Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10/28/2003 - Regular
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Action Agenda October 28, 2003 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for October 28, 2003. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturdays at 4:00 p.m. The meetings 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. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call All present at 3:03 p.m. 2. Invocation: Pastor Mark Graham St. John Lutheran Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS None Chairman McNamara welcomed Mike Stovall, School Board Member, to the meeting C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring October 25 through November 2, 2003, as Red Ribbon Week in Roanoke County Proclamation presented to Ray Bemis, Prevention Specialist with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare and RAYSAC member D. BRIEFINGS 1 Briefing on progress of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee and Capital Planning for fiscal year 2004-2005 (CIP fiscal years 2005-2009). (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) Mr. Robertson stated the Committee's goal, objectives, project evaluation criteria and named the committee members. He also named the committee members E. PUBLIC HEARING Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding proposed amendments to the fiscal year 2003-2004 budget in accordance with Section 15.2-2507, Code of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) Public hearing was held and no citizens requested to speak F. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of refinancing of Water Revenue Bonds: (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator; Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) (a) Request to approve a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds Ms. Hyatt advised that the following information should be inserted into the resolution: $57 million on pages 1 and 2 and the year 2031 on page 2 R-102803-1 JPM motion to adopt the resolution with the inserted information URC (b) Request to approve reimbursement of $11 million from the Water Fund to the General Fund for debt service payments made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir A-102803-2 JPM motion to approve an amended staff recommendation (Reimburse the general fund with an amount not to exceed $11 million from the water fund for the payment of debt service on the $15 million general obligation bonds, and appropriate an amount not to exceed $11 million to the Unappropriated Capital Fund Balance) URC 2. Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $73,057 for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system in the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office. (Diane Childers, Clerk to the Board) 2 A-102803-3 HOM motion to approve staff recommendation . (Approve appropriation of funds in the amount of $73,057 from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system) URC 3. Request to adopt a prioritized list of Primary and Interstate projects to be presented at the pre-allocation public hearing for the Virginia Department of Transportation Six-Year Improvement Program, fiscal years 2004-2010. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) R-102803-4 JPM motion to adopt resolution URC G. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. JPM motion to approve 1St readings 2"d readings and public hearings -11/18/03 URC 1. First reading of ordinance to rezone .81 acres from R-1 Low Density Residential District to C-1 Office District in order to operate a general office, located at 2415 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jeffrey Glick 2. First reading of ordinance to rezone 1.88 acres from I-1 Industrial District to AR Agricultural/Residential District in order to construct single family dwellings, located on Eagle Crest Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Buck Mountain Land, LLC H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the donation of surplus real estate, Tax Map No. 60.16-09-10, East Cleveland Avenue, Vinton Magisterial District, to Habitat for Humanity. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) MWA motion to approve 1St reading 2"d reading and public hearing -11/18/03 URC 3 Mr. Hodge advised that a community meeting will be held on November 3, 2003, at 7:00 p.m., at the Vinton War Memorial I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES Second reading of an ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project including acquisition of easements - Club Lane Sewer Line. Extension, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-102803-5 JPM motion to adopt ordinance URC J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Grievance Panel 2. Industrial Development Authority JBC nominated Carole Brackman, Catawba Magisterial District, to serve an additional four-year term which will expire on September 26, 2007. He asked that confirmation of her appointment be added to the Consent Agenda. K. 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-102803-6 JPM motion to adopt consent resolution URC 1. Approval of minutes -October 14, 2003 2. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School to provide an in-school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities A-102803-6.a 4 3. Request to accept and appropriate an all hazards planning grant in the amount of $20,990 from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management A-102803-6.b 4. Proclamation declaring the week of October 12 through 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Awareness Week No vote required 5. Acceptance of donation of a 20' water line easement from Bonsack Baptist Church, Hollins Magisterial District A-102803-6.c 6. Authorization to exercise an option to purchase communications equipment, building and tower from the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council A-102803-6.d 7. Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) in the amount of $29,117 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance A-102803-6.e 8. Request to approve amendments to the length of service awards program (LOSAP) adoption agreement for the volunteer fire and rescue personnel concerning eligibility requirements A-102803-6.f 9. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority A-102803-6.g L. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for work session on November 18, 2003, concerning the Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for fiscal years 2004-2010 and consideration of projects for fiscal year 2004-2005 in the Virginia Department of Transportation Revenue Sharing Program. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) 5 Consensus of the Board to schedule the work session on November 18, 2003 M. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS None N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS The following citizens spoke regarding the Public Private Transportation Act proposals for Interstate 81: (1) Annie Krochalis (2) Kristin Peckman O. REPORTS JPM motion to receive and file the following reports URC 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Accounts Paid -September 2003 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended September 30, 2003 7. Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to probable litigation, namely methadone clinic; Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the performance of specific public officers; Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of appointments to the Western Virginia Water Authority; and Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to actual litigation, namely Woltz condemnation At 4:53 p.m. JPM moved to go into closed meeting following the work sessions URC Q. WORK SESSIONS - 4th Floor Conference Room (5:00 p.m.) 6 1. Work session to discuss the Interstate 81 Public Private Transportation Act (PPTA) improvement project, specifically the detailed proposal review comments. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development; Anthony Ford, Traffic Engineer) The work session was held from 5:00 p.m. until 5:20 p.m. There was consensus to move forward with sending the review comments to VDOT to meet the deadline of November 4. It was suggested that staff add a comment to Question #2 on both proposals stating that the County would also support government funded development. 2. Work session to consider initiatives for the 2004 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney; Pete Giesen, Special Assistant for Legislative Relations) The work session was held from 5:20 p.m. until 5:40 p.m. There was consensus as follows: (1) Mr. Mahoney will bring back on November 18 a resolution with items mentioned for the 2004 Legislative Program; and (2) the Board will hold a legislative dinner on February 12 in connection with VMWACo Legislative Day in Richmond. 3. Work Session on Public Safety Building Proposal Review under the Public- Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator) The work session was held from 5:40 p.m. until 5:55 p.m. There was consensus for staff to move forward the three proposals received to Phase II: Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems, SafetyFirst Consortium and Public Facility Consortium, LLC. 4. Work session on the progress of the Police Department accreditation. (Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police) The work session was held from 5:55 p.m. until 6:08 p.m. Chief Lavinder reviewed the Assessment Team's on-site final report and advised that a hearing to approve the reaccreditation will be held on November 22 at the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies conference in Colorado Springs, Colorado. 5. Work session on the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program. (Rick Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue) The work session was held from 6:08 p.m. until 6:20 p.m. Division Chief Joey Stump described the program and advised that it is designed to prepare citizens to help themselves and others during times of catastrophic events until emergency responders can arrive. This is a regional program sponsored by the Virginia Department of Emergency Management. 7 6. Work session concerning recovery of DUI expenses. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) This work session was postponed until December 16, 2003 EVENING SESSION R. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION Closed meeting was held from 6:20 p.m. until 6:50 p.m. R-102803-7 JPM motion to adopt certification resolution at 7:10 p.m. URC Chairman McNamara welcomed Mayor Davis, Councilman Grose, and Councilman Altice, from the Vinton Town Council, to the meeting S. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for approval of a resolution proceeding to the Detailed Design Phase for the construction of a new Public Safety Communications Center under the Public-Private Education Facilities And Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator) R-102803-8 HOM motion to adopt resolution to move three proposals forward to the detailed design phase: Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems, SafetyFirst Consortium and Public Facility Consortium, LLC URC T. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding a proposed amendment to the Roanoke County Charter seeking authority to levy and collect taxes on cigarette and tobacco products. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) Public hearing was held and no citizens requested to speak U. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to construct a mini warehouse facility and offices located one-half mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of MJH Development. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 8 0-102803-9 JBC motion to adopt ordinance with conditions but deleting Condition #2 (The applicant shall provide an easement, if one does not currently exist, on their land for the extension of Angel Lane to the adjoining I-1 English property) URC 2. Second reading of an ordinance to vacate portions of a 15' sanitary sewer easement, a 15' water line easement, and a 5' public utility easement upon Lots 15 and 16, Plat of Section No. 2, Quail Ridge, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 3, and resubdivided by Plat of Section No. 2, Quail Ridge, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 197, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) 0-102803-10 HOM motion to adopt ordinance URC 3. Second reading of an ordinance to vacate a portion of an existing 10' public utility easement between Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25 dedicated in Plat Book 3, Page 1, Tinker Knoll, Hollins Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) 0-102803-11 RCF motion to adopt ordinance URC 4. Second reading of ordinances concerning cable television franchise: (Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) One citizen spoke -James Garris (a) Ordinance approving the revised cable television franchise 0-102803-12 MWA motion to adopt ordinance URC (b) Ordinance approving and authorizing the execution of a cable television franchise agreement by and between the County of Roanoke, Virginia and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke 0-102803-13 MWA motion to adopt ordinance URC 5. Second reading of an ordinance to amend the proffered conditions on a 99.38 acre tract of real estate (Vinton Business Center), located in the 2100 block of 9 Hardy Road, Vinton Magisterial District, with a zoning classification of Planned Technology District (PTD) with conditions, upon the petition of the Town of Vinton. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-102803-14 MWA motion to adopt ordinance URC 6. Second reading of an ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-102803-15 HOM motion to adopt ordinance URC V. SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES Second reading of an ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code by the amendment of Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response". (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) JBC motion to move this item to the December 16, 2003 meeting and to schedule a work session at that meeting URC W. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Chris Helton spoke of his concerns about the hazardous road conditions on Harborwood Road. As requested by Supervisor Church, Mr. Covey updated the Board on actions being taken to help the situation. The following citizens spoke of their concerns about the redistricting of Hill Drive in the Pine Hill Subdivision, from Roanoke County to Botetourt County. They have been notified to vote in Botetourt County during the November election and will be required to move their children from Roanoke County schools to Botetourt County schools effective January 1, 2005. (1) Dallas Simmons (2) Heath H. Simmons (3) Scott Ferguson (4) Albert Mitchell (5) Roger Austin (6) Deanna C. Ross Supervisor Altizer advised that a community meeting is being planned in December to discuss this redistricting issue with all concerned parties. 10 X. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church requested that all citizens exercise their right to vote on November 4. Supervisor Minnix congratulated the Police Department upon again winning accreditation. Mr. Hodge advised that the final approval of the accreditation will not be known until November 22, 2003. Supervisor McNamara advised that Halloween will be celebrated on Friday, October 31, and outdoor activities should end by 9 p.m. as is the custom. He asked Mr. Hodge to have extra police on duty and requested that citizens drive carefully during Halloween. Y. ADJOURNMENT JPM adjourned the meeting at 8:57 p.m. to November 9, 2003, at 2 p.m. at The Homestead for the Virginia Association of Counties Conference and a Board Retreat 11 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda October 28, 2003 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for October 28, 2003. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturdays at 4:00 p.m. The meetings 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. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: Pastor Mark Graham St. John Lutheran Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring October 25 through November 2, 2003, as Red Ribbon Week in Roanoke County D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on progress of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee and Capital Planning for fiscal year 2004-2005 (CIP fiscal years 2005-2009). (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) E. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding proposed amendments to the fiscal year 2003-2004 budget in accordance with Section 15.2-2507, Code of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 1 F. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of refinancing of Water Revenue Bonds: (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator; Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) (a) Request to approve a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds (b) Request to approve reimbursement of $11 million from the Water Fund to the General Fund for debt service payments made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir 2. Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $73,057 for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system in the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office. (Diane Childers, Clerk to the Board) 3. Request to adopt a prioritized list of Primary and Interstate projects to be presented at the pre-allocation public hearing for the Virginia Department of Transportation Six-Year Improvement Program, fiscal years 2004-2010. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) G. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. 1. First reading of ordinance to rezone .81 acres from R-1 Low Density Residential District to C-1 Office District in order to operate a general office, located at 2415 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jeffrey Glick 2. First reading of ordinance to rezone 1.88 acres from I-1 Industrial District to AR Agricultural/Residential District in order to construct single family dwellings, located on Eagle Crest Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Buck Mountain Land, LLC H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the donation of surplus real estate, Tax Map No. 60.16-09-10, East Cleveland Avenue, Vinton Magisterial District, to Habitat for Humanity. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project including acquisition of easements - 2 Club Lane Sewer Line Extension, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Grievance Panel 2. Industrial Development Authority K. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of minutes -October 14, 2003 2. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School to provide an in-school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities 3. Request to accept and appropriate an all hazards planning grant in the amount of $20,990 from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management 4. Proclamation declaring the week of October 12 through 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Awareness Week 5. Acceptance of donation of a 20' water line easement from Bonsack Baptist Church, Hollins Magisterial District 6. Authorization to exercise an option to purchase communications equipment, building and tower from the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council 7. Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) in the amount of $29,117 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance 8. Request to approve amendments to the length of service awards program (LOSAP) adoption agreement for the volunteer fire and rescue personnel concerning eligibility requirements 3 L. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for work session on November 18, 2003, concerning the Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for fiscal years 2004-2010 and consideration of projects for fiscal year 2004-2005 in the Virginia Department of Transportation Revenue Sharing Program. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) M. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Accounts Paid -September 2003 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended September 30, 2003 7. Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to probable litigation, namely methadone clinic; Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the performance of specific public officers; Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of appointments to the Western Virginia Water Authority; and Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to actual litigation, namely Woltz condemnation Q. WORK SESSIONS - 4th Floor Conference Room (5:00 p.m.) 1. Work session to discuss the Interstate 81 Public Private Transportation Act (PPTA) improvement project, specifically the detailed proposal review comments. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development; Anthony Ford, Traffic Engineer) 2. Work session to consider initiatives for the 2004 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney; Pete Giesen, Special Assistant for Legislative Relations) 4 3. Work Session on Public Safety Building Proposal Review under the Public- Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator) 4. Work session on the progress of the Police Department accreditation. (Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police) 5. Work session on the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program. (Rick Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue) 6. Work session concerning recovery of DUI expenses. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) EVENING SESSION R. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION S. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for approval of a resolution proceeding to the Detailed Design Phase for the construction of a new Public Safety Communications Center under the Public-Private Education Facilities And Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). (Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator) T. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding a proposed amendment to the Roanoke County Charter seeking authority to levy and collect taxes on cigarette and tobacco products. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) U. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to construct a mini warehouse facility and offices located one-half mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of MJH Development. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 2. Second reading of an ordinance to vacate portions of a 15' sanitary sewer easement, a 15' water line easement, and a 5' public utility easement upon Lots 15 and 16, Plat of Section No. 2, Quail Ridge, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 3, and resubdivided by Plat of Section No. 2, Quail Ridge, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 197, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) 3. Second reading of an ordinance to vacate a portion of an existing 10' public utility easement between Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25 dedicated in Plat Book 3, 5 Page 1, Tinker Knoll, Hollins Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) 4. Second reading of ordinances concerning cable television franchise: (Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) (a) Ordinance approving the revised cable television franchise (b) Ordinance approving and authorizing the execution of a cable television franchise agreement by and between the County of Roanoke, Virginia and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke 5. Second reading of an ordinance to amend the proffered conditions on a 99.38 acre tract of real estate (Vinton Business Center), located in the 2100 block of Hardy Road, Vinton Magisterial District, with a zoning classification of Planned Technology District (PTD) with conditions, upon the petition of the Town of Vinton. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 6. Second reading of an ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit, upon the petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) V. SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code by the amendment of Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response". (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) W. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS X. