Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/23/2001 - RegularP AN ,~-~ ,' A a 838 ~ C!~'L Q • ~ CbC ~ lJ U[Q ~ _ _ ~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 23, 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 3:00 P.M. 2. Invocation: John M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant County Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag CHAIRMAN WELCOMED VINTON TOWN MAYOR DAVIS. MEMBERS OF VINTON TOWN COUNCIL ALTICE GROSE ROTENBERRY AND TOWN MANAGER CLAY GOODMAN TO MEETING B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS ECH ADDED TWO ITEMS TO CLOSED SESSION: SECTION 2.2-3711 A (7) 1 ® Recyded Paper r. LEGAL ADVICE CONCERNING ROUTE 419 CROSSOVER AT SPRINGWOOD PARK AND SECTION 2.2-3711 A (20) TO DISCUSS PLANS TO PROTECT PUBLIC SAFETY AS IT RELATES TO TERRORIST ACTIVITY. VICKIE HUFFMAN, ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY, ASKED TO MOVE ITEM H.1 TO THE EVENING SESSION. ITEM T.4 FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Certificate of recognition to Robert J. Wooddall for his dedicated community service to the Department of Social Services. ACCEPTED BY BETSY SMITH DSS FOR DELIVERY TO MR. WOODDALL SINCE HE WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND 2. Resolution of appreciation to Henry A. Wiley, General Service Department, for twenty-eight years of service to Roanoke County. ACCEPTED BY MR. WILEY R-102301-1 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT RESO URC 3. Recognition of Virginia Municipal League Award to Town of Vinton for Gain Sharing Agreement. VINTON MAYOR DON DAVIS PRESENTED REPORT AND THANKED COUNTY FOR COOPERATION ON AGREEMENT D. BRIEFINGS 1. Results of 2001 Citizen Satisfaction Survey. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator; Frank Martin, Martin Research; and Kathi Scearce, Community Relations Director) PRESENTED BY MR. HODGE MR. MARTIN AND MS. SCEARCE E. NEW BUSINESS 2 1. Motion to reconsider resolution opposing Alternative 6A for the Interstate-73 Highway Project. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) HCN MOTION TO ADOPT RESO AYES: BLJ. HCN NAYS: JPM. JBC, HOM MOTION DEFEATED 2. Approval of an agreement with the Town of Vinton concerning the development of the McDonald Farm Economic Development Project. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) A-102301-2 HCN MOTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENT URC 3. .Request to approve performance agreement with Sims Automotive, Inc. (Land Rover). (Doug Chittum, Economic Development Director) A-102301-3 HOM MOTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENT URC 4. Authorization to approve option for the acquisition of 89 acres of real estate on Read Mountain for ridge line protection. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) A-102301-4 BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENT AND APPROPRIATION URC 5. Request for approval of policies and procedures for accepting contributions and donations for County projects. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) A-102301-5 JPM MOTION TO APPROVE POLICY WITH REVISION TO 1C TO ESTABLISH $1,000 THRESHOLD URC 3 F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. HCN MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND AND PUBLIC HEARINGS -11/13/01 URC 1. First reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for 11.71 acres for a private stable located at 4911 Poor Mountain Road, Catawba Magisterial District upon the petition of Stephen D. and Ruth E. Nash. 2. First reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for 8.77 acres for a religious assembly located at Va. Rte. 311/Laurel Mountain Road intersection, Catawba Magisterial District upon the petition of Star City Church of Christ. 3. First reading of ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-92 Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. 4. First reading of ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-23, Non-Conforming Uses and Structures upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing creation and financing for a local public works improvement project -Paint Bank Road Water Project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-102301-6 JBC MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING, ALT. #1, AND WAIVE SECOND READING DUE TO EMERGENCY URC 2. First reading of ordinance authorizing the acquisition of real estate for the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project, Phase II, to reduce 4 the number of structures in the Carvin Creek Floodplain. (George Simpson, Community Development Assistant Director) BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND HEARING -11/13/01 URC H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second 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) HEARD DURING THE 7:00 P.M. EVENING SESSION I. APPOINTMENTS 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 Resource Authority HCN NOMINATED DAN MORRIS TO REPLACE DIANE HYATT WHOSE TERM EXPIRES 12/31/2002. HCN NOMINATED DOUGLAS ANDERSON BUT WITHDREW NOMINATION WHEN ASKED BY CHAIR TO WAIT UNTIL THE BOARD COULD DISCUSS THE NOMINATIONS JBC REQUESTED THAT ONE OF APPOINTMENTS EXPIRING 12/31/01 SHOULD BE FILLED BY A CITIZEN FROM BRADSHAW ROAD IN CATAWBA DISTRICT. 6. Southwest Development Financing, Inc. HCN NOMINATED WENDI SCHULTZ TO COMPLETE UNEXPIRED TERM OF 5 PETE HAISLIP WHICH EXPIRES 1/12/2002 J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE •ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-102301-7 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO URC 1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee. A-102301-7.a 2. Resolution of congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary in the Roanoke Valley. R-102301-7.b 3. Resolution of appreciation upon the retirement of Daniel A. LaPrade, Police Department. R-102301-7.c 4. Request from Sheriff's Office to accept $8,115 grant for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education Program. A-102301-7.d 5. Request for acceptance of Monet Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. R-102301-7.e 6. Acceptance of donation of 20' sanitary sewer easement from Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. on Reservoir Road, Hollins 6 Magisterial District. A-102301-7.f K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for work session on November 13, 2001 to review the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan (2002-2008) and Consideration of Projects for FY 2002-2003 VDOT Revenue Sharing Program. (Arnold Covey, Community Development Director) BOARD CONSENSUS TO SET WORK SESSION FOR 11/13/01 2. Request for work session on November 13, 2001 to review proposed changes to Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) BOARD CONSENSUS TO SET WORK SESSION FOR 11/13/01 L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE N. REPORTS BLJ MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE REPORTS URC 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Report of September meeting of Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional 7 Commission. 6. Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program 7. List of changes to the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System in September, 2001. O. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-3711 A (3) discussion or consideration of the disposition of publicly held property, Salem Office Supply; Section 2.1-3711 A (7) to discuss legal matters requiring the provision of legal advise by the County Attorney and briefing by staff concerning Route 419 Crossover at Springwood Park; and Section 2.1-3711 A (20) to discuss plans to protect public safety as it relates to terrorist activity. HOM MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED MEETING AT 5:15 P.M. CLOSED MEETING HELD FROM 5:20 P.M. UNTIL 6:50 P.M. P. WORK SESSION (4T" FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) NONE EVENING SESSION Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION HOM ADVISED THAT HE WAS ABSENT FOR PART OF THE CLOSED MEETING AND CAME INTO THE DISCUSSION AT THE BEGINNING OF 419 CROSSOVER R-102301-8 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT CERT RESO AT 7:00 P.M. URC R. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS NONE S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading and public hearing of ordinance accepting an offer for 8 and authorizing the sale of property located at 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia (Salem Office Supply Building -City of Salem Tax Map No. 107-6-1 ). (Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services) HCN MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING WITH ALT. #1. RENOVATION OF BUILDING 2ND AND PUBLIC HEARING -11/13/01 URC T. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to develop a golf course on 364 acres and rezone 118 acres from AG- 3, Agricultural to AR, Agricultural Residential, located at 3608 Pitzer Road, SE, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Nathaniel C. Haile. (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 25, 2001) PETITION WAS CONTINUED AT REQUEST OF PETITIONER 2. Second reading of ordinance to amend the Roanoke County zoning ordinance, Section 30-21 (B) Enforcement Procedures upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 0-102301-9 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 3. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 3.71 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District with conditions for a development of multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Avenue, Hollins Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 28, 2001) 0-102301-10 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 4. Second reading of ordinance authorizing the vacation of an existing 20' drainage easement and acceptance of the relocated 20' drainage 9 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) 0-102301-11 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC U. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Johnson: (1) Thanked HOM for attending press conference Sat. about citizen group and protection for Read Mountain and advised that action today gives citizens opportunity to preserve the mountaintop and could serve as model for others. (2) Has received three calls concerning letters of misstatement distributed in Huntridge section in Bonsack that a commercial entrance for Wal- Mart will be made through a County abandoned well lot. Assured citizens that this is not true, and County will live up to its previous commitment and no one should use scare tactics about a commercial entrance into the subdivision. Supervisor McNamara: (1) Inquired if the County had used the financing part of the Southwest Development Financing Committee and ECH informed that the County has not but is receiving network benefits. (2) Announced statistics in Draper Arden report on water and sewer rates for Virginia and that Roanoke County is one of two counties out of 176 counties that lowered their water rates. Perspective is that County has high water rates but in reality they are below average. Spring Hollow Reservoir is an asset and was great idea. Supervisor Minnix: (1) Followed up on JPM briefing on water rates and agreed that County did great planning and asked to keep as much water in the reservoir as possible. (2) Advised that he enjoyed the press conference and the scenery was beautiful. Commended BLJ for his financial pledge for grandchildren to group and commended citizens for working hard and that we are only county to tackle ridge line protection. W. ADJOURNMENT HCN MOTION TO ADJOURN MEETING AT 7:35 P.M. UW 10 o~ aoaNO,~~ ~• ~~ ~ ~' 1838 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA OCTOBER 23, 2001 HEART CK' THE RL7IE RlUiG6 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 PRESENTATIONS 1. Certificate of recognition to Robert J. Wooddall for his dedicated community service to the Department of Social Services. 2. Resolution of appreciation to Henry A. Wiley, General Service 1 Department, for twenty-eight years of service to Roanoke County. 3. Recognition of Virginia Municipal League Award to Town of Vinton for Gain Sharing Agreement. D. BRIEFINGS 1. Results of 2001 Citizen Satisfaction Survey. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator; Frank Martin, Martin Research; and Kathi Scearce, Community Relations Director) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Motion to reconsider resolution opposing Alternative 6A for the Interstate-73 Highway Project. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 2. Approval of an agreement with the Town of Vinton concerning the development of the McDonald Farm Economic Development Project. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) 3. Request to approve performance agreement with Sims Automotive, Inc. (Land Rover). (Doug Chittum, Economic Development Director) 4. Authorization to approve option for the acquisition of 89 acres of real estate on Read Mountain for ridge line protection. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 5. Request for approval of policies and procedures for accepting contributions and donations for County projects. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. 1. First reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for 11.71 acres for a private stable located at 4911 Poor Mountain Road, Catawba Magisterial District upon the petition of Stephen D. and 2 Ruth E. Nash. 2. First reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit for 8.77 acres for a religious assembly located at Va. Rte. 311/Laurel Mountain Road intersection, Catawba Magisterial District upon the petition of Star City Church of Christ. 3. First reading of ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-92 Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. 4. First reading of ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-23, Non-Conforming Uses and Structures upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of ordinance authorizing creation and financing for a local public works improvement project -Paint Bank Road Water Project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 2. First reading of ordinance authorizing the acquisition of real estate for the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project, Phase II, to reduce the number of structures in the Carvin Creek Floodplain. (George Simpson, Community Development Assistant Director) H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second 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) I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals serving as Fire Code Board of Appeals 2. Grievance Panel 3. Industrial Development Authority 3 4. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 5. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority 6. Southwest Development Financing, Inc. J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee. 2. Resolution of congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary in the Roanoke Valley. 3. Resolution of appreciation upon the retirement of Daniel A. LaPrade, Police Department. 4. Request from Sheriff's Office to accept $8,115 grant for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education Program. 5. Request for acceptance of Monet Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 6. Acceptance of donation of 20' sanitary sewer easement from Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. on Reservoir Road, Hollins Magisterial District. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for work session on November 13, 2001 to review the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan (2002-2008) and Consideration of Projects for FY 2002-2003 VDOT Revenue Sharing Program. (Arnold Covey, Community Development 4 Director) 2. Request for work session on November 13, 2001 to review proposed changes to Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Report of September meeting of Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission. 6. Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program 7. List of changes to the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System in September, 2001. O. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.1-3711 A (3) discussion or consideration of the disposition of publicly held property, Salem Office Supply. P. WORK SESSION (4T" FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) EVENING SESSION Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 5 1. First reading and public hearing of ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the sale of property located at 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia (Salem Office Supply Building -City of Salem Tax Map No. 107-6-1 ). (Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services) T. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The followin_g petition has been requested to be continued by the petitioner: 1. Second reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to develop a golf course on 364 acres and rezone 118 acres from AG- 3, Agricultural to AR, Agricultural Residential, located at 3608 Pitzer Road, SE, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Nathaniel C. Haile. (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 25, 2001) 2. Second reading of ordinance to amend the Roanoke County zoning ordinance, Section 30-21 (B) Enforcement Procedures upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) 3. Second reading of ordinance on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 3.71 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District with conditions for a development of multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Avenue, Hollins Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Senior Planner) (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 28, 2001) U. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS W. ADJOURNMENT 6 ~' -, ~~~~~~ ~~ ~u~~~~~ CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AWARDED TO Robert J. Wooddall ^ After retirement from General Electric in 1981, Mr. Wooddall elected to serve his community with his active leadership and involvement in many volunteer activities, including: ^ Salem Food Pantry Board ^ RAM house ^ Roanoke Area Ministries ^ Family Crisis Committee, Our Lady of Perpetual help Catholic Church ^ Board of Directors for the Campbell Center ^ Mr. Wooddall served as Treasurer of the Roanoke Area Ministries from 1992 until his retirement in March, 2001. ^ Over the past nine years, Mr. Wooddall has worked closely with the social workers at the Roanoke County Department of Social Services (DSS) to provide financial assistance for needy families in the community. ^ Mr. Wooddall has been a dedicated and valuable friend to DSS and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors wishes to recognize his service to the County and the community. ```~~ Presented this 23rd day of October ~ 2001 ~ ~-~ 11 Lsn''U ~P S1 tore a uzzy" innix Cha~rq~oanoke County Board of Supervisors Title Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY,. OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION 102301-1 EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF HENRY A. WILEY, GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, AFTER TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Henry A. Wiley was first employed by Roanoke County on September 14, 1973, in the General Services Department as Janitor I and also held the position of Janitor II; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley retired from Roanoke County on October 1, 2001 as Custodian after twenty-eight years of service; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley was particularly helpful in assuring that the Board Meeting Room was clean and organized, and could always be counted on to assist with any official or special County functions; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley performed his duties and responsibilities in an efficient and effective manner and was held in high regard by his fellow County employees; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley, 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, the appreciation of Mr. Wiley's fellow County employees, and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to HENRY A. WILEY 1 for over twenty-eight years of cheerful, 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 Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services Joe Sgroi, Director, Human Resources 2 C -z AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF HENRY A. WILEY, GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, AFTER TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Henry A. Wiley was first employed by Roanoke County on September 14, 1973, in the General Services Department as Janitor I and also held the position of Janitor II; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley retired from Roanoke County on October 1, 2001 as Custodian after twenty-eight years of service; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley was particularly helpful in assuring that the Board Meeting Room was clean and organized, and could always be counted on to assist with any official or special County functions; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley performed his duties and responsibilities in an efficient and effective manner and was held in high regard by his fellow County employees; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley, 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, the appreciation of Mr. Wiley's fellow County employees, and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to HENRY A. WILEY 1 ~. .' I for over twenty-eight years of cheerful, 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 ~- ' 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: Recognition of Virginia Municipal League Award to the Town of Vinton for Gain Sharing Agreement. AGENDA ITEM: October 23, 2001 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Town of Vinton was awarded a Virginia Municipal League Achievement Award for the Gain Sharing Agreement between the Town of Vinton and Roanoke County. This award was presented at the VML Conference on October 16, 2001 in Virginia Beach Vinton Town Mayor Don Davis and Town Manager Clay Goodman will be present at the meeting to inform the Board of this award and express their appreciation for the County's cooperation on the Gain Sharing Agreement. ~a-~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church _ _ _ Denied () Johnson _ _ _ Received () McNamara- _ _ Referred () Minnix _ _ _ To () Nickens _ 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 23, 2001 SUBJECT: Briefing on 2001 Citizen Satisfaction Survey COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: We have placed this briefing on the agenda to share with you the results of the Citizen Satisfaction Survey. The data is still being tabulated, and is not in final form. It will be available to you at the Board meeting. We do have preliminary information Martin Research, and I believe you will be quite pleased with the results. All County services received excellent grades as they have in the past. The survey was conducted the week after the September 11 terrorist attacks, which is a possible explanation for why an issue we have not seen in the past, street lights, has risen in citizen priorities. Martin Research is finalizing the compilation of data and comparing this year's information to past surveys. Frank Martin from Martin Research will be present at the Board meeting to answer any ofyour questions. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a briefing on the 2001 Citizen Satisfaction Survey. Since 1997, Community Relations has contracted with a vendor to conduct a countywide survey on a biannual basis. The survey involves 500 randomly selected households to provide the Board of Supervisors with a fair representation of what County residents consider important issues. This year, the survey contract was awarded to Martin Research, which also conducted the 1995, 1997 and 1999 County surveys. Frank Martin will be here to present the results to the Board. K hi B. Scearce Director, Community Relations Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To ACTION Motion by: ~~~~ /~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens cc: File 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Motion to Reconsider Resolution Opposing Alternative 6A for the I-73 Interstate Highway Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This action is to reconsider the adoption of a resolution opposing alternative 6A for the I-73 interstate highway project. BACKGROUND: This resolution is before the Board for action after passage of a motion to reconsider at the October 9, 2001 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. After several motions, withdrawal of motions and much debate about the I-73 interstate highway project, the Board adopted a motion by Dr. Nickens to oppose Alternative 6A. This motion passed by a vote of 3-2. This was followed by a motion to reconsider. This motion to reconsider passed by a vote of 3-2. Sec. 2-115 (f) of the County Code provides in part as follows: "Upon passage of a motion to reconsider, the subject matter shall be placed on the agenda of the next regular board meeting for any action the board deems advisable." SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This attached resolution, which is the subject of the motion to reconsider, reflects the motion of Dr. Nickens "to go on record opposing alternative 6A." Staff has attempted to put this motion into a written resolution format with a heading and background information for research and indexing purposes to reflect County practice. The purpose of reconsidering a vote "is to permit correction of hasty, ill-advised, or erroneous action, or to take into account added 1 r R ..,,.. information or a changed situation that has developed since the taking of the vote."(Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised,1990 edition, page 309) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None. Respectfully submitted, `~~~~ Paul M. Mahoney 1 County Attorney l/ Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Vote No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\A1t6AI73MottoRecon.rpt.wpd 2 ~-l AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2S, 2001 RESOLUTION OPPOSING ALTERNATIVE 6A FOR I-7s THROUGH THE ROANOKE VALLEY WHEREAS, the Commonwealth Transportation Board has previously selected Alternative Corridor 6A which generally follows Route 220, Interstate 581, Interstate 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 OS2498-6 of March 24, 1998, Resolution 090898-1 of September 8, 2000, and Resolution 120500-2 of December 5, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, opposes Alternative Corridor 6A for the proposed I-73 interstate highway project. G:\ATTORN EY \PMM \AGENDA \Al t.6A.I78.MottoRecon.Res.wpd A-102301-2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. '~' '~" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~TIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of an Agreement with the Town of Vinton Concerning the Development of the McDonald Farm Economic Development Project COUNTY ADMII~TISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This Agreement with the Town of Vinton will promote and encourage economic development in that area of Roanoke County east of the Town through the joint funding of public infrastructure improvements in the McDonald Farm economic development Project (the "Project") to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in Roanoke County. This action approves this Agreement and authorizes the County Administrator to execute this agreement on behalf of Roanoke County. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On November 2, 1999, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County and the Town Council of the Town of Vinton entered into a Gain Sharing Agreement to address the mutual concerns of each jurisdiction, to promote strong and viable units of local government, and to encourage economic growth and development. On June 26, 2000, a special court entered a Final Order validating and affirming the Gain Sharing Agreement. Section 4 of said Agreement addresses joint public improvements and economic development, and specifically, Section 4.03 addresses the McDonald Farm economic development project. The County and the Town have agreed to negotiate the future joint funding of the costs of this project. This Agreement provides for the County to make future appropriations to fund the costs of development for this Project. The Town and the County shall jointly agree to utilize the funds identified in the Agreement to commence construction of public infrastructure improvements on or benefitting the property. The funds shall not be expended unless both the Town and the County agree to such expenditure. °_. The Town Manager has previously briefed the Board in work session concerning the plans for this Project. The Town Council will act on this Agreement in early November. FISCAL IMPACTS: ~ooo On December 19, -999 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County appropriated $500,000 to begin to pay the County's share of the costs of development. It is anticipated that future appropriations will be required to complete this Project. Any New Tax Revenues (as defined in the Gain Sharing Agreement) shall be distributed in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.03 of the Gain Sharing Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to execute the Agreement on behalf of the County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. Respec lly sub fitted, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to approve Church _ x Denied () staff recommendation Johnson _ x _ Received () McNamara- x Referred () Minnix _ x _ To () Nickens _ x _ cc: File Doug Chittum, Director, Economic Development Dania) Morris, Director, Finance Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney G:\ATTORNEY\PMM\V INTON\VintonMcdonFarmAgree.rpt.wpd .• 9/28/01 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this "~ day of , 2001, by and between the TOWN OF VINTON, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "Town"), and the COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "County") WHEREAS, on November 2, 1999, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County and the Town Council of the Town of Vinton entered into a Gain Sharing Agreement to address the mutual concerns of each jurisdiction, to promote strong and viable units of local government, and to encourage economic growth and development; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 2000, a special court entered a Final Order validating and affirming said Gain Sharing Agreement; and WHEREAS, Section 4 of said Agreement addresses joint public improvements and economic development, and specifically, Section 4.03 addresses the McDonald Farm economic development project (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to negotiate the future joint funding of the costs of this project. IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. The Town and the County agree that the value of the McDonald Farm (the "Property") is One Million Five Hundred Thousand ($1,500,000). a o00 2. On December 19, f~9, the Board of Supervisors appropriated $500,000 for this Project (Action No. ). This appropriation of funds by the County shall be used for those purposes described in paragraph 3. 