ U U ~ ~ ~ a ~ a a ~ i > > o ~ i ~, i ~~ ~ ~ p ~, LL ~ p ~, LL o ~. ~, ~ Z ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ c - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ; o v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ Z ~~- ~, ~+ U ~ U ~ ~ U U U ~ ~ ~ Q~ ,[ j~ i '~ \ U p O U ~ c ~ ~ ~ p~ +~ ~ ~ o c ~ a ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ U~ U a i O ~ ~ ~ U .-. L U ~ ~ ~ U (~ O ~ N ~ N "~- ~ ~ N ~ O L 0 0 N ~ o U c~ ~ ~ O N ~ N 4-= O `~' N (n L ~ ~ U o c ~ o ~ ~U ~ m ~~ _ ~ ~ U ~ .~ L s ~ 0 0 ~ a o ~' OF ROANp,Y~ a °v a? l~ Tl'1 Y1'1"~'1'1" Tl'T rl 11 T7" ~~ TY LZ FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT October 4, 2001 Chief Charles Law 5234 Keffer Rd. Catawba, VA 24070 Dear Chief Law: RICHARD E. BURCH, JR. CHIEF I am pleased to inform you that the final administrative step for the County of Roanoke to institute ambulance transport fees is completed. Please find the attached Regulations for permitting Ambulance Service Agencies in Roanoke County. These regulations will allow the Fire and Rescue Department to utilize the Volunteer Rescue Squad Patient Care Reports for billing purposes in accordance with Virginia Law. Secondly, the regulations will ensure that each Volunteer Rescue Squad meets the new EMS Regulations regarding mutual aid responses issued by Virginia's Department of Health, Office of EMS. The regulations also apply to private ambulance services that respond emergency to EMS calls in Roanoke County. When a private ambulance agency is issued a permit they agree to follow the regulations along with providing mutual aid during Mass Casualty situations. This is a very important aspect that the new State EMS Regulations require. While reviewing the regulations you will realize that all of the Volunteer Rescue Squads in the County already meet the requirements for permitting. Thus, all you need to do is fill out the application, which is attached, and forward it to the Fire/Rescue Office and a permit will be issued. Since the County insures all of the ambulances in the County you may skip those sections that ask about insurance and listing of the vehicles. I plan on attending the next Rescue Chief's meeting scheduled on October 10, 2001 and will answer anyone's questions about these regulations. Chief Burch and I thought it would be important for you to review them prior to the meeting. Feel free to contact me before by paging me at 770-4586. Sincerely, Stephen G. Simon Battalion Chief C. File Copy 3568 PETERS CREEK ROAD NW • ROANOKE, VA 24019 • (540) 561-8100 FAX: (540) 561-8108 • EMAIL: rburch@co.roanoke.va.us ®Recycled Paper PROCEDURES FOR APPROVAL FOR EMS BILLING RESPONSIBILITY 1. STATEMENT OF PRINCIPAL: On May 22, 2001, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted a "Fee for Services" ordinance which provides a legal framework for ambulance transport fees within Roanoke County and adjoining jurisdictions. This ordinance authorizes the County Administrator, or his designee, to develop those rules and procedures which are necessary for initiating and collecting these ambulance transport fees. In order to provide for the safe and efficient transport of citizens who need emergency medical services, these procedures for permitting entities to provide such transport have been developed. This application process and the issuance of permits is necessary to carry out the mandate of the Board of Supervisors when they adopted this ordinance and approved the schedule of ambulance transport fees on August 14, 2001. 2. DEFINITIONS: For purposes of these procedures, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings as set forth in Article VI. FEE FOR SERVICES OF Chapter 2 ADMINISTRATION of the Roanoke County Code and such additional definitions as shall be necessary for the efficient administration of this program. 2.1 Ambulance: The term "ambulance" shall mean any publicly or privately owned vehicle that is specially designed, constructed or modified and equipped for and is intended to be used for and is maintained or operated to provide immediate medical care to or transport of persons who are sick, injured, wounded or otherwise incapacitated or helpless. 2.2 Emergency: The term "emergency"shall mean an unforseen condition or circumstance in which there is a need for immediate medical care in order to prevent loss of life or aggravation of illness or injury. 2.3 Emergency medical services vehicle: The term "emergency medical services vehicle" shall mean an ambulance, rescue squad vehicle, fire truck or other government owned vehicle which may be used for or is maintained or operated to provide immediate medical care to ~l-r~, or transport of persons who are sick, injured, wounded or otherwise incapacitated or helpless. 