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Y. ADJOURNMENT 6 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C - ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring the week of October 25 through November 2, 2003, as Red Ribbon Week in Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION RAYSAC, the Roanoke Area Youth Substance Abuse Coalition, and the Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare have asked that the Board proclaim October 25 through November 2, 2003, as Red Ribbon Week. The red ribbon has been designated as the symbol of intolerance of the illegal use of drugs and a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. In the Roanoke Valley, a number of events are scheduled: - October 26 -November 1, school competitions for the school that best illustrates the spirit of RRW. - Three free parenting workshops, Keeping Your Child Safe From Dangerous Situations, will be held on October 30th, 8:00-9:30 a.m., 12:00-1:30 p.m., and 5:30-7:00 p.m., at the Jefferson Center, Fitzpatrick Hall. - Sunday, November 2"d at 7:00 p.m., at the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center, a Candlelight Vigil of Remembrance and Hope will be held to remember those whose lives have been affected by substance abuse. - A number of businesses and agencies throughout the region will sport banners and ribbons in support of this week. Mary Gwen Parker, Secretary/Treasurer of RAYSAC, and Ray Bemis, a Prevention Specialist with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare and RAYSAC member, will be present to accept the proclamation at the Board meeting. ' ~. C-I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 25 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2, 2003, AS RED RIBBON WEEK IN SUPPORT OF A DRUG-FREE COMMUNITY WHEREAS, the Red Ribbon Campaign was initiated in 1985 by the Virginia Federation of Communities for Drug-Free Youth; and WHEREAS, the red ribbon was designated as the symbol of intolerance of illegal drug use and a commitment to a drug-free life style; and WHEREAS, a group of concerned citizens, parents, students, teachers, police officers, business people, judges, drug treatment providers, counselors, ministers, and other caring individuals have established the Roanoke Area Youth Substance Abuse Coalition (RAYSAC) to bring better coordination and development of substance abuse prevention programs and resources; and WHEREAS, RAYSAC and Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare have asked that the Board of Supervisors recognize Red Ribbon Week in Roanoke County and are promoting the Red Ribbon Campaign in the Roanoke Valley through a variety of activities. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby proclaim October 25 through November 2, 2003, as RED RIBBON WEEK in Roanoke County, Virginia, and encourages all of our citizens to join in the observances and activities of this event. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~- AT AREGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Briefing on Progress of the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Review Committee and Capital Planning for FY2004-2005 (CIP FY2005-2009) SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~"''"~"/ ~/~~- County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~ ~/~,~ i~tti«~ a SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the October 12, 2003 Board of Supervisor's meeting, a work session was held to discuss the planned update of the County's Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for FY2005-2009. A proposal was presented to the Board that included acitizen-based committee that would evaluate and recommend capital priorities to the Board for consideration in developing the FY2004-2005 County budget. This approach will allow a diverse perspective of the capital needs that exist in the county. This briefing will update the Board of Supervisors and the public on the Committee's work to- date, work remaining to be completed, and a planned time-fine for completion of the committee's assignment. The following items will be reviewed and represents several of the important tasks that have been completed by the Committee: • CIP Committee's Goals and Objectives • Capital Project Evaluation Criteria -Guiding Principles Atso attached is a roster of committee members that includes appointment information. -~ County of Roanoke CIP Review Committee Goal & Objectives Committee Goal The CIP Review Committee is a collaborative group established to evaluate and prioritize identified capital projects from a community perspective based upon countywide priorities articulated by the Board of Supervisors. Committee Objectives 1. To be acquainted with the history of the County of Roanoke's Capital Improvement Program and the proposed process for the development of the FY2005-2009 CIP. 2. To become familiar with countywide capital needs identified by department heads through the review of proposals, participation in site visits, and interviews as needed. 3. To evaluate submitted capital projects based on criteria that support the County's mission and guiding principals. 4. To make recommendations on capital priorities for the Board of Supervisor's consideration by December 2003. ~- t Capital Improvement Program Project Evaluation Criteria Providing effective and efficient services and improving the quality of life of its citizens is the County of Roanoke's mission and the foundation of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The Capital Improvement Review Committee has identified the following Guiding Principles for evaluating and prioritizing capital project requests in making recommendations to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. These principles are based on the stated priorities and approved plans of the Board of Supervisors. These principles are presented in no particular order of importance, as individual perspective will influence the relative value of each principle when compared to one another. The Guiding Principles are as follows: • Provide effective and efficient governmental services to the citizens. • Enhance public health, safety, and welfare issues. • Promote the safety and security of our citizens while at home, at work, and at play. • Consider solutions that extend beyond the County's boundaries in meeting future challenges. • Use public investment as a catalyst for economic growth in a manner consistent with the Community Plan. • Safeguard the environment and natural beauty for present and future generations. • Maintain and sustain effective land use planning. • Maintain or enhance cultural, recreational, educational, and social opportunities for all citizens. • Protect existing investment in facilities and infrastructure that are vital in delivering fundamental services to our citizens. • Anticipate future facility and infrastructure needs to best leverage capital resources of the community. • Comply with applicable state and federal mandates. -~ Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee Membership Representing: Catawba District Name: Ms. Barbara P. Fasnacht Representing: Cave Spring District Name: Ms. Dawn Erdman Representing: Hollins District Name: Mr. Jason B. Perdue Representing: Industrial Development Authority Name: Mr. Craig W. Sharp Representing: Library Board Name: Ms. Connie Goodman Representing: Planning Commission Name: Mr. Don Witt Representing: Public Safety Name: Mr. Chris Georgoulis Representing: Recreation Commission Name: Mr. Jack Griffith Representing: Vinton Magisterial District Name: Mr. Michael W. Roop Representing: Windsor Hills District Name: Mr. Lee B. Eddy Thursday, October 23, 2003 Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. L.-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing to receive citizen comments regarding Proposed Amendments to the fiscal year 2003-2004 Budget in accordance with Section 15.2-2507, Code of Virginia SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This is a public hearing to secure citizen's comments concerning amending the FY 2003-2004 budget by adjusting the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the current fiscal year. Sec. 15.2-2507 provides that whenever such amendment exceeds 1 % of the total expenditures shown in the adopted budget or $500,000, whichever is lesser, the county must publish notice of a meeting and public hearing. The notice must state the county's intent to amend the budget and include a brief synopsis of the proposed budget amendment. This notice was published on October 21, 2003. 1. Reimbursement of an amount not to exceed $12 million from the Water Fund to the General Fund for debt service payments made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir 2. Appropriation of $80,000 for the purchase of an electronic agenda system 3. Appropriation of $20,990 grant from Virginia Department of Emergency Management 4. Appropriation of an amount not to exceed $75,000 for School grants 1 c- FISCAL IMPACT: None, as a result of the public hearing later on this agenda. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Requests for appropriations will occur It is recommended that the Board hold the required public hearing. Board action appropriating funds as provided in this notice will occur later during this meeting. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~- ~ C~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~-~' ~ I °`9~'~' County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: In October 1991, the County of Roanoke, Virginia issued $59,731,873.75 of its Water System Revenue Bonds, Series 1991 to fund, with other available funds, an expansion and improvement of the public water supply system which included the acquisition, construction and equipping of a dam and water reservoir, water treatment facilities and distribution, storage and transmission facilities. The Series 1991 Bonds included serial current coupon bonds for years 1996 through 1999 totaling $4,610,000, zero coupon bonds for years 2000 to 2009 of $1,775,000 (maturity value) and term bonds totaling $47,615,000 maturing in 2021 and 2031. In October 1993, the County refunded, on an Advanced Refunding basis, the Term Bonds maturing in 2021 and 2031 with Series 1993 and Series 19936 Bonds. The Series 1993 and 1993 B Bonds are currently callable at 102%. The Series 1991 Capital Appreciation Bonds are not callable. ~- i ~~-> SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County is currently wishing to execute a current refunding of all ofthe Series 1993 and Series 1993 B Bonds. The purpose of this refunding is to accomplish three major objectives: 1. To adopt a new Master Trust Indenture that would provide the County a greater degree of flexibility in making financial, legal and operating decisions in the future. This flexibility is needed in order to transfer the water assets to the proposed new Authority. 2. To reduce the existing Rate Stabilization Fund and the existing Debt Service Reserve Fund that are required under the terms of the Series 1991,1993 and 1993B Bond Indentures and free these resources to the extent possible for other permitted uses by the County. Portions of these funds that are related to the 1991 Bonds will remain. 3. To realize Net Present Value Savings from the lower interest rate currently available in the marketplace. We have applied, and been approved to participate in Fall 2003 Bond Pool Sale of the Virginia Resources Authority (VRA). The VRA needs a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors authorizing the refinancing by October 30, 2003. The bonds are scheduled to be sold in mid-November with a closing the first of December, 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: Based on the current market conditions, savings are estimated to be approximately $650,000 annually through 2009. Then savings will drop to $550,000 annually. Debt service will remain constant from 2010 through 2027. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution authorizing the sale and issuance of Water Refunding Revenue Bonds to refinance the County Water Revenue Bonds, 1993 and 1993 B. ~ - ~ (c~.l AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF WATER SYSTEM REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "County"), has determined that it is advisable to refund, redeem and defease all or a portion of its outstanding $35,625,000 Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 1993 and $18,915,000 Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 19936 (collectively, the "Refunded Obligations") through the issuance of its water system refunding revenue bond (the "Bond"); WHEREAS, the Bond shall be issued pursuant to a Master Indenture of Trust, dated as of October 1, 1991 (the "Master Indenture") between the County and SunTrust Bank (as successor to Crestar Bank), as trustee (the "Trustee") as previously supplemented and a Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust (the "Third Supplemental Indenture") between the County and the Trustee; WHEREAS, the Board has determined to cause the Bond to be sold to the Virginia Resources Authority ("VRA") pursuant to the terms of a Local Bond Sale Agreement (the "Local Bond Sale Agreement") and a Financing Agreement (the "Financing Agreement"), each between the County and VRA; and WHEREAS, the foregoing arrangements will be reflected in the Third Supplemental Indenture, the Local Bond Sale Agreement, the Financing Agreement and the Bond, forms of which have been presented to this meeting and filed with the County document; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. Authorization of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to contract a debt and to issue and sell the Bond in the maximum principal amount of $ The issuance and sale of the Bond is hereby authorized upon the terms set forth herein and upon such other terms as may be determined in the manner set forth herein. The proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bond shall be used, together with other available funds, to refund, redeem and defease any or all of the outstanding maturities of the Refunded Obligations, as determined by the County's Chief Financial Officer. 2. Award and Sale to the Virginia Resources Authority. The award and sale of the Bond to or at the direction of VRA is authorized. The Bond shall be delivered to i ~ - t ~~.~ or upon the order of VRA upon VRA's payment of the purchase price to be set forth in the Local Bond Sale Agreement. 3. Details of Bond. The Bond shall be issued as a single fully registered bond. The County Administrator is authorized to determine and approve all of the final details of the Bond, including, without limitation, its dated date, original aggregate principal amount, interest rates, payment dates and amounts, redemption provisions, and the purchase price of the Bond to be paid by VRA, provided that (i) the aggregate principal amount of the Bond shall not exceed $ , (ii) the true interest cost of the Bond shall not exceed 6.0% (exclusive of Supplemental Interest (as defined in the Financing Agreement)), (iii) the final maturity of the Bond shall not be later than December 31, 20_, and (iv) the purchase price of the Bond to be paid by VRA shall not be less than 95% of the original aggregate principal amount of the Bond. Following the pricing of the corresponding VRA Bonds, the Chairman of the Board or the County Administrator, or either of them shall evidence his approval of the final terms and purchase price of the Bond by executing and delivering to VRA the Local Bond Sale Agreement, which shall be in substantially the form presented to this meeting, with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes not inconsistent with this Resolution as may be approved by the officer executing the Local Bond Sale Agreement. The actions of the Chairman of the Board or the County Administrator in determining the final terms and the purchase price of the Bond shall be conclusive, and no further action shall be necessary on the part of the County. 4. Financing Documents. The Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator, or either of them, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust, the Financing Agreement and the Local Bond Sale Agreement in substantially the forms presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions or omissions as may be approved by the County Administrator, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery of the Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust, Local Bond Sale Agreement and the Financing Agreement on the County's behalf, and the County Administrator is authorized to complete the Local Bond Sale Agreement with the final terms and details of the Bond as determined pursuant to paragraph 3.. The County agrees to pay all amounts required by the Financing Agreement, including any amounts required by Section 6.1 of the Financing Agreement, including the "Supplemental Interest," as provided in such section. 5. Redemption of Bond. The Bond shall not be subject to refunding or redemption without the consent of VRA, as provided in the Bond and the Financing Agreement. 6. Pledge of Revenues. The Bonds shall be limited obligations of the County and principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds shall be payable solely from the revenues derived by the County from its water system, as set forth in the Bonds, the Master Indenture and the Third Supplemental Indenture pursuant to which the Bonds ~-1C~) will be issued, and from other funds that have been or may be pledged for such purpose under the terms and conditions of the Master Indenture and the Third Supplemental Indenture. Nothing in this Resolution, the Bonds, the Master Indenture or the Third Supplemental Indenture shall be deemed to pledge the full faith and credit of the County to the payment of the Bonds. 7. Details of and Sale of Bonds. The Bonds shall be issued upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution, the Master Indenture and the Third Supplemental Indenture. The Bond shall be in substantially the form of Exhibit A attached to the Third Supplemental Indenture, with such variations, insertions or deletions as may be approved by the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator. There may be endorsed on the Bond such legend or text as may be necessary or appropriate to conform to any applicable rules and regulations of any governmental authority or any usage or requirement of law with respect thereto. 8. Evidence of Approval. The Chairman's or Vice Chairman's and the County Administrator's approval or determination of all of the details and provisions of the Bond that they have been authorized and/or directed to approve under this Resolution shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery of the Bond on the County's behalf. 9. Execution and Delivery of the Bond. The Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator are authorized and directed to execute the Bond and the Clerk of the Board (the "Clerk") is authorized and directed to affix the seal of the County thereon and to attest such seal. Such officers are further authorized and directed to deliver the Bond to or at the direction of VRA upon payment of the purchase price set forth in the Local Bond Sale Agreement. 10. Disclosure Documents. The County authorizes and consents to the inclusion of information with respect to the County to be contained in VRA's Preliminary Official Statement and VRA's Official Statement in final form, both prepared in connection with the sale of bonds to be issued by VRA, a portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Bond. If appropriate, such disclosure documents shall be distributed in such manner and at such times as any of them shall determine. The County Administrator is authorized and directed to take whatever actions are necessary and/or appropriate to aid VRA in ensuring compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12. 11. Non-Arbitrage Certificate and Tax Covenants. The County Administrator and the County's Chief Financial Officer, or either of them, are authorized to execute a Nonarbitrage Certificate and Tax Compliance Agreement or any related document (the "Tax Documents") setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Bond and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Tax Code"), including the provisions of Section 148 of the Tax Code and applicable regulations relating to "arbitrage bonds." The Board covenants on behalf of the County that the 3 r-IC) proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bond will be invested and expended as set forth in the Tax Documents, to be delivered simultaneously with the issuance and delivery of the Bond and that the County shall comply with the other covenants and representations contained therein. 12. Refunding. The County Administrator and the County's Chief Financial Officer, or either of them, is authorized and directed to determine the maturities of the Refunded Obligations to be refunded, to provide for such Refunded Obligations to be called for redemption and to provide for their refunding. The County Administrator and the County's Chief Financial Officer, or either of them, is authorized to enter into an Escrow Agreement with an Escrow Agent to be selected by the County Administrator to provide for the refunding of the Refunded Obligations. 13. Further Actions. All officers and agents of the Board and the County are authorized and directed to take such further actions in conformity with the purpose and intent of this Resolution as may be necessary or appropriate in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bond, and the execution, delivery and performance of the Third Supplemental Indenture, the Local Bond Sale Agreement and the Financing Agreement, including the execution and delivery on behalf of the County of such instruments, documents or certificates as necessary or appropriate to carry out the transactions contemplated by this Resolution. All actions previously taken by such officers and agents in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bond are ratified and confirmed. The County Administrator is designated the County's Authorized Representative for purposes of the Financing Agreement. 14. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. 4 CERTIFICATE OF CLERK The undersigned Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, hereby certifies that: 1. A regular meeting (the "Meeting") of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "Board"), was held on October 28, 2003, at which the following members were present and absent: PRESENT: Joseph McNamara, Chairman Richard C. Flora, Vice-Chairman Michael W. Altizer, Supervisor Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Supervisor H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Supervisor ABSENT: None 2. A Resolution entitled "RESOLUTION 102803-1 OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF WATER SYSTEM REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS" was duly adopted at the Meeting by the recorded affirmative roll-call vote of a majority of all of the members elected to the Board, the ayes and nays being recorded in the minutes of the Meeting as shown below: MEMBER VOTE Supervisor Flora Aye Supervisor Minnix Aye Supervisor Altizer Aye Supervisor Church Aye Supervisor McNamara Aye 3. Attached hereto is a true and correct copy of the foregoing resolution as recorded in full in the minutes of the Meeting. 4. The attached resolution has not been repealed, revoked, rescinded or amended and is in full force and effect on the date hereof. WITNESS my signature and the seal of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, this 28 day of October, 2003. Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia [SEAL] AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION 102803-1 OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF WATER SYSTEM REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "County"), has determined that it is advisable to refund, redeem and defease all or a portion of its outstanding $35,625,000 Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 1993 and $18,915,000 Water System Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 19936 (collectively, the "Refunded Obligations") through the issuance of its water system refunding revenue bond (the "Bond"}; WHEREAS, the Bond shall be issued pursuant to a Master Indenture of Trust, dated as of October 1, 1991 (the "Master Indenture") between the County and SunTrust Bank (as successor to Crestar Bank), as trustee (the "Trustee") as previously supplemented and a Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust (the "Third Supplemental Indenture") between the County and the Trustee; WHEREAS, the Board has determined to cause the Bond to be sold to the Virginia Resources Authority ("VRA") pursuant to the terms of a Local Bond Sale Agreement (the "Local Bond Sale Agreement") and a Financing Agreement (the "Financing Agreement"), each between the County and VRA; and WHEREAS, the foregoing arrangements will be reflected in the Third Supplemental Indenture, the Local Bond Sale Agreement, the Financing Agreement and the Bond, forms of which have been presented to this meeting and filed with the County document; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. Authorization of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to contract a debt and to issue and sell the Bond in the maximum principal amount of $57,000,000. The issuance and sale of the Bond is hereby authorized upon the terms set forth herein and upon such other terms as may be determined in the manner set forth herein. The proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bond shall be used, together with other available funds, to refund, redeem and defease any or all of the outstanding maturities of the Refunded Obligations, as determined by the County's Chief Financial Officer. 