1 J ~. 3. The "costs of development" shall mean all local funds expended by the County and the Town and any in-kind donations by the County and the Town for the development of the Project including, but not limited to, land acquisition, site development, water and sewer facilities, other public improvements, and planning, engineering, architectural and marketing services related directly to the Project. Any state or federal funding, or any other grant funds, contributed by the County or the Town and the time and expenses of County and Town personnel shall be excluded from the Costs of Development. 4. Additional funding in future budgets is subject to future appropriations by the Board of Supervisors and Town Council. 5. The Town and the County shall jointly agree to utilize the funds identified in paragraph 2 to commence construction of public infrastructure improvements on or benefiting the property. The funds identified in paragraph 2 shall not be expended unless both the Town and the County agree to such expenditure. 6. The parties acknowledge that prospects that intend to locate in this Project may require unique or specific public improvements or other incentives. Both the Town and the County shall agree to meet and confer in advance before any such improvements or incentives are constructed, installed or provided. Specific improvements required by or incentives granted to an economic development prospect or candidate for location in the Project may be credited to the County's share of the initial value of the Property or portion of development costs of the project. The parties agree to jointly market and promote the Project and the Property. The parties agree to establish the value of the land for marketing the property. Nothing herein shall prohibit the Town from offering as an incentive land or other public improvements when developing marketing proposals for economic development prospects. 2 '~ 7. (a) Until the County's financial participation in this Project matches the Town's financial participation, any conveyance of any interest in real estate or improvements on the Property either by sale, exchange, lease, or dedication may occur only after consultation with the County. (b) Upon the future appropriation of additional funds by the County, so that its financial participation in this Project is equivalent to that of the Town's (based upon value of the Property, costs of development, and any incentives for economic development prospects locating in the Project), any conveyance of any interest in real estate or improvements on the Property, either by sale, exchange, lease or dedication shall occur only upon the mutual written consent of the Town and the County. 8. Any New Tax Revenues (as defined in the Gain Sharing Agreement) shall be distributed in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.03 of the Gain Sharing Agreement. 9. The provisions of this Agreement shall continue in perpetuity. 10. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Town and the County, and each of the future governing bodies of the Town and the County, and upon any successor to either the Town or the County. WITNESS the following signatures and seals. TOWN OF VINTON, VIRGINIA By. Attest: Clerk Mayor s .~ E „c; COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA By. Chairman, Board of Supervisors Attest: Clerk A-102301-3 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of a Performance Agreement with Sims Automotive, Inc. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend approval. There was a meeting ofSims and County representatives with the Clearbrook Civic League last week to explain these changes to the community, and they were well received. This project originally included only the Land Rover dealership. This is replacement of that project and includes several premier dealerships for Land Rover, Mercedes Benz, and Jaguar. This a great project which will require no new outlay of funds and I recommend approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This Performance Agreement with Sims Automotive, Inc. will promote and encourage economic development in the Clearbrook/U.S. Route 220 area of Roanoke County through the recruitment of new retail business to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in Roanoke County. Significant new revenues will be realized as a result of this development. This action approves this Performance Agreement and authorizes the County Administrator to execute this agreement on behalf of Roanoke County. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This Performance Agreement provides for the appropriation of $3000,000 from new local tax revenues generated by Sims Automotive, Inc. The County will release utility liens and pay off- site facilities fees for this project. Sims will develop a 4.66-acre parcel located State Route 220 in the Clearbrook area (Tax Parcel Nos. 88.03-1-30, 88.03-1-31, 88.03-1-32, 88.03-1-33, and 88.03-1-34) with an investment of $7 Million in buildings and other site improvements, and it is estimated that this project will generate $300,000 in new local tax revenues over any three years within the January 2002 -August 2007 period for Roanoke County. Sims will construct new automobile dealerships for Mercedes- Benz, Jaguar and Land Rover. If the project fails to generate the anticipated new local tax revenues within the time period specified, then Sims shall reimburse the County the difference between the amount of new local tax revenues actually produced and $300,000. G:\ATTORNEY\PNII+I\ECONDEV\LandRover\LandROVerSimsPerfAgree.rpt.frm L~'~ «.~ a FISCAL IMPACTS: By Ordinance 121900-13, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County created a utility improvement district in the Clearbrook area of Roanoke County known as the "Stable Road Water and Sewer District" and imposed fees or liens on various properties in this district for the construction of water and sewer lines and appurtenant facilities. In order to accomplish this Performance Agreement the County must appropriate an amount from the General Fund to the Utility Fund in order to release the water and sewer liens and to pay utility off-site facilities fees for this project. The County will subordinate and then release its liens on the real estate in this project upon the completion of the project and receipt of new local tax revenues. These appropriations should be made in future budget appropriations from the new local tax revenues generated by this project. It is anticipated that the County will recover its prof ect investment from 3 years of anticipated new local tax revenues derived from this project within the January 2002 -August 2007 period. Sims will pay the County $25,000 within 30 days of the execution of the Performance Agreement in order to pay its share of the utility connection fees and a portion of the utility liens. Sims will donate land for construction ofpublic highway for a redesigned Buck Mountain Road, the location of which must be agreed to by Sims, the County, and VDOT. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to execute the Performance Agreement on behalf of the County, by and between the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and Sims Automotive, Inc., upon form approved by the County Attorney. The County Administrator is authorized to execute this Performance Agreement upon Sim's accepting title to the real estate. Respectfully submitted, E. Douglas Chittum Director of Economic Development ACTION Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Approved by, rte" /j-~~ ~~-~c~~ Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to approve staff recommendation cc: File Doug Chittum, Director, Economic Development Danial Morris, Director, Finance Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Paul M Mahoney, County Attorney VOTE No Yes Abs Church _ x _ Johnson _ x McNamara- x Minnix x Nickens _ x _ 2 ~` This Performance Agreement (this "Agreement's made and entered into this day of , 2001, by and between the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, (hereinafter referred to as "County'; PETTY, LIVINGSTON DAWSON & RICHARDS, P. C., a Virginia professional corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Qualified Intermediary', and SIMS AUTOMOTIVE, INC., a Virginia corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Sims'. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County desires to promote and encourage the economic development and vitality of Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valley through the recruitment of new commercial enterprises and the expansion of existing business and employment opportunities for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley, in order to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, Sims desires to support the economic development efforts of the County, and in some cases fora certain period of time through its qualified intermediary (as such term is defined in Treasury Regulations Section 1.1031(k)-1(g)), Petry Livingston, Dawson, & Richards, P. C., anticipates constructing several automotive dealerships, including Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, and Jaguar, in the Clearbrook area of Roanoke County (hereinafter referred to as the "Project'; and Performance Agreement_E&WRevised.doc 1 ~~ WHEREAS, by Ordinance 121900-13, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County created a utility improvement district in the Clearbrook area of Roanoke County known as the "Stable Road Water and Sewer District" and imposed fees or liens on various properties in this district for the construction of water and sewer lines and appurtenant facilities; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is located in this utility improvement district, and is subject to the fees or liens imposed, said fees or liens to be a lien recorded among the land records in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office, and which fees or liens are due upon the development of the property; andNOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the covenants and obligations herein contained, which the parties hereto acknowledge as being sufficient consideration for entering into this Agreement, the parties covenant and agree as follows: 1. Qualified Intermediary agrees to pay $25,000 towards the total cost for utility construction of $86,308 as satisfaction of the development requirement set out in Ordinance 121900-13 for Tax Parcel No. 88.03-1-33 (Tax Parcel Nos. 88.03-1-30, 88.03-1-31, 88.03-1-32, 88.03-1-33, and 88.03-1-34 having been combined into 88.03- 1-33) and as further stated in the Public-Private Partnership letter agreement dated February 29, 2001, from Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator for Roanoke County, to James R. Walker, President, Land Rover of Roanoke, Inc. (Exhibit A). This $25,000 payment shall be paid to the County within 30 days of the execution of this Agreement. Performance Agreement_E&WRevised.doc 2 ~-3 The lien imposed on Tax Parcel No. 88.03-1-33 by Ordinance 121900-13 shall be released upon payment of said $25,000. 2. Sims and Qualified Intermediary agree to create a $7,000,000 investment in real estate and business personal property and to create new full-time jobs. Sims promises that this Project will generate no less than $300,000 in local tax revenues for the County during any 3 years commencing January 1, 2002 and ending August 31, 2007. 3. The County agrees to subordinate the lien imposed by Ordinance 121900- 13 (Deed Book 1688, page 1064) to a deed of trust (or replacement deed of trust) by Sims for Tax Parcel Nos. 88.03-1-29, 88.03-1-33, and 88.03-1-35 to acquire this real estate and construct the necessary improvements thereon for successful completion of the Project.4.The County agrees to release the liens of record as being satisfied, which are located in Deed Book 1688 at page 1064 in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office, imposed by Ordinance 121900-13 on Tax Parcel Nos. 88.03-1-29, 88.03- 1-33, and 88.03-1-35 in the amount of $126,383 for sewer improvements and $80,850 for water improvements (total $207,233) upon the completion of the Project and the generation of the new local tax revenues within the time period specified in paragraph 2. 5. County agrees to pay water and sewer off-site facilities fees portion of the utility connection fees in an amount not to exceed $92,767, as authorized by Sections Performance Agreement_E&WRevised.doc ~ .~ , „~ 18-168(f)(2) and 22-82(b)(3)b of the Roanoke County Code. Qualified Intermediary shall be responsible for the payment of the basic connection fee. 6. Qualified Intermediary agrees to donate a 100-foot wide right-of-way for the construction of a public highway connecting a redesigned Buck Mountain Road and Stable Road. The location of this redesigned Buck Mountain Road on Sims' properly shall be agreed upon by Sims, the County, and the Commonwealth of Virginia, Virginia Department of Transportation. 7. This Performance Agreement is contingent upon Qualified Intermediary acquiring fee simple title to the property identified as Tax Parcel Nos. 88.03-1-29, 88.03-1-33, and 88.03-1-35 no later than December 1, 2001. 8. If Sims or Qualified Intermediary, as the case may be, fails to fulfill the promises with respect to new investment or new local tax revenues made to the County in paragraphs 1 and 2, then Sims shall pay to the County the difference between $300,000 and the greatest amount of local tax revenues received by the County from the project during the applicable 3-year period by September 30, 2007. 9. Sims and/or Qualified Intermediary shall have the right to assign this Agreement to a separate entity provided, however, that except as set forth in paragraph 12 hereinbelow, any such assignment shall not relieve the assignor of its obligations herein. 10. This Agreement shall be governed by any and all disputes related hereto shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia.ll. Performance Agreement_E&WRevised.doc 4 ~;~~ This Agreement and any reimbursement of costs and improvements from public funds is subject to future appropriations by the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors hereby appropriates the sum of $300,000 from the General Fund to reimburse the Utility Fund for the release of liens in paragraph 1 and 4 and the payment of water and sewer off-site facilities fees portion of the utility connection fees in paragraph 5. 12. The parties hereto acknowledge that Qualified Intermediary is acting solely as a qualified intermediary in an IRC §1031 like-kind exchange involving Sims. The parties hereto further agree and acknowledge that on or before, but in no event later than December 22, 2001, the Qualified Intermediary will transfer and assign to Sims all of its ownership, title, interest, obligations, and rights in and to of any portion of the Project that it owns as of the date hereof, including, without limitation, (a) fee simple title to any real estate now owned by the Qualified Intermediary and included in the Project, and (b) all of Qualified Intermediary's rights and obligations under this Performance Agreement, so that Qualified Intermediary will no longer have the authority or assets available to continue to be obligated under the Agreement. Moreover, all of the parties agree that that Sims is to be substituted in place and stead of Qualified Intermediary under this Performance Agreement on or before December 22, 2001, and shall be solely responsible for performance of the same at all times thereafter. Accordingly, the parties hereto agree that upon the transfer of the Project to Sims (which shall occur on or before December 22, 2001) Sims shall be, and by its Performance Agreement_E&WRevised.doc 5 ,~ signature hereto agrees to be, substituted in place of the "Qualified Intermediary" under the Agreement and Petty, Livingston, Dawson & Richards, P. C. shall thereafter be relieved of and from any further obligation under this Performance Agreement from and after that date. Approved as to form: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA By Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Roanoke County Attorney SIMS AUTOMOTIVE, INC. By PETTY LIVINGSTON DAWSON & RICHARDS, P. C. By Its Performance Agreement_E&WRevised.doc 6 A-102301-4 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL AND AUTHORIZATION OF THE EXECUTION OF AN OPTION FOR THE ACQUISITION OF APPROXIMATELY 89 ACRES OF REAL ESTATE ON READ MOUNTAIN FOR RIDGE LINE PROTECTION COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: There maybe questions on why this mountain was selected and not others around Roanoke County. This mountain is significant because it remains untouched and has beautiful outcroppings of rocks and can be used as a different type of greenway. This option will be in place for 120 days at no cost to the County. If approved, we will also assist citizen groups seeking donations and grants. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This action authorizes the execution of an option for the acquisition of approximately 89 acres of real estate on Read Mountain, in order to protect and preserve a portion of this environmentally-significant ridge line and view shed. BACKGROUND: Over the past several years the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors has taken several significant steps to protect and preserve environmentally-significant locations in the Roanoke Valley. These steps include view shed protection along the Blue Ridge Parkway, the commencement of construction of the first multi-jurisdictional green way in the Roanoke Valley (Hanging Rock), support for the establishment of the Roanoke Valley Green way Commission, the purchase of 34 acres on Green Ridge, and initial steps for the creation of planning mechanisms within the Comprehensive Plan for the protection of ridge lines. Roanoke County now has the opportunity to acquire approximately 89 acres located G:\BOARD\2001\Oct23\10-23readmountain.doc 1 E.'" on Read Mountain to protect and preserve an environmentally-significant ridge line and view shed. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This action approves and authorizes the execution of an option for the acquisition of Tax Map Parcel Number 39.00-1-8, consisting of approximately 89 acres of real estate. This option agreement is for six months. During this six month option period the County will work with interested citizens and charitable organizations to raise the necessary funds and donations to acquire this property. If the various conditions can be satisfied within the option period, this matter will be brought back to the Board for the adoption of an ordinance authorizing the exercise of the option and acquisition of this real estate. Attached to this Board report is a copy of the "Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Guidelines for Acquiring Environmentally-Sensitive Property" which was adopted by the Board on May 27,1997. These Policy Guidelines were intended to provide direction to the Board and to the public in the acceptance and use of acquisition of environmentally-sensitive properties in the County. These guidelines will assist the Board in evaluating each proposal with respect to conservation goals and stewardship abilities. It is anticipated that this acquisition of real estate can be accomplished for the sum of $200,000. The option fee is $100.00 In addition the Board must have a Phase I environmental audit completed for this property; a baseline documentation report (to determine the conservation value of the property and to document key resources on the property); survey; title examination and title insurance; and review by the Planning Commission for conformity with the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with Section 15.2-2232 of the State Code. In addition the Board should authorize the County Administrator to execute an agreement with the Seller to limit the future use of this real estate to ridge line and view shed protection; limited, passive, recreational use (hiking trails); and preventing any future high intensity uses or development. FISCAL IMPACTS: The purchase price of $200,000 will be subject to future appropriations. Ancillary costs and expenses described above should not exceed $5,000; and these expenses should be appropriated from the Board's Contingency Fund. ALTERNATIVES: G:\BOARD\2001\Oct23\10-23readmountain.doc 2 e STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider: (1) authorizing the County Administrator to execute this option agreement for the acquisition of this real estate, and approve the payment of the $100.00 option fee; and (2) the appropriation of $5,000.00 from the Board's contingency fund for related expenses. Respectfully submitted, Approve by, Janet Scheid Senior Planner Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to approve Church _ x Denied () staff recommendation Johnson _ x Received () McNamara- x _ Referred () Minnix _ x To () Nickens _ x cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Danial Morris, Director, Finance Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Paul M .Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\2001\Oct23\10-23readmountain.doc 3 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS GUIDELINES FOR ACQUIRING ENVIRONMENTALLY-SENSITIVE PROPERTY BACKGROUND From time-to-time, the County maybe approached with a proposal for the donation of money, or the direct transfer of real estate, or the gra~zting of an easement, for the purpose of protecting view sheds, establishing Been way corridors, or for the acquisition of other environmentally-sensitive areas in the County. In response to these potential donations, the Board of Supervisors has adopted the following guidelines for the acceptance and use of such donations. These guidelines are intended to provide direction to the Board and to the public, but are not to be considered as regulations. Circumstances may warrant departure from these guidelines in specific cases. Roanoke County takes its stewardship role seriously. When the County accepts environmentally sensitive property through donation it has made a significant commitment to protect that property in perpetuity. Consequently, the Board must carefully evaluate each proposal with respect to the County's conservation goals and stewardship abilities. GUIDELINES The following guidelines are to be considered by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in evaluating proposals for donations intended to protect or establish environmentally-sensitive areas in the County. These guidelines shall apply to both the donation of money to acquire a particular parcel of real estate and to the actual donation of real estate or easement. The acquisition of the specific property shall benefit the public and shall conform with the County's conservation goals. These goals are sufficiently broad to include a wide variety of lands. The Board uses the following criteria to evaluate lands being considered for protection by asking if the land has- one or more of the following characteristics: A. Does it include unique local scenic viewpoints or outstanding physiographic features (for example, intact ridge lines, distinct outcroppings, waterfalls, bluffs) that help define the character of our locale and enhance our community's sense of place? B. Does it include lands that have the potential to be a part of a community or regional green way system? C. Does it include lands that have the potential to be part of a County, state or federal park system or contribute, due to proximity and visibility, to the protection of such public lands? D. Does it include lands of agricultural, forestry or scenic significance? E. Does it include lands that are valuable as open space due to their proximity to developing areas, their prominence in the perception of community identity or their high scenic value? ~~ ..~ F. Does it include wetlands, flood plains or other lands that are important to the protection of water quality? G. Does it include lands that contain endangered, threatened or rare species or natural communities? H. Does it include lands that are of historical or cultural value or are adjacent to sites of historical or cultural value and will therefore, contribute to the protection of that value? 2. The Board shall assess the total costs associated with acquiring and managing these properties. These costs shall include: A. Baseline Documentation Report -The costs associated with determining the conservation value of the property and identifying and documenting key resources of the property. B. Stewardship -The costs associated with owning the property or easement. C. Environmental Liability -The costs associated with determining that the property is free of environmental liability or for correcting environmental deficiencies. D. Enforcement -The costs of enforcing the terms of the donation or acquisition. 3. The Board shall direct the Planning Commission to review, identify and prioritize real estate in the County deserving of protection and include and identify such properties in the County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map. 4. The Board, pursuant to Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia, shall request Planning Commission review and recommendation for any proposed acquisition or acceptance of real estate or easement, to evaluate conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. The Board shall review each proposal for the acquisition of environmentally sensitive real estate and determine the appropriate level and extent of public use of such properties. In making this determiriation tl~e Board shall take into consideration the conservation value of the property and the extent to which public use may enhance or threaten that value. 6. The Board shall determine what County department or other entity shall have long-term stewardship responsibility for each property. In doing so, the Board shall give consideration to the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, the Western Virginia Land Trust, the Virginia Outdoors Foundation and other organizations where appropriate. 7. The Board shall consider appropriating monies as a lump sum or on an annual basis to the department or entity identified in #6 above for the long-term stewardship costs of such ~~_ ~/ properties. 8. The Board shall encourage donations of money or property from private individuals and organizations, or from public entities, to further the objectives of these guidelines. May 16, 1997 G:\COMMON\MA Y27~PAULGUID. LAN "'~-°° e ~b O U O Q ~ ~ . c C ~~ ~ o `~ ^^~-i~ ~. O ~ ~ ~. ~ u U ~-1 ~~ ~ ~ ~ o ~-I ' V ~ ~ ~ G 3 ,, ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~+ Q W ~ JJ ~~ M~~ ~-y Bradshaw, Crurad Mountain ,_ Property Owners ~~ - T~ ,. I ~ F1#S4r~lt, `mo`o' - :- :--~- -- - -:_~ ~ - County of Roanoke October 9 2001 Department of Community Develo ~ A-102301-5 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Approval of Policies and Procedures for Accepting Contributions and Donations for County Projects COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Following our discussion at the Work Session on improvements to Bent Mountain Library, we have prepared these policies and procedures for your approval. It is very likely that we will need to make changes to respond to questions or suggestions you may have. Essentially this policy is infended to encourage citizens to donate to County projects of their choice, and we express our appreciation in advance to all who wish to do so. This policy will work in concert with and not replace the C/P program, nor will contributions affect the priority listing of any capital project. The policy is separate from the matching grant program sponsored by the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. If fhe Board wishes to have a work session to incorporate your suggestions, we will do so. BACKGROUND: During the work session with the Library Board on October 9, 2001 concerning the improvements to the Bent Mountain Library, the Board of Supervisors discussed a need to establish policies and procedures for the acceptance of contributions and donations to the County or its departments and agencies. In the past, we have accepted cash for specified items as well as operating expenses (Alford Trust for the Vinton Library) ; we have accepted real estate with and without conditions and restrictions (Ex. Vinyard Park); and we have accepted other capital and property for the use of the County or by one of our agencies (Ex. Vehicle for use by the Mason Cove Fire Department). The contributions or donations are not a substitute for proper planning for capital or operations such as through the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or our normal operating budget process nor do they replace programs such as the matching grants as established through the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. These budgeting tools look at our needs and consider the 1 ~,~ impact on a Countywide basis. We also need to be aware that some communities or departments may be better able to solicit and receive donations than other groups and the practice, if used to fund major facilities or programs, could results in inequities in the levels of service provided. The attached policy establishes guidelines for accepting these contributions and donations of major types of assets and prescribes an accounting so that the intended purpose may be achieved. Before items with restrictions are accepted, the Board of Supervisors should receive recommendations from the impacted Department, Advisory Boards and the County Administrator to determine the impact of accepting such a gift. The County Attorney should also determine if there are any other concerns such as discrimination that should be considered. In instances where the gift would result in a liability or hardship for the County, the recommendation may be to not accept the gift. In the case of cash or cash equivalent gifts, the Director of Finance should establish an escrow account outlining any restrictions for the donation(s), maintain an accounting of the funds available, assure that receipts have been issued for the donations, and when the monies are needed for expenditures, to request an appropriation of these monies from the Board of Supervisors to accomplish the purpose of the donation. Any cash equivalents donated should be converted to cash as soon as possible to minimize the accounting procedures. All cash items must be appropriated before the expenditure can be made. Donations of real estate should first have an environmental audit performed to assure that we are not assuming a liability. We should also examine any restrictions as to the impact to the County and implications to on-going costs. Finally, we should look at the impact to our tax base and how we plan to re-use the property. Acceptance of such real property would require two readings of an appropriate ordinance as required by our Charter. Motor Vehicles that are donated should be looked at from the standpoint of necessity and from the manner the vehicle is to be used and the impact to our operating budgets. A determination must be made as to whether the specified inventory of vehicles is to be increased or if the vehicle is a replacement. Other property may be donated and should be considered by the Board of Supervisors before acceptance to assure that the donation is in the best interest of Roanoke County. Equipment may have a minimal cost associated with acceptance, but may become a maintenance nightmare if parts are not readily available or if the 2 service is not compatible or available in the area. This policy would become part of the County Policy and Procedures and would be administered by the County Administrator or designated staff. Donations and Contributions can obviously have a positive effect on our cash management, but can present accounting nightmares if projects are not clearly defined or when de-minimus donations are received. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the attached policy which would outline the conditions upon which assets donated or contributed to the County would be handled. 2. Continue to consider the impact of donations and contributions on an individual basis as they present themselves. FISCAL IMPACT: All cash donations must be appropriated before they can be expended. Other assets must be accepted by the Board and should receive the recommendation of the Department or Advisory Board before the final determination is made. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends adoption of the attached policy. Respectfully submitted, Approv d by,~ ~~~~ John M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Joseph McNamara to approve Church - x Denied ( ) policy with revision to IC to establish Johnson - x Received ( ) $1,000 threshold McNamara- x - Referred ( ) Minnix - x - To ( ) Nickens - x cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Wanda Riley, Executive Secretary, Policy Manual 3 POLICY FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS PURPOSE: To establish guidelines for the acceptance of donations of money and other property for public use by Roanoke County. POLICY 1. Money A. Roanoke County may accept donations of money or cash equivalents from citizens, corporations or other organizations for general County purposes or for specified projects or expenditures. B. Donations for general County purposes, unencumbered by any conditions or restrictions are preferred. C. Donations for specific purposes or with restrictions shall be deposited in the General Fund in an escrow account established by the Director of Finance and may be expended for general County purposes upon appropriation by the Board of Supervisors. The minimum acceptable donation of money or cash equivalents with restrictions shall be $1,000 before a unique escrow account may be established D. Conditions, limitations or restrictions placed upon the donation of money shall be reviewed by the County Attorney for compliance with County ordinances and policies and compliance with United States and Commonwealth laws and regulations with respect to nondiscrimination. The County will not accept any donation that discriminates against any person because of his/her race, religion, color, sex or national origin, age, disability, or other basis prohibited by state or federal law. E. Donations with restrictions or for specific purposes should be reviewed by the Department Head, Advisory Boards and County Administrator to determine the impact of the donation to operating budgets, the Capital Improvements Plan, and equity in operations. F. Donations of cash or cash equivalents to the County for general purposes without any restrictions may be deposited into the General Fund of the County. Should the County choose to use this for a specific purpose, an appropriation by the Board of Supervisors is required. 2. Real Estate A. Roanoke County may accept donations of real estate from citizens, corporations or other organizations for general County purposes or for special purposes. B. Donations for general County purposes, unencumbered by any conditions or restrictions are preferred. C. Donations of real estate shall be reviewed by the appropriate County department for recommendation as to suitability for particular County purposes or needs, and for impact on the County tax base. D. Environmental audits will be conducted for donated real estate to insure that the County will not accept any real estate contaminated with hazardous wastes, or substances that will cause substantial expense to remediate. E. The condition, state of repair and compliance with current building and fire codes of any buildings or structures on the real estate shall be reviewed to avoid any environmental hazards or any significant liabilities arising from such conditions. F. Conditions, limitations or restrictions placed upon the donation of real estate shall be reviewed by the County Attorney for compliance with County ordinances and policies and compliance with United States and Commonwealth laws and regulations with respect to nondiscrimination. The County will not accept any donation that discriminates against any person because of his/her race, religion, color, sex or national origin, age, disability, or other basis prohibited by state or federal law. G. Donations with restrictions or for specific purposes should be reviewed by the Department Head, Advisory Boards and County Administrator to determine the impact of the donation to operating budgets, the Capital Improvements Plan, and equity in operations. 3. Other Personal Property A. Roanoke County may accept donations of personal property from citizens, corporations or other organizations for general County purposes or for specific uses. B. Donations for general County purposes, unencumbered by any conditions or restrictions are preferred. 2 C. Donations of personal property shall be reviewed by the appropriate County department for recommendation as to suitability for particular County purposes or needs. D. Conditions, limitations or restrictions placed upon the donation of personal property shall be reviewed by the County Attorney for compliance with County ordinances and policies and compliance with United States and Commonwealth laws and regulations with respect to nondiscrimination. The County will not accept any donation that discriminates against any person because of his/her race, religion, color, sex or national origin, age, disability, or other basis prohibited by state or federal law. E. Donations of vehicles may require an increase in the authorized inventory of our fleet unless the vehicle is replacing an existing item. F. Donations with restrictions or for specific purposes should be reviewed by the Department Head, Advisory Boards and County Administrator to determine the impact of the donation to operating budgets, the Capital Improvements Plan, and equity in operations. 4. Miscellaneous A. Donations of any property with limitations or restrictions on its use shall be reviewed by the receiving department, any impacted Advisory Board, the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors to determine suitability for general County purposes, and to avoid undue administrative burdens. B. Acceptance of any donation shall not commit the County to additional funding or obligations to operate or add any new programs, personnel or facilities. 3 LL " .. PURPOSE: 1. Money To establish guidelines for the acceptance of donations of money and other property for public use by Roanoke County. POLICY ~~~~ POLICY FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS A. Roanoke County may accept donations of money or cash equivalents from citizens, corporations or other organizations for general County purposes or for specified projects or expenditures. B. Donations for general County purposes, unencumbered by any conditions or restrictions are preferred. __,~C Donations for specific purposes or with restrictions shall be deposited in the General Fund in an escrow account established by the Director of Finance and may be expended for general County purposes upon appropriation by the Board of Supervisors. D. Conditions, limitations or restrictions placed upon the donation of money shall be reviewed by the County Attorney for compliance with County ordinances and policies and compliance with United States and Commonwealth laws and regulations with respect to nondiscrimination. The County will not accept any donation that discriminates against any person because of his/her race, religion, color, sex or national origin, age, disability, or other basis prohibited by state or federal law. E. Donations with restrictions or for specific purposes should be reviewed by the Department Head, Advisory Boards and County Administrator to determine the impact of the donation to operating budgets, the Capital Improvements Plan, and equity in operations. F. Donations of cash or cash equivalents to the County for general purposes without any restrictions may be deposited into the General Fund of the County. Should the County choose to use this for a specific purpose, an appropriation by the Board of Supervisors is required. .~ .~ 2. Real Estate A. Roanoke County may accept donations of real estate from citizens, corporations or other organizations for general County purposes or for special purposes. B. Donations for general County purposes, unencumbered by any conditions or restrictions are preferred. C. Donations of real estate shall be reviewed by the appropriate County department for recommendation as to suitability for particular County purposes or needs, and for impact on the County tax base. D. Environmental audits will be conducted for donated real estate to insure that the County will not accept any real estate contaminated with hazardous wastes, or substances that will cause substantial expense to remediate. E. The condition, state of repair and compliance with current building and fire codes of any buildings or structures on the real estate shall be reviewed to avoid any environmental hazards or any significant liabilities arising from such conditions. F. Conditions, limitations or restrictions placed upon the donation of real estate shall be reviewed by the County Attorney for compliance with County ordinances and policies and compliance with United States and Commonwealth laws and regulations with respect to nondiscrimination. The County will not accept any donation that discriminates against any person because of his/her race, religion, color, sex or national origin, age, disability, or other basis prohibited by state or federal law. G. Donations with restrictions or for specific purposes should be reviewed by the Department Head, Advisory Boards and County Administrator to determine the impact of the donation to operating budgets, the Capital Improvements Plan, and equity in operations. 3. Other Personal Property A. Roanoke County may accept donations of personal property from citizens, corporations or other organizations for general County purposes or for specific uses. 2 .i B. Donations for general County purposes, unencumbered by any conditions or restrictions. are preferred. C. Donations of personal property shall be reviewed by the appropriate County department for recommendation as to suitability for particular County purposes or needs. D. Conditions, limitations or restrictions placed upon the donation of personal property shall be reviewed by the County Attorney for compliance with County ordinances and policies and compliance with United States and Commonwealth laws and regulations with respect to nondiscrimination. The County will not accept any donation that discriminates against any person because of his/her race, religion, color, sex or national origin, age, disability, or other basis prohibited by state or federal law. E. Donations of vehicles may require an increase in the authorized inventory of our fleet unless the vehicle is replacing an existing item. F. Donations with restrictions or for specific purposes should be reviewed by the Department Head, Advisory Boards and County Administrator to determine the impact of the donation to operating budgets, the Capital Improvements Plan, and equity in operations. 4. Miscellaneous A. Donations of any property with limitations or restrictions on its use shall be reviewed by the receiving department, any impacted Advisory Board, the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors to determine suitability for general County purposes, and to avoid undue administrative burdens. B. Acceptance of any donation shall not commit the County to additional funding or obligations to operate or add any new programs, personnel or facilities. 3 w, 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for Public Hearing and First Reading for Rezoning Ordinances; Consent Agenda COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions, rather approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for November 13, 2001 The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) The petition of Stephen D. and Ruth E. Nash to obtain a Special Use Permit for 11.71 acres for a private stable located at 4911 Poor Mountain Road ,Catawba Magisterial District. 2) The petition of Star City Church of Christ to obtain a Special Use Permit for 8.77 acres for a religious assembly located at Va. Rte. 311/Laurel Mountain Road intersection, Catawba Magisterial District. 3) The petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-92 Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards. 4) The petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-23, Non-Conforming Uses and Structures. MAPS ARE ATTACHED; MORE DETAILED INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: (1) That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for November 13, 2001. (2) That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Items 1_4, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by Church Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara Referred Minnix to Nickens a ~'- / County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 For Staff Use Onlv Date rece ved: Received by: q~18~61 JM TW Application fee: PC/B~~cdate: y~0 pO 1I (~ 01 1113 0l Placards issued: y BOS date: es I! 13 0l Case Number ?, C.) - ~~ 1 z 0 ~ ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning Special Use / Variance Applicants name/address w/zip Phone:_540-380-4054 Stephen D. & Ruth E. Nash Cell # $ 40 8 7y - ~ 3 ~ S 4911 Poor Mountain Road woek # 38 7- 8K rs Salem, VA 24153 Fax No. _540-387-7121 Owner=s name/address w/zip Phone Owner/Applicant Fax No. Property Location Magisterial District: Catawba 4911 Poor Mountain Road Salem, VA 24153 Community Planning area: Roanoke County Tax Map No.: 6402-1-51 Existing Zoning: Rl Size of parcel(s): Acres: 11.71 Existing Land Use: None REZONING AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: Proposed Land Use: Private Stable Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIR Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? es No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No VARIANCE APPLICANTS (V) Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/S V R/S V R/S V x Consultation x 8 1/2" x I l" concept plan x Application fee x Application x Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable x Justification N J A Water and sewer application x Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner=s agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. j ~. ~ ~~~' ~>~~C~ Owner=s Signature ~"-1 JUSTIFICATION, FOR REZONING OR SPECIAL L?SE PERMIT REQUEST Applicant Stephen D. & Ruth E. N The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The addition of this Private Stable will add to the charm of the community. There are presently other Horses in the community and this property did have a Horse on it at one time so the facilities already exist which include a barn and fenced in fields, which I am presently repairing. The property is on 11.71 acres which is more then adequate for 2-4 horses. Our plans are to only have two horses but we are applying for 4 horses in case our plans change in the future. We have maintained Horses for the past 5 years so we know what is involved with their maintenance as well as how to maintain the property so it does not become unattractive or cause Health Hazards to the community. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. This project conforms to the general guidelines and policies of the Roanoke Community Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. Our plans are to have two horses on the property. The property was already set up for horses when we purchased it in mid January of 2001. Since we purchased it we have been making improvements to the house and barn as well as the property itself. I intend to continue fixing up this property and it will be a very attractive and charming part of the community. There will not be any impact to the adjoining properties. There are natural barriers between the adjoining properties to maintain privacy. (see attached photo) We will maintain the fields to prevent any health-related problems. We have a well so there will not be any additional burdens to the public water supply. /~~- ~ JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE'REQUEST Applicant The Board of Zoning Appeals is required by Section 15.2-2309 of the Code of Virginia to consider the following factors before a variance can be granted. Please read the factors listed below carefully and in your own words, describe how the request meets each factor. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. 1. The variance shall not be contrary to the public interest and shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of the zoning Ordinance. This is a rural setting. There are Geese, Chickens and Horses presently in the community. I have improved the appearance of the property while still maintaining the character and charm of the Original Farm. I am a very neat and organized person and I fully intend to keep this Stable clean and appealing. 2. The strict application of the zoning ordinance would produce undue hardship; a hardship that approaches co~scation (as distinguished from a special privilege or convenience) and would prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property. This Stable would not prohibit the use of this property. 3. The hardship is not shared by other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. Such hardships should be addressed by the Board of Supervisors as amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. There should not be any hardships that other property owners will share. 4. The variance will not be of a substantial detriment to the adjacent properties or the character of the district. This stable will have no affect on the adjoining properties. We plan on having two horses on 11.71 acres, which is more than enough room. This old farm has always been part of the community and now it will be returned to it's original charm. This property is well know by many people in this area and we have had many people stopping by and telling us how good the old place is looking. They are glad to see someone is fixing it up. ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants Name: Stephen D, & Ruth E. Nash DEPARTMENT OF Special Use, Existing Zoning: R 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Proposed: Private Stable Tax Map No. 64.02-1-51 Magist. Dist: Catawba J ~°".... i 12/J.8/OOV MON 11:g5J'FAXv540ta87V4106 0 1Raly PIN sEr • IRON CIN FOU O S D6T iL .r ~ Q 'D ~ z • n N in ~t.a• -- SCgLE ~"Y 4d' 0 ~o 4r ~~ ~; iij ~v ate' G} Q~ 2~ `d'am ~ Q ~ 3 o' o i n,/ `~- \ \ ¢~ ti_ . z __ ~. ~~J~ ~ ~ a" rv `}'~~' N ~`~ N ~ ~ Y` o -- ~ w D U ~ q7 ~- ~~ [j ._~ 4 A~ O ~ \ ( U- Sf1CN, PROPEAIV 13 M f,E.YA DEiP E511 bl COOJbb (EsrECTNE W'rEeOCr, Q ~ ~0,; nC ~S EW LAUTEN9CHLAGER z VC~J002 {~O sVr+vE7 Or TrK rxEusES S.hIDRtI NEREDH NES 0[EN fAt ELL p/oROygyENTS WO vi31®LE ENDtMCE Of EASEUENt^ ARE NO ENCRMLIiYEN15 0'f IYPgOyEYgN13 fRNER naov A(yplVMtl O7NER YIW/ gMpgN NEREON, tltf5 SllRV6Y 1US PCRFORYEO RT AND KJSUg„IECY TO INitlpYA710N ~MHY_II Wr gE d5lYOS D 91' ~w~., y > 20NE Y ^NAOED. Y UNSNAD(tl AND AE. SEE {'Euw uEP E ~.~" wv~). 100 O 100 2D0 300 ScaIP 1 " = 1 00' N ,~ / W kAlLlRrAY l__ ~ / , ~'~N ~s9 ~` / ` I~N~c ~jnR ~~. ~ ~ 1 ~-c, L .~ i 7.7i 6 ~~ei~r rN ..r-~r~ ~ACI~~S Fi~i~ Rp Y nNE' .-- syAOE~~ ~-_ ~O ~?~. FnAMr HUUSE _ rU2 /( A. q 1 1 ~" (SEE DElnu.,) //• \ '-~`IRF fF_NC`F~ -~---- C3ARN, sF~ED -~ E '-~ 5l-1f"D DRF3 VET \ ~ ~\o~T SH~Ds ~_wn~ .' ~ V .p U C.+ ~ C.+ nt O c.~ -1 ~ ~~W.x7 .:' ~ v[n?Y ~ N ~ ' c> > ~ ~ ~ i~~. N r \a, U?.r A L'-; r~ ~ „ 0 ~~\ r, euV, 1' U(IIITY o`!J ~? ~--- 23CiO' f TO E'.1 F OLE "' ,^,~ 194,$^----- BARLEY DR. --~ ~ ~-= UTl1_ITY 6 C1 -+-e;26"16'54"(='..243.14' B e - ~5 51, P'~t2F~ 74i~lJi~Jl"A+iiV ~®AD 3~\- ~~ - _! 6~2 ~,/~ r. ~ . NUMfaE QELTn - Rnplijg Ar.~~ TANGENT CI-TORO BE/1RING C 1 24-4 -.. _, _ ` .-. L - ~ , ~ -'..-. _ ~--^ 41 ,_ 296..;9 i2;~_83 64, C2 ~T3~'O°," 9,7 17.G.id4 S:SG'47'Ir"E NOTES: _ __ 1 47, T 4 t 2'!. 1 6 64.F35 t 1 8.68 ,516'28' f 8n~ 1, OWNERS Of' RECORp; JOhIN RUt3ERT RREWS7F..R AND -' -'- --..- BLANCHE E7. PEDNF_AU ESTATE 2. t_EGnL REFERENCE ~JCED BOOK 803, C}AGF_ TS7 ' 3. TnX MnFY NUMBER: 64,02- 1,-51 SAU'RVEY t OF 4. UNUERGRUUND UTILITY SERVICE LINES 5`p~'"'~r ~~/V ®~ ~ )/, ~~ }~~~ ~MN111 /1 iJ /r~ ~ / 4/~V~i7 ~~~~`.~'G~°_" ~~i 4.91 1 POOR' MOUNTAIN ROAD ~f 17,716 ACRES AS DESCRIBED - IN DEED BOOK 803, PAGE 151 r~ TUDp a. tVf:RET I ~, CATAWRA MfIGISTF_RIAL DISTRICT Np. 2U01 ROANCiKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ,+LO soave ^ INC. /Z _vF. op SURVFYf:D DE:C[=MBER 9, 2000 Q- ,1G8 ~R0020957.00 r~'Vn SU1;vF_{O SCALE: 1 " -•.-, 1 00' RN,.LGM ~~rN~i~ TEL' ~i40-772-9580 FAX: ~4p_'772-SUSp nrr,-tv.,«c ~e..ownaw PL.~NNERS ARCMCTECTS ENGii+iEEi2S SIDRVEY00~~ HK:MKN (3alzer & Associates Inc, 7208 Corporote Circle f2~[]nnliP, v,, 7Ar51s] .%:~~..~ ~.wuyrr: t g~rr~1~~~ ~~ll ~ ~~~~ ~~~ r'~r~ ~'~ .~~ ~r Co Rau e~ ~l~~e e~R~v ~e4~ Ct~R~~R N~~ ~~ T~R~~-~S ExlsriN[~ BffRN -- .-~... ~' c+ {~J~~T a°rIO~JGR;a~H A~G'~NDI's" Burrower I C lint 5lephen Nash Prulk:rn AJdress 4911 Poar Mountain ~~u~aci airy Salem coun,} Salem I,~„~ National City Mortgage ~'~ „ ~ ~~ Stag VN I.ip (; nde; 24153 a -, +W `+ '"'9 A. c, '~ f:RON I' OF Sl1l3JEC'"f PROPfR fY 1 ti.s ~ F',e~J ~ REAR OF SUBJECT PRt)P[iR"!Y ~~ ~ ~... 2 Caunry ~of Roanoke Community Development Plnnn' g 7.cminu 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, ETA 24018-0798 (~40} 772-2468 FAX (54G) 772-2108 For Std Use Only Dax rxeived: ~~,1~'~U /i i • Rex9veQ by: ~-- ~ , Appii;anan fee: ~' ~,, , PGBZA dut: ~- i, i P~z;.aras ~: r'` sae ~: ~,~., l1' 3~~~'i Case N>~bc ~ "' I ~ f 7.06 , •~~~''~~~.'•~!+' s 7.l. "7 i i ,: - .L'' :yt'. , T ~', ~_c t~ .'! M1 ~t n..i+ r ~ t~ [~.•+~~~.~...,a,7~nTt7C1a7MN/_72~°F'_a2': :~i~ ~ .f. Check type of application filed (c~eck all Ll:at apply} ' Rezoniag ~Sperial Use ~ Variance ~ ]m /a s w D. ph~.~a, 540-563-5678 `~ar~ti y°'~iurc`i of ~Frnst P.O. Box 7321, Roanoke, VA 24019 Fax No. Owner's name/address wl~p Phone: wW1-rt.~~ ~tcHAre.O L+MyRA Q. 1~~-o SWtMM~R I,NI X33 ?yIFR ~D FazNa. 5R LAM - Properry Locarion ction t R d i t i l IV Magisterial District: Catawba erse r~ oa n ~oun a VA 311/Laure 5WIM F ~1N M L l520 O Tt-FO M 050 N M~ M 6 2t A 4 O Q Community Planning area: Tax Map ivo.: 36.03-1-56 ~~? ~, v ~ - c ~ - 5~ Fxiszir~ Zoning: R-1 ~ ' ` ~~ Vacant (former swim club/resident 8 . ~ S?ze of parcels}: Acres: Existing Land Use: ^'r:T':y'~~.t - -.: ~1 ~r t~i'~c!P~'-~~'~ •'r ,..' :~ •,'~~;..,: ~.T e r ety~ 'r r ~ ' ' ~ _ . ~ eLPPv~ICArl~ ,~sr~ S ~,~ffE I3T (~57 R - ~ Proposed Zon~g: Proposed Land Use: Religious Assembly Does the parcel meet the ~n;m„rt, lot area, width, and frontase requirements of tae requested district? Yes ~ ~ No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE I,5 REQiJIRED FIRST. Dots the cancel meet the minitIInxn criteria for Ilse teauested Usc Twpe? Yes ~ No O IF CIO, A YARIA,'~CE 7S REQUIItID FIl2SI' If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No ~ LS .n ~ '.4 rr. 1( ff i.5 M _ .4. ~ c. iF-~~E~.."J ~.~v!F"na ~L!aF~+aL`!cl. t. `' - roF'"'i ~, ! -.;L~.' `^'~ ,'> Variance•of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: 3s the appcation complete? Please check ~' enclosed. APPLICATION WII~L NOT BE ACCEPTED IF AIVY OP' THBSE ITEMS ARE MCSSIIVG OR INCOMPLETE. v i Conailtatioa '~ 8 112' x 11" concept plan I Application fee ~ Appiication '" ~ Metes and hounds description Pmftcrs, if applicable `~ lnstiticaaen '- Witsr and sewer appcation ~ ! ~ Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am eith a awnes o pyap~rty own=i s ag~r contract purr~mscr and aat attin~ with the Io3owle~iQe'and consent of tho owner. ( 1 I Oaaer's Sigma>re Applicant Star City Church of Christ The Planning Commission will study xt~e~;d-speeial nse permit requ~ to rl .'.,,,;nP L~~ rued and justifiearior for the gauge in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as tiaorotlgbly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 34-3) as well as the purpose found at the begi~.vug of tae applicable zoning distrct c:assi$cati,on in the Zoning Ordia2nce. The area is zoned as R-1 Low-Density Residential District. The property contains 2 rental prope ies in addition to the main building to be used for religious assembly. The 2 properties will continue t be rented as residences. The ordinance states that "only uses of a community nature which are ge- nerally deemed compatible are permitted in this district. This would include parks and playground , schools and other similar neighborhood activities." Usage of this property for religious assembly i the very definition of use of a community nature. People from the community could not only join in worship services and other uses of the property as needed, but benefit from the beauty of the property as viewed from the roadway. 'I Please explain how fire project conforms to the g~P~A1 ~ ,;r~nt;n~-c any po&cies contained in the Roanoke Coltnry Couuannity Plan. Due to the property layout, use for~religious assembly would continue to provide access to roadwa s for area residents and would not cause congestion. By its very nature, a church naturally adds an aids in provision of harmonious community. The church will endeavor to provide for the preservati n lof the natural beauty and forest areas surrounding the property. It is our aim to also protect surface ~ and groundwater resources. The area is currently zoned for low density. The main building on the property would be used not as a residence, but solely for religious assembly. While we desire to use the ro ert for communit benefit, not just on Sundays, the "high density" would be variable, ~ot p P Y Y as in an apartment complex or other high density residence. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the proeem itself, :he adjoitvmg propc;ties, and the sttrrottndiag area, as well as tae impacts on public services and facilities, inclu3mg water/sewer, roads, sci:ools, p~)o;lrecresrion and fire and rescue. The impact of the granting of a special permit for religious assembly would benefit the community including the adjoining properties and surrounding area. Public services and facilities would not be affected. If anything, water/sewer usage would be less than the constant use of a residence. Roads and parks would not be affected in any way, and fire and rescue needs would be minimal. ~ l y ` O V ~y tr x Y V 4 • 1 N 1 M /yam / V A O ~ ~+ •- " C r ~, ~~ 0~•. ~ V • i °~ x W W c..n Q1 ~ ~ A N . P G ~ N 11 /, ~ 1 / ~ y I4 I^i Iry /`~ ~ N Y 1 ' N N .P •A E x .~. N O 00 ~ 0 s ~ n ~ 1 ~ N ~ _ ~ ~ ~ N f w~ o tiu i rN /f/ '...+ i • ~ ~ x~ /// ' /`'~ i O J CD r y S ) /l 4 N O o N r ~ ~ ~./ ~~~ x'11 ~ O ~ ~ ,VI • ~ I~ ~' N y . ~A ~ _ i i f II O ~ ~ f ~ A N ~ ~ 1 • ~_ p ~ 1 r o. C. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ • w t, ~ 00 E 1 ~ 1 W N 1 I~~ 1 X v ~ / ~ '0 ~ ~ / u `". w ~ 1 t ~ ~'~ C7 ~ ° ` . ., ~ ~ ~/ N ~ ~~ ~ r •t j I ~ ~ /~ .~ ti ~w / ~ Qy v a V .. ~' '~ 1 ~ r' / ,~J~, n ~ 1 1 .~ ~ i ,/ Qa 1 `, fit. ! 1 ~ Q1 / ! ~• Z 4 ~~ h Nr ~ ~, ~ j~ 1 - ~ O dt ~ ~ ! 1.4 ~ N ~ / ` 1 ~ 00 ~ .~ /+ ~ CO I tiJl• O ~ ~b w C 'p ~ ~ % ~~ r. 0 1, ~~ r ./ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ll \ 1.~ /p p 2~~E. ~ j 1~ 1 ., \ l 1 , • . a, 1 > , ~ . ~. c 4 e oG ~ bq ` M~G Nr4~ N /"""' ", ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N D ~ O ~ ~ \ -~ O f7 J ~ -i < !~ r O f7 i 2 ~• C o ~ J ~ 4 = V O Z7 H v \ N \ N r ~ 0 `I N • G° ro ~ w m ~ N O N Ou o y ^ w y N `~ y ~. ~ ,~1 V I • VI O ^ P r o I -t N Y 7 r.. ~ ! N w ~ I ~ I w~ ~ N V A' w1 ~_ ._ 1 z, ._.~ I ` r O I G I ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants name: Star City Church of Christ Existing Zoning R-1 Proposed Special Use (Religious Assembly) Tax Map No. 36.03->-56 & 59 i ~' :er 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading: Petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to Amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-92 Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: At the request of the Planning Commission, staff has reviewed and revised the Screening, Landscaping and Buffer requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed ordinance provides more flexibility to both the developer and the nursery provider in the placement of vegetative landscaping while also giving credits for existing vegetation and encouraging the use of native landscaping materials. Local arborists, landscape architects and professional urban foresters have reviewed the proposed revisions. The Planning Commission has held several worksessions on these revisions and will hold Public Hearing on November 6, 2001, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: Hold first reading of this ordinance on October 23, 2001. 7 / fir/ f Respectfully Submitted, (% ~,, Janet Scheid, Senior Planner Department of Community Development ACTION Approved, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara Referred () Minnix To () Nickens 1 ~ "+~ Sec. 30-92. Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards. Sec. 30-92-1. Intent. (A) It is the intent of these provisions to: Set minimum standards that will ease the transition between zoning districts of different intensities. 