2.4 Ordinance: As used in these Procedures, "ordinance" shall mean Article VI, FEE FOR SERVICES, of Chapter 2, ADMINISTRATION, of the Roanoke County Code, adopted as Ordinance 052201-13 and the Resolution Adopting a Schedule of Ambulance Transport Fees and Providing for an Effective Date, adopted August 14, 2001, and all subsequent amendments to or re-enactments of these provisions; 2.5 Patient: The term "patient" shall mean an individual who is sick, injured, wounded or otherwise incapacitated or helpless. 2.6 Permit: The term "permit" shall mean a permit issued by the County Administrator or his/her designee, authorizing the operation of an ambulance or emergency medical services vehicle. 2.7 Person: The term "person" shall mean an individual, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company, group of individuals acting together for a common purpose, or organization of any kind. 3. APPLICATION FORM: 3.1 Any person, as defined above, desiring the legal authority to operate an emergency medical services vehicle, including ambulances, for purposes of transporting individuals needing emergency medical services shall obtain a permit from the County of Roanoke by fully completing the attached application form and providing the documentation described below. 3.2 The application form shall be completed and signed by the president, chairman or chief executive officer of the person or legal entity on whose behalf the application is filed. The signature of such individual shall constitute his or her representation that he or she has personally read the application, is familiar with the information requested and certifies to the best of his or her information and belief that the information contained in the application is correct. Furthermore, by signing the application, each individual acknowledges on behalf of their organization or legal entity that they understand that any false or materially misleading statement contained in the application may be ground for denying the 2 application or for revoking any permit which has been granted based upon such false or materially misleading statement. 3.3 By completing and submitting this application for a permit, the person applying for this permit agrees that they will provide to the Chief of Fire and Rescue, or his designee, any additional information which shall be reasonably necessary to fully evaluate the application and to fairly determine the suitability of the applicant to comply with the requirements of Roanoke County in the administration of its ambulance transport fee program. Further, the applicant agrees to be bound by any subsequent authorized amendments to or modifications of this program and its rules and procedures. 4. CONDITIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF PERMIT: 4.1 State permits: As a condition for issuance of a permit to transport a patient within Roanoke County and adjoining jurisdictions, the person applying for such permit shall possess a current valid permit issued by the Commonwealth of Virginia to operate an ambulance or emergency medical service vehicle. Continued possession of such valid permit shall be a continuing condition for holding a valid permit issued by Roanoke County under this Ordinance. The permit holder shall be under a continuing legal duty to report to the Chief of Fire and Rescue or his designee, any notice or proceeding concerning in any manner the status of any permit issued by the Commonwealth of Virginia, including, but not limited to, any notice of a violation, scheduling of a hearing which may reasonably affect such permit or a notice of revocation of such license. The permits issued by Roanoke County shall coincide in duration with the applicable state permits, currently a two (2) year period. 4.2 Insurance: As a condition for issuance of a permit to transport patients, the person shall obtain and provide to the Chief of Fire and Rescue, or his designee, a valid certificate of insurance from an insurance company authorized to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia, or in the alternative, a certificate of self-insurance where permitted by law, which certificate shall verify the following minimum coverages: 3 ~~ 2.1 Motor Vehicular Liability Insurance : $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage with minimum $ 3,000,000 umbrella coverage; 2.2 General Liability Insurance & Incidental Medical Malpractice Coverage: $1,000,000 with minimum # 3,000,000 umbrella coverage; All certificates of insurance shall contain a clause obligating the company issuing the certificate to provide to the Roanoke County Administrator and the Roanoke County Risk Manager written notice at least fifteen (15) days prior to the cancellation of any insurance policies insuring the permit holder. Further, the County of Roanoke shall be named as an additional insured on all such policies of insurance as its interests may appear. 