2. Award and Sale to the Virginia Resources Authority. The award and sale of the Bond to or at the direction of VRA is authorized. The Bond shall be delivered to or upon the order of VRA upon VRA's payment of the purchase price to be set forth in the Local Bond Sale Agreement. 3. Details of Bond. The Bond shall be issued as a single fully registered bond. The County Administrator is authorized to determine and approve all of the final details of the Bond, including, without limitation, its dated date, original aggregate principal amount, interest rates, payment dates and amounts, redemption provisions, and the purchase price of the Bond to be paid by VRA, provided that (i) the aggregate principal amount of the Bond shall not exceed $57,000,000, (ii) the true interest cost of the Bond shall not exceed 6.0% (exclusive of Supplemental Interest (as defined in the Financing Agreement)), (iii) the final maturity of the Bond shall not be later than December 31, 2031, and (iv) the purchase price of the Bond to be paid by VRA shall not be less than 95% of the original aggregate principal amount of the Bond. Fallowing the pricing of the corresponding VRA Bonds, the Chairman of the Board or the County Administrator, or either of them shall evidence his approval of the final terms and purchase price of the Bond by executing and delivering to VRA the Local Bond Sale Agreement, which shall be in substantially the form presented to this meeting, with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes not inconsistent with this Resolution as may be approved by the officer executing the Local Bond Sale Agreement. The actions of the Chairman of the Board or the County Administrator in determining the final terms and the purchase price of the Bond shall be conclusive, and no further action shall be necessary on the part of the County. 4. Financing Documents. The Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator, or either of them, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust, the Financing Agreement and the Local Bond Sale Agreement in substantially the forms presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions or omissions as may be approved by the County Administrator, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery of the Third Supplemental Indenture of Trust, Local Bond Sale Agreement and the Financing Agreement on the County's behalf, and the County Administrator is authorized to complete the Local Bond Sale Agreement with the final terms and details of the Band as determined pursuant to paragraph 3.. The County agrees to pay all amounts required by the Financing Agreement, including any amounts required by Section 6.1 of the Financing Agreement, including the "Supplemental Interest," as provided in such section. 5. Redemption of Bond. The Bond shall not be subject to refunding or redemption without the consent of VRA, as provided in the Bond and the Financing Agreement. 6. Pledge of Revenues. The Bonds shall be limited obligations of the County and principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds shall be payable solely from the revenues derived by the County from its water system, as set forth in the Bonds, the Master Indenture and the Third Supplemental Indenture pursuant to which the Bonds will be issued, and from other funds that have been or may be pledged for such purpose 2 0 under the terms and conditions of the Master Indenture and the Third Supplemental Indenture. Nothing in this Resolution, the Bonds, the Master Indenture or the Third Supplemental Indenture shall be deemed to pledge the full faith and credit of the County to the payment of the Bonds. 7. Details of and Sale of Bonds. The Bonds shall be issued upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution, the Master Indenture and the Third Supplemental Indenture. The Bond shall be in substantially the form of Exhibit A attached to the Third Supplemental Indenture, with such variations, insertions or deletions as may be approved by the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator. There may be endorsed on the Bond such legend or text as may be necessary or appropriate to conform to any applicable rules and regulations of any governmental authority or any usage or requirement of law with respect thereto. 8. Evidence of Approval. The Chairman's or Vice Chairman's and the County Administrator's approval or determination of all of the details and provisions of the Bond that they have been authorized and/or directed to approve under this Resolution shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery of the Bond on the County's behalf. 9. Execution and Delivery of the Bond. The Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator are authorized and directed to execute the Bond and the Clerk of the Board (the "Clerk") is authorized and directed to affix the seal of the County thereon and to attest such seal. Such officers are further authorized and directed to deliver the Bond to or at the direction of VRA upon payment of the purchase price set forth in the Local Bond Sale Agreement. 10. Disclosure Documents. The County authorizes and consents to the inclusion of information with respect to the County to be contained in VRA's Preliminary Official Statement and VRA's Official Statement in final form, both prepared in connection with the sale of bonds to be issued by VRA, a portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Bond. If appropriate, such disclosure documents shall be distributed in such manner and at such times as any of them shall determine. The County Administrator is authorized and directed to take whatever actions are necessary and/or appropriate to aid VRA in ensuring compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12. 11. Non-Arbitrage Certificate and Tax Covenants. The County Administrator and the County's Chief Financial Officer, or either of them, are authorized to execute a Nonarbitrage Certificate and Tax Compliance Agreement or any related document (the "Tax Documents") setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Bond and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Tax Code"), including the provisions of Section 148 of the Tax Code and applicable regulations relating to "arbitrage bonds." The Board covenants on behalf of the County that the proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bond will be invested and expended as set forth in the Tax Documents, to be delivered simultaneously with the issuance and a 3 delivery of the Bond and that the County shall comply with the other covenants and representations contained therein. 12. Refunding. The County Administrator and the County's Chief Financial Officer, or either of them, is authorized and directed to determine the maturities of the Refunded Obligations to be refunded, to provide for such Refunded Obligations to be called for redemption and to provide for their refunding. The County Administrator and the County's Chief Financial Officer, or either of them, is authorized to enter into an Escrow Agreement with an Escrow Agent to be selected by the County Administrator to provide for the refunding of the Refunded Obligations. 13. Further Actions. All officers and agents of the Board and the County are authorized and directed to take such further actions in conformity with the purpose and intent of this Resolution as may be necessary or appropriate in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bond, and the execution, delivery and performance of the Third Supplemental Indenture, the Local Bond Sale Agreement and the Financing Agreement, including the execution and delivery on behalf of the County of such instruments, documents or certificates as necessary or appropriate to carry out the transactions contemplated by this Resolution. All actions previously taken by such officers and agents in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bond are ratified and confirmed. The County Administrator is designated the County's Authorized Representative for purposes of the Financing Agreement. 14. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 4 ACTION NO. A-102803-2 ITEM NO. F-1.b AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve reimbursement of $11 million from the Water Fund to the General Fund for debt service payments made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In 1991, the County issued $15 million of general obligation bonds, and $59.7 million of water revenue bonds to finance the expansion and improvements of the public water supply system which included the acquisition, construction and equipping of a dam and water reservoir, water treatment facilities and distribution, storage and transmission lines. The annual debt service on the water revenue bonds is repaid through the water rates. A five-year series of annual water rate increases was implemented to pay the debt service on these water revenue bonds. The last of these rate increases went into effect on July 1, 1995, for a cumulative increase of 97%. In order to avoid further increases in the water rates, the annual debt service on the $15 million general obligation bonds is repaid through the general fund. To date, the general fund has paid $12,928,781 in debt service payments. Other than this debt payment, the water fund is self-sufficient -the water rates, charges and other revenues pay for the expenses of the water system. In order to comply with the rate covenants of the water revenue bonds, the water system had to generate surplus funds every year. In addition, the sale of water to Roanoke City _., during the drought periods has generated surpluses that were not planned in the budget. These surplus funds can be use for capital or other one-time expenditures. In addition, as the result of the planned refinancing, the Water Fund will have access to funds that were previously set-aside in escrow accounts for the security of the bondholders. These newly available funds are: Debt Service Reserve Fund -The Debt Service Reserve Fund currently has a balance of $4,781,208. After the refinancing, we will be required to maintain a balance of $1,775,000, for the non-callable 1991 Bonds. This will result in available funds of $3,006,208. 2. Rate Stabilization Fund -When the County issued our bonds in 1991, it was for a new system that did not have any history. As additional security for the bondholders, we were required to establish a Rate Stabilization Fund to protect the revenue stream of the water system. This fund currently has the required balance $3,701,965. After the refinancing, we will only be required to maintain a balance of $1,331,250, for the non-callable 1991 Bonds. This will result in available funds of $2,370,715. The County would like to use the available funds from the water surplus and the reduced escrow balances to reimburse the general fund for $11,000,000 of the debt service that has been paid on behalf of the water fund. This will still leave sufficient funds in the water fund for known capital improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: The reimbursement of $11,000,000 from the water fund to the general fund will give the general fund cone-time source of capital that can be used for the pending Public Safety Center project. The decrease in interest income in the water fund, as a result of the transfer of $11 million, will be more than offset by the refinancing savings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following: Reimburse the general fund $11,000,000 from the water fund for the payment of debt service on the $15 million general obligation bonds. 2. Appropriate the $11,000,000 to an account for the pending Public Safety Center /Equipment. 2 VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approva amended staff recommendation (reimburse the general fund with an amount not to exceed $11 million from the water fund for the payment of debt service on the $15 million general obligation bonds, and appropriate an amount not to exceed $11 million to the Unappropriated Capital Fund Balance) Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 3 -. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~- ~ lb~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve reimbursement of $11 million from the Water Fund to the General Fund for debt service payments made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~''""' ~~°~`~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In 1991, the County issued $15 million of general obligation bonds, and $59.7 million of water revenue bonds to finance the expansion and improvements of the public water supply system which included the acquisition, construction and equipping of a dam and water reservoir, water treatment facilities and distribution, storage and transmission lines. The annual debt service on the water revenue bonds is repaid through the water rates. A five-year series of annual water rate increases was implemented to pay the debt service on these water revenue bonds. The last of these rate increases went into effect on July 1, 1995, for a cumulative increase of 97%. In order to avoid further increases in the water rates, the annual debt service on the $15 million general obligation bonds is repaid through the general fund. To date, the general fund has paid $12,928,781 in debt service payments. Other than this debt payment, the water fund is self-sufficient -the water rates, charges and other revenues pay for the expenses of the water system. In order to comply with the rate covenants of the water revenue bonds, the water system had to generate surplus funds every year. In addition, the sale of water to Roanoke City F -i Cb) during the drought periods has generated surpluses that were not planned in the budget. These surplus funds can be use for capital or other one-time expenditures. In addition, as the result of the planned .refinancing, the Water Fund will have access to funds that were previously set-aside in escrow accounts for the security of the bondholders. These newly available funds are: Debt Service Reserve Fund -The Debt Service Reserve Fund currently has a balance of $4,781,208. After the refinancing, we will be required to maintain a balance of $1,775,000, for the non-callable 1991 Bonds. This will result in available funds of $3,006,208. 2. Rate Stabilization Fund -When the County issued our bonds in 1991, it was for a new system that did not have any history. As additional security for the bondholders, we were required to establish a Rate Stabilization Fund to protect the revenue stream of the water system. This fund currently has the required balance $3,701,965. After the refinancing, we will only be required to maintain a balance of $1,331,250, for the non-callable 1991 Bonds. This will result in available funds of $2,370,715. The County would like to use the available funds from the water surplus and the reduced escrow balances to reimburse the general fund for $11,000,000 of the debt service that has been paid on behalf of the water fund. This will still leave sufficient funds in the water fund for known capital improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: The reimbursement of $11,000,000 from the water fund to the general fund will give the general fund aone-time source of capital that can be used for the pending Public Safety Center project. The decrease in interest income in the water fund, as a result of the transfer of $11 million, will be more than offset by the refinancing savings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following: 1. Reimburse the general fund $11,000,000 from the water fund for the payment of debt service on the $15 million general obligation bonds. 2. Appropriate the $11,000,000 to an account for the pending Public Safety Center /Equipment. ACTION NO. A-102803-3 ITEM NO. F-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: October 28, 2003 Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $73,057 for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system in the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the request of the Board, staff has researched methods for implementing an electronic records management system in the Board of Supervisors and Clerk's Offices. Surrounding localities have been contacted regarding their methods of records management, and the results indicate that a number of localities have moved to an electronic format. To summarize, 10 of the 12 localities that were contacted currently utilize electronic records management systems. These include the following: Roanoke County School Board, Cities of Roanoke and Norfolk; Counties of Augusta, Chesterfield, Henrico, Henry, Prince George, Prince William, and Stafford. The two remaining localities, Montgomery County and Loudon County, are currently considering the possibility of moving to an electronic format. In addition, staff has researched citizens' usage of the Board of Supervisors' website which indicates that there were 22,086 visits to the website during the seven month period from January -July 2003. The website receives an average of 103 visits daily, with the majority of these visits being to access the Board Actions portion of the online records. This appears to demonstrate a growing usage by citizens to online information regarding Board actions. Staff is recommending the purchase of Agenda Manager Software by Laserfiche. This system will address two key issues for the Board of Supervisors and Clerk's Offices: (1) generation of the agenda packets in electronic format; and (2) implementation of a systematic approach to securing and maintaining the historical records. The advantages of this system include the following: • Reduction of paper costs which are conservatively estimated at $8,000 annually Enhanced research and document retrieval capabilities: the text searching feature of the software will eliminate the need for staff to manually review and index Board actions. Approximately 1,440 records are indexed annually at an estimated employee cost of $1,985. In addition, citizens and staff will have the ability to conduct text searches via the website. Staff receives approximately 520 requests for research annually which translates to $4,300 in employee costs to process these requests. • A paperless system will conform to the County's Environmental Assessment Team goal of reducing paper usage by 25% in order to achieve ISO 14001 certification. It is also consistent with the environmental management policy adopted by the Board on August 14, 2001. Security of records will be enhanced as a result of having all components of the agenda packet stored in electronic format. At present, it is not possible to obtain all components of the agenda in electronic format and the paper versions are the only official record available. In the event of a disaster, we would be unable to recover some of these records. Once the new software is implemented, staff will begin scanning prior year's records so that electronic copies are available. • Laserfiche is a enterprise records management system that can be implemented by other departments within Roanoke County. Currently, the Finance and Human Resources Departments are considering utilization of this software. The total cost to implement the electronic records management system is $79,884, which includes the purchase of software and equipment. Rollover funds in the amount of $6,943 are available to apply to this cost, leaving a balance of $73,057 to be funded from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance. The breakdown of costs is summarized below: Description Price Server for document imaging system $ 15,000 Complete LaserFiche package: 40,726 • Software • Scanning equipment • Maintenance/support Monitor for scanning station 900 2 Notebook computers for BOS and staff 23,258 $ 79,884 Included in the cost summary is $23,258 for the purchase of new notebook computers for the Board members and staff. There are currently three notebook computers being used by Board members which will be re-distributed to staff, thereby reducing the number of new purchases required. A separate server is necessary to run this software, and it is anticipated that the Human Resources and Finance Departments will also utilize this server upon future implementation of records management systems in their offices. The proposed schedule for implementation is as follows: • Equipment and software installation: January 2004 • Implementation of system in Clerk's Office: January -March 2004 • Training for Board members and staff: March 2004 • Full implementation (live at Board meetings): April 2004 FISCAL IMPACT: Funding in the amount of $73,057 will be needed for the purchase of equipment and software. Staff recommends that this amount be taken from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve appropriation of funds in the amount of $73,057 from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system. 2. Do not approve the requested appropriation of funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1. 3 VOTE: Supervisor Minnix motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $73,057 for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system in the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office SUBMITTED BY: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board ~ ~~~ APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~''`"'~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~~"'~Or.',,,` SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the request of the Board, staff has researched methods for implementing an electronic records management system in the Board of Supervisors and Clerk's Offices. Surrounding localities have been contacted regarding their methods of records management, and the results indicate that a number of localities have moved to an electronic format. To summarize, 10 of the 12 localities that were contacted currently utilize electronic records management systems. These include the following: Roanoke County School Board, Cities of Roanoke and Norfolk; Counties of Augusta, Chesterfield, Henrico, Henry, Prince George, Prince William, and Stafford. The two remaining localities, Montgomery County and Loudon County, are currently considering the possibility of moving to an electronic format. In addition, staff has researched citizens' usage of the Board of Supervisors' website which indicates that there were 22,086 visits to the website during the seven month period from January -July 2003. The website receives an average of 103 visits daily, with the majority of these visits being to access the Board Actions portion of the online records. This appears to demonstrate a growing usage by citizens to online information regarding Board actions. G a. Staff is recommending the purchase of Agenda Manager Software by Laserfiche. This system will address two key issues for the Board of Supervisors and Clerk's Offices: (1) generation of the agenda packets in electronic format; and (2) implementation of a systematic approach to securing and maintaining the historical records. The advantages of this system include the following: • Reduction of paper costs which are conservatively estimated at $8,000 annually Enhanced research and document retrieval capabilities: the text searching feature of the software will eliminate the need for staff to manually review and index Board actions. Approximately 1,440 records are indexed annually at an estimated employee cost of $1,985. In addition, citizens and staff will have the ability to conduct text searches via the website. Staff receives approximately 520 requests for research annually which translates to $4,300 in employee costs to process these requests. • A paperless system will conform to the County's Environmental Assessment Team goal of reducing paper usage by 25% in order to achieve ISO 14001 certification. It is also consistent with the environmental management policy adopted by the Board on August 14, 2001. Security of records will be enhanced as a result of having all components of the agenda packet stored in electronic format. At present, it is not possible to obtain all components of the agenda in electronic format and the paper versions are the only official record available. In the event of a disaster, we would be unable to recover some of these records. Once the new software is implemented, staff will begin scanning prior year's records so that electronic copies are available. Laserfiche is a enterprise records management system that can be implemented by other departments within Roanoke County. Currently, the Finance and Human Resources Departments are considering utilization of this software. The total cost to implement the electronic records management system is $79,884, which includes the purchase of software and equipment. Rollover funds in the amount of $6,943 are available to apply to this cost, leaving a balance of $73,057 to be funded from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance. The breakdown of costs is summarized below: Description Price Server for document imaging system $ 15,000 Complete LaserFiche package: 40,726 • Software • Scanning equipment • Maintenance/support Monitor for scanning station 900 Notebook computers for BOS and staff 23,258 $ 79,884 t ~-~ Included in the cost summary is $23,258 for the purchase of new notebook computers for the Board members and staff. There are currently three notebook computers being used by Board members which will be re-distributed to staff, thereby reducing the number of new purchases required. A separate server is necessary to run this software, and it is anticipated that the Human Resources and Finance Departments will also utilize this server upon future implementation of records management systems in their offices. The proposed schedule for implementation is as follows: • Equipment and software installation: January 2004 • Implementation of system in Clerk's Office: January -March 2004 • Training for Board members and staff: March 2004 • Full implementation (live at Board meetings): April 2004 FISCAL IMPACT: Funding in the amount of $73,057 will be needed for the purchase of equipment and software. Staff recommends that this amount be taken from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve appropriation of funds in the amount of $73,057 from the Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance for the purchase of equipment and software to implement electronic records management system. 