2. Provide visual and noise buffers between certain land uses and adjoining activities. 3. Promote the protection of the natural environment through plantings that absorb gaseous emissions and improve air quality. 4. Encourage the incorporation of existing vegetation into new developments. 5. Encourage attractively landscaped areas in new developments. 6. Improve the quality of the environment within the County and to provide a certain and predictable review and approval process for landscape plans by establishing minimum standards for planting in new developments. Sec. 30-92-2. Administration. (A) These provisions and requirements shall apply to buildings and developments requiring a site development plan pursuant to Section 30-90 of this ordinance. The board shall also have the authority to apply any of these requirements as a condition of a special use permit approved by the board. (B) Landscaping required by this ordinance shall be planted during an opportune planting season, and shall be in place and in good condition prior to a final certificate of zoning compliance being issued for the site. The property owner in accordance with the existing landscape ordinance shall immediately replace landscaping which dies . After the issuance of a final certificate of zoning compliance for a site, it shall be the property owner's responsibility to maintain required screening, landscaping and buffer yards. (C) Temporary irrigation must be provided to insure establishment. A description of the type of irrigation system used to establish the landscape is required to accompany the site plan. Irrigation systems are encouraged with landscape materials, which cannot survive on native precipitation. All plant material must meet American Association of Nurserymen Specifications for No. 1 Grade. Native plantings are encouraged when compatible with the surrounding land use. Every effort should be made to incorporate healthy existing trees into the landscaping plan. For native plant listings refer to the Department of Conservation & Recreation's publication entitled "Native Plants for Conservation, Restoration, and Landscaping-Western Virginia-Mountain Region." (D) These regulations supplement screening, landscaping or buffer yard requirements for specific land uses as may be described in Article IV, Use and Design Standards. Where a conflict may exist between standards, the more stringent standard shall apply. (E) Written decisions of the administrator regarding these provisions may be appealed to the board of zoning appeals pursuant to section 30-24 of this ordinance. Appeals shall be made within thirty (30) days of the administrator's written decision. The approval of a site development plan shall constitute a written decision of the administrator. (F) Any required vegetation that has died must be replaced within 30 days. If during an inopportune planting season, time will be expanded to within 30 days after the start of the opportune planting season. Sec. 30-92-3. Modifications (A) Screening, landscaping and buffer yards required by this section shall be applied equally to all similarly situated properties. Modifications to these standards may be granted in writing by the administrator if the administrator finds any of the following circumstances exist on the proposed building site, or surrounding properties: 1. Natural land characteristics such as topography or existing vegetation on the proposed building site would achieve the same intent of this section; 2. Innovative landscaping or architectural design is employed on the building site to achieve an equivalent screening or buffering effect. 3. The required screening would be ineffective at maturity due to the proposed topography of the site, and/or the location of the improvements on the site. 4. The topography of adjacent and surrounding sites is such as to render required screening ineffective at maturity. 5. The size or character of the area or equipment to be screened is such that screening may be ineffective in carrying out the intention of this section. (B) When the acreage of a site is significantly larger than the area proposed for physical improvements or active usage, buffer yards shall be reserved as required by the section. However, to achieve the intent of this section, the administrator may approve an alternative location and design for required screening and plantings. (C) When property lines abut an adjacent jurisdiction, the administrator shall determine the specific screening and buffering requirements along that property line(s) after consideration of the zoning designation and/or land use of the adjacent property. Requirements shall not exceed those that would be required for similarly situated/zoned property within the county. (D) When a site plan is submitted to modify or expand an existing building or site improvements, or accommodate a change in land use, buffer yard and screening requirements shall only be applied to those portions of the site that are directly affected by the proposed improvements, or change in land use, as determined by the administrator. (E) The areas of any required buffer yard shall not be required to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the site proposed for development. In such cases, the administrator shall allow the width or location of certain buffer yards to be reduced or eliminated. The administrator shall require additional landscaping and/or screening within the remaining buffer yards, or elsewhere on the site. (F) No landscaping or screening shall be required which in the opinion of the administrator interferes with traffic safety, or which violates the provisions of Section 30-100-8 of this ordinance. Sec. 30-92-4. Enforcement Procedures and Penalties (A) All landscaping must be in place prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. In situations where a building, structure, or property, must be occupied or used prior to completion of landscaping requirements, the county may issue a temporary or partial certificate of zoning compliance. A bond in the amount of 40% of the total cost of landscaping shall be held until final zoning approval. .. (B) Any violations shall be subject to Section 30-22 of Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. 30-92-5. Standards and Specifications (A) General 1. Ali landscape plans shall be prepared by either a registered landscape architect, certified nurseryman, arborist, or professional engineer. At a minimum, fifty (50) percent of all plantings shall be native and every effort should be made to incorporate healthy existing vegetation into the landscaping plan. 2. No vegetation greater than thirty (30) inches in height shall be allowed in the clear sight triangle. 3. For each tree removed from the disturbed area with a trunk diameter of 24" or greater @ five (5) feet above ground level, shall be replaced with one of similar species or characteristics unless otherwise approved by the administrator. (B) Where buffer yards are required by this ordinance the following shall apply: 1. Buffer yards shall be reserved solely for screening and landscaping. No proposed building, building addition, structure, parking area or any other type of physical land improvement shall be located in a buffer yard. Not withstanding the above, a driveway entrance or a public road may cross a buffer yard if it is necessary for safe and convenient access to the building site. In addition, buffer yards may be used for greenways. 2. When a proposed buffer yard has a variation in elevation of greater than six (6) vertical feet at any point, the required screening or landscaping within the yard shall be placed to maximize the effectiveness of the screening or landscaping, as determined by the administrator. 3. The maximum slope of any required buffer yard shall be 3:1(Horizontal:Vertical). Sufficient vegetation and ground cover shall be established and maintained on any slope to ensure stabilization and re-vegetation. In areas where extreme slopes exist, retaining walls no greater than 4 feet in height may be used. If more than one retaining wall is used, a planting area at least six (6) feet wide with a slope no greater than 3:1 must be left between the retaining walls. 4. Existing vegetation within buffer yards shall be considered as a substitute for otherwise required screening, if in the opinion of the administrator, the type, size, and density of the existing vegetation complies with the following standards and the intent of this section. Any existing trees to be incorporated into the landscape must be adequately protected during construction to insure their survival. (Fencing around the drip line perimeter). 5. Where deemed appropriate by the County Zoning Administrator, buffer yards may be allocated for the present or future use as a greenway. (STAFF NOTE: In definitions section add - Greenways-protected, vegetated pedestrian corridors that provide linkages between neighborhoods, parks, civic centers, commercial centers, work places, etc. -or- a linear area maintained as open space in order to conserve natural and cultural resources, and to provide recreational opportunities, aesthetic and design benefits, and linkages between open space and recreational facilities and their users. (C) Where screening is required by this ordinance, the following shall apply: 1. Screening shall be visually opaque, and constructed of a durable material. It shall be installed within a required buffer yard and shall be continuously maintained so as to meet the intent of this section. 2. Acceptable screening materials include stockade fences, decorative masonry walls, brick walls, earth berms, and/or a mix of evergreen/deciduous vegetation. Alternative materials maybe approved, if in the opinion of the administrator, their characteristics and design meet the intent and standards of this section. (D) Where landscaping is required by this ordinance, the following shall apply: 1. Existing vegetation shall be considered as a substitute for otherwise required landscaping, if in the opinion of the administrator, the type, size, and density of the existing vegetation complies with the following standards and the intent of this section. Any existing vegetation to be preserved and incorporated into the landscape must be adequately protected during construction to insure their survival, as specified in the Protection and Preservation Methods Section {Section 30-92-4(E)}. 2. All plant material must meet American Association of Nurserymen Specifications for No. 1 grade. Native plantings are encouraged when compatible with the surrounding land use. Every effort should be made to incorporate healthy existing trees into the landscape. 3. All plant species chosen shall be suitable for planting and growth within the proposed environment and shall meet the size requirements in the following table. Plants used for screening purposes shall be planted in accordance with the on-center requirements of the table. If spacing requirements are not specified, required landscaping shall be arranged within a buffer yard to achieve the intent of this section. Size/Spacing/Number/Minimums Screening & Spacing Height At Planting Final Height Requirements Evergreen/deciduous shrubs 24" 6' minimum 5' on center Small evergreen trees 5' 15' minimum 15' on center Large evergreen trees 6-8' S0' minimum 20' on center Small deciduous trees 1 '/z" caliper 15' minimum 15' on center Large deciduous trees 1 %" caliper 50' minimum 30' on center (E) Protection and Preservation Methods 4. Vegetation designated for protection and/or preservation shall be enclosed in a protection zone which establishes limits of construction disturbance to the root area of designated plant material. All protection zones and measures shall be established to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. During construction, plastic or wood fencing shall be installed at the perimeter of all protection zones. Vegetation of specimen quality, historic designation or cultural value: Provide extraordinary measures to ensure complete protection/preservation *Type of material specified may vary due to site-specific determinants. Silt, erosion control, or geotechnical fabric materials are not acceptable for use as vegetation protection. 2. Areas designated for protection and/or preservation shall not be violated throughout the entire construction period by actions including, but not limited to: • Placing, storing, or stockpiling backfill or construction related supplies • Felling trees into the designated area. • Burning within or in close proximity. • Modifying site topography in a manner which causes damage by collection/ponding or flow characteristics of site drainage. • Trenching or grading operations. • Operating equipment or machinery. • Parking of construction vehicles. • Temporary or permanent paving or impervious surface installation. • Temporary or permanent utility construction installation. • Disposal of construction debris or chemical pollutants. 3. Work or construction related activities within areas designated for protection and/or preservation of existing vegetation shall be accomplished only with prior approval of the Zoning Administrator. r `~ 30-92-5. Applicability of Regulations & Requirements (A) Requirements of screening, landscaping and buffer yards between zoning districts shall be determined by using Chart 1. CHART 1 Adjoining Zoning Site Zoning R-3 R-4 C-1 C-2 I-1 I-2 AG-3 D D D D D E AG-1 D D D D D E AR B B BorC BorC D E AV A A A A D E R-1 A A B C D E R-2 A A B C D E R-3 B B B D E R-4 A B D E p~ D E NC B C C-1 B C C-2 B B TYPE A B C OPTION 1 (Large Buffer, Minimal Landscaping) OPTION 2 (Smaller Buffer With More Landscaping/Screening) 20' buffer Large trees One row of evergreen shrubs and one row of deciduous shrubs 30' buffer Large trees One row of evergreen shrubs and a row of deciduous shrubs 40' buffer Large and small trees One row of evergreen shrubs and a row of deciduous shrubs 15' buffer One large and 3 small trees for every 75' 6' screening & 2 large shrubs for every 10' 20' buffer One large and 2 small trees for every 50' 6' screening & 3 shrubs for every 10' 3 0' buffer One large tree for every 30' 6' screening & 4 shrubs for every 10' D 50' buffer Large and small trees One row of deciduous shrubs E 75' buffer Large and small trees One row of deciduous shrubs (B) 35' buffer One large tree for every 30' 6' screening & 6 shrubs for every 10' 50' buffer One large tree and two small trees for every 30' 6' screening & eight shrubs for every 10' Requirements for Adjacent Right of Way /Street Side Plantings 1. Where a new or expanded development, or reconfigured parking area is proposed adjacent to a public street right-of--way, a planting strip shall be established between the parking areas and the adjacent right-of--way. The planting strip shall have a minimum width often (10) feet. 2. Within this planting strip a minimum of one (1) large deciduous tree shall be planted every thirty (30) linear feet along the public street right-of--way. Small trees planted every 20 linear feet, may be used where an overhead power line or other obstruction is present. In addition, a minimum of two (2) shrubs shall be placed in the planting strip for every five (5) linear feet of frontage. This should not be construed as meaning that the plants must be uniformly planted. (C) Parking Areas 1. New parking areas shall include landscaped medians, peninsulas or planters that are planned, designed and located to channel traffic, facilitate storm water management, and define and separate parking areas and aisles. 2. Each landscaped area shall be planted with large deciduous trees with a minimum caliper of one and one half (1 '/a") inches at the time of planting in accordance with Section 30- 92-3(C). I"' ,-°- 3. Rows of parking shall be separated by a landscaped island at least every 15 spaces and landscaped islands shall also be placed at the end of each row. Landscaped parking islands shall be spaced throughout the parking area and have a minimum dimension of 8' in width of planting area. To protect the plant material from vehicular damage, the island must be delineated by a clear physical barrier such as concrete curbs or set landscaping timbers. 4. A minimum of one large tree with surrounding turf grass or other ground cover shall be required in all parking lot islands. Additionally, three shrubs for every 15 parking spaces shall be planted within or adjacent to the parking area. 5. Large parking areas shall be broken into sections not to exceed 100 parking spaces. Each section is to be separated by major landscaped buffers to provide visual relief. 6. Paved areas greater than 500 sq. ft. such as loading areas, that are not necessarily striped parking lots shall place one landscaped island, as specified above for every 750 sq. ft. of area. They shall be located to channel traffic, and/or define separate parking areas. 7. Expansion of existing parking areas shall comply with the requirements above if the expansion involves the addition of an area equivalent to ten (10) or more parking spaces and the resultant parking area has the equivalent of fifteen (15)_or more spaces. The amount of landscaping required above shall be based on the number of spaces in_the new parking area only. (D) Landscaping Requirements for New and Expanded Developments -Adequate minimum landscaping shall be provided as follows: 1. The area coverage of trees and shrubs to be planted, together with the existing crown area of those retained shall occupy at least 35 percent of the total land area of the proposed project. Total land area for purposes of this paragraph shall be the area shown on the site plan as the area of the site plan under consideration. 2. The approved Crown Coverage allowances are listed below. They are based upon the anticipated size at maturity when located in a built environment. Type Large deciduous trees Large evergreen trees Small deciduous trees Small evergreen trees Large shrubs Small shrubs Minimum Height at Maturity Crown Coverage Allowance 50' min. height 30' min. height 15' min. height 15' min. height 1,250 square feet each (35') 500 square feet each (22') 250 square feet each (15') _250 square feet each (15') 5' min. height 10 square feet each (3') 2' min. height 5 square feet each (2') Shrub planting which apply toward crown coverage allowance requirements shall not exceed more than 25 percent of the total crown coverage allowance requirements. Shrub plantings proposed for use as screen plantings (such as related to refuse service areas, outdoor storage areas, mechanical equipment, etc.) do not apply toward Crown Coverage allowance requirements. ~"'~~ 4. Groundcovers, perennial plantings, or turf grass do not apply toward Crown Coverage allowance requirements. (E) Additional Screening Requirements 1. All refuse service (dumpsters/containers) and outdoor storage areas in all zoning districts shall be screened from surrounding views. In addition, ground level mechanical equipment shall be screened or landscaped. 2. Commercial and industrial use types shall screen from surrounding views all articles and materials being stored, maintained, repaired, processed, erected, fabricated, dismantled, or salvaged. Articles and materials available for retail sale by a commercial use type shall be exempt from this requirement. 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading: Text Amendment to Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-23 Nonconforming Uses and Structures COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: In the past there have been situations that have presented hardships for individuals with owner- occupied structures, used for residential purposes, that were located in non-residentially zoned areas of Roanoke County. One option is to rezone the impacted properties. This option may present potential problems with zoning inconsistencies within established neighborhoods. The Roanoke County planning staff is currently in the process of reviewing and evaluating the current Nonconforming Uses and Structures section of the Zoning Ordinance. County staff has discussed several options to best address the specific issues brought to staff's attention and maintain the integrity of the existing neighborhood. The option that meets these criteria the best is the revision of the Nonconforming Uses and Structures section of the zoning ordinance. The planning staff is also taking into consideration nonconformities that may occur as a result of government action such as the widening of Route 11/460 West, Interstate 81, Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) and the possibility of the future Interstate 73 as the Nonconforming Uses and Structure section of the zoning ordinance is evaluated. The text amendments will be presented to the Roanoke County Planning Commission at their Public Hearing on November 6, 2001 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends holding First Reading on October 23, 2001. ~l Respectfully Submitted, ~ o .~ Janet Scheid, Senior Planner Department of Community Development ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Approved, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No. Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE 102301-6 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FORA LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PAINT BANK ROAD WATER PROJECT WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public water system to Paint Bank Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public water system and the creation of a special utility (water) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public sewer system over ten years at an interest rate of 8%; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on October 23, 2001, and the second reading was waived because of the emergency nature of this request; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public water extension for the Paint Bank Road community. The total construction cost of this public water project is estimated to be $36,550.00, to be initially financed as follows: Citizen Participation (4 at $3,655 each) $14,620 Advance from the Public Works Participation Fund $21,930 TOTAL $36,550 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $21,930 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Water Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Paint Bank Road Water Petition Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated October 23, 2001. The Paint Bank Road Water Petition Project Area is created for a period of ten (10) years. Any owner of real estate within this service area may participate in and benefit from the public water extension to this service area by paying at a minimum the sum of $5,000 ($3,655 toward construction costs, plus $1,345 toward the off-site facility fee), said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public water extension. 3. That the Board authorizes and approves the payment by the property owners in the project service area who elect to participate on or before January 23, 2002, of their portion of the cost of extending the public sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (a) The total amount per property owner/residential connection may be financed for 10 years at an interest rate of 8% per annum. Down payment of $1,345.00 will be applied to the off-site facility fee. 2 (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require to secure this installment debt. (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. (d) Property owners who wish to participate after the January 23, 2002 deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $7,076 ($4,386 construction costs plus 20% plus $30 x length of road frontage in excess of 250 feet) plus the off-site facility fee in effect at that time (currently $2,690). 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the four (4) anticipated in this ordinance, who elect to participate shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Water Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid; any further payment of construction costs shall be returned to the Water Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. 3 On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance with the County funding the Basic Construction Cost of $3,655.00 for the fifth property to achieve the 50% participation, waive the second reading because of the emergency nature of the request, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: 1 Brenda J. Hol n, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Danial Morris, Director, Finance 4 . ~ ~_~ #928 44.03-5-38 PROPOSED SPECIAL WATER SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY 44.03-5-39.1 X912 44.03-5-39 -_ ry910 44.03-5-40 #892 PROPOSED END OF WATER LINE x'863 a 44.03-5-41. s 44.03-5-43 ~y858 44.03-5-44 #B50 44.03-5-45 ~y842 44.03-5-46 ~y834 44.03-5-47 _ JEB26 h'818 44.03 -5 -48 EXISTING 24" WATER LINE 10075 50 25 0 100 200 300 400 SCALE PAINT BANK ROAD WATER PETITION PROJECT OCTOBER 23, 2001 44.03-5-41 X851 ~~ PROPOSED WATER LINE PROPOSED SPECIAL WATER SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY 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 23, 2001 SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance Authorizing Creation of and Financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project -Paint Bank Road Water Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ ~~ ACKGROUND: The Roanoke County Utility Department has been advised that private wells serving properties on Paint Bank Road provide a less than adequate supply of water. Several property owners were required to drill several wells trying to find adequate water. Some property owners do not have an adequate water supply forcing them to ration water. Public water presently exists at the intersection of Texas Hollow Road and Paint Bank Road. During the fall of 1999, several petitions for varying portions of this area were addressed but eventually failed to generate the needed 50°Io participation to proceed. On September 6, Utility Department staff received another petition with 4 signatures from property owners along the southern portion of Paint Bank Road to extend public water lines to serve their properties. The area required to serve these 4 properties encompasses 10 properties necessitating a commitment from 5 property owners to have the required 50% participation. Canvassing of the neighborhood by one of the property owners did not generate any additional commitment from the non- participating property owners. However, the 4 participating property owners have agreed to pay an additional $500 each to compensate for the fifth property. C-r-l SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Based on location of properties agreeing to participate, the proposed service area was established as shown on the attached map. Utility Department staff has determined that the cost to extend public water lines approximately 1350 feet to serve the 10 properties of this area would be $36,550. The attached ordinance establishes a special service area for the project with each participating property owner paying their cost share through a special connection fee as shown below. The ordinance also establishes a method of financing at an interest rate of 8% for a period of up to 10 years for the initial participating property owners. This connection fee includes the fair share of the construction cost required to extend the public water system to serve the subject properties along Paint Bank Road, as well as, 50% of the off-site water facility fee of $2,690. Basic Construction Cost $3,655.00 Off-Site Facility Fee (w/50% Credit) 1,345.00 TOTAL CONNECTION FEE $5,000.00 The fee proposed above would be applicable, only if the property owner financially committed to participate in the proposed project prior to or during the 90-day grace period cited below. ALTERNATIVES Alternative 1: The four participating property owners would pay the per property connection fee of $5,000.00 with the County funding the Basic Construction Cost of $3,655.00 for the fifth property to achieve the 50% participation. Alternative 2: The four participating property owners would pay the per property connection fee of $5,000.00 plus an additional $500.00 towards the Basic Construction Cost. Alternative 3~ Do not approve request for extension of public water to the proposed service area of Paint Bank Road. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated cost of the project is $36,550. Alternative 1 would require funding of $21,930 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Alternative 2 would require funding of $19,930 from the Public Works Participation Fund. C~ - / RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Alternative 2 allowing a 90-day grace period. Properties not participating within this time period would pay their share of the construction plus a 20% increase and the full off-site facility fee should they connect at a later date. Based on present fees, the cost to connect at a later date would be $7,076.00. APPROVED: ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to mer C. Hodge County Administrator Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs C, - I ~y928 44.03-5-38 PROPOSED SPECIAL WATER SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY 44.03-5-39.1 ~y912 44.03-5-39 ~~- ~y910 44.03-5-40 X892 44.03-5-43 #858 44.03-5-44 #B50 PROPOSED END OF WATER LINE X863 \ 44.03-5-41.1 44.03-5-41 y951 ~~ PROPOSED WATER LINE 44.03-5-45 ~y842 PROPOSED SPECIAL WATER SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY 44.03-5-48 #834 44.03-5-47 ~_ _ ~y826 ~y818 44.03-5-48 EXISTING 24" WATER LINE ~ 10075 50 25 0 loo 200 300 400 SCALE PAINT BANK ROAD WATER PETITION PROJECT OCTOBER 23, 2001 r ~~""t AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PAINT BANK ROAD WATER PROJECT WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public water system to Paint Bank Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public water system and the creation of a special utility (water) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public sewer system over ten years at an interest rate of 8%; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on October 23, 2001, and the second reading was held November 13, 2001; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public water extension for the Paint Bank Road community. The total construction cost of this public water project is estimated to be $36,550.00, to be initially financed as follows: U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\paint.bank.road.water. ord.wpd 1 .