4.3 Notice of change of circumstances: Every person applying for a permit and every holder of a permit under this procedure shall immediately give notice in writing to the Chief of Fire and Rescue of any change in the information set forth in the application for a permit. Such changes shall include, but not be limited to, any change in rates for transport of patients, any change in insurance coverage or any change in ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the common stock of any corporation which has applied for or currently holds a permit. Failure to provide notice of any such change within fifteen (15) days of its occurrence shall be grounds for immediate suspension of the permit, within the sound discretion of the Chief of Fire and Rescue. Any volunteer rescue squad holding a permit shall give notice of any change of officers of the squad, including notice of any normal, annual election of officers. 4.4 Commitments b~permit holders: By applying for and accepting a permit from Roanoke County authorizing the transport of patients , the holder of the permit agrees to the following commitments: 4.1 To comply with all the terms and conditions set forth in the Ordinance and in the regulations or procedures promulgated by the County Administrator in accordance with his authority 4 ~` under these county code sections and all other applicable county, state and federal laws and regulations; 4.2 To contact the Roanoke County Emergency Dispatch Center (E-911 Center) before responding to a call for emergency medical services in order to insure appropriate coverage for such services within the County, unless prior arrangements have been agreed to as set forth by the Chief of Fire and Rescue for certain designated areas of the County; 4.3 To comply with any designated response area assignments which may be made by the Chief of Fire and Rescue or his designee; 4.4 To provide such mutual aid response and assistance as requested by the County of Roanoke Emergency Dispatch System during incidents of mass casualty in so far as possible; All Volunteer Rescue Squads operating within Roanoke County shall provide mutual aid to any location within Roanoke County to which they are dispatched; 4.5 All Volunteer Rescue Squads operating within Roanoke County shall abide by the current ambulance transport fees schedule as set forth by Ordinance, and shall provide emergency medical transport and services without consideration of a patient's financial status; 4.6 Provide, and promptly update, a list of all emergency services vehicles currently owned or operated by the permit holder which will operate in Roanoke County. 4.5 Record keeping and access to records• By applying for and accepting a permit from Roanoke County authorizing the transport of patients within the county, the holder of the permit agrees to the following conditions regarding record keeping and reports of every emergency medical transport: 5.1 For all Volunteer Rescue Squads operating in Roanoke County, to forward to the designated official or agent of the Roanoke County Department of Fire and Rescue, the necessary information regarding the identity of the individual transported and the particulars of each transport upon forms to be provided by the Department; 5 ~-~ 5.2 To maintain records of all transports for a period of three (3) years and provide access to such records to any designated official of Roanoke County during regular business hours; Record pertaining to any minor patients (under 18 years of age at time of transport) shall be maintained for three (3) years after the minor reaches the age of eighteen (18); 5.3 To assist any representative or agent of the Department of Fire and Rescue with any inquires concerning any question or dispute regarding the circumstances of any transport 5.4 To assist the Department of Fire and Rescue in investigating any alleged violation of county, state or federal laws or regulations concerning any transport of an individual within Roanoke County. 4.6 Business license and authority to do business: An non-governmental person applying for a permit under these procedures shall provide evidence of a current Roanoke County business license or such license from another Virginia jurisdiction as required by Title 58.1 of the Code of Virginia. Further, if requested, the applicant shall provide proof of legal authority to do business within the Commonwealth of Virginia and the name and address of their registered agent for purposes of service of notice or process. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application Form: 2. Permit Form: 6 V"~ Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department Application for Ambulance Service Agency 3568 Peters Creek Rd Roanoke, VA 24019 (540) 561-8100 Name of Ambulance A enc Business Address of Ambulance A enc Phone Number: E-Mail Address: VA State EMS A enc License Number: VA State EMS A enc License Ex iration Date: Authorized Person for A enc List all Emergency Service Vehicles that operate or have the potential to operate in the County of Roanoke (list each vehicle number as identified by the Virginia Department of Health, Office of EMS alon with the Division of Motor Vehicles License Plate Number 1 7 2 8 3 9 4 10 5 11 6 12 Attach additional copies if more space is required Verification of Insurance for Motor Vehicle and General Liability Insurance must accompany this a lication for rocessin . Applicant agrees to abide by all administrative procedures set forth in County of Roanoke Ordinance 052201-13 (Article VI, FEE FOR SERVICE of Chapter 2, ADMINISTRATION By signing the application, each individual acknowledges on behalf of their organization or legal entity that they understand that any false or materially misleading statement contained in the application may be grounds for denying the application or for revoking any permit which has been grated based upon such false or materially misleading statement. Authorized Si nature of A licant A enc Date: Roanoke County Ambulance Agency Application Fire and Rescue Department Revised 10/2001 Mary Allen -Permit for Ambulance Service 10-01.ppt Page 1 Q "' County of Roanoke ~PN~ RFs Q ~ '~ m O 1. ~,~ ~ 4 RT ~`~` Roanoke County Fire & Rescue Department Permit for Ambulance Service Agency This is to certify that Station Name Has met all requirements set forth by the County of Roanoke Ordinance 052201-13 (Article VI, FEE FOR SERVICE of Chapter 2, ADMINISTRATION) in accordance with the Code of Virginia Emergency Ground Transport- Advanced Life Support (CT-PM) Date o[ Issuance _ Date of Expiration VA EMS Ageacy_ Permit Number Chief Richard Burch, fr. Saltalion Chisf Steve Simon AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2001 RESOLUTION 100901-7 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 2.2-3712 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 Minnix to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Minnix NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens cc: File Closed Meeting File A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors OF pOANp,~~ , 4 ti '' ~ 2 ` ~ v a ~~~~~ .~~ ~~ 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) 772-2193 Internet E-Mail: bholton@www.co.roanoke.va.us October 10, 2001 Mr. James T. Phipps, Director Court-Community Corrections Program 516 East Main Street Salem, VA 24153 Dear Mr. Phipps: Attached is a copy of Resolution No. 100901-6.c approving revisions to the membership of the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for the Court Community Corrections Program. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, October 9, 2001. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Attachment cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff ® Recycled Paper ,~` f o~ aoa-vo,~~ ~- '~ ~ 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE MARY H. ALLEN, CMC ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 CLERK TO THE BOARD (540) 772-2005 BRENDA J. HOLTON FAX (540) 772-21 93 DEPUTY CLERK Internet E-Mail: mallen@www.co.roanoke.va.us Internet E-Mail: bholton@www.co.roanoke.va.us October 11, 2001 Mr. James D. Campbell Executive Director Virginia Association of Counties 1001 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219 Dear Mr. Campbell: Attached is the VACo 2001 Annual Meeting Voting Credentials Form designating Harry C. Nickens as Roanoke County's voting delegate. This designation was approved by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, October 9, 2001. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bj h Attachment cc: The Honorable Harry C. Nickens ® Recycled Paper I .~° ./'' VACo 2001 Annual Meeting "" `, Voting Credentials Fo. m ~~ "" Voting Delegate: (Supelvisor) Name Harry C. Nickens Title Sip _rv~r, Roanoke County Boa~•d-of Supervisors Locality County of Roanoke Alternate Delegate: (Supervisor) Name Title Locality Certified by: (Clerk of the Boa1•d) Name_ Marv H. Allen Title Clerk to the Board Locality County of Roanoke VACo 2001 Annual Meeting PI-oxy Statement County authorizes the following person to cast its vote at the ?001 Annual Meeting of the Virginia Association of Counties on November 13, 2001. a non-elected official of this county. -OR- a Supelvisor from COUIlty. This authorization is: Uninstructed. The proxy may use his/her discretion to cast County's votes on any issue to come before the annual meeting. II1st11zcted. The prosy is limited in how he/she may cast County's votes. The issues on which he/she may cast those votes and how he/she should vote are: (List issues and instructions on the back of this form) Certified by: Name_ Title Locality pOANp~~ ~ ~~~ `~`' p ~ e - ,-U~ ~ 1838 ~l~icc <~~ the C~~~uiity :1~ln~inislrator ELMER C. HODGE P.O. Box 29800 Phone: (540) 7?2-2004 5204 Bernard Drive Fax: (540) 772-2193 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 E-mail: ehodgeCQ?co.roanoke.vaus September 28, 2001 ~: Ms. Elizabeth S. Doughty President Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce 212 S. ,letf~erson Street Roanoke, V A 24011-1702 Re: Shell Building -Valley Gateway Dear Beth: In our meeting on September 24, you requested that payment of the attached