2. Do not approve the requested appropriation of funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003. RESOLUTION 102803-4 REQUESTING VDOT TO CONTINUE FUNDING PROJECTS CURRENTLY IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAN AND ADOPT THOSE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AS "PROJECTS NOT ON PLAN" FOR INCLUSION INTO THE 2004-2010 INTERSTATE AND PRIMARY SIX YEAR PROGRAM. WHEREAS, the Six Year Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction; and WHEREAS, this program is updated annually to assist in the allocation of federal and state funds for interstate, primary, and secondary roads. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: and That it hereby expresses its opposition to the funding allocation decision of the Commonwealth Transportation Board to require that expenditures for Virginia's Smart Road project be taken or diverted from other approved road projects in the Same District. 2. That it requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board to reconsider its adopted method for distributing funds to road projects within the Salem District, and that it develop a more equitable system for funding these road projects. 3. That the following projects identified as "Projects on Improvement Plan" are recommended to continue to receive funding for planning and construction Interstate 73 -Roanoke County continues to be very supportive of this project. In a letter dated June 3, 2001, the Board of Supervisors encouraged VDOT to work closely with the impacted citizens to address their concerns and mitigate any negative impacts to them. This is in addition to the resolution 120500-2 passed December 5, 2000, reaffirming the Boards support for I-73. • Interstate 81 - Roanoke County continues to support VDOT's proposed plan to widen I-81 from its present four lanes. We look forward to continuing our partnership with VDOT to develop regional cooperation for storm water detention facilities, potential utility crossings and other design issues that could impact Roanoke County's future. • Route 11/460 (West Main Street) -Roanoke County continues to support the ongoing design for improvements in this important commercial and residential development area. Improvements will provide an increase in the level of service bringing it up to standards required for the expected growth. 4. That the following projects identified as "Projects Not on Plan" have been identified by the Board of Supervisors as extremely important to the growth of Roanoke County or for safety improvements and are requested to be included in the Virginia Transportation Plan for Fiscal Years 2004- 2010. They are listed in Priority Order: 1. Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) Need: Roanoke County is requesting that this project between Coleman Road (Route 735) and Cotton Hill Road (Route 688) be added back on the Six-Year Program. The residential development expected to occur within this area will place additional demands on the road system that is currently providing an inadequate service level. 2. Route 11 (Williamson Road) Need: Now that Route 11 has been widened from Plantation Road to Hollins College, there remains one section of three-lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City Limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the alignment of Florist Road with Route 11 creates additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.52 miles, is currently athree-lane with the center lane used for turning movements. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. 3. Route 115 (Plantation Road) Need: This two-lane section of Plantation Road is approximately 2.43 miles in length width with numerous secondary road connections. The road needs to be improved from Roanoke City limits north to Route 11. If full funding were not available, various spot improvements, such as turn lanes, alignment and grade 2 improvements would help with safety issues. Additional land is available along the road for future development, which will increase traffic and construction costs in the future. 4. Route 220 S (Franklin Road) Need: This section of 220 is approximately 2.0 miles long and is a four-lane divided highway. Recently a traffic study was conducted for a commercial development and the report predicted a level of service of D or F within the next couple of years. Additional lanes and improved vertical alignment is required from the Roanoke City limits south to Rte. 668 (Yellow Mountain Road). Spot improvements are needed now at the intersections of Route 419 and Route 220 S and Rte. 679 (Buck Mountain Road) and Route 220. 5. Route 116 (Jae Valley Road) Need: The Salem Residency has notified staff that the bridge over Back Creek is in need of repair and we wish to offer our support for improvements to the approaches and bridge replacement. This road is serving the growing commuter traffic from Franklin County and recreational traffic to Smith Mountain Lake. 6. Route 460E (Challenger Avenue) Need: This section of Route 460 beginning west of the East Corporate Limits of the City of Roanoke and proceeds east to the Bedford County Line, a distance of 7.59 miles. The continued growth within this corridor has increased traffic demands. Other primary roads in Roanoke County which deserve consideration for spot improvements: 7. Route 419 (Electric Road) Intersection improvements, Route 118 (Airport Road), Route 24, (Washington Ave.) improvements at the intersection of William Byrd High School, Route 311 (Catawba Valley Road) at Route 864 (Bradshaw Road) construct a left turn lane. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 3 A COPY TESTE: C~. 1dz.~-~~-- Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Fred Altizer, District Administrator, VDOT The Honorable Whittington Clement, Secretary of Transportation and Chairman, Commonwealth Transportation Board Ozlee Ware, Salem District, Commonwealth Transportation Board Mayor Ralph Smith, City of Roanoke Roanoke Valley Delegation to the General Assembly Senator John Warner Senator George Allen Congressman Robert Goodlatte Congressman Frederick Boucher 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. f ~ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA: Request to adopt a prioritized list of Primary and Interstate projects to be presented at the pre-allocation public hearing for the Virginia Transportation Six-Year Improvement Program, fiscal years 2004 thru 2010 SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey, Director Department of Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge %~~^' ~°~`Q~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS: n ~,,~,~~e~C SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Transportation and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation are holding public hearings throughout the state this fall on next year's six-year program. This year's public hearing for the Salem District is scheduled for November 12, 2003 at Christiansburg High School from 5 to 7 PM. In the past, public meetings have been held in early spring. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) voted on the tentative program in May. This was a very tight timetable to consider public input. The Secretary of Transportation felt by holding the public hearings in the fall, the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation will have more time to evaluate public input on the transportation priorities that should be included in the new six-year program. The Virginia Transportation Improvement Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction for distribution in the Six Year Program. This program is updated annually. 1 r- -3 As a part of the development of this program, the Transportation Board conducts public hearings in each of the nine construction districts in the state to receive input from members of the General Assembly, members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, City Council members and members of the general public. Roanoke County is within the Salem District along with eleven (11) other counties and ten (10) cities. All are lobbying for these construction funds. These federal and state funds are allocated according to formulae as mandated by state and federal statutes for interstate, primary and urban roads. The Commonwealth Transportation Board Six-Year Improvement Program allocated for the next six years is $6.6 billion for 1,622 projects. The six-year funding allocation for the Salem District Primary System shows a 17% funding increase over last year. The allocation of $99,278,000 was increased to $116,662,000 but the funding allocation to the Smart Road increased also from $36,356,000 to $64,783,000 thus eliminating any opportunity to allocate more funding to other primary projects in the Salem District. Even with this increased funding, Roanoke County is still opposed to the funding allocation decision of the Commonwealth Transportation Board to require that expenditures for Virginia's Smart Road project be taken or diverted from other approved road projects in the Salem District. Below are the projects that are currently in the Six- Year Program in Roanoke County. Six-Year Improvement Program: Interstate 81 - At exit 141, add turn lanes and signals on Route 419. This improvement addresses safety concerns. Interstate 73 -The CTB has selected a route and VDOT is currently working on the final environmental impact statement for Federal Highway Administration approval. Once Record of Decision is received from FHWA, final design, right of way acquisition and construction can begin. Interstate 81 -Two detailed proposals submitted by Fluor Virginia, Inc. and Star Solutions to improve I-81 in Virginia are currently being evaluated by an advisory panel created by the Secretary of Transportation. The goal of the advisory panel is to make recommendations to the Secretary and the Commissioner by the end of the year. Route 11/460 (West Main Street) -Development of the final construction plans is continuing. Public hearing will be held but no date has been scheduled. Projects Not Listed on either the Construction or Development Six-Year Program: Below are a list of projects that need to be added to the Commonwealth Transportation Board Interstate and Primary Six-Year Plan to address congestion and safety concerns in Roanoke County. 2 ~-3 Route 11 (Williamson Road) -The widening of Rte. 11 North of Rte. 115 leaves a section of three-lane road south of Rte. 115 to Roanoke City Corporate limits (existing five lane flush). There is significant congestion along this segment of road and the existing bridge structure is substandard. The district recently lowered the bridge capacity from a 25 to 20-ton weight limit over Carvins Creek. In addition, the acute alignment of Florist Road with Rte. 11 in the same vicinity creates additional congestion and safety concern. We believe that this work will compliment the proposed widening of Rte. 11 from Rte. 115 to Hollins College and have a major positive impact on the North County area. The existing section of road (1.92 miles) in question is a three-lane road with a flush median for turning movements. The alignment is fairly level except for a steep incline adjacent to Boxley Hills. The improvements would probably consist of a five lane flush highway with appropriate turning lanes. Route 115 (Plantation Road) - We encourage the continuation of improvements north to Rte. 11; however, if funding is not available for the entire project, Roanoke County is asking consideration be given to additional spot improvements (turn lanes, alignment and grade improvements) at various locations. The existing road (2.43 miles) is a two-lane facility with numerous side connections to residential neighborhoods. Additional land is available for future development. The road is winding in spots with some minor grade changes. The average annual daily traffic estimates for Rte. 115 is approximately 15,000 vpd from Roanoke City Corporate limits to I-81. The improvements would probably consist of a five lane flush highway with appropriate turning lanes. Route 116 (Jae Valley Road), Bridge - VDOT staff has informed us that the bridge over Back Creek is in need of replacement. Route 220 S (from Rte. 419 to Yellow Mountain Road) -This section of Rte. 220 is partially in Roanoke City and County. Development and traffic in this area has increased tremendously over the past couple of years. Roanoke County is requesting VDOT to begin preliminary engineering on ways to alleviate traffic congestion in this area and improve access along this corridor. Route 221 (Brambleton Ave.) -portion of between Route 735 (Coleman Road) to Route 688 (Cotton Hill Road) was removed from the Six-Year Plan due insufficient funding. Route 460E -Route 460E from the Roanoke City limits to alternate Route 220. This corridor continues to experience growth in residential/commercial and industrial development. Projects that deserve consideration for spot improvements: Route 419 (Electric Road) Intersection improvements, Route 118 (Airport Road), Route 24, (Washington Ave.) improvements at the 3 ~-3 intersection of William Byrd High School, Route 311 (Catawba Valley Road) at Route 864 (Bradshaw Road) construct a left turn lane. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the prioritized list of projects and resolution to be presented at the pre-allocation hearing on November 11, 2003. 4 F-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003. RESOLUTION REQUESTING VDOT TO CONTINUE FUNDING PROJECTS CURRENTLY IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAN AND ADOPT THOSE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AS "PROJECTS NOT ON PLAN" FOR INCLUSION INTO THE 2004-2010 INTERSTATE AND PRIMARY SIX YEAR PROGRAM. WHEREAS, the Six Year Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction; and WHEREAS, this program is updated annually to assist in the allocation of federal and state funds for interstate, primary, and secondary roads. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: and 1. That it hereby expresses its opposition to the funding allocation decision of the Commonwealth Transportation Board to require that expenditures for Virginia's Smart Road project be taken or diverted from other approved road projects in the Same District. 2. That it requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board to reconsider its adopted method for distributing funds to road projects within the Salem District, and that it develop a more equitable system for funding these road projects. 3. That the following projects identified as "Projects on Improvement Plan" are recommended to continue to receive funding for planning and construction • Interstate 73 -Roanoke County continues to be very supportive of this project. In a letter dated June 3, 2001, the Board of Supervisors encouraged VDOT to work closely with the impacted citizens to address their concerns and mitigate any negative impacts to them. This is in addition to the resolution 120500-2 passed December 5, 2000 reaffirming the Boards support for I-73. • Interstate 81 - Roanoke County continues to support VDOT's proposed plan to widen I-81 from its present four lanes. We look forward to continuing our partnership with VDOT to develop regional cooperation for storm water detention facilities, potential utility 1 ~-3 crossings and other design issues that could impact Roanoke County's future. • Route 11/460 (West Main Street) -Roanoke County continues to support the ongoing design for improvements in this important commercial and residential development area. Improvements will provide an increase in the level of service bringing it up to standards required for the expected growth. 4. That the following projects identified as "Projects Not on Plan" have been identified by the Board of Supervisors as extremely important to the growth of Roanoke County or for safety improvements and are requested to be included in the Virginia Transportation Plan for Fiscal Years 2004- 2010. They are listed in Priority Order: 1. Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) Need: Roanoke County is requesting that this project between Coleman Road (Route 735) and Cotton Hill Road (Route 688) be added back on the Six-Year Program. The residential development expected to occur within this area will place additional demands on the road system that is currently providing an inadequate service level. 2. Route 11 (Williamson Road) Need: Now that Route 11 has been widened from Plantation Road to Hollins College, there remains one section of three-lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City Limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the alignment of Florist Road with Route 11 creates additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.52 miles, is currently athree-lane with the center lane used for turning movements. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. 3. Route 115 (Plantation Road) Need: This two-lane section of Plantation Road is approximately 2.43 miles in length width with numerous secondary road connections. The road needs to be improved from Roanoke City limits north to Route 11. If full funding were not available, various spot improvements, such as turn lanes, alignment and grade improvements would help with safety issues. Additional land is available along the road for future development, which will increase traffic and construction costs in the future. 2 ''~ 4. Route 220 S (Franklin Road) Need: This section of 220 is approximately 2.0 miles long and is a four-lane divided highway. Recently a traffic study was conducted for a commercial development and the report predicted a level of service of D or F within the next couple of years. Additional lanes and improved vertical alignment is required from the Roanoke City limits south to Rte. 668 (Yellow Mountain Road). Spot improvements are needed now at the intersections of Route 419 and Route 220 S and Rte. 679 (Buck Mountain Road) and Route 220. 5. Route 116 (Jae Valley Road) Need: The Salem Residency has notified staff that the bridge over Back Creek is in need of repair and we wish to offer our support for improvements to the approaches and bridge replacement. This road is serving the growing commuter traffic from Franklin County and recreational traffic to Smith Mountain Lake. 6. Route 460E (Challenger Avenue) Need: This section of Route 460 beginning west of the East Corporate Limits of the City of Roanoke and proceeds east to the Bedford County Line, a distance of 7.59 miles. The continued growth within this corridor has increased traffic demands. Other primary roads in Roanoke County which deserve consideration for spot improvements: 7. Route 419 (Electric Road) Intersection improvements, Route 118 (Airport Road), Route 24, (Washington Ave.) improvements at the intersection of William Byrd High School, Route 311 (Catawba Valley Road) at Route 864 (Bradshaw Road) construct a left turn lane. z 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for public hearing and first reading for rezoning ordinances; consent agenda SUBMITTED BY: Janet Scheid Chief Planner APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge 4~ /f County Administrator 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 18. 2003. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1. The petition of Jeffrey Glick to Rezone .81 acres from R-1 Low Density Residential District to C-1 Office District in order to operate a general office, located in 2415 Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. 2. The petition of Buck Mountain Land, LLC to Rezone 1.88 acres from I-1 Industrial District to AR Agricultural/Residential District in order to construct single family dwellings, located on Eagle Crest Drive, Cave Spring Magisterial District. Maps are attached. More detailed information is available in the Clerk's Office. Gi-~ 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 18. 2003. 2. That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Item(s) 11=2, 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. 2 G-i County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 For Staff Use Only Date received: Re~,eived by: ~~ Application fee: PC,!B~Aate: Pll,ards issued: BOS date: ~ , ~~ r~ Case Number ~J. "~- ~ ~ ~ ~-,~ ~ _ ~ ALI_ APPLICANTS Ch pe of application filed (c:heck all that apply) ezoning ^ Special Use ^ Variance ^ Waiver ^ Administrative Appeal Applicants name/address w/zip Z ~ ~ L t=C%~~ ~ ~. i ~. ~~. Phone: ~~4' J ~r7 i °~~C~%~ .r- ..~~ ~ ~ C~ ,~i G ~ 1~'- v.~ .~ ~ I~~ , `'r,'~ . Work: Cell #: z~f~r~ FaxNo.: ~~~..f ~~/- J~..S~ Owner's nameladdress w/zip ~ ~'~ /~ U~c: f7~: c Phone #: ~YC~ ,~ 7 ~ ~- ~ ~ ~~ ~' ,a ..,~ k ~ U fs ~ ~.{C'~~v /~ C.7,r'~: f,~ _ ~,t-y~--t~~,.,;~.~... z ~G~i~Work: Fax No. #: Property Location Ma sterial District: ~ ` ..,~ ,~, `> ~ ~' ,/,,,~ ~~ /~' t Conununit3~ Planning area: i'~l . ~ ' %` Tax Map No.: ~ ~~ % / ~- ~ "' ~~,7 Existing Zoning: Size of paicel(s}: Acres: ~~ Existing Laud Use: ~;~ ,~~5 ~ ~ ~~,r ~~ I~B~L(1NIN(~' J'!'C~ClAL C/J'~~ Y~~KMl1 ANU WAU~a4~K A!'YLI C.ANl :~ (K1S> W ) Proposed Zoning: ~ ~ Proposed Land Use: ~ ~~~~ Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes C~ No ^ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. ~,~^ Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes G~-' No ^ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIl2ST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ^ No ^ --~---~------ ---._.T~ .__., .__---------- --- -- - ----- ------ -----.... VHK/H IVY A. WH/V/'.K HIV/)A/IIV//1V 1.\/K411L/H 4YYH .4/ NYYI 11 N1V/.\/V/V{'/NNI Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance iu order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. RJS/W V/AA R/S/W V/AA R/S/W V/AA t/~ Consultation 1/ 8 1 /2" x 11 "concept plan Application fee Application !/ Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable ~/ Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I ant 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 ~~~~. Owner's Signature _. ~- - i ~ JUSTIFICAT'lON FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT OR WAIVER REQUEST Applicant ---~~~7 '~-'~:- ~' C:~L ''~ The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safet~~, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request fitrthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrottuding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. ,IUSTIFICATIQN FOR VARIANCE REQUEST ', Jeff Glick Ins Agcy Inc ,~s~, .:F Auto-Life-Health-Home and Business 2 2 E ectric Rd Roanoke, Va 24018 Phone {540) 989-6969 September 22, 2003 RE: Rezoning of 2415 Electric Road, Roanoke, VA 24018 1) The proposed zoning is consistent with existing adjacent properties. The Our Lady of Nazareth Catholic Church property adjacent to the South and West is zoned C1. The vacant property adjacent to the North is zoned R3. 2) The Roanoke County Community Plan has designated the property in the "Transition" area. Transition areas generally serve as developed buffers between highways and nearby or adjacent lower intensity development. Transition areas are best suited for office, institutional and small-scale, coordinated retail uses. The proposed office use fits well into the Transition designation. 