~ `~„~ .,:. Citizen Participation (4 at $4,155 each) $16,620 Advance from the Public Works Participation Fund $19,930 TOTAL $36,550 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $19,930 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Water Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Paint Bank Road Water Petition Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated October 23, 2001. The Paint Bank Road Water Petition Project Area is created for a period often (10) years. Any owner of real estate within this service area may participate in and benefit from the public water extension to this service area by paying at a minimum the sum of $5,000 ($3,655 toward construction costs, plus an additional $500 as the proportional share of the construction costs to achieve the required 50% citizen participation, plus $1,345 toward the off-site facility fee, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public water extension. 3. That the Board authorizes and approves the payment by the property owners in the project service area who elect to participate on or before February 13, 2002, of their portion of the cost of extending the public sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (a) The total amount per property owner/residential connection may be financed for 10 years at an interest rate of 8% per annum. Down payment of $1,345.00 will be applied to the off-site facility fee. U:\WPDDCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\paint.bank. road. water. ord.wpd 2 C-/ (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require to secure this installment debt. (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which maybe required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. (d) Property owners who wish to participate after the February 13, 2002 deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $7,076 ($4,386 construction costs plus 20% plus $30 x length of road frontage in excess of 250 feet) plus the off-site facility fee in effect at that time (currently $2,690). 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the four (4) anticipated in this ordinance, who elect to participate shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Water Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid; any further payment of construction costs shall be returned to the Water Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\UTILITY\paint.bank.road.water.ord.wpd 3 s ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER ~ ' '~ MEETING DATE: October 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance Authorizing the Acquisition of Real Estate for the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project -Phase II COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: { ~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board previously approved acquisition of 13 properties for the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project by Ordinance 020999-3 on February 9, 1999. Eight of those properties were identified and acquired in Phase I, and five were identified for acquisition in Phase II. During Phase I, one of the property owners decided not to participate and an additional property was identified for acquisition. As such, the ordinance did not include the additional property for acquisition. This ordinance identifies that additional property, namely the Wood property, tax map number 38.11-1-57, and will allow staff to authorize the documents and take necessary actions to acquire the property as part of Phase II. FISCAL IMPACTS: Grant funding has been previously accepted and approved by Board action on June 26, 2001. No additional funding is necessary. ALTERNATIVES: Alternative 1. Approve the ordinance authorizing acquisition of the Wood property. Alternative 2. Decline the ordinance at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 1. a ~ SUBMITTED BY: f (/!G~'''~}`' K/, l~~r°"r~' rte" George W. Simpson, III, P.E., Assistant Director Department of Community Development V .L..,.H APPROVED BY: ~~~ mer C. Hodge County Administrator G -.c'. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, October 23, 2001 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL ESTATE FOR THE CARVIN CREEK HAZARD MITIGATION PROJECT, TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF STRUCTURES IN THE CARVIN CREEK FLOODPLAIN WHEREAS, Roanoke County has been awarded two grants from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to purchase flood-prone homes in the Sun Valley/Palm Valley area of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Grants (the Grants) is to reduce the number of structures located in the floodplain and subject to flooding damages; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County accepted the Phase I Grant on December 15, 1998, and approved the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project (the Project), and the Board accepted the Phase II Grant on June 26, 2001; and, WHEREAS, by Ordinance #020999-3, adopted on February 9, 1999, the Board of Supervisors authorized the acquisition of thirteen identified properties in connection with the Project, eight of which were acquired in Phase I; and, WHEREAS, the owners of one of the properties, previously identified and approved,elected not to participate, and an alternative property has now been identified for acquisition in Phase II of the Project; and, WHEREAS, the real estate to be acquired is located in the Carvin Creek floodplain; 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 October 23, 2001, and the second reading was held on November 13, 2001. r ~' NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the acquisition of real estate is hereby authorized, referenced by tax map number, from the following property owner, their successors or assigns: TAX MAP NO. PROPERTY ADDRESS 38.11-1-57 5332 Palm Valley Road Wood, Paul Allen (deceased) & Nancy D. 2. That the consideration for this property acquisition shall not exceed a value to be determined by an independent fair market value appraisal; and 3. That the consideration for this real estate acquisition shall be paid from the Carvin Creek Hazard Mitigation Project Grant funds, not to exceed and subject to the amount of funds available; and 4. That in order to accomplish the provisions of the Grants and ordinances, the Board hereby adopts by reference the "Carvin Creek Acquisition Policy," which establishes the procedures and requirements by which acquisition of all real estate shall be accomplished. The Board may amend this policy from time to time by resolution; and 5. That the funds for this acquisition have previously been accepted and appropriated, and are available in the Drainage/Flood Control capital account. 6. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish these acquisitions, all of which shall be on form approved by the 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 23, 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 expired 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 expired 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 RESOURCE AUTHORITY Attached are letters from Chief Executive Officer John Hubbard advising that the four year terms of Allan C. Robinson, Jr., and Douglas L. Anderson will expire December 31, 2001. Also attached is a letter of resignation from Ms. Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer, 1 with her recommendation that Danial Morris, Finance Director, be appointed. Ms. Hyatt's four year term will expire December 31, 2002. 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 Wendi Schultz to complete the unexpired term. The term expires January 12, 2002. SUBMITTED BY: APPRO ED BY: Mary H. Allen, CMC Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson _ Received () McNamara- _ _ Referred () Minnix To () Nickens 2 ^~~' 4 - ~, ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY October 3, 2001 Ms. Mary Allen, Clerk Board of Supervisors PO Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Appointment to Board of Directors Dear Mary: Roanoke Valley Resource records indicate that the four-year term of Allan C. Robinson, Jr., who was appointed by the County of Roanoke to the Resource Authority Board of Directors, will expire on December 31, 2001. It is requested that the Clerk's Office inform the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority of the reappointment of Mr. Robinson or appointment of a new member by January 1, 2002. All members, whether new or reappointments, will need to be certified and given the Oath of Office prior to the Authority's annual organization meeting to be held January 23, 2002. know. Your assistance with this matter is appreciated. If you have any questions, please let me Sincerely, ~~ John R. Hubbard Chief Executive Officer Cc: Allan C. Robinson, Jr. 1020 Hollins Road Roanoke, Virginia 24012 (540) 857-5050 Fax (540) 857-5056 Web Site: www.rvra.net ~?~;'~ ~ / "~ ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY October 3, 2001 Ms. Mary Allen, Clerk Board of Supervisors PO BOX 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Appointment to Board of Directors Dear Mary: Roanoke Valley Resource records indicate that the four-year term of Douglas J. Anderson, who was appointed by the County of Roanoke to the Resource Authority Board of Directors, will expire on December 31, 2001. It is requested that the Clerk's Office inform the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority of the reappointment of Mr. Anderson or appointment of a new member by January 1, 2002. All members, whether new or reappointments, will need to be certified and given the Oath of Office prior to the Authority's annual organization meeting to be held January 23, 2002. Your assistance with this matter is appreciated. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, J O~ John R. Hubbard Chief Executive Officer JRH/dtc cc: Douglas J. Anderson 1020 Hollins Road Roanoke, Virginia 24012 (540) 857-5050 Fax (540) 857-5056 Web Site: www.rvra.net ~ AOANp~-~ O G ~ ,A ~ 2 A a2 Cn~~xx~~ ~~ ~~xxr~.~..~ 1838 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER October 12, 2001 Board of Supervisors County of Roanoke P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Sirs: It has been my privilege to serve on the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority since its inception in October 1991. Through these years I have made sure that the Resource Authority operated in the best financial interest of the participating members. In this capacity, I have structured bond sales, reviewed annual budgets, and ensured making sure that tipping fees are adequate but not excessive. I had been fulfilling these RVRA representation functions as part of my role of Director of Finance of the County of Roanoke. Since, I am no longer working in this capacity I would like to pass this position of RVRA board member to the current Director of Finance, Danial Morris. Therefore, at this time I would like to resign my seat on the RVRA (which expires December 31, 2002) and recommend that this seat be assigned to Danial Morris. I would like to thank the Board for the opportunity to serve on this authority during these formative years of the RVRA. Sincerely, ~cr.~.•~-Q., i~ - ~~:~~.~1 Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer cc: Elmer Hodge Dan Morris DDH/jsh P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (540) 776-7190 • FAX (540) 772-2193 r-~ ®Recycled Paper f ---- , AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION 102301-7 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for October 23, 2001, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) CommunityAdvisoryCommittee. 2. Resolution of congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary in the Roanoke Valley. 3. Resolution of appreciation upon the retirement of Daniel A. LaPrade, Police Department. 4. Request from Sheriff's Office to accept $8,115 grant for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education Program. 5. Request for acceptance of Monet Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 6. Acceptance of donation of 20' sanitary sewer easement from Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. on Reservoir Road, Hollins Magisterial District. 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 Johnson to adopt the Consent Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H Iton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Gerald Holt, Sheriff Danial Morris, Director, Finance Vickie Huffman, Senior Assistant County Attorney Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development 2 A-102301-7 . a 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) CommunityAdvisory Committee COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee At the October 9, 2001 meeting, Supervisor Nickens nominated Ann Rogers to serve on this committee. There are no specific terms for this committee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the above appointment be confirmed. Submitted by: Approved by, Mary H. Allen CMC Elmer C. odge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to approve Church _ x Denied () Johnson _ x Received () McNamara- x Referred () Minnix _ x To () Nickens _ x _ cc: File Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Community Advisory Committee 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 23, 2001 RESOLUTION 102301-7.b OF CONGRATULATIONS TO ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY ON THE OCCASION OF ITS 50r" ANNIVERSARY IN THE ROANOKE VALLEY WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company was founded in 1931 as part of Sears, Roebuck and Company, being named after an automobile tire line that Sears carried at that time; and WHEREAS, the Allstate Insurance Company is celebrating its 70`h anniversary in the United States, its 50`h anniversary in the Roanoke Valley and its 31S` anniversary in the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company is ranked the ninth largest employer in the Roanoke Valley by the Chamber of Commerce, employing over 1,400 employees in multiple County locations, including the National Support Centerwhich services customers and agents countrywide; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company, lives up to its slogan "You're in Good Hands with Allstate," by service to the community through the Allstate Foundation established in 1952 that awards grants tonon-profit agencies seeking to improve the quality of life and The Helping Hands Program which works with community groups to identify and address their most pressing needs; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company employees in the Roanoke Valley give of their time and talent through volunteer involvement in Junior Achievement, the West End Center, Boys and Girls Club, Meals on Wheels delivery, blood donor drives, and various other charitable organizations. 1 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, offers its congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on its 50tH anniversary in the Roanoke Valley; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors expresses its deepest appreciation to Allstate for its leadership role of service to the community and for providing employment to residents of the Roanoke Valley. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~~2.P~~- Brenda J. Hol on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Congratulations File 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: Resolution of congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on the occasion of its 50th Anniversary in the Roanoke Valley. AGENDA ITEM: October 23, 2001 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Allstate Insurance Company is celebrating their 70th anniversary in the USA, 50tt' anniversary in the Roanoke Valley and 31 st anniversary in Roanoke County on October 29, 2001. Staff requests that the Board approve the attached resolution of congratulations which will be presented to Allstate by Chairman Minnix at their celebration on October 30, 2001. er C. Hod e County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara- Referred () Minnix To () Nickens Y r en.o/ ~, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY ON THE OCCASION OF ITS 50T" ANNIVERSARY IN THE ROANOKE VALLEY WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company was founded in 1931 as part of Sears, Roebuck and Company, being named after an automobile tire line that Sears carried at that time; and WHEREAS, the Allstate Insurance Company is celebrating its 70th anniversary in the United States, its 50th anniversary in the Roanoke Valley and its 31St anniversary in the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company is ranked the ninth largest employer in the Roanoke Valley by the Chamber of Commerce, employing over 1,400 employees in multiple County locations, including the National Support Center which services customers and agents countrywide; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company, lives up to its slogan "You're in Good Hands with Allstate," by service to the community through the Allstate Foundation established in 1952 that awards grants tonon-profit agencies seeking to improve the quality of life and The Helping Hands Program which works with community groups to identify and address their most pressing needs; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company employees in the Roanoke Valley give of their time and talent through volunteer involvement in Junior Achievement, the West End Center, Boys and Girls Club, Meals on Wheels delivery, blood donor drives, and various other charitable organizations. 1 -' ~ NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, offers its congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on its 50th anniversary in the Roanoke Valley; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors expresses its deepest appreciation to Allstate for its leadership role of service to the community and for providing employment to residents of the Roanoke Valley. 2 S ~ 1, r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION 102301-7.c EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF DANIEL A. LAPRADE, POLICE DEPARTMENT, AFTER TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Daniel A. LaPrade was first employed by Roanoke County on July 1, 1973, in the Sheriff's Office as a Deputy Sheriff, Traffic Bureau, and has also held the positions of Deputy Sheriff in the Detective Bureau, Services Division, Youth & Family Services, as well as Personnel Training Sergeant and Deputy Sheriff-Captain; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade retired from Roanoke County on October 1, 2001 as a Police Officer -Captain after twenty-eight years and three months of service; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade excelled at administrative responsibilities for the Police Department, especially concerning employment and Human Resources issues; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade was instrumental in substantially increasing the funds obtained by the Police Department over the last year through his most recent assignment managing the proposals and processing of grant applications; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade, 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 1 County to DANIEL A. LAPRADE for over twenty-eight 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 Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holt n, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Joe Sgroi, Director, Human Resources 2 ~ ; I ^~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF DANIEL A. LAPRADE, POLICE DEPARTMENT, AFTER TWENTY- EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Daniel A. LaPrade was first employed by Roanoke County on July 1, 1973, in the Sheriff's Office as a Deputy Sheriff, Traffic Bureau, and has also held the positions of Deputy Sheriff in the Detective Bureau, Services Division, Youth & Family Services, as well as Personnel Training Sergeant and Deputy Sheriff-Captain; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade retired from Roanoke County on October 1, 2001 as a Police Officer -Captain after twenty-eight years and three months of service; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade excelled at administrative responsibilities for the Police Department, especially concerning employment and Human Resources issues; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade was instrumental in substantially increasing the funds obtained by the Police Department over the last year through his most recent assignment managing the proposals and processing of grant applications; and WHEREAS, Captain LaPrade, 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 1 t 1 ~°' County to DANIEL A. LAPRADE for over twenty-eight 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 A-102301-7.d 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept the Adult Literacy and Basic Education Program Grant COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: N~ ~~~V~ ` ` BACKGROUND: We have received grant funding approval from the State Department of Education for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education/GED program operated by Roanoke City Schools and administered by TAP -This Valley Works, under the auspices of the Roanoke County/Salem Jail facility. The funding period will run from July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002. The total funding is in the amount of $8,115.00. We will be required to provide matching funds in the amount of $13,380.00, which will be supplied from the Sheriffs SubFund. Acceptance of this grant will require no additional funding from the Board of Supervisors. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The grant was approved by faxed notification on October 02, 2001. The grant period is from July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002. The total amount of the grant is $8,115.00 in federal funds and requires matching funds in the amount of $13,380.00, which will be supplied from the Sheriff's SubFund. No additional and/or matching funding from the Board of Supervisors will be required. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the acceptance of the awarded funds. Respectfully submitted, Gerald S. Holt Sheriff Approved by, ~~~ ~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator s-~ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to approve Church _ x _ Denied () Johnson _ x Received () McNamara- x Referred () Minnix _ x To () Nickens _ x cc: File Gerald Holt, Sheriff Danial Morris, Director, Finance ~~" ~I ~~i w ~~ z ~ c ~ _ c_ y ~ O~~ Q C H G p QI~ N >~~~ M ~ ~ aWN~ tooC 3 ~~~ ~C ~AaE O n ~ ~a lV Q O N ~ M' ~ W ~` _ Qa~ O l~i ~~~ WVm ... ~~~ .~,.» a ) ._ 0 ! u W H I ~ ~ b a ~ d ~ ~ ~ ., , d T ~ ',' ~ ', a~ ~ o '~ ~ E ~ ~ c W N 01 O U~ }~ , ~ ~ ~ Shp ~ M ~ J •~ O [ ~D c ~ Q ,dY ~ N ~ M1 r v ' -` 4 d ~ ~ j~ ~ ~ 0 D jQ V 2 ~ ^ C ~ " h w! ~ Q ~ N ~O GV C4 ~ ~ ~ ~D ~ Q ~ ~` n ~ ~ $ 'c ~ > > u ~ ~ ~ ~ a J a o d ~~ .•, v Q ~ ~~ ~ C Q o ~ ~, o ~ . o ~ ~ ~ V D I {il ~ N ~ M ~ ~ ~ N m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ w C ~ ! y ~o 6 a 4 J ~ v d~ i QV .. '-1 ~ L d u u u d u F~ H ~ ~ N Q ~ N N ~v~ '~ 4 y ~ ~ v ~ ~ a a a N O J ~ ~ ' ~ 0 ~ ~ `p G C ~ _3 ~ ~ C a~4 ~ ~ a r .-. ~ ~i~ a~ o ~ e ~ ~ '84 9~+ G ~ ON z 0~: 9~8~ 6 ~ NlllU,;-f1C~ S~i~JO~'~ ,13~~H~ S I Hl dN.1 rb ~ ~ t t ~~~,? -~-:~; i0.'~~2~'20~1 1~:~34 EYpeaditure CAtegory TAF THIS UALL~'~ ~.JQRKS EDU-YOUTH y 93876293 LITERACYlROANOT~E COUrTTY JAIL INSTRUCTIONAL BUDGIET WORKSHEET 2001-2002 Z.OCOII Cash Match 1000 PERSONAL SL-'R~v"ICES Instructor Specialist 1 aa$19.OOx20x52 11,223 A/I.. Accrual 2fl00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FICA VUTA 1:rCA AIL w.c. Retirement EAP General insurance 3G00 PURCHASED SERVICES 4000 INTERNAL SERVICES 5000 OTI~ER CHARGES Space Cost Travel Student Bus Passes 6400 MATERIALS &. SUPPLIES Office Supplies lnstructionat Material Postage In Service Training Test Fees ?000 EQUIPMENT TOTAL - 511,223 ADMINISTRATION 2,157 GRAND TOTAL 513,380 N0. 166 DE~~ ~~ FedetaU State Tote! 7,777 ] 9,400 $7,777 519,000 338 2,495 SS,11S $21,a9S • 10= ~~~'i_'~~~11 1U: ~1~ TAP THIS ~,~ALLE r" iuCiR{•.~ tDU-`r'OUTH a 9387520.3 N0. 16E D~1~ ~• / L,YTERACYlROANOI~E COUNTY JA1L ADMINYSTRATION BYIDGET WORKSHEET 2001-2002 Lacal Eapenditx~re Casts ]FederaU CatcgorY Matclt State 'Total 1000 PERSONAL SERVICES AIL Accrual 2000 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FICA VUTA FICA AfL. W.C. Retirement EAP General Insurance 3000 PURCHASER SERVICES 4000 II~I'ERNAL SERVICES G000 OTHER CHARGES Fiscal Aclministratiou-Roanoke Adult ED. S 338 $ 338 Fiscal Support-County Jail S 2,157 2,157 5000 MATERIALS 8c SUPPLIES 7040 EQUIPMENT G1tAND TO?AL S 1,157 S 338 S 2,495 a ~j"' THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2001, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 102301-7.e REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF MONET DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor Johnson Seconded By: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix Nays: None Absent: None A Copy Teste: 7L~--- Brenda J. Holt , CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Department of Transportation ~OANOKE COUNTY D~P,~RTMENT ®F C®MMUNITY ®EV~LOPM~NT TL]LE V~.s1,®V ~S9 ~~~~. O Acceptance of Monet Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. • • • C m L U O M N O r 0 p E c >. 9 a S a N O _T m v .p O O L ~ 9 ~ < Z c'1i ?_ N ~ a ~ O v~, Y C ~ t ~ D :; z ~ U n m ~ ~ m ~ `° `° U ~ m O r Z n 3 0 ~ ~ u~ N r m m O m m m O m m m ~ ID P ~ d a° a i a° d a m g N ~ N T ~ C tl ~~ V j ~j p p O O O O ~ ~ ~ b \ ~` U W E Q ~ \ o r y I c- n W ^ Q ~ m m o m a m m ~ O ~ O O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V m ~ m C W b 25 25 ~ ~ !5 ~ a `o ~ ~' ~+' ~ m m d ~ 2 a ~ ¢ a ~ 2 e F b ¢ `u ~ ° c ° a ° ° i r ° II Z ° d LL ~~ - ~ u., r - d ii r - ~ ti F - a t d ti f - . t F - x m D L ~ . ' O ~ b h O ~ o ~ W Z Z O ~ ~ `a ~ N c7 f h m h N Q Z Z '~ ~~ ~t,.,~, "~ ~~.,, H Z S V LL Q Z F- U LL N Q W U H W W Z C7 z w H H U H S C7 H Z Y Z O Q n r g 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Monet Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Palm Land Company, L.C., the developer of The Groves, Section 8, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that they accept .18 mile. of Monet Drive, from the intersection of Brookhaven Court, east, to its cul-de-sac. The staff has inspected this road, along with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and finds the road is acceptable. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to VDOT requesting that they accept Monet Drive into the Secondary Road System. 1 SUBMITTED BY: i~ ~. r a ,. Arnold Covey, Director Department of Community Development APPROVED BY: /Hf,G.~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved ()Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens 2 .(.,.Mrs.. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2001, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF MONET DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right- of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote A Copy Teste: Moved by: Seconded by: _ Yeas: Nays: Mary Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors pc: Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation File 3 ~- NORTH ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THE GROVES, SECT. 8 Acceptance of Monet Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. ~I C 7 ~ U ~I C m L U cSf dl Q 3 s m a `a c 0 v a m L_ O N C 0 Q d m Q L G. 1 Q ~c C Z 0 r~ N 0 0 0 E c ~. m N ^C O S A 0 a N . O V m ~C O C0 O YU 0 U O E zq C O N ~_ .~ 7 O m E R Z .-. M c~ ~_ N ~ O v, > C ~ O Z U F O O n ~. ~ C 6 ~ J m ~ c m ~ U O H 8 z a 3 d ° a N m O a N N z m h - C O ~ \ ~ ~ U N Q \ U] O b ~ ~ y W ~ m ~ J C U ~ ~' `c u`. r°- a b ~ N o W Z Z O C ` m gy Z ..,e._.. ~.,.... ~ B .... +~:wnr.':5'. A-102301-7 .f 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION OF A 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT FROMPROFESSIONAL COORDINATED SERVICES, INC. (BOTETOURT COUNTY TAX MAP NO. 106-17 & NO. 106-22) ON RESERVOIR ROAD IN THE AREA OF THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the acceptance of the following easement for sanitary sewer purposes in connection with development of the Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. property on Reservoir Road, in the area ofthe Hollins Magisterial District, conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: a) Donation of a sanitary sewer easement, twenty feet (20') in width, from Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. (Botetourt County Deed Book 407, page 210, and Deed Book 369, page 200; Tax Map No. 106-17 & No. 106- 22), as shown on a plat prepared by Kyle D. Austin, L.S., dated August 23, 2001, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The location and dimensions of this easement have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering and utility staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the donation of this easement. I.' ,./ ~- Respectfully submitted, V cki L. Huffm Sr. Assistant Cou y Attorney ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to approve Church _ x Denied () Johnson _ x _ Received () McNamara_ x _ Referred () Minnix _ x _ To () Nickens x cc: File Vickie Huffman, Senior Assistant County Attorney Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development 2 Shaded Area Denotes Sanitary Sewer Easement Area = 5,686 Sq. Ft. (0.131 Ac.) Ann B. Walls Nancy B. Birdsong D.B. 39, Pg. 542 Tnx 1~ 106-16 Iron Pipe Fd. 0 d' ~ ~ _ _ Professional Z Coordinated Services, Inc. j L ~ D.B. 407, Pg. 210 ~' O cD Tox # 106-17 ~ ~ O CA ~ ~ w V (V o 20' Sanitary Sewer ~ o amen Mason Hcynesworth D.B. 46, Pg. 5B1 Tax ~ 106-14 Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. D.B. 369, Pg. Z00 Tax # 106-22 `~t Iron '~nainli~~e - ~ ~ Pin 57$•52'20 "~ 15g ~ ~ O ~ ~ o .72 N ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ D ~ '~ rn C N a v ~ ` William S. & Sibyl P. Johnson o D.B. 224, Pg. 001 y w Tax ~ 106-18 Easement Plat Showing a 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement Located on Property of Professional Coordinated Services, Inc. Deed Book 369, Page 200. ~~pLT H OFL Deed Book 407, Page 210. ~ ~ ~,p ' 8~2~~°~ Amsterdam Magesterial District ~ Botetourt County, Virginia KYyLE~ D. A?U~STI~N--- //Y~~~. Gd~w~ut D Scale: 1 " = 50' Date: August 23, 2001 LICENSE N0. 1483 Kyle D. Austin L.S. ~qND SURV~~ P.O. Boa 749 Buchanan. Virginia 24066 Telephone i 1640) 264-1748 ~.J "' ERHIBIT A 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: REQUEST FOR A WORK SESSION FOR THE SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM SIX-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2008 AND CONSIDERATION OF PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 VDOT REVENUE SHARING PROGRAM. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: VDOT and County staff requests the Board of Supervisors to schedule a work session for November 13, 2001 to review and finalize the proposed plans. U ITTED BY: ~~. Arnold Covey, Director Department of Community evelopment Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: APPROVED BY: ~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Church Johnson - McNamara Minnix Nickens 1 .