Note in the amount of $260,440.50, due on May 15, 2002, by the Greater Roanoke Valley Development Foundation to the Industrial Development Authority, be deferred until the s11e11 building is sold. My staff and I have researched this and are willing to support your request. What you are asking certainly makes sense. We have been partners in this from the very beginning. Since this is a contract modification, I will take it to the Board at the next meeting for official approval. I anticipate the Board will concur as well and I will let you know within the next few weeks of the outcome. Sincerely, (~ ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Enclosure c: Robert C. Lawson, Jr., Past Chairman, Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce Doug Chittum, Director, F,conomic Development i NOTE $260,440.50 Roanoke, Virginia May 15 1997 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby promises to pay to the order of The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, in lawful money of the United States of America, the principal sum of Two Hundred Sixty Thousand Four Hundred Forty Dollars and 50/100 ($260,440.50), without interest, being negotiable and pavable, without offset. at- Rnannlra Virginia, or at such other place as the holder of this Note may hereafter designate in writing, payable as follows: The Note herein shall be due and payable in full on the ~Yrt.~-~y~ day of 2002 or at such earlier date as the secured property is sold by the Grantor. In the event the subject property is leased by the Grantor, the balance due under the Note shall be amortized over the remaining term of the Note. Right of anticipation is reserved. If default be made in any of the payments obligated to be made by this Note, the entire principal sum shall at once become due and payable without notice at the option of the holder of this note. Failure to exercise the option shall not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise the same in the event of any subsequent default, breach, or breaches. Presentment, protest, and notice are hereby waived. The OSTERHOUOT, FERDUSON, NATT, AHERDN & ADEE ATTD R N EYS-AT- LAW ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 makers and endorsers of this Note also waive benefit of the homestead exemption as to this debt, and agree, in the event of default, to pay a reasonable attorney's fee for cost of collection on the unpaid balance of this Note. Should the Greater Roanoke Valley Development *~G-~ NEWS RELEASE For Immediate Release Contact: Kathi B. Scearce, Director of Community Relations 540-772-2010 kscearce(a,co.roanoke.va.us Kodak Likes Development of Valley Greenways Roanoke Valley Greenways Receives Kodak American Greenways 2001 Award September 26, 2001 -Roanoke, Virginia -The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission is a recipient of the 2001 Kodak American Greenways Award. Sponsored by Eastman Kodak Company, the National Geographic Society and the Conservation Fund, the award program honors individuals and organizations that have played a leadership role in fostering a national network of greenways and linked open spaces. The program also provides small grants to assist communities with their greenways planning and design efforts. "We are extremely pleased to be a part of the American Greenways Program," said Hays Bell, Vice President of the Eastman Kodak Company. "Helping families experience natural beauty in their own backyards is one of the most important things we can do for our children and for generations to come. We're proud to join with The Conservation Fund in their efforts to support community greenway projects." "This is a very big honor for the valley, and we are thrilled to have been recognized for our hard work," says Liz Belcher, the Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator. "Greenways have a huge impact on our quality of life because they allow us to link recreational, cultural and natural features together for the use of all the valley's citizen's. In addition to the Kodak award, the Commission will receive a joint project grant of $269,000 from the Commonwealth Transportation Board on Thursday, September 27. The joint project is between the City of Salem and Roanoke County fora 7-mile section of greenway through west Roanoke County and the City of Salem. The check presentation ceremony will take place at the Moyer Complex at 10:00 a.m. About Roanoke County Roanoke County was founded in 1838 and adopted its first charter in 1986. The mission of the County is to be a government in partnership and in unity with its people, creating a progressive and innovative community. It is the primary goal of the County government to be an excellent steward of the resources entrusted to it by County citizens and to add value to those resources through the delivery of a broad spectrum of efficient, quality services. Administrative offices for the County are headquartered on Bernard Drive. ###