3) The proposed office will be used as an insurance office with three .employees. The office will generate minimal traffic. The office is visited by 5 to 10 clients over the course of a day. There will be no change to the water and sewer services. The rezoning will have no impact on other public services including schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. ~-i CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST' 'I A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use pernu# or valiance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS a. Applicant name and name of development b. Date, scale and north arrow c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties e. Physical feattues such as ground cover, natural watercoiuses, floodplain, eta. f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties g. All property 1rnes and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development _ j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces additional in, formation required forREZO1VING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. It project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify that all items required in the checklist above are complete. i/ ~-~ ~' Signature of, ljcau ' Date (N jest a~~ pe,~k:~v6 t y/~ ~~,~d ~% ~ ~ ~~ ~ ,, ~, / ` __ .' ~~ ~ ~~. -- / / 2415 ~~ ~o~ ~R ~S \~SJ9 C vcr.EUt- ~ L~'VE 1 ~: ` ~ t~ C9 ~ • t `~'o ...\ ' ~\ ~o~wD~C~ Z +~D ( 8 8'~ ~c..C.gS ~- - i Portic vacatec Wentworth & 13. s 1~ _ 1~, #T35 #Tlti 17. r #T4F Dr 78. tae no. 1§, WoodleY 4afl Ae. 2#Pf 75. - _ #T,70 #T5T 23 a3ra ~ 1~ ~• Zoning R3C ~'~~ zrl~ #'~ #T.~ #T;~ ,8 s ~ #TTl '~' 3§. rz. 3338 #73T 71. 77. #T.;B 70.1 zoos 21. 38. 2.80 Ac.(D) 2.tt Ao.C r; 3' 9 sT62 a. J' 53. as3a #'"~ 59 70. (~0 51. zap b. n~ #Ta~ Zoning R > ~ 5z. 2 Zoning C 1 a5~ ct ~-- 0 #77B 60. a3#a 16. 4T## ~ ..~ ~ .5 59. ~-'~ ?35D 18. 2 d a6tl# y 78. = 8 ~a 58. 19. .a a~ to.a~ Ao. ,;~1 - ~ 2ws ~ x r~ 20. ,e aa#~ 21. aam# f.et ~w. gyp, v ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants name: Jeffrey Glick DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Rezoning from R1 to C1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 76.11-3--77 i lS "~ County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O BOX 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 Fnr Staff Use Only Date received: Received by: ~~ Application fee: PC/H°ZA date: Plalcards i s1ued~ 1 ~ ` G BOS date: Case Number O~ - i ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning ^ Special Use ^ Variance applicants name/address w/zip C/ 0 Don Dye Phone: 7 7 6- 9 0 5 2 Buck Mountain Land, LLC Work: 776-90~ Cell#: 520-3250 P . 0. Box 2004 1 : 776-9054 FaxNo . Roanoke, Va. 24018 C)•,aner's name/address w/zip B u c k Mountain Land LLC Phone #: 7 7 6- 9 0 5 2 C/0 Don Dye P. 0. Box 20041 Fax No.#: 776-9054 Roanoke Va. 24018 Property Location Magisterial District: Cave S p r i n South of Buck Mountain Road Community Planning area: Cave Spring Tax Map No.: ~" ~ i ~`~ 3- y~ 9 8. 0 1 -~- ~, 9 8. 0 1--~- )/xisting Zoning: I - 2 Size of parcel(s): Acres: ]. 8 8 );xisting Land Use: U t i l i t Contractor / O f f i c e & Shop REZONING AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS (R/S) PraposedZoning:AR Agricultural/Residential District Proposed LandUsc: Low Density Single Famil Dwellin s 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 ~7 No ^ A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST IF NO , If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ^ No ^ ~ ARIANCE APPLICANTS (i~ 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 i"TE11IS ~ItE AIISSINC OR INCOMPLETE, RCS V R/S V R/S V Consultation 8 1/2" x 11"concept plan Application fee i Application Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable l Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners T f~ereby certify that I am either the owner of the prope or the owner=s agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. Owner's Signature Y JUSTIFICATION FOR REZ01~1ING, SPECIAL USF PERMIT' OR WAIVER" REQiTEST I Applicant Buck Mountain Land LLC - The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver 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 Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. THE I2 ZOINING OF THIS 1.88 ACRE TRACT DOES NOT FIT IN THIS NEW DEVELOPED SUBDIVISION. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. CURRENTLY MEETS ROANOKE COUNTY LAND USE 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. REZONINING THIS SMALL 1.88 ACRE TRACT FROM I2 TO AR WILL BENEFIT THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION THE LAND LIES WITHIN. All PUBLIC UTILITIES AND ROADS ARE ALREADY IN PLACE. THE TRACT CAN ONLY YEILD 5 LOTS AND SHOULD IN NO WAY HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC SAFETY. 3 G- ' ~. CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: AI,L APPLICANTS a/'/ a. Applicant name and name of development V/ b. Date, scale and north arrow ~/ c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions _/~' d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties ~// e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. cf f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties _~ g. All property lines and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights _~/ i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development ds , j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional information required for REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections _ o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p, Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify that all items r uired in the checklist above are complete. ~ ~' 2~ ~3 Signa a of applicant Date 6 .. "~~" aMa.uo:..orv~m~wvraveavi ex~ aava WOJ'7dN345Wf11N7lIVW ~IIYW'3 BLObZ VINIJHIA '3JIONVOa d~~~~~IA 3x~~d~~ 8 Sbb6-ZLL IObS)~Xb'j 69902 X08'O'd S213[~[I~(d'ld-S2[OA3A2If1S-S2i39I~t1`JI~I3 -•~ ~e evs-bss~ ,~,,~ llbb-bLL (O45) ~3NOHd MS ~3fIN3AV N01318WVN9 b994 '1 J ~C'.7 r ~ r~o~~1d N"~QS'~n'~ gOpZ 6L Ii38W31d3S ,~~o J U J:7.1. 1 ~ `~, `cq ~ ~ N ^I ~ ~ ~ M o~ ~~ ~15~ ~$ ~ i ~ Q eti ZCTS }, a ~ F= °0 2S~„~~ ~ 3 ~ FO+ ~ ~ N ~ ~ D Ch L~ 2~' ~ ~ o O O m ~' m ~ ~ C` Z ~ J ~~ZO gW~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ .rye ~ ^/ ~ ~+ ~~`~ '~z1~~ a ~ ~~~ ~ p Q'i ¢ ~ Z W ~ ¢1 ~ ~ ~~~ ~_ ~~ o ~~~ ~N~ ~ ~ W a • WQ C` C0 U ~'F-Z3 7~V~ ~, Q~~ t~~ ~ ~ ~ Q O a ~ O 2 ~Ua t7S<y ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ x ~ r. w ~~~ ~mmh ~~~~~ ~~~'~~ ~ a o Z Q^ O o~ z ~~`~ ~~~> ~~~~~~~~~ya~ ~ mho ,~ e~ ~~ 'z ~ QL t` ~e~~ U ~ U ANC ~~y~~ ~3' C~`66~~W6 ~ ~~5~~~~~ x~~~ 0~~~3~ ~ ~ti Zr ~~ZZZ~1W.,~~~ ~ 4 ~O< 64v10 N Oz O IMJ ~~~~Z~`q ~2~N~2O~ 44 <00 ~ ~?~42~mp~2"2 ~dt{~~{yy~~ 4NQ Oj~e~j70~ ~~0~ t ~~~~<~oz~a ~~~~ i ~_ ~ I o / ~ i( P c ~,b~~ ~/ ~~~~ i / ~ /~/ ~~ ~ ~°~~ ~/ ohs ~~ C? ~~ ~d / / 1/ fi / $ ~v D / ~ ~ / / ` ~ ~ Y I Y 4 ~ 1 / v o~ W~ \ Z ~ '~ W ` ~' v -rs. o ~~,/ p~ I N~ m ~ ~- 9 / ~ rt A~n / ~ J~'y ~ ~ ~ U ~~ W ,~ s~ ~~ ~+$ gt ~ ~ ~ .urrt ~$~ a ~ ~ ~o hxg ~o ZZ ~ / ~o w~ ~ Q' ~~ ~ ~ O\. IR ,1fTYt ,aL'611 / / ,OaZD¢ ,OOYSZ - ,fSYaG -AU£LLSZN r + ~~~i ~6~zd Zvi $~~o~ z ~(1) )dN1C SWt~ kt PVIV .7Il~N1_ a U„Z VIN. )t11:1 ~~IC~~IYON --- ~~. ,~~•`~ rt ._ t~ _~ tb~ t_~~,,o~,~~ft t;~d ~~l'~~~~'~1d52~~.)?~~~15- <j1~7~;1')pv~l ~- o~ ,~~ a.~~s _ itt._<att~< iV~~lll H\t flt.7'\~'vQi3ifli .4t~,.3<t~ :~(~ `'..1_~~ (,~0~,~~, !~.1~1~i~~Yl1 i rr -- cGOGhZk?98.4~~1d:?S .~ira. U 1 O ;o tz I wi, r.rr~..+.~.r+.n. a ~~~~~~~~~~ ~I ~ ~fi~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ 1 ~ ee ~ e~y~~+ ~t~m~~ d`~~~~~~~~ ~ v .~N ~ I{~ __ ~"~ n ~ ~ I`ryti.h'u~mm°~ ` ~ I V __J I . _~ 1 1 j 1 1 ,1 L 4 ~ ~ l ~~~~~3 I ~~~~ ~~ t~V 41 C1 ~, .i ~SMV~ ~~. / ., /~. w Jr ;~ ~: tCtiry ' ' .,,i n. pp~~~ tic -, u °'i' f a;`„~i __,~` I --._ ,~ ~M. ~ ,> LC 3'JYd '?L :K7D8 lYb SS ~'^ ~::' ~ -~ tm°~ -e ~---tom---~--- pp fi N e ~N~h~q Q2 ON ~~~~~~~3" ~~~~ m~~~a~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~`„o ~~~~~~U$h ~~~~ J~~~m~~~ ~~~}U ~ ~ ~~~s ~, s~ a°~~p7{~~ ~~~~ ~~2m5~h~ ~~~o~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ _~~~~,~~ ~~ ~S iZ.6.. P.Q ~m~ ~~Vt.l {M ~~ ~~ ~v e ~~ O I ~~ J ~~ ~~ tuo~s - Erna K~atrr ~` `' y k4y .fD NVIGt331Y ,.~~.~,_ ._ 2 a ~-f ~ ~~~ ~~= ~~~~~ ; ~~~c 2 ~ ~ ~~~2~ ~a~~~~;~ j~ ~~ ~ ~y~~~''t 1$~~~~ +~~~~12 ~~ I ~~ IZ I ,a } ~~ ~ a ~~ ~~°~~ IIN I~ - ~ 2 i m m m o f ..~ ~ ~i~ ~ *~o ~ ~ ~ 'J 'al ~ l - to , F~,: ~ _~ r S'^ ' i ~ , ~' `` ~ O 9 f - ~~~~ ~z~~~~ ~~~ ~~~_ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~e ~~~~~~ >, Z~~ "~ -~~i~~ I _~~~~,. iH X32 ie~ H ~~~ ~ ~ ~!~I1~~ ,~,~ I~ e 2 ~~ ,, 0 ' ~~ w, 'i ~~. .~?` ~>_.~ ~ ? }, a ^ ~, \ a.,uv~i,' ~. r~ .. ~ ti.~~~ ~~~~ t, ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ 02 ~~~k~ ~~ ~~` ~~°''~ i ti $ 4 J ~u g~~kQ~ ~y~my~i ~ v ~~~~ ~ ' '~ i' ~ ~ i ti ; I Q i~ i i I ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~_ ,,~ ~ ~ 11~~~, '9 ~~~ IC6iO~h 2 ~ r ~- ~ 2 U ~'~ ~ ~' ~ •' ~ ~~ 1 J U ~ ! ~ ~ 7 \ r .~ I w -,~ ~aa 'i. ~~ ~'' > 1 ~~ ~ L -:i r ' ~ o t= ~' 4 J C' /~ ~ ( i 7 i + ~~ C., ~ Y ~. ~ ?, ~ c -~ W ~ ~ ~ r..,~ r, ` : 4 U ~ ~- v "" i:C n c } <« ~.: IZ ~~ U x 1~ d l~: s ~~ ~~ ~v ~. ~ ~tl ,~ j £ ~ ~ q C' ~tii i~ cw ~ ~~~ ~Ti~~ '~~ ~~ ~ ~7~ $~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ,,~ ~2~ ~~ ~ ~~ 3^~~ ~~~ ~44~ t ~ ``~Y ~Z.~ti ^V~n ~t~~y ~~a ~~~~} ~~~ ~~p~ ~~4 m22~~h~ ~" r ~'1 ~ ~~~ ~y~ ~~ °~~~~~r ,~ ~~~~spo~a~~~~~~~~a N "i V u5 'd ~. _-.~. 'I ._ -'__ l ~' ,~ ..r ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants C/0 Don Day DEPARTMENT OF Zoning: Rezoning From I2 TO AR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 98.01-3-99,27,31 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ - I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: APPROVED BY: October 28, 2003 First reading of an ordinance authorizing the donation of surplus real estate, Tap Map No. 60.16-09-10, Vinton Magisterial District, to Habitat for Humanity Elmer C. Hodge ~'~/~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~,,~,~,~ ~r~es"~.,~~ a~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the October 14, 2003, meeting, the Board approved moving forward with a request from the Roanoke County School Board to donate a parcel of surplus real estate on East Cleveland Avenue, Tax Map No. 60.16-09-10, to Habitat for Humanity. This lot is adjacent to the former Roland E. Cook School in the Town of Vinton and was acquired on July 30, 1955, for $850. The School Board declared the property surplus at their meeting on October 9, 2003 since the property had not been used for any purpose in recent years. The topography of the lot, and its relationship with the R. E. Cook School was reviewed, and it was determined that the schools are not likely to have a use for the property in the future. A request was received from the Vinton Lions Club to donate the lot to Habitat for Humanity for one of their projects. In order to approve the donation of the property to Habitat for Humanity, a second reading and public hearing will need to be held on November 18, 2003. Mike Altizer, Mike Stovall and Don Davis have spoken with several neighboring property owners. In addition, the adjoining property owners have been notified by letter of the proposed donation and will be invited to attend a community meeting on November 3, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. at the Vinton War Memorial. Representatives from the Roanoke County School Board, Roanoke County staff, Town of Vinton, and Habitat for Humanity will plan to be present at the meeting. Attached to this Board report are the following exhibits: (a) Rendering of the proposed three-bedroom home (b) Floor plan for the proposed three-bedroom home (c) Plat showing the location and adjacent properties FISCAL IMPACT: The land value is presently assessed at $16,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N-1 Staff recommends that the Board approve the first reading of the ordinance, hold the scheduled community meeting, and approve the attached ordinance after the second reading of the ordinance on November 18, 2003. a i ~ ~I ;~, i ~,, ti' ~ ~, ~ ~r 1-4~ 1 Q z ~ Q > 1. ~7 ,~ d ~, tLl ~- o z Q ~ 2 [Y EXHIBIT A i .~ 11N~/Wnl'I ., 1b'll dH __ ~ ncrt. woo ag ~_. tF-i.. i ~ ~ ~; ;~ _ ~" ~•~ ;~ I _ - - _ _ - ~ - - - _ -; - _ ~~~~,I;+, , , ,, ,~ Iii; ~' ! , n ~, j, ~, , ; + ' ; i -I ' ail;!, ~ ' ~' , I ~+, ~ ,i , I+ ,6, I I ~ I ~ ' i ,~ij II I 1 i~i + - , II il' I ' ' t. . I .I ';~ + I c I ' l I I ~ i ~ ~I~~I' ~ '~ '~ ~ d ~ I jl ~i 'I ~ I ~ Q u I~+ ~;i i ''I h II ~ J ' l ' 'I I ~ v i I I ~ , i ++ I'j ~~j ~+~ ~ ~~ i , ~ ~ p l ~i~ I I I ' ! ,, ! ,~~ I ~i,+i + , , I !, a ~ , I ~ u; i;;,~ I~ : - } . I . ~. , v,I :d Z Q C J v I x n _ ~ ~ + ' ' I~ I i - r..~. 1 = .I . 1 ~ . • i f I J i ! ~ ~ ;' S , o ~ ,~ : ~k ~~ , i ~ i ~ ~ ~. s •~ _,. I~. ~:~ - ~- + ) r ~ ~ > ~ '~ ' . ~ 3,. 'r~ A{ o~ i} Z Q J a~ o~ .si . t -< s7 EXHIBIT B 1 t 227 • l <n ~ • • • ~0.8~0~ ~4~s ~ t o~ ~-~- ~~ ' ~2 -' / S9 ~ ``~ % 1S0 / ••••M' ~ 402 5A ^~n ; 11.6 ~ 302 ~ 1~ . / s° ~~~ >>o ~~ ~ ~ 1 S0 / ~ 3g 6 0~. 41 ~ 305 ~ / 2 / ``~ 315 1 ~ Sg ~ 308 , / 1 1.41 S2 ~~ 48 ~ / 12. , 14. '~s ,, 8 ~ s4.8 1 i ~ 3 N ° ,° 15 . 401 ~~ ~~ ~ l 7 SO 319 co`V 16. 42SSA ~i 4 7 . ,0 11 ~s / so S ~~ 17 .~ ,~ o ,~ ~ l 10 / 405 '"~ ~ 22s ,~ 46 . ~ / ~ 8 ss Sp s ~ N '~~ / Com. ~ ~ 45 . i ~ l l , ° 64.82 ~~ 300 _/ ~ l 7 ~ 1 / 8S co ~ Va. ~ , 4.4 . o , ~ 6 ; 5 ~•• S° 308 ~ ~ ~ 43. / / o / St ••••••• ~S l % 316 ~ ~ ^~ L41 . 0 7 •••••• ~S 320 j l % ~ ~••• 6s / / l 328 ~ ~O ~ ' ••••• / ~ ~ 00 s0 ••~••• 8S 400 o 81 boa d/ S0 •••••• % 9_ o Of 100 j •••••• , ,~ oar~o e Co. / i 317 ~ 10 .~' 11. ,~ ~ 339 55 100 50 3 4 325 12 • * 401 / 4` 14 / S0 5 6 ~ ^° ~ 0 13. i 40~ o / S0 - / 14. ~ ~ l 12 j / 100 / 7 ^~ j ro - _ / / / 1 , ~- 412 1 13 % 4 0 . ~ 11 , 10 % 9 SO SS / 2 ~choo/i Boardl of Rdahoke i Co. 8 45 lRo/an~ E. Cgok E/~m. Sc~oo/ ° 9 ° 12 ~5/ • • ~ ~ l 3 404 / 11 / ~5 ••••• i i oard/ ° ~ i ••••• l of ~ 38., o / 41. so ••••• R amok Co. 408 1 M i 37 Sp s0 ••••••• s° ~ / 307 ;~ ~ 50 .Sn ••••~, EXHIBIT C ~ ~ % 10 n ~-i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMNISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE DECLARING A PARCEL OF REAL ESTATE TO BE SURPLUS AND DONATING SAME TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, NAMELY PROPERTY LOCATED ON EAST CLEVELAND AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 60.16-9-10) 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, having been made available for other public uses before permitting disposition by sale or donation, is hereby declared to be surplus; and 2. That a public notice regarding the donation of this surplus real estate was advertised in the Roanoke Times & World News on November 4 and November 11, 2003; and 3. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing were held on November 18, 2003, concerning the disposition of the following parcels of real estate identified as Tax Map No. 60.16-9-10; and 4. That the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, all of which will be on form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance will be effective on and from the date of its adoption. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-5 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INCLUDING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS BY DONATION OR BY PURCHASE -CLUB LANE SEWER LINE EXTENSION WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public sewer system to the Club Lane and Valley Drive area of the County; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public sewer system over ten years at an interest rate of 8%; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the second reading was held October 28, 2003; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public sewer extension to the Club Lane and Valley Drive area of the County. The total 1 construction cost of this public sewer project is estimated to be $115,000, to be initially financed as follows: Citizen Participation (10 at $6,400.00) $64,000 each) Advance from the Public Works $51,000 Participation Fund TOTAL $115,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $51,000 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Club Lane Sanitary Sewer Petition for Public Works Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated 15 September 2003. The 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 $7,400 ($6,400 toward construction costs plus, plus $1,000 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 December 27, 2003, of their portion of the cost of extending the public water system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 2 (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 $1,000.00 will be applied to the off-site facility fee. (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require securing 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 December 27, 2003, deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $9,680 [$6,400 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 $2,000)]. New property owners (defined as persons who acquire ownership of real estate within the Project Service Area after the date of the adoption of this Ordinance) shall have ninety (90) days from the date of their acquisition of the real estate to participate in and benefit from the public water/sewer extension to this service area by the payment of $7,400, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the 3 public sewer extension. New property owners are not eligible to participate in the installment financing payment method described above in paragraph 3. 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of those anticipated in this ordinance, who elect to participate shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Sewer Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid; any further payment of construction costs shall be returned to the Sewer Fund. 5. That the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary water and sewer line easements, as shown on the attached map for the Club Lane Sanitary Sewer Project, either by donation or by purchase pursuant to paragraph 6 of this ordinance, is hereby authorized across the following properties, referenced by tax map number: 67.10-1-10 67.10-1-12 67.10-1-13 67.10-1-14 67.10-1-15 67.10-1-16 67.10-1-22 67.10-1-23 67.10-1-24 6. That the consideration for these easement acquisitions shall not exceed a value equal to 40% of the current tax assessment for the property to be acquired plus the cost of actual damages, if any, or the amount determined by an independent appraisal; and 7. That the consideration for these easements shall be paid from the Sewer Repair and Replacement Fund; and 4 8. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director of Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development William E. Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 5 ~~ ~ 0 a. ~ I ~ Lti9 1 G a ~~, • ~~2~~ ~. V ill '/~ QQpW ~ ~~t~?~ ~ ti I ~C~~ ~~ C~ h gh i ~k ,t ~ Q J ~~ I ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~~r~ titer oo J J ~~~ 108 r~Q'~ <o~~4r,~ 1 ~~?1"-, u ~~ ~ i ~'~ ' i yyon, ~ ~ ~ ..ham,,. - 'i `'' ~; r + , \ ~ ~ o = rQ\ `h ~, ~ : `~ ~'~ ~ c ~ i ~ tc.e ~ ~ c+.: i n, ~h ~O cn C~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ tU i ~ \ t 1j`Q 'i ~ ~ ~ `V ~ ~ vet li i 0 u ~ ~ ^ ti ~ 3 ~l ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ a~~o4c`c1Zc~ ~:~u'v~~.t.:. ~ ri'~ ,~i~ ^.~aZ o `a.C~~ryU ~ v~ ~,Cln~iy ro`14j~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ c >~ `~I / ~ .~.. ~~~x~ 401. ` _ ''~ f ~ Q ~ .. !E ~ ~. } ~Do 0 . ~ .'~ f` !i1 Lei' ~" {1 lai ~ ~~ - jr : '. FT Cl lr) i iy 'r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ,. T l ... _.. ., ~ O . S .~ ~. i -- ~ - ~ '~ -~N~-~1ii-SIR--~wl1-i~Ml9~'--aMi111 `- -- -- b0 O "HCiaC(11U~~~~ +•~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. Z- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of an ordinance authorizing creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project including acquisition of easements -Club Lane sewer line extension, Windsor Hills Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robertson Utility Director APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~.~"' /~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: r~~,,,,,*T1.,,,~r~~'`~d`'•~ BACKGROUND: Utility Department staff has performed a preliminary engineering study to evaluate the feasibility of constructing sewer line extensions along Club Lane and Valley Drive. This study was performed at the request of several property owners on Club Lane located in the Farmingdale Community of the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. Property owners in this area have experienced problems with failing septic systems and saturated soil conditions. A letter dated July 28, 2003 was sent to 19 property owners not currently served by public sewer on Club Lane and Valley Drive. From this mailing, Utility Department staff received 15 responses (10 in favor, 3 not interested and 2 only indicating their desire for a public meeting). A public meeting attended by 15 residents was held at Hidden Valley Middle School on September 15, 2003. Based on the response and the location of interested property owners, a proposed service area, which can serve 18 properties, has been established as shown on the attached location map noted as Attachment "A." First reading of this ordinance was approved at the Board meeting held on October 14, 2003. 1 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Providing public sewer to the interested property owners would require construction of 2,200 feet of sewer line in two separate extensions at an estimated cost of $115,000. This construction cost includes instaPlation of sewer laterals up to the property line and clean outs which would serve all properties in the service area. The attached ordinance establishes a special sewer service area for the project with each participating property owner paying their share of the cost through a special connection fee of $7,400. This connection fee includes the fair share of the construction cost ($6,400) required to extend the public water system to serve the 18 properties within the proposed service area plus $1,000, which represents 50 percent of the off-site sewer facility fee of $2,000. The ordinance also establishes a method of financing up to $6,400 for the initial participating property owners. This financing would be for a period of 10 years at an annual interest rate of 8%. The proposed connection fee of $7,400 would be applicable only if property owners financially commit to participate in the proposed project within 60 days of enactment of the ordinance. ALTERNATIVES: Alternative 1: Establish a special sewer service area along Club Lane and Valley Drive, which could potentially serve 18 properties, as indicated on the attached sketch. Approve construction of 8-inch diameter sewer line extensions as shown on attached sketch. The estimated cost to construct this alternative is $115,000. For those property owners, who choose to not connect during the initial sign-up period, the construction cost would have a one time 20 percent increase. Under this alternative, the total cost for initial participants would be $7,400 with later participants paying $9,680 (based on the present off-site facility fee of $2,000). Alternative 2: Do not approve request for extension of public sewer service to the proposed service area along Club Lane and Valley Drive. FISCAL IMPACT: If Alternative 1 is selected, the total construction cost would be $115,000. The ten (10) interested property owners would contribute $64,000. A transfer from the Public Works Participation Fund would fund the remaining $51,000. 2 ~ . ,- .. ~~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Alternative 1 be approved and that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached ordinance after the second reading. Said ordinance shall establish the service area and authorize construction and funding for the Local Public Works Improvement Project, Farmingdale Area -Club Lane Sewer Line Extension. Said ordinance shall also authorize the 10 year financing option for participants as well as acquisition of easements for the following properties: 67.10-1-10 67.10-1-12 67.10-1-13 67.10-1-14 67.10-1-15 67.10-1-16 67.10-1-22 67.10-1-23 67.10-1-24 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INCLUDING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS BY DONATION OR BY PURCHASE -CLUB LANE SEWER LINE EXTENSION WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public sewer system to the Club Lane and Valley Drive area of the County; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public sewer system over ten years at an interest rate of 8%; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the second reading was held October 28, 2003; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public sewer extension to the Club Lane and Valley Drive area of the County. The total 1 Z I construction cost of this public sewer project is estimated to be $115,000, to be initially financed as follows: Citizen Participation (10 at $6,400.00) $64,000 each) Advance from the Public Works $51,000 Participation Fund TOTAL $115,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $51,000 from the Public Works Participation Fund. Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Club Lane Sanitary Sewer Petition for Public Works Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated 15 September 2003. The 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 $7,400 ($6,400 toward construction costs plus, plus $1,000 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 December 27, 2003, of their portion of the cost of extending the public water system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 2 ~- 1 (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 $1,000.00 will be applied to the off-site facility fee. (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require securing 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 December 27, 2003, deadline (other than new property owners) shall pay a minimum of $9,680 [$6,400 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 $2,000)]. New property owners (defined as persons who acquire ownership of real estate within the Project Service Area after the date of the adoption of this Ordinance) shall have ninety (90) days from the date of their acquisition of the real estate to participate in and benefit from the public water/sewer extension to this service area by the payment of $7,400, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the 3 public sewer extension. New property owners are not eligible to participate in the installment financing payment method described above in paragraph 3. 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of those anticipated in this ordinance, who elect to participate shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Sewer Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid; any further payment of construction costs shall be returned to the Sewer Fund. 5. That the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary water and sewer line easements, as shown on the attached map for the Club Lane Sanitary Sewer Project, either by donation or by purchase pursuant to paragraph 6 of this ordinance, is hereby authorized across the following properties, referenced by tax map number: 67.10-1-10 67.10-1-12 67.10-1-13 67.10-1-14 67.10-1-15 67.10-1-16 67.10-1-22 67.10-1-23 67.10-1-24 6. That the consideration for these easement acquisitions shall not exceed a value equal to 40% of the current tax assessment for the property to be acquired plus the cost of actual damages, if any, or the amount determined by an independent appraisal; and 7. That the consideration for these easements shall be paid from the Sewer Repair and Replacement Fund; and 4 i-~ 8. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. 5 /~ 9 ~~ ` ~\ ~ ~ ~ / +- r ~~ ~J ~ ~` ~ ' ~ t I 'A --- ~ ~ D _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~' F~ , ~~ .~ ~~o~, o~r"~Ri n''~~~~ c~O ~ i~ C~ ~OWO ~c r ~ ~ ~~ .. .~~_~ V ~ ; . `y ~ w ~ O Q '~ 1 ~ ~. o ~ ~„ ~. g~ q v~.~ ~'~a; 1 z ~, 'a. Q ; n e '~ c, ~: c, ~~ i\`J ^^\ U '~ W v ,:i :~ \ ~;~, ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ z -~ 4 r ~4. (T Q (~ ~~' o V~2cd,'.. o 'ti. L c q J '~ 1 ~- 'T ~ 2 ~ ~ ;~ ~a. ~ ti~1 ~~ a° ~ -.. ~ ~. ~ R I ~ Z u ~ ~ ) ~ ~~ \ i ~ ~ -Y ~ ~7 `. f ~ ~ -,~ ~ J 4: ~ ~ ~ ~ Q Q ~~~j~ . - 1 ~y ~ ',.~ ~~ n ~`2~C`1~O ~~ a; h~ ~~ ~o~~Q~ a ~ ~~ > ~ '~ ~o~Q~ 'c~~~~s Q ~ ~ 1 -? ~ ~~~ ~. ~,. ; ~r ~yf7ry~/ n`I ~/ I / _ `r ~ Lp80 / n, a ~ \i f ~~~ ~ 1, c~~ i, - , f ~ ~, r m ' ~ `\~ ~? ~ ~: ~ ~, _; ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ,~. ~ o _ ~~:,~,! o~ o °r ~ ~. ~ ~ t - ` ~. ~ ~:rj. . ' i f ' ,t J 1 L ~ ~ O ~~ w .. ~,. O J ,* .< ~ ~ ~, J ~ Z ~F J ~~ ~ ~~:~. ~ a ~~z ~~~~'~ 8 ~~ U ~ 4z a?~ t 1 ~ : { G ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ /~ ~ ~` ~ ~`•i'~., ~~J ~ Y. ~ r ii rP { ~"~ ~ ~ yr ~ 1~ ` O ! ^, s - ~ 1,k/k2 Va~e „ ~_____._~ / '- ~ ~ ~ ~ I r~ ~ r 'r ' (' ~ ' ~ >. ~~ ~ >.. ~ t\ ~ tV ~~ >T~l ~-~~nv`o ' r~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~a'~ , ~ z~ ~ ~4 <~UzZ,O ~ v FI~^ ° m ` 4R`~~h ,~ ? ~ L R `~ `~ '>> ` i ~~~ i ~i O ~- ~ [1`, '~ ^t ~ -) hR'WT`~ ti ~ `' ~ ~ n ~ ^) n ~T1 ~~ ~+~ i ~~n:~~. "~~ ~ h i7' ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ , m ~ ; ~~ }' ~ M) ~n •~ ~ ~ .J ,~ ~ ~ -i -r ~ ~ ~ -~ ~, ` a „2 ~~ .iJ i cep ~ -~~i n }; i 4°t~ -- ~.~ r. I ~ ~~~ ~~_ ~~ ~~ ~, ~ ~ ~ Rl r ~ ~ t a ~ ~t ~ rl ~ ~ h~~ ? `J M ~ -~ ~ ,~ } ~ -b S~ ~. Q V W QOM O Q j~~ v~j Q W W `-+ 1\ W Q ~~ u~ ~; ~, ~~~~~ ~ oz Q ~~_~~~ ~ Ja' ~Ci ~. iii 'C~2-'i r O~Q t > ~ ~ ~ m~ t^ ~^ C) ~n ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ m ~., `i ~ ,! p~~2 5 ~ ~Z3 ~_ m any:, ~2'0~~~ ~.02~, R~i~^ Q2~Tn ~ ~ ~ O ~'' Q h Q ~ ~_~' ~ I Q ~ Z ~1~~~, rj ~~ v ~~ m ~ ~ i ~ «l / ,`' i^~^ r / ~~ -a. Y o .< ~ ~ P, c / 3 ~ ,~ k } ~~Y ~~~' ~~~~ ~R ~~~~~ HICCdGYllll~~~~ ~'+ 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards SUBMITTED BY: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~N County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. GRIEVANCE PANEL The three-year terms of King Harvey and Karen Ewell, alternate members, will expire on October 28, 2003. 2. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY The four-year term of Carole Brackman, Catawba Magisterial District, expired on September 26, 2003. 1 :f AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28 2003 RESOLUTION 102803-6 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K -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 28, 2003, designated as Item K -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 9, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -October 14, 2003 2. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School to provide an in-school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities 3. Request to accept and appropriate an all hazards planning grant in the amount of $20,990 from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management 4. Proclamation declaring the week of October 12 through 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Awareness Week 5. Acceptance of donation of a 20' water line easement from Bonsack Baptist Church, Hollins Magisterial District 6. Authorization to exercise an option to purchase communications equipment, building and tower from the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council 7. Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) in the amount of $29,117 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance 1 8. Request to approve amendments to the length of service awards program (LOSAP) adoption agreement for the volunteer fire and rescue personnel concerning eligibility requirements 9. Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. olton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Dr. Patricia Radcliffe, Director, Special Education and Pupil Personnel Services Dr. Linda Weber, Schools Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk of School Board Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance John Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Vickie Huffman, Senior Assistant County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Jimmy Chapman, Grant Administrator, Police Department Richard Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue Wanda Riley, Executive Secretary, Policy Manual 2 . '. K~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28 2003 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K -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 28, 2003, designated as Item K -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 8, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -October 14, 2003 2. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School to provide an in-school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities 3. Request to accept and appropriate an all hazards planning grant in the amount of $20,990 from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management 4. Proclamation declaring the week of October 12 through 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Awareness Week 5. Acceptance of donation of a 20' water line easement from Bonsack Baptist Church, Hollins Magisterial District 6. Authorization to exercise an option to purchase communications equipment, building and tower from the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council 7. Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) in the amount of $29,117 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance 1 8. Request to approve amendments to the length of service awards program (LOSAP) adoption agreement for the volunteer fire and rescue personnel concerning eligibility requirements 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. 2 ,,_ October 14, 2003 879 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 October 14, 2003 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of October, 2003. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman McNamara called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph McNamara, Vice-Chairman Richard C. Flora, Supervisors Michael W. Altizer, Joseph B. "Butch" Church, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Teresa Hamilton Hall, Public Information Officer IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by Reverend Everett Kier, Salem Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Joint proclamation declaring October 19 through 25, 2003 as "Building Character Week" in the Roanoke Valley e October 14, 2003 8$ Chairman McNamara presented the proclamation to Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police; Rick Crosier, Crime Prevention Officer; and McGruff, the Crime Prevention Dog. IN RE: BRIEFINGS 1. Introduction of Teresa Hamilton Hall, Public Information Officer. Elmer Hodge, Count Administrator) Mr. Hodge introduced Ms. Hall and advised that she has 12 years experience in television news. She spent the last nine years at WDBJ Television where she worked as a reporter and weekend anchor. In addition, she is an adjunct professor at Virginia Tech where she teaches public speaking and public relations courses. Ms. Hall grew up in the Blacksburg area and graduated from Virginia Tech in 1991. Shortly after her graduation, she began work at WWA Television in Bluefield, West Virginia. She joined WDBJ in the fall of 1994 as the station's Danville bureau chief. She also worked in the Blacksburg newsroom before transferring to the station's Roanoke newsroom as weekend anchor. Mr. Hodge indicated that Ms. Hall lives in the Glenvar area with her husband, Shannon, and their son, Derrick. He noted that she has a great combination of experience, talent, integrity, and love of community which will make her an excellent resource for Roanoke County citizens. Ms. Hall advised that although she has only been on the job for approximately one week, she has already been made to feel very welcome. The staff 6 October 14, 2003 883 recently featured in Fortune Magazine as one of two elite manufacturing plants in the United States. Three businesses were also recognized by the Virginia Manufacturer's Association for receiving the Governor's Environmental Excellence Award: ITT Night Vision, Southern States Co-Op, Inc., and Novozymes Biologicals. Today, Novozymes Biologicals was named the Biotechnology Company of the Year at the Virginia Biotechnology Association meeting in Northern Virginia. Ms. Cox stated that there are two major communication vehicles being utilized by the Economic Development Department: the Roanoke County Business Partners Television Program on RVTV Channel 3 and the Roanoke County Business Partners E-Newsletter. Roundtable meetings were held in all five magisterial districts and staff plans to continue with this program. Ms. Cox stated that staff has been working with the Department of Business Assistance in Richmond through Workforce Services and the businesses represented at the meeting today reflect these accomplishments because they have brought in over $100,000 of training funds for use in their internal and external expansions. Ms. Cox introduced Sherry Elder, Manager of Human Resources, and Randall Vandergriff, Manager of Inventory Control, from Atlas Cold Storage. She stated that Atlas Cold Storage is currently undergoing a $9 million dock expansion and information technology upgrade. They have approximately 240 employees and were approved to receive workforce training funds in the amount of $68,229 for retraining 171 employee positions. a October 14, 2003 88rj three weeks and it was the result of their strong work ethic. He stated that in the past, their technology was not integrated and generated lots of paper. The company made the decision to upgrade and integrate their manufacturing, financial, and sales systems. They included in this some of their key customers. As a result, they have experienced tremendous cost savings and a reduction in paperwork. In addition, their employees have expended a great deal of effort to improve product quality and increase productivity. All of these components keep their textile business competitive and allow them to research products to determine a niche market where they can be competitive. He thanked Ms. Cox for her assistance in securing workforce training funds for the company, and displayed some of the items produced at the plant. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to acce t and appropriate grant in the amount of 464 242 from the Federal Emergency Management A enc FEMA to the Fire and Rescue Department for the purchase of new firefighting breathing apparatus. Richard E. Burch, Chief of Fire and Rescue A-101403-1 Chief Burch reported that the Fire and Rescue Department was recently awarded a grant in the amount of $464,242 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) through the FIRE ACT grant program to replace the firefighting breathing apparatus (SCBA). He advised that there were over 19,000 requests for October 14, 2003 887 Supervisor McNamara moved to approve staff recommendation, acceptance and appropriation of the grant and authorization to donate the old breathing apparatus to other departments. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 2. Resolution requesting that the Governor of Virginia designate Roanoke Count as a rima disaster area due to this ey ar's excessive rainfall and moisture. Jonathan M. Vest, Extension A ent R-101403-2 Mr. Vest advised that while the rainfall experienced this year helped to recharge ponds and streams and the groundwater table, the amount and timeliness of the rainfall occurred during a critical time of the growing season. This resulted in a number of vegetable crops being delayed in their initial planting or rotting in the ground after planting. Corn yields were well below normal due to the excessive moisture, with some crops being planted as late as July. In addition, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs implemented provisions for hay quality in 2002. This year, hay quality has been affected due to the short growing season and late harvesting which resulted in a decline in quality. The full impact of this decline will not be fully realized until late spring 2004. Mr. Vest advised that all fruit and vegetable crops have been affected by the excessive moisture. Beginning in April 2003, rainfall totals were 0 October 14, 2003 AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 889 3. Resolution pursuant to Sections 15.2-1900 throu h 15.2-1907, and Title 25.1 _ eminent domain, of the Code of Virginia 1( 950' as amended to authorize eminent domain proceedings for the acquisition of, and immediate right of entry to, a permanent 20' sanita sewer easement, together with the ri ht of access and two 10' temporary construction easements, upon the rip vats park in Highfields Subdivision Tax Map No. 86.11-04-48), bein owned in undivided interests ~ all of the Highfields lot owners. (Gary Robertson, Utilit Director R-101403-3 Mr. Robertson reported that in March 2003, the Board approved the Roselawn sanitary sewer extension project. This project required the acquisition of easements across eight separate properties, of which staff has reached agreement on seven of the eight properties. The remaining property is a private park which is jointly owned by twenty-five (25) owners. The County has communicated with the 25 property owners and a community meeting was held in August. To date, staff has been unable to reach agreement with 12 of the 25 property owners. Staff is requesting that the Board approve the condemnation action so that the contractor can obtain right-of-entry to the property in order to meet the deadline for completion of the sewer line project by a October 14, 2003 gg ~ Supervisor Flora moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 101403-3 PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15.2-1908 THROUGH 15.2 -1907, AND TITLE 25.1 -EMINENT DOMAIN, OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA (1950, AS AMENDED), TO AUTHORIZE EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF, AND IMMEDIATE RIGHT OF ENTRY TO, A PERMANENT 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF ACCESS AND TWO 10' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS, UPON THE PRIVATE PARK IN HIGHFIELDS SUBDIVISION (TAX MAP #86.11-04-48), BEING OWNED IN UNDIVIDED INTERESTS BY ALL OF THE HIGHFIELDS LOT OWNERS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a permanent sanitary sewer easement, twenty feet (20') in width and consisting of 6,667 square feet, is necessary for public use in connection with a Roanoke County project, known as the Roselawn Sanitary Sewer Extension Project and/or the Roselawn Off-Site Sewer Project, to extend gravity sanitary sewer service to an area of the County containing approximately 700 acres of property located in the drainage area along Roselawn Road, said project having been previously approved and authorized by Ordinance #032503-9 adopted by this Board on March 25, 2003. 2. That the project is necessary for the general health, safety and welfare of the public, and specifically is necessary to enable the County of Roanoke to provide sanitary sewer service to new and existing residences in the service area through a gravity line, which will further eliminate the additional costs to the public of operating and maintaining existing and future lift stations. 3. That acquisition of a permanent 20'sanitary sewer easement, with the right of access and two 10' temporary construction easements, is required to construct, install, improve, operate, inspect, use, maintain, and repair or replace a sanitary sewer system and related improvements, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto from a public road, upon, over, under, and across a "Private Park" owned by the Owner or Owners of Lots in Highfields, and designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map #86.11-04-48. 4. That this easement is one of a series of easements required for the project and is the only remaining easement to be acquired. October 14, 2003 893 10.That the interests of the following owners of sixteen (16) lots, referenced by tax parcel number, remain to be acquired and the County has been unable to agree on the compensation to be paid or other terms of purchase or settlement with said owners: Tax Parcel # Owner s 86.11-4-10 Carolyn Davis and Thomas Howard Beasley, III 86.11-4-11 Paula M. Beman 86.11-4-14 James Parsons Maddox and Clara J. Maddox 86.11-4-15 Vann G. and Florence A. Flowers 86.11-4-16 Randal L. Downs 86.11-4-17 Henry B. Bell 86.11-4-20 Gary and Carol L. Sternes 86.11-4-21 Robert L. Haynes, Jr. 86.11-4-30 Philip Trompeter 86.11-4-32 David R. and Bonnie Wall Lievsay 86.11-4-34 & 35 Daniel J. and Diane D. Fair 86.11-4-36 Eugene H. Connelly 86.11-4-39 John D. Sledd and Poarch Giles Sledd 86.11-4-40 & 41 David W. Wimberly, Sr. 11. That the acquisition of the undivided interests of the above-described lot owners, by condemnation or otherwise, is hereby authorized and approved for public use, namely the 20' sanitary sewer easement, together with the right of access and the two 10' temporary construction easements, on the "Private Park" in Highfields. 12.That it is immediately necessary for the County to enter upon and take possession of the easement and commence construction of said sanitary sewer extension and related improvements to complete the work during the current construction season, to avoid additional costs to the public associated with delaying the contractor, and to ensure timely availability of sanitary sewer service to the citizens of Roanoke County. 13.That a certified copy of this resolution, to be sent by certified mail to each of the property owners specified in paragraph 10 on or before October 20, 2003, shall constitute notice to said property owner of the offer to purchase as set forth herein and the County's intent to enter upon and take possession of the subject easements to commence construction, as provided for in Sections 15.2-1902, 15.2-1904 and 15.2- 1905, and Chapter 3 of Title 25.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 14.That the Roselawn Sanitary Sewer Extension account is hereby designated as the fund from which the purchase price or the judgment of the court in condemnation proceedings shall be paid to the respective property owners. October 14, 2003 895 concern and as the chief federal law enforcement officer for this area, he stated that the concerns are appropriate and well founded. He advised that he was present to provide information regarding law enforcement efforts against narcotics trafficking in the Roanoke Valley. He stated that fighting drug trafficking is a top priority, a violent crime task force has been formed, and Roanoke County police officers play an active role in federal prosecutions. He reported that 469 defendants were prosecuted in 2002 for drugs and guns, the largest number in the history of the office. For Roanoke, 3'/2 times as many defendants have been prosecuted this year as were prosecuted two years ago. Law enforcement has taken an aggressive approach against prosecuting these types of crimes. He advised that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration reported for 2002 that nearly 1,600 Virginians reported substance abuse for either heroin or opiates, which is approximately 9% of all substance abuse admissions for the Commonwealth of Virginia. Alcohol is the leading substance abuse admission at 33%. He commended those who seek treatment for substance abuse, and stated that the animosity should be focused on the drug dealers and not the addicts. Mr. Brownlee stated that community leaders across America are dealing with the establishment of methadone clinics. The following guidelines for establishing locations for proposed clinics were provided: (1) open, well-lit parking lots; (2) near a main highway; (3) away from residential areas and schools; (4) near a police station to make it easier for law enforcement to monitor. Mr. Brownlee stated that if there is a 0 October 14, 2003 897 commonly go together. Mr. Wolthuis responded that firearms are inevitably associated with drug trafficking. Chairman McNamara noted the Board's concern on this issue and advised that the Board members were limiting their comments due to the possibility of future litigation. Chairman McNamara thanked Mr. Brownlee, Mr. Melick, and Mr. Wolthuis for the briefing. IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First readin of an ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement ro'ect including acquisition of easements =Club Lane Sewer Line Extension, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director Mr. Robertson advised that staff received a petition from the residents of Club Lane requesting a sewer line extension. An engineering study was performed and in July, letters were sent to 19 property owners to determine the level of interest in the project. Of this number, 15 responses were received: 10 favorable responses, 3 not interested, and 2 indicated only a desire for a public meeting. A public meeting was held on September 15 and the service area has been modified to serve only 18 of the properties, of which 10 would be participating. The cost is $115,000 which will be funded by a $7,400 fee paid by each of the participating property owners. Staff is requesting that this amount be financed for a period of 10 years at an interest rate of 6 October 14, 2003 899 Cox Communications Roanoke. Jose h B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorne Mr. Obenshain acknowledged Mike Pedelty, Cox Communications, who was present at the meeting, and thanked Supervisor Altizer for his assistance in this matter. He advised that following receipt of a request from Cox, representatives of Roanoke County, Roanoke City, and the Town of Vinton have conducted several negotiating sessions with officials of Cox which have resulted in the terms of a franchise agreement that is acceptable to all parties involved. He also noted that this item involves two separate actions: adoption of a new franchise ordinance and approval of an ordinance authorizing the execution of the new franchise agreement. Supervisor Altizer stated that this was a great opportunity for regional cooperation to bring three localities together. He expressed appreciation to Mr. Pedelty for his part in the negotiations. Supervisor Altizer moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for October 28, 2003. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 3. First readin of an ordinance to vacate portions of a 15' sanita sewer easement, a 15' water line easement, and a 5' public utilit easement upon Lots 15 and 16, Plat of Section No. 2 Quail Ridge, e October 14, 2003 901 noted that the local utility companies have been contacted and they had no objections to the proposed vacation. Staff also has no objections to the vacation. There was no discussion on this item. Supervisor Flora moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for October 28, 2003. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 5. First readin of an ordinance amending ordinance 121900-3 enlarging a local public works improvement rp oject' Webster Road water rp oject, and authorizing financing. Paul Mahoney, Count Attorne 0-101403-4 Mr. Mahoney advised that this ordinance is designed primarily to alleviate hardship to a citizen. He stated that in December 2000, the Board approved the Webster Road water project. Following adoption of this ordinance and completion of the water project, a citizen experienced problems and would like the County to expand the water project to include his property. The purpose is to provide an opportunity to the citizen, as a result of the economic hardship, to be able to finance the cost of the water extension over the next 70 months. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the expansion of the district to include this property and allow the citizen to amortize the e October 14, 2003 903 (a) Property owners pay a down payment of $4,000.00, and finance the remaining $1,800.00 for 70 months at an interest rate of 8% per annum. (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require to secure this installment debt. (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. 4. That the payment by citizens in the enlarged project service area who elect to participate shall be made to the Public Works Participation Fund. Any off-site facility fee collected on this project shall be returned to the Water Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Flora to approve the first reading, dispense with the second reading pursuant to Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, and adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 6. First reading of an ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code ~ the amendment of Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response". Paul Mahoney, County Attorne Mr. Mahoney reported that in March 2002, the Board adopted an ordinance that authorized the County to recover expenses incurred during emergency responses to accidents involving driving under the influence (DUI). The 2003 session of the General Assembly expanded this legislation to include the following additional categories: (1) reckless driving when such reckless driving is the cause of the accident 6 October 14, 2003 905 Assistant County Attorney go to court for each case, as opposed to the current system in which one Assistant County Attorney goes to court with an affidavit. Supervisor Church stated that the intent of this ordinance was to hold individuals accountable and recommended that a better solution be devised. Supervisor Flora inquired if the expansion of the ordinance to include the three additional situations is still DUI related. Mr. Mahoney advised that it is not. Supervisor Flora expressed concern that every individual who has an accident and receives a reckless driving ticket would be fined under this ordinance. He stated that this would include almost every individual involved in an accident. He noted that this really involves expanding the ordinance in order to recover more money for emergency services purposes. Supervisor McNamara expressed concern that a program that collects $2,036 is not cost effective for the government to administer. He stated that expanding this program to include additional offenses is not the direction the County should be moving. Supervisor Church strongly disagreed and stated that probably 75% - 80% of reckless driving charges are reduced to improper driving and for the ordinance to apply, the charge must result in a conviction. He noted that if a defendant has any counsel representation, approximately 75% of those charged with reckless driving are reduced to improper driving. He stated that the County must either turn their head against something that is wrong because it is not cost effective or else do something 0 October 14, 2003 907 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 14, 2003, designated as Item I -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 14, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -September 23 and September 30, 2003 2. Confirmation of appointment to the Virginia Western Community College Board 3. Request from Police Department to accept and appropriate grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services in the amount of $5,025 for use by the Roanoke Valley Triad for purchase of 19 Project Lifesaver bracelets 4. Request from Roanoke County Schools to accept and appropriate E-Rate reimbursement funds in the amount of $2,018.88 for purchase of instructional equipment 5. Request from Roanoke County Schools to accept and appropriate grant in the amount of $1,500 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts for arts curriculum development 6. Request from Roanoke County Schools to accept and appropriate grant in the amount of $1,966 for purchase of assistive technology equipment and materials for students with disabilities 7. Designation of voting delegate to the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) conference to be held November 9-11, 2003 8. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County upon the retirement of Cecil Showalter, General Services Department, after sixteen years of service 9. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County upon the retirement of the following individuals in the Sheriff's Department: (a) Michael J. Simpson after twenty-seven years of service (b) Arthur L. Lee after twenty-six years of service 10. Request from Police Department to accept and appropriate grant in the amount of $2,100 from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for police officers to work DUI checkpoints 11. Request from Fire and Rescue Department to accept and appropriate grant. in the amount of $7,900 from the Virginia Fire Services for construction of a trench rescue simulator 12. Request to accept South Concourse Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) secondary system, Hollins Magisterial District 13. Request to approve holiday schedule for 2004-2006 14. Request from the Roanoke County School Board to proceed with the donation of surplus real estate to Habitat for Humanity October 14, 2003 gpg WHEREAS, Michael J. Simpson was employed by Roanoke County on August 2, 1976, as a Deputy Sheriff with the Sheriff's Office, and also served as Rehabilitation Counselor, Deputy Sheriff -Chief Corrections Rehabilitation Counselor, Deputy Sheriff - Sergeant -Classification and Treatment, and Deputy Sheriff -Sergeant -Civil Division; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Simpson retired from Roanoke County on October 1, 2003, after twenty-seven years and two months of service; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Simpson exhibited professionalism and integrity during his many years of service and was instrumental in the progress of the Roanoke County Sheriff's Office. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to MICHAEL J. SIMPSON for more than twenty-seven years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 101403-5.i EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY UPON THE RETIREMENT OF ARTHUR L. LEE, SHERIFF'S OFFICE, AFTER TWENTY-SIX YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Arthur L. Lee was employed by Roanoke County on May 1, 1977, as a Deputy Sheriff with the Sheriff's Office where he served in several capacities during his years of service, including shift supervisor, with the rank of Sergeant; and WHEREAS, Deputy Lee completed the law enforcement course at Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy; and WHEREAS, Deputy Lee retired from Roanoke County on October 1, 2003, after twenty-six years and five months of service; and WHEREAS, Deputy Lee exhibited professionalism and integrity during his many years of service and was instrumental in the forward progress of the Roanoke County Sheriff's Office. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to ARTHUR L. LEE for more than twenty-six years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. October 14, 2003 911 specifically, that the surrounding citizens will be notified and that a community meeting will be held prior to any decision being finalized. Supervisor Altizer requested that Mr. Hodge communicate with the School Board regarding this matter, and advised that he would like to be present at the community meeting. Supervisor Altizer moved to approve Item I-14. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS Chairman McNamara noted that Supervisor Minnix requested that a work session be scheduled on October 28, 2003, to continue discussion of Item F-6, ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code by the amendment of Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response". IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Chairman McNamara again recognized Ms. Paula Beman, 5455 Lakedale Road, who had submitted an appearance request form. Ms. Beman was not in attendance when called upon to speak. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor McNamara moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: 0 October 14, 2003 913 Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Offices. (Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board) The work session was held from 6:00 p.m. until 6:05 p.m. It was the consensus of the Board to proceed with implementation of the electronic records management system. Staff was instructed to bring the matter to the Board for funding approval on October 28, 2003. 2. Work session to discuss Virginia's Explore Park. (Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; Debbie Pitts, Assistant Director of Recreation) The work session was held from 6:05 p.m. until 7:17 p.m. and was presented by Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; Debbie Pitts, Assistant Director of Recreation; Tom Brock, President of The River Foundation; and Marc Taubman, Chairman of the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA). Mr. Brock reported that investments in Explore Park total $46,244,838 and he highlighted recent accomplishments at the park. Mr. Taubman outlined the role of the VRFA and recommended revising the mission statement to reflect the park's new focus on a recreational component to the park's operations. Mr. Haislip and Ms. Pitts outlined the Explore NOW! initiative which will create more recreational opportunities for visitors and will extend the park's hours of operation. Plans for future development include the Hancock-Cartledge Education Center Amphitheatre and a Frontier Fort. 6 October 14, 2003 915 concerning the proposed Regional Water and Wastewater Authority. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) The work session was held from 7:26 p.m. until 7:57 p.m. Mr. Mahoney advised that decisions needed to be reached on four key issues in the proposed articles of incorporation: (1) composition of the Board of Directors; (2) membership of the Board; (3) name of the authority; (4) any special provisions requiring a greater than majority vote. Number and Composition of Water Authority Board: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix and Flora indicated support for 7 members on the Water Authority Board. Supervisors Altizer and Church recommended 9 members. Supervisors Altizer, Church, and Flora indicated that no elected representatives should serve on the Water Authority Board. Supervisor Minnix stated that at least initially, each locality should have one elected representative on the Board. Appointment of Tie-Breaker (7th Member): It was the consensus of the Board that the tie-breaker will be recommended by the Water Authority Board, but the appointment will be subject to approval/ratification by the member localities. Name of the authority: Suggestions included "Regional Service Authority" and "Roanoke Regional Utility Authority". Mr. Hodge advised the Board that there will probably be discussion at the joint meeting on October 17 regarding Roanoke County's withdrawal of $12 million from the County's Utility Fund. 6 ACTION NO. A-102803-6.a ITEM NO. K-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School to provide an in-school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities SUBMITTED BY: Dr. Patricia Radcliffe Director of Special Education and Pupil Personnel Services APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This is a request for approval to receive funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School. The study will provide an in- school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities who have been identified as having Emotional Disturbance, which will improve academic performance and ultimately success in passing SOL tests. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School. VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Dr. Patricia Radcliffe, Director, Special Education and Pupil Personnel Services Dr. Linda Weber, Schools Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk of School Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. K- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: October 28, 2003 Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School to provide an in-school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities Dr. Patricia Radcliffe Director of Special Education and Pupil Personnel Services Elmer C. Hodge G~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This is a request for approval to receive funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School. The study will provide an in- school focused social skills and behavioral intervention program for students with disabilities who have been identified as having Emotional Disturbance, which will improve academic performance and ultimately success in passing SOL tests. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of funds in the amount of $45,000 from the State Department for a pilot study at William Byrd High School. ,. ~ ~ ACTION NO. A-102803-6.b ITEM NO. K-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept and appropriate an all hazards planning grant in the amount of $20,990 from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management SUBMITTED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. Asst. County Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County has been advised that we have been approved for an all hazards planning grant from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management in the amount of $20,990. The purpose of this grant is to assist in preparing a regional plan to consider the Local Capability Assessment of Readiness (LCAR) instrument developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This preparation can include the self-assessment, regional planning, training and exercises, and a strategy for enhancing the overall preparedness of the locality. Monies from this grant must be obligated by December 12, 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: The total amount of the grant is $20,990 and does not require any local match. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of grant in the amount of $20,990 forthe development of the Local Capability Assessment of Readiness (LCAR) instrument and any related planning, training, and documentation. ,~ . ~, VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~~-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept and appropriate an all hazards planning grant in the amount of $20,990 from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management SUBMITTED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. Asst. County Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County has been advised that we have been approved for an all hazards planning grant from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Emergency Management in the amount of $20,990. The purpose of this grant is to assist in preparing a regional plan to consider the Local Capability Assessment of Readiness (LCAR) instrument developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This preparation can include the self-assessment, regional planning, training and exercises, and a strategy for enhancing the overall preparedness of the locality. Monies from this grant must be obligated by December 12, 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: The total amount of the grant is $20,990 and does not require any local match. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of grant in the amount of $20,990 for the development of the Local Capability Assessment of Readiness (LCAR) instrument and any related planning, training, and documentation. 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring the week of October 12 through 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Awareness Week APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The request that the County proclaim the week of October 12 through 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Awareness Week was received on October 13 from Ms. Lin Young, Chairperson, Community Based Immunization Project (CBIP). When Ms. Young was notified that the proclamation could not be included on the October 14 agenda, she requested that the proclamation be presented at the next meeting and mailed to her. CBIP is a public/private partnership based in Roanoke and is a member of the state organization Project Immunize Virginia. It is comprised of health professionals from Carillon, Roanoke City/Allegheny Health Departments, physicians from the private sector, pharmaceutical representatives, service agencies and volunteers. They want to protect the community from vaccine preventable diseases and premature deaths and encourage greater acceptance and use of immunizations as a safe and effective means of preventing life-threatening disease and disability. CBIP's current program is Vaccinate and Vote, a campaign striving to increase adult immunization rates in the Roanoke Area. They are encouraging people 55 years old and older to receive an influenza vaccination on November 4 after they vote. Volunteers will distribute educational information about flu vaccines and available clinics in the Roanoke areas at several polling sites in Roanoke City, Roanoke County, and the City of Salem on Election Day November 4, 2003. The Vaccinate and Vote Flu Vaccine Clinic will be held at Preston Park Primary School, 3142 Preston Ave NW, Roanoke, on November 4, 2003, between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. ~ -~r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 DECLARING OCTOBER 12 THROUGH OCTOBER 18 2003, AS NATIONAL ADULT IMMUNIZATION AWARENESS WEEK IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases in America today occurs among adolescents and adults of all ages, and all cultures, races, and ethnic and societal groups; and, WHEREAS, each year tens of thousands of adolescents and adults die from vaccine-preventable diseases or their.complications in the United States; and, WHEREAS, safe and effective vaccines are readily available to protect against disease, disability, and death from communicable diseases, including diphtheria, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, measles, mumps, pneumococoal diseases, rubella, tetanus, varicella and shingles; and, WHEREAS, October 12 through 18, 2003, is National Adult Immunization Week, a time devoted to increasing public knowledge, acceptance, and use of vaccines to protect adolescents and adults against serious, life-threatening diseases; and, WHEREAS, the annual observance is intended to increase awareness and understanding of vaccine-preventable diseases and their prevention at local, state, and national levels. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim October 12 through October 18, 2003, as National Adult Immunization Week, and we urge young people and adults to make sure that they and their loved ones are up to date on their immunizations because being up to date protects them, their families and friends and our community from preventable disease. ACTION NO. A-102803-6.c ITEM NO. K-5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of donation of a 20' water line easement from Bonsack Baptist Church (Tax Map Nos. 40.01-01-07 & 40.01-01-08) to the Board of Supervisors, Hollins Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Vickie L. Huffman Sr. Assistant County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the acceptance of the following easement for water purposes conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. The water line extension has been installed in connection with the Bonsack Baptist Church expansion located at the intersection of Cloverdale Road and Kingsmen Road in the Hollins Magisterial District and will serve the entire area. a) Donation of a water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, from Bonsack Baptist Church (Deed Book 1404, page 1403 -Tax Map No. 40.04-01-07; and Deed Book 798, page 264 -Tax Map #40.01-01-08) as shown on a plat prepared by Roderick F. Pierson, LLS, dated October 6, 2003, 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. FISCAL IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the donation of this easement. VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Vickie L. Huffman, Sr. Assistant County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 • • ~ ZISIH%'3 -- 3 s ~ i ~ 7 s i 1 ;+ ~~~ : ~~ 1 ~~; ~ ~ r ~~' t ~In ;~ ~ U ~~ v ~ r F oa g BPir~ ~~ 1 =8 4 ~a ' r ~ ~~ z~ ~ r _ ,-~ W % ? 1 00 ~ ,~qw { a~ ~ a~ i S W ~ O ~~~ ~ y zrr~.l i ~Ep r o~~ u i ~5io r ~'' <g + ~> "~~" ~ M W ~ w ~ I ~ i ~ /0y O W U i ~ i ~ (~ ~ ~'~\ ~\ N 4y ~ C ~ ~ w u ^~ W ~ ~ F ~/ ' QJ ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ ~ V Q CO Q aa ! e'~cc~yc ~n ~ u > ~ ? ~ s ' ~. U~ ~ z - ~ ~' 2~ • ~- I~ S ~ C ~ ammC V ' N W ~ ~ ! i > cn T ~ ~ = O ~ vm ~' O I ~-~' > U y~ j® o + ~ ~ Ww t,_t a to o y ~ ~ t-- w 7 ~, °o ccz , r n ~.W Q~tn - Q o ~~~ j ~~~o~~ ~~a i~ t. Z~ ~( ~=x~V~ W i Nw2 I U ~[ ~ Q ~"~ ~ Y ~ 2W4 ~ Z J 0 Z Q I-- ~~ Q u ~ fr O U=p ~, er 4 ~ uW ~ a ~~ ~ ~O~ o ta86 3> \ F- ~~~ ~v If ~ ~ Aaad b \* ~ o ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ \~ O ~a4 9p J ~ i09 ~ ~ m / ~ ~D @C Q- d~d'e?~ a~ \ m p '~/ ~~ ~b a`o A w , ap~a k yu,. ~ ~ ~ c SQL x V + ~ am y } pKO~ ~ ~`5 EXHIBIT A 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~~ S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of donation of a 20' water line easement from Bonsack Baptist Church (Tax Map Nos. 40.01-01-07 & 40.01-01-08) to the Board of Supervisors, Hollins Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Vickie L. Huffman Sr. Assistant County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: I~~~ ~t'' ""~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the acceptance of the following easement for water purposes conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. The water line extension has been installed in connection with the Bonsack Baptist Church expansion located at the intersection of Cloverdale Road and Kingsmen Road in the Hollins Magisterial District and will serve the entire area. a) Donation of a water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, from Bonsack Baptist Church (Deed Book 1404, page 1403 -Tax Map No. 40.04-01-07; and Deed Book 798, page 264 -Tax Map #40.01-01-08) as shown on a plat prepared by Roderick F. Pierson, LLS, dated October 6, 2003, 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. FISCAL IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the donation of this easement. ~ ZIgI~3 --__ 3 .____.,.__ i ~ ~ i (I I g ~~ ~ I ~~ I $~ ;~ 0 Fie ~$^ ~~ ~ ° ~xm ~~ ~~6x ~ro = N z m ; ( t ~ 1 7 Q ~ H 2 ~ 1 ~ ~ > z ~ _ ~ ! . O V K'`y t G~ I ~ W I ~ C ~~,~iJ ~ z~ ~ s~e I c "~~3 I ~~ ~~~o ~ M Y W` i ' 1 Q 1 Q Q yl ~ O / ~ °<uv W a ! ~ d. 1.1. t~ Q Y=<« W = ~ ~ ~c> { OUP Qe za x„-~,yoo puu = i r Id Z r~ 1.. I.~i J • W j I ~ ~~~ W ~ 1 n ~ I ~"I~ ~ 0 i P~`~ Vie` `` ( ` W~ V ~T~ ?U R>$d ~e I i (mod ( -'-.