~ v 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Work Session: Petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to Amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-92 Screening, Landscaping, and Buffer Yards. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: At the request of the Planning Commission, staff has reviewed and revised the Screening, Landscaping and Buffer requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed ordinance provides more flexibility to both the developer and the nursery provider in the placement of vegetative landscaping while also giving credits for existing vegetation and encouraging the use of native landscaping materials. Local arborists, landscape architects and professional urban foresters have reviewed the proposed revisions. The Planning Commission has held several worksessions on these revisions and will hold Public Hearing on November 6, 2001. Staff is requesting a worksession with the Board of Supervisors on November 13, 2001 to review these proposed changes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: Schedule worksession on November 13, 2001. .~ Respectfully Submitted, .- `~ /"~ ,, Janet Scheid, Senior Planner Department of Community Development ACTION Approved, Cq6~.~ ~~ ~5 _ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No. Yes Abs Approved () Motion by: Church Denied () Johnson Received () McNamara Referred () Minnix To () Nickens ~i GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General ', Amount Fund Revenues Unaudited Balance at June 30, 2001 $7,931,381 6.29% July 24, 2001 Appropriation to the VRFA -Explore Park ($100,000) July 24, 2001 Loan to VRFA -Explore Park (250,000) Unaudited Balance at October 23, 2001 $7,581,381 6. Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $7,581,381 $7,581,381 6.02% Note: On December 18, 1990, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25% of General Fund Revenues 2001 - 2002 General Fund Revenues $126,027,248 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $7,876,703 Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance Ap r~By'f~,~~ T/ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator - .,~ CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Unaudited balance at June 30, 2001 6,2001 Lloyd Property Settlement Proceeds ug 14, 2001 Solid Waste Collection Canisters 11, 2001 Mason Cove Fire/Rescue Station Septic System Transfer from 2000-2001 departmental savings Unaudited balance at October 23, 2001 Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance Amount $656,424.43 984,000 (42,000.00) (40,000.00) $1,558,424.431 App~ed By,~ 'ri`.,/ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator '~`~ RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2001-2002 Original Budget $100,0 August 28, 2001 Citizen Satisfaction Survey (12,000.00) September 25, 2001 RV Employers of People with Disabilities Awards (1,000.00) Balance at October 23, 2001 $87,000. Respectfully Submitted, Danial Morris Director of Finance ~~~ ApprC~y, 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 FY 1997-1998 Original budget appropriation une 23, 1998 Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation FY 1999-2000 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (1,219,855) 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 23, 2001 Reserved for Future School Operations $670,000.00 1,113,043.00 2,000,000.00 321,772.00 2,000,000.00 780,145.00 495,363.00 2,000,000 (1,804,427) 195,573.00 2,000,000 (465,400) 1,534,600.00 $9,110,496.00 FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation July 11, 2000 SW Co Regional Stormwater FY2001-2002 Original budget appropriation July 1, 2001 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle Unaudited Balance at October 23, 2001 $1,500,000.00 (290,000.00) 1,500,000.00 (1,858,135.00) 851,865.00 * Of this amount $447,280 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~ y' / Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~•"' ~, Lee B. Eddy 2211 Pommel Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Tel/Fax: 540/774-2930 MEMORANDUM To: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Date: 10/10/O1 Subject: Report of September Meeting Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission I am pleased to transmit an overview of the activities/actions of the Regional Commission at its meeting on September 28, 2001. The meeting was held at Botetourt County's Greenfield Education and Training Center. I was out of town on the date of the meeting and was not able to attend. If there are any questions please contact Wayne Strickland, Executive Director for the Commission, at 343-4417. ' '~. ~• - ~, r,~i c~ ~~ . r.;~, v --' Serving Alleghany County, Botetourt County, Clifton Forge, Covington, Craig County, Roanoke City, Roanoke County, Salem, and the Town of Vinton 313 Luck Avenue, SW / P.O. Box 2569 / Roanoke, Virginia 24010 Phone: 540.343.4417 / Fax: 540.343.4416 Connis~on E-mail: rvarc@rvarc.org / www.rvarc.org OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES/ACTIONS Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Meeting Thursday, September 28, 2001 • Election of Commission officers was held. Mayor Temple Kessinger, Jr. (Covington representative) was re-elected C"airman and Bill Bestprtch (Roanoke City representative) was elected Vice Chairman. The two-year terms begin in October. Howard Packett (City of Salem representative) was reappointed Treasurer and Wayne Strickland (Executive Director of the Regional Commission) was reappointed Secretary to the Commission. Mayor Don Davis, Town of Vinton representative, was thanked for his service as Vice Chair of the Commission for the past two years. • The Commission's annual audit report, for the period ending June 30, 2001, was accepted as presented. The Commission's auditor stated that there were no questioned costs and that the internal controls at the Commission were excellent. • Marilew Barnes, Town of Clifton Forge representative, was recognized for her service on the Commission. This was the last meeting for Ms. Barnes since she will be moving to New York at the end of October. • Introduced a new staff member, Ms. Ronda Boutte, who will head up the new rideshare program. The Regional Commission was recently awarded funds to administer the rideshare program for commuters in the Roanoke Valley and surrounding areas. • Announced that the Kegional Commission will host the 12`~ Annuai Virginia Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Conference, November 1-2 at The Hotel Roanoke & Conference Center. The Virginia Association of Planning District Commissions sponsors this annual event. Brochures were distributed at the meeting. • Reported that legislation to reauthorize the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) was recommended by the Senate Public Works Committee. Congress may take up reauthorization by the end of this year. • Mr. James Tate, III, Project Manager of Virginia's A.L. Philpott Manufacturing Extension Partnership (VPMEP), addressed Commissioners. The mission of VPMEP is to assist small- to mid-sized manufacturers in improving their profitability and competitiveness. Information packets on the company were distributed at the meeting. ~` • Approved sending a letter to the two film offices (Virginia Highlands Film Office and Blue Ridge-Southwest Film Office) stating that the Regional Commission can no longer provide office space since the Commission's new rideshare program has moved into the vacant space. j 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In accordance with the Self-Insurance Program, Ordinance #61494-4, Section 2-86.C, attached is the Fiscal Year to Date claims activity and status report including the First Quarter which ended September 30, 2001. Attachment A -Auto, Attachment B -General Liability FISCAL IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Respectfully submitted, Robert C. Jernigan Risk Manager ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No. Yes Abs Church _ _ Johnson _ McNamara _ _ Minnix Nickens _ Y -~~ Z ~ O ~ O M ~ (OD O O N ~ 00 1~ W } o~ M Q M et N M N CO N d W rn N ~ cND W O) ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' Q o. N ~ O 0 U 0 U 0 U 0. O a O o U ~ ~ - o p M I- ~ W ~ ~ c°a m ~ Z ~ ~ W g o a a Q Y a a Q O a U a > > > ~ > > > a N U U ~ N W ~ i W ~ L 0 ~ U ~ ~ N ~ .. O a ~ > ~ ~ o ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ w J Q y U = Z Y O U y U >, ~ N U Z -~ O v a 2 t > m r ~ Y °' r ~ 2 ~ > ~ p L > ` > N Y O L fn W ~ o Z H w o ~ ~ L in E ~ w •- o ~ Q ~ „°i J ~ Z ~ 2 i ° ~ ca 'o ° -° E ° 2 ~ O w t N F- O N n c~ ~° a> ~ ~ i a -° a~ w m °c~ I U a> ~c ~ ° .. f0 ~ .. 'c U W Q ~ m ~ Q ~ ~ m I } J W ~ - _..._ .. _.. __. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ LL ~. ~ 'O ~ "° U ~ T O In to U ~ a to ~ F- W W o Q I'- ~ Q o 0 M ~ 0 M c 0 ~ 0 0 N 0 0 W 0 r - U U ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 Q _ _~ __ _ ~ ~ __ N O M V M O M to I~ i ~ . I i O O O O O I U Z N N .- O r O N N N m a Q .." a~ E Z n W } Q c+> a w °.-° ~ M W ~ W H r Q O ~ N M ~ W i- ~ a W ~ m d W N ~ U ~ z Q fn ' W W ~ U Z `" O N O '~ ' Q z O a ~ Z Q U wo J W ~ O Z w fn F" o ~ ~ Q W } J ~ u. V U ~ W ~ a ~ Fa- O ~ Z W ~ Q a w o o z ~ w 0 U ~ ~ w w ~ Q W H a 0 ~ U Z o W } L U Q N 0 N rn a 4 Y "` Z °o °o rn w o Q a w ~ ~ w w H ~ ~ ~ a i 0 0 0 ~- (n U U U O N O F- O ~ ~ y ~ ll.l m W ~ _ ~ Z p ~ U U Q > p U > ~ w ~ - a w ~ v~ w ~ fn ~ LiJ Z ~ a w ~ ~ N r ~ 1"' J ~ _ J w m ,n Q N J J ~ ~ o W p s ~ ~ m a O ° `~ d ~ > Q a~ ~ i fn Z T ~ W fA W H Q ~ ~ ~ ~ Q W J ~ a ~ ~ .n U W m ~ f0 f- ~ w -o ~ ~ U L Q > m w ~ ~ 0~ m ~ -p ~ H ~ v ~ p ° ~ m ~ Q h- W ~ LL ~ d ~ ~ W = _ ~ ~ ~ ~ H Z w o w ~ N 0 U p ~ Q o 0 N N 0 0 N o 0 ~ o ° o _ Q 0 0 J Z N N U ~ ° a~ m w a /Y - ~ m Z W g o Q a w w w ~ ~ ° o ~ N Q O M ~ N W ~ z ~ m U ~ W Q a a w w ~ ~ N w W p J f" O N Q C J ~ J W ~ U J Z ~ W Z ~ W Z ~ fA W a Z Q U LL Q (n Q ~ ~ W Q ~ (n ~ U J Q J Q O U z ~' w N ~ ~ ~ ~ a a o ° z a w ~ w w ~ ~ ¢ N U ~ ~ W Q D g O U Z Q w } E L U f0 Q N 0 N rn co ~ `~ J ~;T: . ~~3~~ C®10~~1t®N~~A~,'I']E-~ o f ~~R~INIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET CHARLES D. NOTTINGHAM RICHMOND, 23219-2000 JAMES S. GIVENS COMMISSIONER STATE SECONDARY ROADS ENGINEER October 11, 2001 Mr. Elmer C. Hodge Roanoke County P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Mr. Hodge: The enclosed report contains a list of all changes to the Secondary System of State Highways in your county approved by the State Secondary Roads Engineer in September 2001. All additions to and abandonments from the Secondary System are effective the day they are approved by the State Secondary Roads Engineer. This date appears in the far right column of the monthly report. These changes will be presented to the Commonwealth Transportation Board at its monthly meeting on October 17, 2001. If you have any questions or comments about this report, please call Martin Law at 786-7399. 1 James S. Givens ~ ~- ~.- State Secondary f~'oads Engineer JSG/MII WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING • ~ d o -~ w O h o w O .~ ~ ~ ~ h Qa ~ ~ bA C u C .~ L 6~ ~.+ L ar ~ y r'0 a y `/~y C O o •= ~ > ~~ ~ ~o o °' OVl ~ Oa 7 O L 'w bD y ~ ~ ~ O ~ CE ~ ~ Z ~ o U t~ L p~ O r%~ i Lam' O b o4i O 2! U C O ~_ 'C ^C Q bD' C U 8 H ~ ~I 0 v a, 0 0 a O O U cd Q U H a~ .~ Ca 'o a°i N v'i Q: 0 V w h a 0 0 v o+ 0 0 v O N Q U 0 F 0 U a ..~ 0 L4 w N Vl 0 ~ ~ ~ ~i Q O U % ~ G o +~+ ~ Q' h ~ W a ~ d G r 3 o' rn o~ 0 a i O N C O d CD R C i ~ i s U a Z ~~ - O ' H N Vl 0 I ~'~/'` ~.`. ~f 0 0 N 1 ~i I ~ 0 U O '~ Q O ~~ I Q n 0 I~ '~ s n o~ C O Q U v 0 'Zt i 0 m i '~ .~ C ~.. y tl 3 '_' .oo s o, ~ tl Ih 0 ~v ~~ ~' 0 ~~ U 'h m s_ ~.r y I~ n U Zt y r d i y y C E 0 h AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION 102301-8 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 2.2-3712 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, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Meeting File 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading and Public Hearing of Ordinance Accepting an Offer for and authorizing the sale of property located at 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia (Salem Office Supply Building -City of Salem Tax Map No. 107-6-1) COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The lack of expansion space at the Courthouse is along-standing issue that will not go away. The purchase of the Salem Office Supply building was a compromise solution after we simply were unable to find space elsewhere. Neither the building nor the site are ideal but it is the best we have. It is my recommendation that we proceed with the first and second readings. However, unless we come up with a better offer than those already on the table and one which offers us a way to resolve the critical space issues, 1 recommend that we keep the building. BACKGROUND: This is the first reading of a proposed ordinance to declare the property located at 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia (the "Salem Office Supply" building) to be surplus property and to authorize the conveyance of said property. The County has advertised the building for sale, and is in the process of receiving bids. For the last decade, Roanoke County .has needed additional space in the Courthouse located in Salem. The Commonwealth of Virginia has continued to increase the numbers of judges, clerks and related employees, while the space available has remained static. As an example, the Court Services Unit recently lost space due to additional staff for the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Clerk's Office. Staff has looked at many options, including purchasing property, leasing space and adding on at the Courthouse complex. In 1999, Roanoke County purchased Salem Office Supply on East Main Street as a possible solution to this problem. The building contains over 19,700 square feet on two floors and is located directly across the street from the County Courthouse. The County paid $325,000 for the building, and has since put an additional $25,000 into it for stabilization, interior demolition and architectural and engineering work. There is $500,000 still available for renovation of the building. G: I BOARD 1200110ct23110-23Salem-Office. doc Once the interior of the building was stripped, and the framing and interior brickwork became visible, the architects determined that the building needs significant work in order to make it suitable for renovation, increasing the cost of the project. The Board of Supervisors then instructed Staff to place the building for sale. As part of that process, the County obtained an appraisal of the building indicating a value of $150,000-200,000 in its present condition. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern has prepared a feasibility study for renovation of the Salem Office Supply Building or construction of a new building on the site. A table comparing the costs, advantages and disadvantages is attached. As the Board will note, renovation of the 19,000+ square feet will provide the County with over 12,000 square feet of office space at a cost of $47/square foot for the entire building. The Hayes, Seay report points out that the disadvantages of renovation are far outweighed by the building's proximity to the Courthouse. New construction is almost twice that, with an estimate of $84/square foot, but has the advantage of providing between 14,000 and 17,000 square feet of office space as well as additional parking capabilities. New construction also includes the possibility of renting out a portion to help offset the cost. None of the other property which has been reviewed by Staff and the Board over the last decade is available at this cost. For example, the County was recently offered 9,000 square feet of space at a nearby building at a cost of $15.50/sq. ft -over $142,000/year. Another option involved filling in the courtyard at the Courthouse, which would cost $1.09 million for 7,000 sq. ft. of new space, and would require renovation work to the courthouse and jail costing almost $400,000 for a total of $1.48 million. The bids which have been received by the County, while within the current appraised value of the building, do not recover the cost of purchase, let alone the additional costs incurred by the County for interior demolition, stabilization and architectural and engineering work. If the building is sold, the problem of space and parking still remains. The lease for the property which is currently being used for parking at the Courthouse is up for renewal in six months and may or may not be renewed by the owner. A public notice regarding the public hearing for the sale of this surplus property was published in the Roanoke Times on October 9, 2001 and October 16, 2001. ALTERNATIVES AND FISCAL IMPACTS: 1. Renovate the building for use as office space. This alternative provides the County with over 12,000 square feet of office space at a cost of $47/sq. ft for renovating the G:IBOARD1200110ct23110-23Salem-Office.doc 2 entire building. The additional funding required is $426,428, and the total cost of the project is $926,428. 2. Demolish the existing structure and build a new facility. The consultant has provide two alternatives. A. Build a four story 26,400 sq. ft building with 17,124 sq. ft of office space at a cost of $84/sq. ft. The additional funding required is $1.72 million, and the total cost of the facility is $2.22 million. This would provide a new building with good circulation, energy efficient systems and parking spaces. B. Build a four story 24,000 sq. ft building with 14,799 sq. ft. of office space at a cost of $84.50/sq. ft. The additional funding required is $1.52 million and the total cost of the facility is $2.02 million. This has the advantages of Option 2A above, although it is not a full build out of the site, and would have ahigher cost/sq. ft. Funding for Alternative 1 and part of Alternative 2 is available from the proceeds of the sale of the Lloyd property. 3. Approve the first reading of this ordinance and authorize the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator to execute the necessary documents to consummate this transaction. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. The need for additional space in the Courthouse has existed almost since the building was completed, and will only grow in the future. The County has looked at various options throughout the City of Salem and the combination of location, cost and space available make this option the most appealing for the long term needs of the County. In the long run, owning space is far less expensive and more cost effective. Additionally, renovating this space leaves the Courthouse property available for parking. Funding for renovation is available from the sale of the Lloyd Property, which the County sold for $984,000 in March of 2001. Respectfully Submitted by Anne Marie Green Director of General Services Appro ed by: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator G:IBOARD1200110ct23110-23Salem-Office.doc 3 S-I ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: VOTE No. Yes Abs Church Johnson McNamara Minnix Nickens cc: File G: IBOARD1200110ct23110-23Salem-Office. doc 4 N C O 0 a O. O _d R (0 L 7 ~ U ~ N ''' O O O `~ O U ~ Q~ N ~ O ~ ~ U C O 'X O L O i- a n• o a o ~ c ~ 1 L •~ ~ o ~ 0 3 cv o.~~ N .~ ~ M ~ N N C ~ ~ ~ (9 tOn .~ ~ C a •~ ~ O U >, Q ~ ~ Q ~ .0-~ O U N ~ ca ;~ td o o° N ~ O ~ ,~ N y (B C M N ~ Q O ~ X O• O ~ ~ ~ O c ~ ~' T U U a~ ~l~^ o ~' VJ ~ L ~ ~ j coo N O ~ .o O .~ (0 (0 'O C ~ ~ N ton O ~ ~ ~ j, cv ~ ~ N Q ` ~ ~ ~ C U O ~ _ ~ U ~ 2 o ~ 0 U C 7 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ coo ~~ o ~ _ - ° p~~ a ~ pp ~ ~ v~ a~ ~ m - ~ C ~ ~ O ~ ~ U ~ „U C - ~ _ O 7 ~ N •- ~ ~ ~ N - • ~ N N ` O = ~ O V ~ ~ CO V c ~ o • ~ _ O ;~ ~ ~ O ~ •~ ~ ~~ ~ O '~ U L •~ ~ O O L L ~~ L O 'O O L ~= P O O •- J J 2~ •~ ? (Op = J 2 2 J = ~- N M I Q In .~ ~ N M ~- N M ~ ~ U (~ N ~ .a 0 0 ~ C ~ c ~ ~ :? o ~ O ~~~ O ~ •N ~ ~~ U (C ~ "d U o C w ~ ca c m -v ~ c v ~ o ~ a O N ~ ~ ~ o •~ c o ~ ° ° '~ ? ~ ~ O v n. c ~ U o ~ ~ ~ },. N ~ a~ -a o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ai O ~ (~ U ~ (~ U ~ :N ~ .D C ~ • ~ ~ ~ N O ~ N (p ~ N N ~ 3 3 0 ~ U ~ : ° ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w a O O c 0 O O ~~v~ ~w~¢ Y 0~ ~~ 3~ ~v ~ ~ r N M ~- N M `~ Q In O~ Cfl I~ (A O ~ ?' C ~ •S C 0 • C O - O v N U ~ a m w ° ~ ~ m o ~ c a ~° v i oS ~ c a ° cn m ~ N o ao _ ~ d ~ ~ L ~:8 •~ O O M N _ ~ N ~ t [) VJ ~ N N ~ ' ~ U C ~ t v cfl O N ao N ? V i ~ N O a ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ N L O d O +• a LL ~? Et? ~ U ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ _V V '~ C. •~ N Ov~ Q N r f~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ •~ ~ CO N. ~ CO ~' O Q O ' C U O C U O C. is Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o O o~ o c co o c v C~ ~ p N C E ~ N C ~ ~ ~ U 3 ~'~ • D 3 Z' • ~ o C B o c ~ ~ N N M i -/ O O .~ O O ca C (0 (0 N L_ c c~ a~ N C U C 0 U a~ r 0 (0 N o. a O U_ N c0 0 C 0 U p L c~ L_ U N N N ~ L N a ~ ~ O O U ~' C ~ N 7 . ~ a ~~ :=' O o a~i ~ L j ~ O S-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 EAST MAIN STREET, SALEM, VIRGINIA (SALEM OFFICE SUPPLY BUILDING -TAX MAP N0.107-6-1) BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject property has been declared to be surplus, and has been made available for sale; and 2. That the public notice regarding the public hearing for the sale of this surplus property was advertised in the Roanoke Times & World News on October 9, 2001 and October 16, 2001; and 3. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading and public hearing of this ordinance was held on October 23, 2001; and the second reading on this ordinance was held on November 13, 2001, concerning the sale and disposition of property located at 400 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia, Tax Map No. 107-6-1, known as the "Salem Office Supply" building; and 4. That an offer has been received from for the sum of to purchase this property and this offer is hereby accepted; and That the proceeds from the sale of this real estate are to be allocated to the capital reserves of the County to be expended solely for the purposes of acquisition, construction, maintenance, or replace of other capital facilities; and 6. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. U:\W PDOCS WGENDA\REALEST\salem. office. supply. ord.wpd FROM i HAILE_LANDSCAPE_DESIGN FAX N0. : 540 951-4877 Oct. 19 2001 12:24PM P2 i " +~ 1 SCt~PE . GN 1NC. P.O. Ilox 25 Blacksburg, Virginia 24063 (540) 951-8733 (540) 951-4877 www.hailescapes.com To: Janet Scheid Date: 10/1 S/O1 ranet Y spoke with Jeff Owens yestez~day ar~d he was still working on a group of investor.l would h~ce to request an extension for the rezoning of the Saul Farm property to the moIIth of November. If I need to attend the meeting next Tuesday evening to ask for the extension in person please let me know. Sorry for the decay, I'm doing everything I can to make the project a mality. Regards, ~ , c~ Nathaniel Haile 1 T z_ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE 102301-9 AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 30-21.B.. "ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES" BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: Sec. 30-21. Enforcement Procedures. **** (B) Property owners, permit applicants, and/or establishment owners/managers, as applicable, shall be notified in writing of violations of the provisions of this ordinance. The administrator shall, in the notice of violation, state the nature of the violation, the date that it was observed, and the remedy or remedies necessary to correct the violation. The administrator may establish a reasonable time period for the correction of the violation, however in no case shall such time period exceed fi~f-teen-(~~-j ten _~10~ days from the date of written notification, except that the administrator may allow a longer time period to correct the violation if the correction would require the structural alteration of a building or structure. (C) If the violation is not corrected within the time period specified in the first notification, a second written notice shall be sent. The second notification shall request compliance with these provisions within a period not to exceed seven (7) days. **** 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: Brenda J. Hol n, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Circuit Court Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge Diane McQ. Strickland, Judge Richard C. Pattisall, Judge Robert P. Doherty, Jr., Judge Jonathan M. Apgar, Judge James R. Swanson, Judge Steven A. McGraw, Clerk Juvenile Domestic Relations District Court Joseph M. Clarke, II, Judge Philip Trompeter, Judge John B. Ferguson, Judge Joseph P. Bounds, Judge Ruth P. Bates, Clerk Intake Counsellor General District Court George W. Harris, Judge William Broadhurst, Judge Vincent Lilley, Judge Julian H. Raney, Judge Jacqueline F. Ward Talevi, Judge Theresa A. Childress, Clerk Skip Burkart, Commonwealth Attorney Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Magistrates Sherri Krantz/Betty Perry Main Library Ray Lavinder, Police Chief Richard Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue Roanoke Law Library, 315 Church Avenue, S.W., Rke 24016 Roanoke County Law Library, Singleton Osterhoudt Roanoke County Code Book Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Kathi Scearce, Director, Community Relations Danial Morris, Director, Finance O. Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services Thomas S. Haislip, Director, Parks, Recreation & Tourism Gardner Smith, Director, Procurement William E. Driver Director, Real Estate Valuation Alfred C. Anderson, Treasurer Nancy Horn, Commissioner of Revenue t ~/. ~~' PETITIONER: Roanoke County Planning Commission CASE NUMBER: 33-10/2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: October 2, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: October 23, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County zoning ordinance, Section 30-21 (B) Enforcement Procedures. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Ms. Janet Scheid presented the staff report. She explained that Section 30 of the Roanoke County Code (the Zoning Ordinance) allows 15 days to correct violations that deal with the parking of recreational vehicles, boats and commercial vehicles. In order to make this section of the Code consistent with other sections of the Code, staff is recommending that this time to correct be reduced from 15 to 10 days. D. CONDITIONS None E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason made a motion to approve the request. Motion carried 5-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 2 t~ ~~ County of Roanoke Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: David Holladay, Planner Date: September 18, 2001 Re: Petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend Section 30-21 (B) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to enforcement procedures. On August 14, 2001, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors held a work session to discuss enforcement procedures for nuisance code and zoning violations. Concerns had been raised about the length of time necessary to resolve cases, especially when public health and safety are concerned. The majority of current enforcement involves violations of three sections of the county code. The first two codes, Sections 12 and 13 of the County Code, address inoperative motor vehicles and unlawful accumulations of trash and weeds. The other code is the Zoning Ordinance, which is Section 30 of the County Code. Parking of recreational vehicles, boats and commercial vehicles are included in the Zoning Ordinance. Each of the three sections of the County Code/Zoning Ordinance address enforcement procedures and the time allowed for resolving violations. County Code Section 12, inoperative motor vehicles requires a notice to correct the violation within 15 days. County Code Section 13, unlawful accumulation of trash and weeds, requires a notice to correct the violation within 14 days. Zoning Ordinance Section 30 requires a first notice to correct the violation within 15 days and, if necessary, a second notice to correct within 7 days. In addition to reviewing procedures and staffing, the Board of Supervisors has requested that the County Code and Zoning Ordinance be amended to reduce the time period allowed for a property owner to resolve violations. On September 25, 2001, the Board of Supervisors will hold a second reading of an ordinance to reduce, to 10 days, the time allowed for resolving violations of County Code Sections 12 and 13. The Board of Supervisors has referred the amendment of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-21 (B), Enforcement Procedures to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation at the October 2, 2001 public hearing. The proposed ordinance amendment is attached for your review, Section 30-21. Enforcement Procedures. T- 2 (B) Property owners, permit applicants, and/or establishment owners/managers, as applicable, shall be notified in writing of violations of the provisions of this ordinance. The administrator shall, in the notice of violation, state the nature of the violation, the date that it was observed, and the remedy or remedies necessary to correct the violation. The administrator may establish a reasonable time period for the correction of the violation, however in no case shall such time period exceed fi-~t~~err-(~ ten (10) days from the date of written notification, except that the administrator may allow a longer time period to correct the violation if the correction would require the structural alteration of a building or structure. C) If the violation is not corrected within the time period specified in the first notification, a second written notice shall be sent. The second notification shall request compliance with these provisions within a period not to exceed seven (7) days. i '~ 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2s, 2001 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 3o-21.B.. "ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES" BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: Sec. ~0-21. Enforcement Procedures. ~~~~ (B) Property owners, permit applicants, and/or establishment owners/managers, as applicable, shall be notified in writing of violations of the provisions of this ordinance. The administrator shall, in the notice of violation, state the nature of the violation, the date that it was observed, and the remedy or remedies necessary to correct the violation. The administrator may establish a reasonable time period for the correction of the violation, however in no case shall such time period exceed fifken-(~.rj ten (10) days from the date of written notification, except that the administrator may allow a longer time period to correct the violation if the correction would require the structural alteration of a building or structure. (C) If the violation is not corrected within the time period specified in the first notification, a second written notice shall be sent. The second notification shall request compliance with these provisions within a period not to exceed seven (7) days. ~~~~ U:\W PDOCS\AGENDA\CODE\nuisance.zoning.ord ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE 102301-10 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 3.71-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3990 CHALLENGER DRIVE (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 50.05-1-1) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF BOWMAN DALTON, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held August 28, 2001, at which time this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for further consideration; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001, and on October 2, 2001; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 3.71- acres, as described herein, and located at 3990 Challenger Drive (Part of Tax Map Number 50.05-1-1) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Office District, to the zoning classification of R-3, Medium Density Multifamily Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Bowman Dalton, Inc. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (a) The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with 1 the plat entitled "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., under date of August 8, 2001, Exhibit A. (b) The C-1 and R-3 property shall share a common access road. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-1-3); thence N. 37 deg. 15' 00' W. 200.85 feet to the actual place of beginning; thence S. 37 deg. 15' 00" E. 298.52 feet to a point; thence N. 51 deg. 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37 deg. 15' 00" E. 277.28 feet to a point; thence S. 48 deg. 45' W. 301.79 feet to a point on the easterly side of the Proposed Private Road Common Area; thence with same generally in a southerly direction to the northerly right-of- way ofChallenger Avenue; thence S. 32 deg. 00' W. 54.62 feet to the westerly side of the Proposed Private Road; thence proceeding with the westerly side of the private road in a northerly direction to a point on the southerly line of the Common Area; thence S. 48 deg. 45' W. 199.05 feet to the Place of Beginning, and containing 3.71 acres. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 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: Brenda J. H ton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William E. Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney ROANOKE COUNTY Aplicants Warne: Bowman-Dalton, Inc. DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Rezoning ,from C-1 to R-3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 50.05-1-1 PETITIONER: Bowman Dalton -Challenger Avenue Multifamily "~ , CASE NUMBER: 28-8/2001 Planning Commission Hearing Date: October 2, 2001 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: October 23, 2001 A. REQUEST The petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 3.71 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of Multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Drive, Hollins Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Ms. Janet Scheid presented the staff report. She stated that the current proposal has 505 feet of frontage on Route 460 zoned C-1, Commercial. The proposed R-3 development has a density of 9.4 units per acre. D. CONDITIONS • The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz", prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. under date of 13 September 2001. • The C-1 and R-3 property shall share a common access road. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Ross made a motion to approve the request with the conditions. Motion carried 5- 0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission MEMORANDUM DATE: September 24, 2001 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Janet Scheid, Senior Planner RE: Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Rezoning Request BACKGROUND As you may recall, you heard this petition to rezone property from C-1, Commercial to R-3, Multi-Family Residential on August 7, 2001. The petitioner's request at that time was to rezone 4.62 acres of a 5.12 acre parcel to multi-family to allow the construction of 35 townhouse units. As a result of dialogue at that public hearing the petitioners decided to revise their conceptual plan and reduce the acreage to be rezoned to R-3. The resulting plan showed 4.33 acres to be rezoned, leaving all of the frontage property to the east side of the private access road remaining C-1. The Board of Supervisors heard this rezoning petition on August 28, 2001. At that public hearing there was considerable discussion between the Board and the petitioners about the merits of leaving all of the frontage property along Route 460 commercial, i.e., both sides of the public access road. The Board voted to send this petition back to the Planning Commission for further consideration at your October 2, 2001 public hearing. CURRENT PROPOSAL The current petition is to rezone 3.71 acres from C-1, Commercial to R-3, Multi- Family Residential. This proposal leaves 505 feet of frontage on Route 460 zoned C-1, Commercial. The commercial property is in two lots totalling1.41 acres. The R-3 zoning district allows 12 units per acre. The original density proposed on August 7 was 7.5 units per acre. The current proposal is for 9.4 units per acre. At your August 7 public hearing, an adjoining citizen, Mr. Witt stated that the petitioners had told him that a portion of the property along a common boundary line would not be developed. In the original proposal this property was designated "Common Area". Under the current proposal this portion of the / "° property would remain C-1 and could be developed in the future. The screening and buffering that would be required along Mr. Witt's property line would be identical whether the adjoining property is zoned C-1 or R-3 -both require Type C screening and buffering. STAFF CONCLUSIONS Staff suggests the following proffer: The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz", prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. under date of 13 September 2001. County'of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-206$ FAX (540} 772-2108 / ^ ,,,~ Fnr Staff Use Only Date received: 1v~22(o( Received by: ~ / Application fees/ ~ g5 ° ~ PC/B~4date: g' 7 ~ O/ Placards issued: BOS date: ~ J 2$16 f a $ - N b g ~ Z 0 ~ ~ er Case um 'ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) ~1 Rezoning 0 Special Use 0 Variance Applicants name/address w/zip Phone• 989-0000 ®CaNV1~N-C1AI TaN, INC' 772-0126 c/o Edward A. Natt, 3912 Electric Rd., Roanoke A Fax No. 2408 Owner's name/address w/zip Phone: ggg-0000 Robert L. and Reba S. Metz c/o Edward A. Natt, 3912 Electric Road, Roanoke VA Fax No. 772-Ot26 24618 Property Location Magisterial District: Ho I I i ns 3990 Challenger Avenue Roanoke, V i r i n i a Community Planning area: Ho I l i ns Tax Map No.: Part of 50.05-1-1 Existin Zonin g g~ C-1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: 4.62 acres ~` Existing Land Use: Vacant REZONING AND SPECIAL LJSE PERIVIIT APPLICANTS (R/S) Proposed Zoning: R-3 Proposed Land Use: Townhouses Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes ~ No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIItED FIItST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ~ No 0 VA~RIA,NCE APPLICANTS (V) Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ~ v v v X Consultation X 8 112" x 11" concept plan Application fee Application Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner s agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. ROBERT L. METZ ; ~ Owner's Signature REQA S. METZ: Owner's Signature .. ~" 7VSTII+'IC~:TION FOR `.R:EZQIVING ~OR SP.ECIAL `USE FERIVIIT>REQUEST Bowman-Dalton, nc. Applicant The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfaze. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The use of the subject property for townhouse construction will further the purposes of the County Ordinance in that it will provide an orderly transition from residentially zoned property to commercial property. It will provide a significant number of housing units while reserving a large green space on the property. All setbacks required by the Ordinance would remain in effect. Commercial property will remain for a portion of the frontage on Route 460. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The use of the subject property for townhouse construction will provide a transition from commercially zoned to single-family residential property by use of amulti-family housing district. The townhouses will be two or three bedrooms with approximately 7.5 units per acre. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding azea, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, pazks/recreation and fire and rescue. The impact of the request on the County's public services and facilities would be minimal in that water and sewer are available. There will be minimal impact on the road as there will be one entrance on the approximately 300 feet of Route 460. Impacts on other County services will be minimal. RDANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Aplicants name: Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Zoning: Rezoning from C-1 to R-3 Tax Map No. 50.05-1- > ~ .~ PROFFERS Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 3990 Challenger Avenue Hollins Magisterial District Roanoke County 50.05-1-1 Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Robert L. and Reba S. Metz PROFFERS The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. under date of~~~~R~~~. August 8, 2001 ~~ ~~xx~x~~~~~xxx~~x~ I~l~~. 3. The C-1 and R-3 property shall share a common access road. Applicant: BOWMAN-DALTON, INC. BYE ~-- G - ~--- Owners: ~ L~-~j~C-l: ~~ ~'L ~ ~~ ,-^ Robert L. Metz ~'~ `, Reba S. Metz \UOLLY\SYS\offiak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Bowman-Dalton PROFFERS.doc w~aNiaswm~nwv ~irow-3 Ys6•Z[L (0691 ~%Vi 16t-6[L (069) ~3NOHd ~~ ~ "~ mov e+:~+vw ~ ~~ B106Z VINIOMN'iMONVON 69902 %09'O'd M9'iON3AV NOliIHYWNN 699Y ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ k ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ , ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ s s~ ~ s° ~~~~ ~~ g ; ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~y ~gp~~q ~3~Q3~~~~ d~ t ~ q~~ ~~y3~~ p~~61f ii6l3g~k0~~~~ii~g~~~ ,~~ !g ~„ , bi g~ ~~~~ ~~4~~~~ ~ ~ ~~aa ~~ ~a~a, @g ~6~ ~~~~~~e ~~~~~ 9 ~~~~~~~ ~~ ~$ 5 55~~~5@~ ~ ~~~~;~~~E~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ r!%%~ r = Ir rl ~ ~ /~ r rl ~ ~~/ r ~rlr ~ rJll ail r ICI /I 1 1 r I'1 /~/ ~ /~ / ~, /ref rlj / / /~ A ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~g 6~ ~~ a ~~~ ~~~ ~~3 ~~$~ °~M ~~~ ~~~~~~~. JN~ El ~ a, N ~~ 3 w ~ o r~ ~ N ~I ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ O Lj~ ~ 4 o ~~ w e ~ ~ ~` ~ O N 4 ~ w ~ UC W a O w ] ~ a ~s~ ~- U~ U5 Q ~ M "`'1 Vf ~~~a~, {~~ Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 3990 Challenger Avenue 50.05-1-1 Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Robert L. and Reba S. Metz LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that certain parcel of land situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-01-03); thence N. 37° 15' 00" W. 200.85 feet to the actual Place of Beginning; thence N. 37° 15' 00" W. 298.52 feet to a point; thence N. 51° 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37° 15' 00" E. 277.28 feet to a point; thence S. 48° 45' W. 301.79 feet to a point on the easterly side of the Proposed Private Road Common Area; thence with same generally in a southerly direction to the northerly right-of--way of Challenger Avenue; thence S. 32° 00' W. 54.62 feet to the westerly side of the Proposed Private Road; thence proceeding with the westerly side of the private road in a northerly direction to a point on the southerly line of the Common Area; thence S. 48° 45' W. 199.05 feet to the place of BEGINNING, and containing 3.71 acres. \UOLLY\SYS\ofnak\Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Bowman-Dalton LEGAL.doc PROFFERS Address of Subject Property: 3990 Challenger Avenue Hollins Magisterial District Roanoke County Tax Map No.: Applicant's Name: Owners: 50.05-1-1 Bowman-Dalton, Inc. Robert L. and Reba S. Metz PROFFERS '~~,~~ OCT 2001 Department of Community The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. under date of 13 September, 2001. 2. Access to the remaining commercial property shall be provided from the access road to the R-3 property. Applicant: BOWMAN-D TON, I Owners: __. / ~'~ ~ t. Robert L. Metz ~ -~ 1, Reba S. Metz F.`,ofrak`.Users\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Bowman-Dalton PROFFERS.doc AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 3.71-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3990 CHALLENGER DRIVE (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 50.05-1-1) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF BOWMAN DALTON, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held August 28, 2001, at which time this matter was referred to the Planning Commission for further consideration; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2001, and on October 2, 2001; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 3.71-acres, as described herein, and located at 3990 Challenger Drive (Part of Tax Map Number 50.05-1-1) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Office District, to the zoning classification of R-3, Medium Density Multifamily Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Bowman Dalton, Inc. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (a) The subject property will be developed in substantial conformity with the plat entitled "Plat Showing Rezoning Exhibit, Property of Robert L. Metz and Reba S. Metz," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., under date of August 8, 2001, Exhibit A. (b) The C-1 and R-3 property shall share a common access road. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\bowmandalton.rzn.frm 1 ~"~ Beginning at a point on the northerly side of Challenger Avenue at the southeasterly corner of the property of W. M. Witt and Mary B. Witt (Tax Map No. 50.05-1-3); thence N. 37 deg. 15' 00' W. 200.85 feet to the actual place of beginning; thence S. 37 deg. 15' 00" E. 298.52 feet to a point; thence N. 51 deg. 00' E. 539.88 feet to a point; thence S. 37 deg. 15' 00" E. 277.28 feet to a point; thence S. 48 deg. 45' W. 301.79 feet to a point on the easterly side of the Proposed Private Road Common Area; thence with same generally in a southerly direction to the northerly right-of--way of Challenger Avenue; thence S. 32 deg. 00' W. 54.62 feet to the westerly side of the Proposed Private Road; thence proceeding with the westerly side of the private road in a northerly direction to a point on the southerly line of the Common Area; thence S. 48 deg. 45' W. 199.05 feet to the Place of Beginning, and containing 3.71 acres. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. U:\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\bowtnandalton.rzn.frm 2 ^ T- .3 i ~ ~~ ~T G~ ~ ~w• a ~~~"8 ~, _-- t ,- • ~~ ,--- ` r e ~~i ~ ' ~~,; ~ iii i ~/ ~~i~~ /~ ~ ~ /~ %~ ~ l~ ~'~ ~ 1 1,l % ~/ // / I l~l l~l ~ 1 j''~' ~ ~ ~~ !~~ ~'~~ ~,z ~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 ORDINANCE 102301-11 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 N0.87.16-4-3) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by subdivision plat entitled `SECTION N0.26, HUNTING HILLS', 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 `NEW LOT 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 ANNAJEAN LAUGHER CREATING HEREON NEW LOT 1A (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, 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 `NEW 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 of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court 2 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: Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner William E. Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 3 • • r 1 ~~ ~V•,•• P ERSE~Rj~- . s. N N O~ z/n d' = J _ F=d ' W 2 O h Vl F .- . l ? ~ ~ Y?a ~ ! V O ~ J m ' ~ V ~ ~ N 1 N _ ' ~ ~' W ~~ r ~ ~ ~ 3 ° in oa v, < N ~~ r ti ~O 4 H ^~« ~~~ F 199.73' n ~ `~ f N ~~~ i ,r ~~ •. 9 ~ ' ` • `~` H ~O ~~ ~ \ X W a vNpi n ,~I 16F ~S Zg N ~,S Z 0 ~0~ 02 p^' ~~~~Q~. O ~. S~ `vh Q. rti o~ O ~U 2 s~~~J .00 ~~ M Og~2g 1 ~S °i °o ~ b 'e3Nn ~ W (j ~~~aoa 1~ W jyj = ~~O~N ¢°'~>m `~ o w 'I ~l 1.'~ U 3 y~0 U O ~ O _ Y Nn'X .. Z O W ¢=Z ~1-t xP- 7 a U a 0` ~! a Z ~ V ~ Y W W OI ~-t~0~a~0~N p aOD 100 N. W w F ~v~n~oNrnm~ a w y < tn00001n OO~i i~00p~ppp ~~~pp m 17 ~f N M 'C Q Z C W 0 ~O>~ V N rint`bnlornrr 1N O d U a - o rnnaunnnoov~ ~mapommmm~~ N } ~ a ~~~om<o~g< m.-nnnNOno ~ o ao tV j f00 V N tCh d. Q U d' y ( '-Nd'.-10 m011n OM p o nlonnno.-mmn < N Z o Z n r~ 1~ n: 1: cu o6 1~ 1~ 1: o z m ~ O Z J O .-N17 Y'IO t0n0001 ~ H U O ~7 1 ~q V EXHIBIT A W 0 z ~o~ m zo' W W . = O ~ 3>' oo: m, 3 moo. a 1A O ~ W ' F- NO]~ ~ ~O~ W WO! f/1 ~ W ; W ~ W a N= w o31 fn r O 1 S sN1 ~' aG1 ~QQz LLI UJI W W Z ox! W <t-• ~ ~I~i W O J =~~ 1 Q ~ r- i 3 °a~ p L:ac Z i~~ Y ~n.c • G~ ~~~ ~N( fox So~R 5~~, 2T~ JA~ R~A° ARC , ~3 3`~5 ~~', RAC ' S0. G 3 ` ~ ,ARC ~ m ~ d, , 0 o ~- ~~' h ~. ,o' ~~~ I Q 2y~. z9' ,~R~ ~ 0 P~' Q~ ~\? ~P~ ~ / Q~ ~~, ~`~ ~ ~~ Q~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~,~~ Q~ /~~ Q~~~~ 0 / /~~ / ~ J of 5/%EGR/r~iE cRE57~ r GIRGGE D 04 .i~ --,LoT '~A "- .SEC• 26 Nu.~Ti~/~ Ni~cs ~[3_ /9 FU.Zo } W 0 • 0 Q /VEw LoT 3A \ s ~ Q ' ~ ~ SEC7ion/ z ~, NU/VT/NG ,~//CLS V ~ ~ P.,B. /9, F~G.20 ~ ~ 0 ~ i~ ~ N ~ ~ Q ~ W ~ . OF E.k'/ST/NCi ~"' WATER CouRSE ~ LEGAL /PEFE,eENGE /S ,¢ oFEX/ST/NG P. f3. /9, /~c. zo ,ORA/NAGS EsM'T. ~ TAX No. 87. /6 - 4 -3 SEE PLAT BDO/~ //, _ _~ P,9GE /3B ~ . LEGEN PROPERTY LINE '~ SJRVEV FOR CENTER L/NE LEON HAR R / s ~o~~~-.I.TH OF ~i 9 G+= ~ DAVID A. 6ES8 duo ~oo=uo ti('~4• ~~ ~~ 9 3v-'9g ~, '~rN~ 8URV~~ $NOW/NG A NEW ,ZO' DRA//JAGS EASEMENT 70 ,BE ,OED/GATED 7o Ro,4n/o,~E COUNTY, V/RG/N/A S/TUATE ON NEW ,CDT 3A, SEC..ZG, HUNT/NG ///LLS. iQoAMokE `purtTY, V/i2G/N/Q SCALE / ": ,ZO' ,~EP7EMf3ER 30, /998 JACK G. BESS LAND SURVEYOR 5422 STAIR'~CEY RD ROANOKE, VA 24014 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 23, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: Second 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 second 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. SiT~MITTED BY: APPROVED BY: f ~ t Arno d Covey, Director Elmer C. Hodge Department of Community Development County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Church Received () Johnson Referred () McNamara to Minnix Nickens I • V ~ Ee SE% P N I ro '- ~ O X F .~.cc~7o• F 199.73' N Ot zNa Z J_ F=a W Z O h NFL ~~m ~ n Y ? a ~ 1 V 0 2 m ~ c I N M f N 1 1 1 ~ M w V) ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~~ VI a 3 ~ ~ ~ i ~ a ~ . ~'Q ~ N ~~ N F- ~ O ' ~ X W ~ /O O h N ' r ui "~ N u"1 N Z y~ o 1j3No ~ - V F O g O " W Y dW N X O O Y VIZ ~~'< a ~ vaoi' .! W ~ O K t9 ~~~~~~gm~N m °Ummv7a n N O W d' p w F u i Y i ~a~/. 1oouNirnm~ W ~ N N W p rim OnOOMi oOOpWppp N~p 000 p M d ~ M ~ Q Z Q NN 1 01 V nnmm~lui:nnn h 0 o ~ < ~ d p U ? o,napnnnoov~ 1'~aoooamaomm~~ ° N ~, °~ ? ,'~u°~inomaom aa vO1i ~ ° ~ ,gym.-nnr~NOno a Q o U d' IV 1(j 10 O (y fV tG (~ ~N~.-rG 000~1n 017 ^~ p Z w O Z nlonnn o.-01 toh 1:r~1~r~ioeul~l~n N ~ 0 o 2 Q ¢1 t7 ~ w Z r.Nr) aNtOn W 01 ~ J 1a-. U ~ V 1 1r /~ W O W D Z 7' =m a 0 =O' ~ti GJ~~~Q Q ~. y~2 ' ~~ O _~~ ? ~ e ~ ~.e1J .00 ~ 2 ~1 •OSSbZB ~S °i °o ~ l i~ Q M O v1 ~~¢oa ^~~ia,: w~~ ~pO~N Q ~ ~ ~ m ~ o EXHIBIT A ~n W W = O ~ 3 ~ ~ ~~: m. JN: O ~W' k- hm~ F ~o~ W W O ~ N ~~: W W a ~' _ W O; 1 cn t= 0 1 _ ~ N 1 ~' ao1 zz m U ~ 1 s Z SS! w a1-~ ~1~f WOf J =~~ Q OOc J~'[ 3 ° W'- Y =oi .~ / / "° GE TAX So R~~ JA• SEA' 21~ /, of r SEREGR //~ GRE57 G/RGLE p P "' ;LoT %A' SEC. 2G Nu.~/Ti~/U N/G L S /: 13, /9 FG.20 W N 0 R~A° 420 ~~' l RC , ~3. ~° oo., A 3`~5~ RA°~ ~ 5p.(~3.- AR~" m ~ ~.o o m ~, m ~. I io' /o. I Z5~.29 ~R~ ~ 0 P~ Q~ /P~ JQ ~Q~ ~ ~V ~° ~.° Q~ ~ ~V ~ ~~ ~ ro ~ ~ 2 ~~~ Q~~~~ ~ / /~~ ~ J W ~ Z Zw O ~ ~ ~ `p Q NEW L07 3A 9 --~ t e ~ ~ SECT/ON .Z ~, HU/VT/NG ,4//LLS J 0 ~ ~ ~ 'V i~ ~ ~ ~ p W M. ~ OF EX/ST/Nfs ~ WATER C'ouRSE /s ~ of EX/STING L)RA/NAGS EsM'T. i SEE Pt.oT BooK //, - _~--- _ PAGE /38 ~. LEGAL REFE,eENGE P. /3. / 9 , AG. z o TAX No. 87. /6 - 4 -3 LEGEN ~ = PRoPERTy L /NE `~ SJR VE ~/ FOR CENTER L/NE ~, EO /V HAR R / s ~~i-LTM pF SNOW/NG A NEW ,ZD' DRA/NAGS EASEMENT 70 Ott `~ ,BE ,DED/GATED 7o RoANO,~E CaUNTY, V/RG/N/A ~.~' 'PC ~/TUATE ON NEW ,COT 3A, SEC..Z~(o~, HUNT/NG f//GLS . V DAVID A. BEST ~ ROA~VOIrCE L U/~lT Y ~ Y/RG//1!/A. No.~00=240 ~~4 ~~ SCALE / "= 20 ~ ,~EP7EMf3E12 30~ /q98 ~ 9- 30-~98 4, JACK G. BESS qN0 8UR~~yp LAND SURVEYOR 5422 STA(K''KEY RD ROANOKE, VA 240 T 4 ~N $• /O / s 9 ~ Q • 9855/ ffiIBIT B ~~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 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 subdivision plat entitled `SECTION N0.26, HUNTING HILLS', 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, /~-~ ~ / 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 `rr~w 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 o~ ROANp,~~ ~ ~~ ~ p z c~ a (~.~~xxY~ ~a~ ~~xr~.~..~ 1838 Board of Supervisors H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman Cave Spring Magisterial District Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Vice-Chairman Catawba Magisterial District P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 October 29, 2001 Mr. Daniel A. LaPrade 3041 Merino Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. LaPrade: Bob L. Johnson Hollins Magisterial District Joseph McNamara Windsor Hills Magisterial District Harry C. Nickens Vinton Magisterial District Enclosed is a resolution of appreciation upon your retirement which was unanimously approved at the October 23, 2001 Board Meeting. On behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County and its citizens, I wish to offer my appreciation for your many years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to the County. I am pleased to send you this resolution, and notification that Roanoke County has purchased a $100 Savings bond in recognition of your years of employment with the County. This bond will be forwarded to you from the Federal Reserve Bank at a later date. If you would like to have your resolution framed, please bring it to the Clerk's Office, at the Roanoke County Administration Building, 5204 Bernard Drive, at any time. It has been our experience that framed resolutions may be damaged when mailed. On behalf of each member of the Board and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept this Resolution and savings bond with our best wishes for a productive retirement and continued success in the future. Sincerely, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Attachment cc: Joseph Sgroi, Director, Human Resources OFFICE: Ray LaVlndelfA~OIICe Chlef VOICE MAIL: E-Mail (540) 772-2005 (540) 772-2193 (540) 772-2170 bos@co.roanoke.va.us O~ AOANp~.~ z ,h 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD Internet E-Mail: mallen@www.co.roanoke.va.us 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (.540) 772-2005 FAX (540) 772-2193 BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Internet E-Mail: bholton@www.co.roanoke.va.us October 26, 2001 Ms. Ann Rogers 6347 Back Creek Road Boones Mill, VA 24065 I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). This is a new committee being formed for the purpose of advising the MF'fl policy board on various regional transportation related issues. There are no specific terms for this committee. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, appointed, or re-appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Very truly yours, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Michael W. Gray, Director of Transportation Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization P. O. Box 2569 Roanoke, VA 24001 ® Recycled Paper INTER MEMO ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS O F F I C E CLERK'S OFFICE TO: Butch Church Bob Johnson Joe McNamara Fuzzy Minnix Harry Nickens FROM: Brenda J. Holton ~ ~ DATE: October 17, 2001 SUBJECT: ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY APPOINTMENT On the October 23rd agenda, you are notified that Douglas Anderson's appointment to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority will expire December 31, 2001. Mr. Anderson has called the Clerk's Office and indicated his willingness to serve another term if the Board should want to reappoint him. cc: Elmer Hodge .~ I N T E R MEMO O F F I C E County Administrator's Office To: Members of the Boar Supervi s From: Elmer C. Hodge /~ Subject: Access to ublic records and informati n p Date: October 11, 2001 Following the October 9 Board meeting, there was concern expressed that all Board members receive the same information. I would like to submit the attached for your concurrence. Additionally, the staff is in the process of developing policies for improving security of County buildings and records. As a result, we have developed some procedures for providing information for the Board members, responding to requests for information, and the use and security of the County's official records. The State Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-1539 states that the Clerk to the Board is the custodian of all official records of the Board of Supervisors and is responsible for their preservation. This includes the official Minute Books, resolutions, ordinances and actions approved by the Board of Supervisors, the Board agenda packets, audio and video tapes of the meetings and all contracts, deeds and agreements approved by the Board. I have asked Mary Allen to insure that they are kept in a secure place (in some instances fire proof files), and under lock and key. Anyone requesting access to review them, including myself, must contact Clerk Mary Allen or Deputy Clerk Brenda Holton, and the records may not be removed from the Administration Center. We have also purchased a new TV and two new VCR's to record Board meetings and have copies available for the Board and staff. Mr. Mahoney advised that the meeting videos we have on file are official public documents and Ms. Allen is charged with keeping and preserving them. Therefore, one copy of the video will be archived and secured as a public document. Another copy will be available for staff, citizens and the Board members to view. Should anyone request an additional copy, we will have the capability to accommodate the request. Attached are procedures that we have developed concerning the security of the public records and responding to requests from the Board, staff and the public for information. These procedures will assure that the official records will be kept secure but information and research will be available upon request. Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. CC: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Brenda Holton, Deputy Clerk PROCEDURES PRESERVATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RECORDS AND PROVIDING INFORMATION TO BOARD MEMBERS, THE PUBLIC AND STAFF OCTOBER 12, 2001 Preservation of Official Board Records: The official records of the Board of Supervisors consist of: The official Minute Books, Board agenda packets, resolutions, ordinances, actions, audio and video tapes of the meetings, contracts, deeds, and agreements approved by the Board of Supervisors The Clerk to the Board is designated by the State Code as the custodian of the records and responsible for their preservation. 2. All official records will be keep in a secure location and locked when not in use by the Clerk's Office. 3. Requests for research, review and copies of official Board records will be processed through the Office of the Clerk to the Board. 4. No records may be removed from the Administration Center or the Board Storage area at the County Public Service Center. 5. A copy of these procedures will be kept in the County Administrator's Policies and Procedures Manual. Requests from Board members for transcripts research or information If a Board member requests transcripts, information or research of a general nature concerning an upcoming agenda item, copies will be provided to all Board members and the County Administrator, County Attorney and Clerk to the Board. 2. If a Board member requests transcripts, information or research concerning a specific issue or complaint in his district, the information will be provided to that particular Board member. If the information or research may have County-wide implications, copies will be provided to all Board members and the County Administrator. Requests from the Public or Media for transcripts research or information If the public or media requests transcripts, information or research, the Clerk's Office will follow the Freedom of Information Act requirements, including charging reasonable costs for research time and copies. 2. If the information is requested by an individual running for public office, that information will be provided to all individuals running for the same office. Audio and Video Tapes One audio tape and two video tapes of Board meetings will be recorded. One copy of each will be archived and kept in a secure location. 2. The second video tape will be available for viewing in the Board Conference Room by the County staff on the day after Board meeting. The video will then be made available for Board members, staff and the public to view. If the video is removed from the Board Conference Room, the individual must sign up with the Clerk's Office to remove the video. 3. Additional copies of the audio or video will be made available to the Board members upon request, and to the public in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act requirements. • FACT Sheet Read Mountain News Conference Contact: Kathi B. Scearce County of Roanoke Director of Community Relations 540-772-2010 lcscearce(cr~,co.roanoke.va. us ^ Read Mountain Alliance is a citizen initiative working to preserve the upper elevations (above 1800') of Read Mountain. The founder of the Alliance is Ron Crawford. ^ The Read Mountain Alliance, the Western Virginia Land Trust, the Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission and Roanoke County are partnering to expand the current greenway system to include Read Mountain. ^ By including Read Mountain in the valley's greenway system, a unique and vital resource of scenic, natural and economic value will be protected. The mountain is unique in that there are no buildings, roads, power lines, communication towers or any other man made structures on the higher elevations. ^ Read Mountain is surrounded on all sides by development and road networks. The mountain has an extensive recorded history dating back as far as 1774. ^ At its next meeting, the Board of Supervisors will vote on the approval and authorization of an option for the acquisition of real estate on Read Mountain for ridgeline protection. If approved by the Board of Supervisors, Roanoke County would acquire an option to purchase 89.8 acres of land on Read Mountain. ^ The option to purchase will expire after 180 days on April 23, 2002. Until the expiration of the option, Roanoke County will work with Read Mountain Alliance, the Western Virginia Land Trust, the Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission and other interested citizens and charitable organizations to raise the necessary funds and donations to acquire the property. Roanoke County will pay a $100.00 fee to secure the option. At their July 10, 2001 meeting, the Board of Supervisors authorized County staff to assist the Read Mountain Alliance with technical expertise, legislative assistance and grant applications. County staff will continue this work as the Alliance, the Trust and Commission work to raise funding for the purchase of the property. ~~ L J • of ROANp~E` ~ ,o._ ~ ~ Z -=~f ~ Read Mountain o v ~ a r83S News Conference Agenda Contact: Kathi B. Scearce, Director of Community Relations County of Roanoke 540-772-2010 kscearce(cr~,co.roanoke.va. us News Conference Program 607 Ray Street • 10:00 a.m. Welcome and Introduction -Ron Crawford, Read Mountain Alliance Founder 10:05 a.m. Remarks - H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Board of Supervisors Chairman 10:10 a.m. Remarks -Bob Johnson, Supervisor 10:15 a.m. Remarks -Roger Holnback, Western Virginia Land Trust Executive Director 10:20 a.m. Remarks -Jim Phipps, President, Greenways Commission 10:25 a.m. Hike to Summit of Read Mountain ~-~ Mary Allen -VML Achievement Award Page 1 ~ 1 From: Wanda Riley /`` To: Mary Allen ~ ~>^~ Date: 10/4/01 2:57PM ,~ Subject: VML Achievement Award THIS MESSAGE IS FROM ELMER: For the second meeting in October, Vinton will be here to tell us about a joint VML Achievement Award received for the gain sharing agreement. Please add this item under proclamations, resolutions, recognitions and awards section of the agenda. Thanks. ~ ~ ~"~ ~ ~ ~ s ,k.. ~,z r ,q y~ -~~ n ~ `~ { Y ~\ / O \. ~'n~~f ~ ~'wgE'4_>-fir%'4 i ~``~~~ ~, ~~ k J ~'`" G'~;~r ~', .~~ s f. ~,: `~~ ~..,, Oct 19 O1 10:08a TOWN OF VINTOIY 540-983-0621 p.l 311 S. Pollard Street Vinton, VA 24179 (540)983-0607 (540)983-0821 Fax FaX To: Brenda Holton Frvm: Carolyn Ross Fax: (540) 772-2193 Pages: 3 Phone: Date: October 19, 2001 Re: VML Award CC: The following is the information you requested from Clay. Let me know if you have questions. Oct 19 O1 10:08a TOWN OF VINTON 540-983-0621 Gain-share agreement WrNHER~ helped solve age-old conflicts INTON IS LOCATED in eastern Roanoke County within an east-west corridor drat runs between the city of Roanoke and the Bedford County lines. 'I-he town occupies a special position in Roanoke County. Because of its physical features, political boundaries and roadway transportation system, the com- bined beauty of Vinton and East Roanoke County constitutes an island within the community. The geographic isolation of East Roanoke Gounty has been a principal factor resulting in Vinton providing public water/sewer and fire/rescue services to East Roanoke Gounty. The residential and commercial devel- opment was a natural outgrowth of the town along the three principal roads that link the Vinton community. Vinton residents send their children to the same schools, shop at the same retail stores and make use of many of the same commercial, government and cultural facilities. The council had caicerns that, without expanding its borders and thus its revenues, the town could not maintain local services at comparable tax rates. 1-he fear was that a smaller, poorer, Iandlocked citizen base would p.2 have to pay higher taxes to support the shrinking level of services. This concern grew li•om the population decline from 1980 to 1990. The town suffered a 4.5 percent decline from 8,027 (I y8U) to 7,665 {1990). Its per capita real property assessments were substan- tially below those of the remainder of the county and its property tax base; had increased much more slowly than Roanvke County. The average income of town residents was below that of the remainder of the county artel Vinton's income levels were growing slower than the county's as a whole. The town's area is comprised of 3.2 square miles will, little usable vinton land For development. Faced with the challenge of ensuring the long-term adequacy of its tax base, Vinton Town Council examined annexing the remaining portion of East Roanoke (:ou,rry_ The county was ativare of the town's annexation study efforts. Over the years the town and counnj had forged many joint venture settizce delivery programs. These close ties were fwther cemented by the p,•actice of the mayor, Vinton Magisterial District board representa- dye, the county administrator and dte town manager meeting to discuss these joint services programs and othrr issues. Turing one such meeting, Roanoke Counn~ officials suggested that both parties investigate revenue sharing instead of annex- ation. County representatives were provided with copies of Vinton's preliminary annexation study figures and recog- nised the town's concerns about its future financial viability. A town with a strong financial position would be preferable to Roanoke County. Town officials also did not want to see long-term joinE service delivery programs harmed by [he potential conflict and animosity that could result from a contested annexation. Following this preliminary discussion 5F.!'TG]!Ufll '11101 Yi The two localities are sharing not only the cost of developing and marketing atown-owned 100-acre tract in East Roanoke County, but also tax reve~tues cJonoratod from tho rubcaque~t development. Oct 19 O1 10:08a TOWN OF VIIYTOtV 540-983-0621 p.3 of a revenue sharing option, the town and county entered into negotiations to work out the details. Initial discussions centered on the traditional revenue sharing agree- ments that had been approved in Virginia. They provided for a county to pay a town or city a percentage of al] taxes collected within the county. County representatives said they were willing to share tax revenue arising from the new ~ owth in Last Roanoke County. Like Vinton, thr county faced growing service de- mands and wanted to ensure that a revenue sharing agreement would not compromise its ability to meet existing sczvice delivery demands. llrafting the details of a "gain share" agreement proved challenging. .after many attempts, town and county stafl'r•eached agreement on a pz•oposal that called for revenue to be shared as follows • The county will share ++rith the tON'Ii, certain taxes arising from new eonstnlctiun caking place after July 1, 1999. New construction is defined as date of issuance of a ccrtiflcate of occupancy dated July 1, 1999 or ater. • New consu•uction included substantial repairs or additions that exceed the 25 percent of the original asscsst;d value of the property. • 'T'axes subject to the sharing obligation include property taxes, BPOL taxes, motor vehicle decal/ taxes, bank fi anchise taxes, food and bevel-age taxes, admission taxes and transient occupancy lases. • Sales taxes, consumer utility taxes, utility license taxes and 91 ] taxes were excluded. The agreement did not require the tracI:ing of all tax revenues from individual parcels. To simplify the record keeping requirements, personal property and motor vehicle decal taxes will be estimated based upon certain ratios. Personal properly taxes will be triggered with the issuance of a certificate of occupancy and calculated based on county~+'ide personal property taxes to countywide real property taxes. A similar ratio was established to caIculatc motor vehicle decal tax. The total amount of tax revenues from new construction would be reduced by 50 percent of the county's costs to provide certain services. Once again, the town and county agreed to estimate these costs. The county's payment to the town would reflect their costs co provide law enforcement and trallic control, solid waste collection and disposal, and fire and rescue ser- vices. Tha e would be no efTort to compute the actual costs of provid- ~ zng these services. Instead, the average countywide per capita costs would be used. The per capita costs would be taken from the county's annual ti,+ancial report. The estimated number of people residing in newly constructed properties in i East P.oanoke County would multiply the per capita cost amount ~ for the respective services. The town and county prepared ~ revenue impacts based on the various gain share models. The model assumed that 25 ^ew houses would be constructed annually with an average assessed value of ~ 135,000. Based on ~,' these assumptions, the town would receive an estimated payment in the amount of ~ 1,683,947 over 15 years. Over 20 years, die total estimate was 1;3,474,027. The town agreed to forgo annex- , ation during tltc term of the agree- ment. The proposed Gain Share pa~znents would provide sufficient ne~~- revenues to address GnauciaJ concerns. 2001 VML • VACO Directory A complete listing of thousands of local government officials, including elected representatives in all 40 cities, 95 counties and 158 of Virginia's towns. Listings include addresses, telephone numbers, fax numbers, a-mail addresses and up-to-date population figures. To order a copy of the 2001 directory, send a check for S35 made payable to VML at P.O. Box 12164, Richmond, VA 23241 or call VML at (804) 649-8471. Future ties were cemented in the agreement. Both parties agreed to work together to meet capital needs in the Vinton community. Roth parties also agreed to work closer to address land use alzd development issues in the greater Vinton community. An example of this cooperative spirit has been the development a town-owned, ! 00-acre vacant property located in East Roanoke County. 1'he town and county are working together tv develop and market the land, having.jointly funded first phase development totaling X950,000. Additional incentives were established in the Gain Share Agreement for this site's develop- ment. If no public funds are used in the development of the site, new taxes will be shared based on the regular Gain Share basis. if either party uses public funds, the ne+~• taxes will be shared based on the town or county investment in perpetuity. The voluntary settlement agree- ment was presented and approved by the Commission on Local Govern- ment and validated by a t1tl•ee judge panel. The Gain Share :1Jrcement established a new and improved approach in addressiztg a significant community need and strengthened ties and relationships between the town and county. 'I8 1'tI1GtAlA TU1{'A' d CITI' Mary Allen - Re: board of supervisor meeting Page 1 ,, From: Joyce Earl To: Allen, Mary Date: 10/22/01 3:14PM Subject: Re: board of supervisor meeting I think that sounds like a good idea. Sorry for the trouble. Joyce Earl Assistant Director Roanoke County DSS (540) 387-6267 »> Mary Allen 10/22/01 02:26PM »> The problem is that it is already on the agenda. Could we just announce that Mr. Woodall's daughter is not present and acknowledge the Certificate? We can then mail it to him? I hate to do that but we rarely have to reschedule this type of thing. Mary H. Allen CMC Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke 540-772-2003 »> Joyce Earl 10/22/01 12:14PM »> Pat Beach, who was going to accept the appreciation award on behalf of Mr. Woodall at the October meeting needs to be reschedule for the November meeting. Please let me know if this doable. I apologize for the inconvenience and the short time frame. Joyce Earl Assistant Director Roanoke County DSS (540) 387-6267 ''tZOANOKE CO. DSS ``~~ ~ _ ~la~~ -~I~~ Re: Robert ~'. Wooddall 540 387 b210 ~~~~ 10/09 '01 13:05 N0.821 01/01 .~.c `~3 Roanoke County DSS would like to express our sincere gratitude to Mr, Robert J. (Bob) Wooddall for. hi.s many years of. dedicated service to our agency and the residents of our community i.n hi.s position as Treasurer of Salem Area Ministries. ARer serving in the Navy duri.~ World. War. TT, and Later. working as an engineer at GE, Mr. Wooddall retired from. the Salem plant i.n 1981. He then elected to serve h.is community with hi.s active I.Eadership and i.nvolvem.ent in. many volunteer. activities. Bob served Salenn Area Ministries for 9 years as Treasurer., beginning in 1.992. He also served on the Salem, Food I?amry Board, hTe was very active in the founding anal development of the R .A M House, and he continued to volunteer. his time at Roanoke Area. Ministries for. many years in. the capacity of Treasurer and. in fundraising Mr. Wooddall. currently serves on the l~ami.l.y Crisis Committee for Our Lady of Perpetual I-Tclp Catholic Church. in Salem, anal. on the ]3oard. of Director. s for. the Campbell Ave. Center. Over th.e past 9 year. s, Mr. Wooddall h.as worked closely with the Social Workers at Roanoke County ASS to provide Sn.ancial assistan.cE for needy families in. the community. Mr. Wooddall has been "on1.y a phone call away" each day to lend his fin.anci.a). support to assist families in. times of crisis. The workers here at DSS have relied heavily on his support anal generosity to help meet the needs of families in our. community. Worker. s have often called Mr. Wooddall at home numerous ti.rries each, d.ay to aslc for. assistance, anal could always count on. Mr. Wooddall's empathy, eagerness to help, and ei~ici.ency in getting the financial crisis resolved. He has been. a wonderful anal loyal friend to DSS. We thank him. for his service to Salem Area Ministries. After 9+ years of servi.cc as Treasurer of Salem. urea Mi.nistri.cs, Mr. Wooddall decided to resign. in March. due to health problems, He will continue to reside in Salem with o».e of his 5 claughters_ Although NIr, Wooddall's position as Chairman. has been. filled. by another talented person,lV,(r. Wooddall will be sorely missed by the Soci,at Workers here at Roanoke County DSS. Daughter is Pat Beach (387-2159). Sh.e teaches At South Salem Elm. Mary ;ellen - Re: presentation to the board Page 1 ' From: Mary Allen To: Joyce Earl Subject: Re: presentation to the board We'll add to the Oct. 23 agenda. »> Joyce Earl 10/09/01 02:48PM »> I am faxing the information regarding Mr. Bob Wooddall to you today. He is physically unable to accept a certificate of appreciation himself. His daughter Pat Beach is willing to accept it for him as he watches on T.V. She is planning on attending the 3:00 Board meeting on October 23rd. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thank you for your help with this. He and the staff will appreciate it. Joyce Earl Assistant Director Roanoke County DSS (540) 387-6267 Joyce Earl Assistant Director Roanoke County DSS (540) 387-6267 CC: Brenda Holton Brenda Holton - Re: Terrorism and security Page 1 From: Dan ODonnell To: Elmer Hodge; Paul Mahoney Date: 10/ 19/01 10:32AM Subject: Re: Terrorism and security completely agree. Dan O'Donnell, Asst. Co. Administrator Dodonnell@co.roanoke.va.us (540) 772-2017 »> Paul Mahoney 10/19/01 10:30AM »> ECH and DOD: If you want to discuss the various County security measures that have been or will be implemented to protect against a terrorist attack, I recommend that this discussion occur in closed meeting. We should not disclose these measures to the "bad guys". Public disclosure would defeat the purpose of the security measures. There is a specific section in the FOIA that a-lows such a discussion in closed meeting. Sec. 2.2-3711.A.20 allows "Discussion of plans to protect public safety as it relates to terrorist activity." Vickie Huffman will cover the 10/23 BOS meeting for me. This communication and advice is provided to you within the scope of the attorney-client privilege,. and as such, it is confidential and is exempt from disclosure under the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney CC: Brenda Holton; Mary Allen; Vickie Huffman INTER MEMO ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS O F F I C E CLERK'S OFFICE TO: Butch Church Bob Johnson Joe McNamara Fuzzy Minnix Harry Nickens FROM: Brenda J. Holton ~~ DATE: October 17, 2001 SUBJECT: ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY APPOINTMENT On the October 23~d agenda, you are notified that Douglas Anderson's appointment to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority will expire December 31, 2001. Mr. Anderson has called the Clerk's Office and indicated his willingness to serve another term if the Board should want to reappoint him. cc: Elmer Hodge ti MEMORANDUM TO: MARY ALLEN FROM: MELINDA COX DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2001 RE: BOS RESO ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY Mary, listed below are the main points for a RESO with bullets of support information. Please let me know what else I need to provide you with to complete the RESO. I am hoping that we can have this available for the October 9`n BOS meeting, do you think this is realistic? Thanks so much! Melinda Allstate Insurance Company is celebrating its anniversary / 70`n Anniversary in the USA / 50`n Anniversary in the Roanoke Valley o Anniversary date is October 29, 2001 o Celebration on October 30, 2001 / 31 S` Anniversary in Roanoke County (We opened this building in February 1970) History / Founded in 1931 as part of Sears, Roebuck & Company / Concept for the Company began with two men on a commuter train / The name Allstate was derived from an automobile tire line that Sears carried (tire no longer manufactured) / Known as the "Good Hands" People -slogan is "You're in Good Hands with Allstate" The Roanoke County facility / Only National Support Center (services the entire USA) / Core competencies (main functions) include Policy Processing and ALSTAR agent calls Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce ranked Allstate as the ninth largest employer in the Valley in 2001 / Approximately 1,400 employees in 3 County locations / National Support Center o Electric Road o Supply Facility on Brandon Avenue o Approximately 1,200 employees / Market Claims Office o Valleypointe facility o Approximately 51 employees / Roanoke National Subrogation Claims Center o F&W Complex on Electric Road 0 114 employees / Agent offices - 16 agents and 4 support employees in the Roanoke Valley Community Service / The Allstate Foundation o The Company's commitment to the community is demonstrated through The Allstate Foundation. Established in 1952, The Foundation is an independent corporation funded by the contributions from Allstate. Grants are awarded to non-profit organizations that seek to improve the quality of life in communities across the country. o The Foundation has developed focus areas (see below) to target contributions to align with the Allstate Corporation's business goals. ^ Personal Safety and Security ^ Neighborhood Revitalization ^ Financial Planning & Education o Non-profit organizations can submit proposals o Committee reviews and approves proposals for distribution of funds / Community Service Committee o Our Mission: Why We Volunteer ^ To be anemployee-and-agent driven community involvement program which targets social issues at a local level by providing volunteer opportunities to Allstate employees and agents; to make "You're In Good Hands With Allstate" a reality by bringing warmth, kindness and inspiration to others while having fun through volunteer service. o Through the Helping Hands Program Allstate Employees aspire to: ^ Work with community groups to identify and address their most pressing needs ^ Increase the involvement of employees and agents at all levels in volunteer activities Address vital issues in the areas of community and economic development, auto and highway safety, and personal safety and security Increase awareness of volunteer projects that illustrate the Company's dedication and commitment to communities and to America's youth o Annual events sponsored by the Helping Hands Committee ^ The Gift of Life Club (American Red Cross) • 6 bloods drives at the facility each year ^ The Allstate Giving Campaign allows employees to donate to any 501 (c) (3) organization. The Company matches a portion of each employee's donation. • We support the United Way of Roanoke Valley through the Allstate Giving Campaign as well as providing a loaned executive for approximately 3 months during the Campaign. In addition, our local office also provides a trainer to the United Way for one week to prepare the loaned executives for their responsibilities. Each year a group of volunteers also participates in the Day of Caring. ^ America's Promise • America's Promise -The Alliance for Youth is dedicated to mobilizing individuals, groups and organizations from every part of American life, to build and strengthen the character and competence of our youth. At the heart of America's Promise is a set of five basic promises made to every child in America: o An ongoing relationship with a caring adult-parent, mentor, tutor or coach; o A safe place with structured activities during non- school hours; o A healthy start; o A marketable skill through effective education; and • Allstate began its dedication to America's Promise in 1997. • Below are just a few examples of our dedication locally to America's Promise o Junior Achievement ^ Mentoring Program called Project Business ^ Bowl-A-Thon ($9453.60 raised) ^ Sponsor Hall of Fame Dinner ^ Sponsored Golf Tournament ^ Board Member o West End Center School Supply Drive • In 2001, Allstate purchased 219 book bags that were filled by our employees. Employees also donated miscellaneous supplies. • Monetary donations to the West End Center's Wish List. o Boys & Girls Club ^ Sponsored a Golf Tournament ^ 3 Board Members o Sponsorship of local High School After Prom Parties o Support of Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) o Corporate Sponsorship of Child Health Investment Partnership (CHIP) -Tug for Tots ^ 21 Volunteers for the Tug / A few other 2001 community service activities to date o Monthly Meals on Wheels Delivery - 122 volunteers ^ In addition, Allstate provided a donation to the League of Older American's Lunch on the Lawn. Our employees also purchased 305 tickets. o Relay for Life Walk (American Cancer Society) ^ Corporate sponsorship ^ 210 Walkers ^ $24,979.94 raised o National Night Out (Citizens Appreciation Day) ^ Distributed 3,400 safety brochures and videos o Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Walk-a-thon ^ Over $9,350 raised ^ 64 Walkers o March of Dimes WalkAmerica ^ Corporate sponsorship ^ Flea market open to the public on premises to raise money ^ Raised $13,054 ^ 75 Walkers and 12 Workers o Sponsorship of WDBJ Companies That Care AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2001 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY ON THE OCCASION OF ITS 50TH ANNIVERSARY IN THE ROANOKE VALLEY WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company was founded in 1931 as part of Sears, Roebuck and Company, being named after an automobile tire line that Sears carried at that time; and WHEREAS, the Allstate Insurance Company is celebrating its 70th anniversary in the United States, its 50th anniversary in the Roanoke Valley and its 31 st anniversary in the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company is ranked the ninth largest employer in the Roanoke Valley by the Chamber of Commerce, employing over 1,400 employees in twee multiple County locations, including the National ...---~• Support Center which services `"~ ~~`~~~ "~~`~~' °`~`~~ customers and agents countrywide; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company, lives up to its slogan "You're in Good Hands with Allstate," by service to the community through The Allstate Foundation, established in 1952 that awards grants to non-profit agencies seeking to improve the quality of life; and The Helping Hands Program which works with community groups to identify and address their most pressing needs; and WHEREAS, Allstate Insurance Company employees in the Roanoke Valley give of their time and talent through volunteer involvement in Junior Achievement, the West End Center, Boys and Girls Club, Meals on Wheels delivery, blood donor drives, and various other charitable organizations. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, offers its congratulations to Allstate Insurance Company on its 50th anniversary in the Roanoke Valley; and FURTHER, THE Board of Supervisors expresses it's deepest appreciation to Allstate for its leadership role of service to the community and for providing employment to @@ residents of the Roanoke Valley. ~~~-~~ c~-~w~y s~~~ o~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mary Allen, Clerk -Roanoke County Board of Supervisors FROM: Deputy Lisa Park, Administrative Analyst DATE: October 18, 2001 SUBJECT: GED Grant Board Report Last week I sent to you via inter-office mail, a Board Report for acceptance of funds for the 2001-2002 GED grant. I found a discrepancy in the amounts on that report and have enclosed a corrected copy for you to approve for next week's board meeting. Thank You. Brenda Holton -Board Report Page 1 From: Gary Robertson To: Elmer Hodge Date: 10/17/01 10:39AM Subject: Board Report I was wondering if it is too late to get a board report on the agenda for the 23. We have a request for a water line extension on Paint Bank road. It is my understanding that one of the property owners is presently out of water. Mr. Church has talked with this citizen and is trying to help. The only thing I see as somewhat controversial is participation. The water line can serve up to 10 properties, but only 4 have agreed to participate so far. As you know we normally require 50% participation which would need 5 participants. The other 4 offered to pay an additional $500 each if they could get water and Mr. Church told them he would support that. As you know I want to run water lines everywhere. What do you think? CC: Mary Allen Mary Allen -RVRA Appointment Page 1 '' From: Brenda Holton To: Mary Allen Date: 10/4/01 11:58AM Subject: RVRA Appointment Doug Anderson on the RVRA called to say that his appointment expire Dec 31. He would like to be reappointed. I told him that we would let the Board know. He will call Dr. Nicken to let him know that he would like to be reappointed since he appointed him last time. Mary Allen - Re: RVRA Terms Page 1 From: Mary Allen To: Diane Hyatt Subject: Re: RVRA Terms We've already discussed, but I'll put this email in the last meeting in October so the Board will have all of November and December to find replacements. »> Diane Hyatt 08/29/01 11:46AM »> There are several terms that will be up for renewal on the RVRA at 12-31-01. I know that Doug Anderson is one and maybe Allan Robinson. When should we start putting these on the board report so that the board will be thinking about them? Mary Allen -Legal Notices -Reply Page 1 ~ From: Legals Staff <legals@roanoke.com> To: <MALLEN@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 10/8/01 11:48AM Subject: Legal Notices -Reply thanks -this one also runs Oct. 9 & 16 -cost $129.58... f=FGXC s=8 LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS~o The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-21 (B) Enforcement Procedures. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 5, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board (1772904) Mary Allen -Legal Notices -Reply Page 1 From: Legals Staff <legals@roanoke.com> To: <MALLEN@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 10/8/01 11:39AM Subject: Legal Notices -Reply thanks Mary - ad will run Oct. 9 & 16 -cost $142.12 LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 3.71 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of Multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Drive, Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 5, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board (1772897) Mar; Allen 'Legal Notices Page 1 _~, From: Mary Allen To: Legals Staff Subject: Legal Notices Attached are legal notices for the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. Please publish on October 19 and October 16. Call or email me if you have questions. Thanks CC: Tammi Wood LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Bowman Dalton, Inc. to Rezone 3.71 acres from C-1 Commercial Office District to R-3 Medium Density Multifamily Residential District for a development of Multifamily housing located at 3990 Challenger Drive, Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 5, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, October 9, 2001 Tuesday, October 16, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2003 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 23, 2001, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-21 (B) Enforcement Procedures. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 5, 2001 Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, October 9, 2001 Tuesday, October 16, 2001 Direct the bill for publication to: Roanoke County Community Development Planning & Zoning Division 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2068 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 2 . • PUBLIC NOTICE Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, at its meeting on October 28, 2001, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia, at the evening session beginning at 7:00 p.m., will hold a public hearing on the following: ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40o EAST MAIN STREET, SALEM, VIRGINIA (SALEM OFFICE SUPPLY BUILDING -TAX MAP NO. 107-6-1) All members of the public interested in the matters set forth above may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. A copy of the full text of the ordinance is on file and is available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, whose office is located at 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Roanoke County, Virginia Publish on the following dates: October 9, 2001 October 16, 2001 Send invoice to: Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 ATTENTION: MRS. MARY ALLEN -. Mary Allen - Re: Ann Rogers Page 1 .> From: Mary Allen To: Brenda Holton Subject: Re: Ann Rogers Thanks. »> Brenda Holton 10/10/01 08:33AM »> Dr. Nickens left a voice mail message this morning. He said that he appointed Ann Rogers to the CAC of the MPO yesterday. He gave her address and phone number and asked that you add to the consent agenda for the next meeting. Ann Rogers 6347 Back Creek Road Boones Mill, VA 24065 725-8222 She lives in the Cave Spring District. 1 • ~ Y 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) Co ~'~' ~ D ~ Community Advisory Committee. / O -~ 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