~ m-~ I ' QOi-r-FQ ~Q ~ ~ c ~ I W LY. Sn C7 ~<o zW °- I w°-f= ~ ZWZZFW- 8~ ~~~ Ti ' I Z.WQQOV)-gip ~~ l ~E=.,~c7~C? V ~z~ ~ f. W Y'd' Q ~ W W >~~ jjr~~I a~NX_I ~I o~ j ZWQ it ~~Z~ Z aLCS y~j {Iff U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 11 ~1- ~ r~~," "'a a m G ~ ^__~^ ~ V ~ , r~H s ~ ~ Sb~ 4 r W ~t~, ~6g f;`e a ~3 \ ~s `o~~oA 40~ :k1 ~ ~ m d.' ~ eo a e1 o c ~ A ~e FQ`e .` ~ y.Jc v a y4~ ~ ~ o~ s ~° t a };~ O ~ ~*~ ~k0~ ~ ~-~ EXHIBIT A +. r~ ACTION NO. A-102803-6.d ITEM NO. K-6 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to exercise an option to purchase communications equipment, building and tower from the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council SUBMITTED BY: Vickie L. Huffman Senior Assistant County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On July 8, 2003, the Board of Supervisors approved execution of an option to purchase agreement with the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council. The agreement grants Roanoke County the option to purchase the communications building and tower, together with all of the appurtenant fixtures, located at the E911 site on Poor Mountain. The option expires on October 31, 2003. The EMS Council and the County have shared resources at this site for years, and the relationship has been mutually beneficial. However, the EMS Council no longer uses the building or the tower, and has agreed to sell the improvements to the County for $42,000, subject to retaining the right to place an antenna on the tower and equipment in the building in the future at no cost, so Fong as it is used solely for provision of emergency medical services. The tower, building and related equipment, as well as the site, continue to be critical to the operation of the County E911 communications system. Rental income is currently generated by third party use of the tower and there is potential for future revenue. Although the condemnation proceedings for acquisition of the land have not been concluded, staff recommends that the Board authorize exercising the option to avoid a loss of the opportunity to do so. FISCAL IMPACT: The purchase price for the building, tower and related improvements is $42,000, and funding is available in the E911 account. Revenues from rental of the tower will return to this fund, and staff expects that the purchase price will be recovered through rental income within five years. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, to exercise the option and to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of the Board of Supervisors as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of the communications equipment, building and towerfrom the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Vickie L. Huffman, Sr. Assistant County Attorney Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~~-~o AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to exercise an option to purchase communications equipment, building and tower from the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Vickie L. Huffman Senior Assistant County Attorney Elmer C. Hodge C~ f/~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On July 8, 2003, the Board of Supervisors approved execution of an option to purchase agreement with the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council. The agreement grants Roanoke County the option to purchase the communications building and tower, together with all of the appurtenant fixtures, located at the E911 site on Poor Mountain. The option expires on October 31, 2003. The EMS Council and the County have shared resources at this site for years, and the relationship has been mutually beneficial. However, the EMS Council no longer uses the building or the tower, and has agreed to sell the improvements to the County for $42,000, subject to retaining the right to place an antenna on the tower and equipment in the building in the future at no cost, so long as it is used solely for provision of emergency medical services. The tower, building and related equipment, as well as the site, continue to be critical to the operation of the County E911 communications system. Rental income is currently generated by third party use of the tower and there is potential for future revenue. Although the condemnation proceedings for acquisition of the land have not been concluded, staff recommends that the Board authorize exercising the option to avoid a loss of the opportunity to do so. ~ ~ ,. s t~''~+ FISCAL IMPACT: The purchase price for the building, tower and related improvements is $42,000, and funding is available in the E911 account. Revenues from rental of the tower will return to this fund, and staff expects that the purchase price will be recovered through rental income within five years. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, to exercise the option and to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of the Board of Supervisors as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of the communications equipment, building and towerfrom the Western Virginia Emergency Medical Services Council, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. ACTION NO. A-102803-6.e ITEM NO. K-7 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) in the amount of $29,117 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: James R. Lavinder Chief of Police Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Bureau of Justice Assistance administers the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG). The purpose of the LLEBG program is to provide units of local government with funds to underwrite projects to reduce crime and improve public safety. FISCAL IMPACT: The final award amount is $29,117 in federal funds and a match from Roanoke County is required in the amount of $3,235. The local match will be provided from existing Police Department funds, Account number 471100-6013. The grant period is from October 15, 2003, through October 14, 2005. ALTERNATIVES: There are no alternative funds available at this time. If accepted these funds should be appropriated to a separate account for the Police Department established by the Finance Department. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends acceptance of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant in the amount $29,117. VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Jimmy Chapman, Grant Administrator, Police Department Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Police Department to accept and appropriate Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) in the amount of $29,117 from the Bureau of Justice Assistance SUBMITTED BY: James R. Lavinder Chief of Police APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Bureau of Justice Assistance administers the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG). The purpose of the LLEBG program is to provide units of local government with funds to underwrite projects to reduce crime and improve public safety. FISCAL IMPACT: The final award amount is $29,117 in federal funds and a match from Roanoke County is required in the amount of $3,235. The local match will be provided from existing Police Department funds, Account number 471100-6013. The grant period is from October 15, 2003, through October 14, 2005. ALTERNATIVES: There are no alternative funds available at this time. If accepted these funds should be appropriated to a separate account for the Police Department established by the Finance Department. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends acceptance of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant in the amount $29,117. ACTION NO. A-102803-6.f ITEM NO. K-8 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve Amendments to the Length of Service Awards Program Adoption Agreement for Volunteer Fire and Rescue Personnel concerning eligibility requirements and Death Benefit. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Leon Martin LOSAP Chairman Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In 1989, the Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for the Volunteer Fire/Rescue and Auxiliary Police personnel was approved by the Board of Supervisors. This program provides retirement benefits to volunteers meeting the criteria based on yearly requirements of service. A LOSAP Board of Trustees, consisting of six volunteers, county personnel and advisory members oversees the administration of this program. Amendment V- The LOSAP Board has completed research involving the alteration of the current Life Insurance Policy held through Volunteer Firemen's Insurance Services, INC (VFIS). The LOSAP board has approved the adoption of a $6,000 death benefit to take the place of the current $5,000 life insurance olic The extra $1,000 for the death benefit would compensate for the average tax differential. The death benefit would be provided through the County of Roanoke with an existing $75,000 account that has already been put in place and an additional $5,000 that would be added from the $200,000 budgeted annual amount for LOSAP benefits. In the event that a death benefit is paid out, the death benefit fund would be replenished through the same $200,000 budgeted annual amount. The eligibility requirements will remain the same. The approved beneficiary hierarchy will be similar to the US Department of Justice Public Safety Officer's Benefit (Federal PSOB) hierarchy of beneficiaries. See attached. In addition, The LOSAP Board of Trustees wishes to include a Volunteer Chaplain position in the Eligibility Requirements of the LOSAP Plan. This will allow the Volunteer Chaplain accrue points and earn the same benefit as our Volunteer Firefighters and Rescue personnel. Finally, The LOSAP Board wishes to delete the phrase "Police Auxiliary" from the LOSAP Adoption Agreement as that program no longer exists within the Police Department. FISCAL IMPACT: No additional funding should be required for these amendments. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the amendments to the LOSAP adoption agreement. 2. Do not approve the proposed amendments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1, approval of the amendments to the LOSAP Adoption Agreement. VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Leon Martin, LOSAP Chairman Ray Lavinder, Chief of Police Richard Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue Wanda Riley, Executive Secretary, Policy Manual 2 KR • AMENDMENT V TO ADOPTION AGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT II TO THE MASTER PLAN FOR VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. LENGTH OF SERVICE AWARDS PROGRAM COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 1. Section 14 of the Adoption Agreement, entitled "Death Benefit" is hereby deleted and the following new Section 14 is substituted in lieu thereof: (14) Death Benefit: b In the event of a Participant's death prior to Retirement, the County of Roanoke (not VFIS) will provide a $6,000 death benefit to the survivors. Once Roanoke County approves a claim for death benefits, unless the volunteer has otherwise specifically designated in his/her will a specific bequest of the Roanoke County Volunteer Death Benefit, the benefit will be paid to eligible survivors in a lump sum, as follows: If the volunteer is survived by a spouse but no eligible children (as defined below), the spouse will receive 100% of the program benefit. 2. If the Volunteer is survived by a spouse and eligible children, the spouse will receive 50% of the program benefit and the children will receive equal shares of the remaining 50%. 3. If the Volunteer is survived by eligible children but no spouse, the children will receive equal shares of • 100% of the program benefit. 4. If the Volunteer is survived by neither a spouse nor eligible children the program benefit shall be paid to "the designated beneficiary by such officer under such officer's most recently executed life insurance policy, provided that such individual survived such volunteer." 5. If the Volunteer is survived by neither a spouse nor eligible children and dies not have a life insurance policy, then the benefit will be made payable to the surviving parents in equal shares. 6. If none of the above is available then the benefit is void. "Eligible children" are defined as any natural, illegitimate, adopted, or posthumous child or stepchild of the Volunteer who, at the time of the officer's death, was age 18 or under, or between age 19 and 22 (inclusive) and afull-time student at an eligible educational institution, or age 23 or older and incapable of self support due to mental or physical disabilities. 2. Article VI, Section 6.5 of the Master Plan, entitled "Designation of Beneficiary" is hereby deleted and the following new Section 6.5 is substituted in lieu thereof: Artic/`l~^e~\ VI, Section 6.5 Designation of Beneficiary: iT~T o 1,~ .7:.,~ ..,L,;lo ,,.. ~: rt .7 r ~ _ a • a / Fes'' ~~ ".y • o ~ //}},,~~ a CST a b b D D ha,l~ .... ..r ..l:..o\ See Section 14 of the Adoption Agreement for Designation of Beneficiary. (7) Eligibility Requirements Amendment IV- Effective July 1, 2002, Section 7 titled "Eligibility Requirements", will be deleted and the following will be substituted in lieu of: A LOSAP eligible member is defined as: • A volunteer member who is 18 -54 years of age or older and has been approved by the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department application process as a Firefighter/Re sc uer; • & been accepted by a Roanoke County Volunteer Fire/Rescue Organization as a Firefighter/Rescuerv • • & meet Firefighter/Rescuer SOP's, certifications, etc as indicated by Roanoke County Fire & Rescue Department and Fire/Rescue Organization; • Firefighters/Rescuers must be certified at minimum level within 18 months of acceptance into organization. This means a Firefighter must have Firefighter I within 18 months of acceptance into organization; and Rescuers must have EMT-B within 18 months of acceptance into an organization. Any member age 16, although not eligible for this Plan until he/she attains age 18, will receive credit for his prior years of service at attainment of age 18. Proposed Amendment V - Effective October 14, 2003 - Section 7 titled "Eligibility Requirements", the following shall be added to existing section 7, which remains intact: The Department Chaplain shall be a LOSAP eligible member subject to the following: • The Chaplain is the designated department Chaplain as set forth in County Policy # A-O1- 004. • The Chaplain shall record monthly points based on a point system constructed by the LOSAP Board specific to the Chaplain position • Points submitted shall be verified by the Chief of Fire/Rescue, or their designee in lieu of • a volunteer Chief Signature. ,. 2 ~~ • I (6) Year of Fire Rescue or " ~~'~^~~~ n^'~^^ c^~-"^^ Proposed Amendment V- Effective October 14, 2003- the phrase auxiliary police shall be removed from throughout the Adoption Agreement as that particular portion of the program was terminated in 2000. A year of fire for rescue er--pekoe-a~.~y service shall be credited for each Plan Year in which a Member is awarded the minimum number of points as defined in the Accredited Service Standards Certification Program. The point schedule shall be attached to and made a part of this Adoption Agreement. • • 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve Amendments to the Length of Service Awards Program Adoption Agreement for Volunteer Fire and Rescue Personnel concerning eligibility requirements and Death Benefit. SUBMITTED BY: Leon Martin LOSAP Chairman APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In 1989, the Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for the Volunteer Fire/Rescue and Auxiliary Police personnel was approved by the Board of Supervisors. This program provides retirement benefits to volunteers meeting the criteria based on yearly requirements of service. A LOSAP Board of Trustees, consisting of six volunteers, county personnel and advisory members oversees the administration of this program. Amendment V- The LOSAP Board has completed research involving the alteration of the current Life Insurance Policy held through Volunteer Firemen's Insurance Services, INC (VFIS). The LOSAP board has approved the adoption of a $6,000 death benefit to take the place of the current $5,000 life insurance op Iicy. The extra $1,000 for the death benefit would compensate for the average tax differential. The death benefit would be provided through the County of Roanoke with an existing $75,000 account that has already been put in place and an additional $5,000 that would be added from the $200,000 budgeted annual amount for LOSAP benefits. In the event that a death benefit is paid out, the death benefit fund would be replenished through the same $200,000 budgeted annual amount. The eligibility requirements will remain the same. The approved beneficiary hierarchy will be similar to the US Department of Justice Public Safety Officer's Benefit (Federal PSOB) hierarchy of beneficiaries. See attached. ~ ~~° In addition, The LOSAP Board of Trustees wishes to include a Volunteer Chaplain position in the Eligibility Requirements of the LOSAP Plan. This will allow the Volunteer Chaplain to accrue points and earn the same benefit as our Volunteer Firefighters and Rescue personnel. Finally, The LOSAP Board wishes to delete the phrase "Police Auxiliary" from the LOSAP Adoption Agreement as that program no longer exists within the Police Department. FISCAL IMPACT: No additional funding should be required for these amendments. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the amendments to the LOSAP adoption agreement. 2. Do not approve the proposed amendments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1, approval of the amendments to the LOSAP Adoption Agreement. rS_ \' AMENDMENT V TO ADOPTION AGREEMENT AND AMENDMENT II TO THE MASTER PLAN FOR VOLUNTEER FIREMEN'S INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. LENGTH OF SERVICE AWARDS PROGRAM COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 1. Section 14 of the Adoption Agreement, entitled "Death Benefit" is hereby deleted and the following new Section 14 is substituted in lieu thereof: (14) Death Benefit: In the event of a Participant's death prior to Retirement, the County of Roanoke (not VFIS) will provide a $6,000 death benefit to the survivors. Once Roanoke County approves a claim for death benefits, unless the volunteer has otherwise specifically designated in his/her will a specific bequest of the Roanoke County Volunteer Death Benefit, the benefit will be paid to eligible survivors in a lump sum, as follows: 1. If the volunteer is survived by a spouse but no eligible children (as defined below), the spouse will receive 100% of the program benefit. 2. If the Volunteer is survived by a spouse and eligible children, the spouse will receive 50% of the program benefit and the children will receive equal shares of the remaining 50%. 3. If the Volunteer is survived by eligible children but no spouse, the children will receive equal shares of 100% of the program benefit. 4. If the Volunteer is survived by neither a spouse nor eligible children the program benefit shall be paid to "the designated beneficiary by such officer under such officer's most recently executed life insurance policy, provided that such individual survived such volunteer." 5. If the Volunteer is survived by neither a spouse nor eligible children and dies not have a life insurance policy, then the benefit will be made payable to the surviving parents in equal shares. 6. If none of the above is available then the benefit is void. "Eligible children" are defined as any natural, illegitimate, adopted, or posthumous child or stepchild of the Volunteer who, at the time of the officer's death, was age 18 or under, or between age 19 and 22 (inclusive) and afull-time student at an eligible educational institution, or age 23 or older and incapable of self support due to mental or physical disabilities. Article VI, Section 6.5 of the Master Plan, entitled "Designation of Beneficiary" is hereby deleted and the following new Section 6.5 is substituted in lieu thereof: Article VI, Section 6.5 Designation of Beneficiary: b ho .1: ~.~ ..,l.a,. ,,.. t: r1,,,7 r., ~__._ ~' b C~ T a a > b b ..1.71.7.-~.... ..r ..1~.,.~\ See Section 14 of the Adoption Agreement for Designation of Beneficiary. (7) Eligibility Requirements Amendment IV- Effective July 1, 2002, Section 7 titled "Eligibility Requirements", will be deleted and the following will be substituted in lieu of: A LOSAP eligible member is defined as: • A volunteer member who is 18 -54 years of age or older and has been approved by the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department application process as a Firefighter/Re scuer; • & been accepted by a Roanoke County Volunteer Fire/Rescue Organization as a Firefighter/Rescuer; • & meet Firefighter/Rescuer SOP's, certifications, etc as indicated by Roanoke County Fire & Rescue Department and Fire/Rescue Organization; • Firefighters/Rescuers must be certified at minimum level within 18 months of acceptance into organization. This means a Firefighter must have Firefighter I within 18 months of acceptance into organization; and Rescuers must have EMT-B within 18 months of acceptance into an organization. Any member age 16, although not eligible for this Plan until he/she attains age 18, will receive credit for his prior years of service at attainment of age 18. Proposed Amendment V - Effective October ]4, 2003 - Section 7 titled "Eligibility Requirements", the following shall be added to existing section 7, which remains intact: The Department Chaplain shall be a LOSAP eligible member subject to the following: • The Chaplain is the designated department Chaplain as set forth in County Policy # A-O1- 004. • The Chaplain shall record monthly points based on a point system constructed by the LOSAP Board specific to the Chaplain position • Points submitted shall be verified by the Chief of Fire/Rescue, or their designee in lieu of a volunteer Chief Signature. 2 ~ ` ,,,_.~ ~ ~~ ~~ (6) Year of Fire. Rescue or "°°~'~^r•, n^':°° c^r°:°^ Proposed Amendment V- Effective October l4, 2003- the phrase auxiliary police shall be removed from throughout the Adoption Agreement as that particular portion of the program was terminated in 2000. A year of fire ; or rescue er-pekoe--atoy service shall be credited for each Plan Year in which a Member is awarded the minimum number of points as defined in the Accredited Service Standards Certification Program. The point schedule shall be attached to and made a part of this Adoption Agreement. 3 ACTION NO. A-102803-6.g ITEM NO. K-9 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of committee appointment to the Industrial Development Authority SUBMITTED BY: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Supervisor Church nominated Carole Brackman, Catawba Magisterial District, to serve an additional four-year term which will expire on September 26, 2007. He asked that confirmation of her appointment be added to the Consent Agenda. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the above appointment to the Virginia Western Community College Board be confirmed. 1 VOTE: Supervisor McNamara motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Industrial Development Authority Committee File ACTION NO. ITEM NO. L- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request for a work session for the Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for fiscal years 2004-2010 and consideration of projects for fiscal year 2004-2005 in the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Revenue Sharing Program SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey Director of the Department of Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge tr~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: VDOT and County staff request that the Board of Supervisors schedule a work session at their meeting on November 18, 2003, to review and finalize the proposed plan. `_ ~ iii ~ ~~ ~ ~-'~ ~ C ~- AGENDA ITEM NO. _ P HE RING ORDINANCE CITIZEN SUBJE I would Pike the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ADDRESS: Cf y,~~ ;~ ~~~ ~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~~~ '~ ~'.~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: 6 s 3t^ ri. a, ~.9'n., _>" ~4w;&'6~!t?~IG&~1~," ~,.p4:~'{„N~~„.~rl~~;~,~iis;t;Id~1zX~.i''s`':,. Comments to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors October 28, 2003 Andrea B. Krochalis MA, CAGS 9428 Patterson Drive Bent Mountain, VA 24059 Thank you for this opportunity to address the Board. I am concerned about the impact of I 81 on our County Comprehensive and Community Plan. I want to acknowledge the time Anthony Ford spent with members of Rail Solution recently. Since that meeting, we have received additional information, and want to share that with you today. A PowerPoint presentation from last month (September, 2003) by Reebie & Associates is posted on the Internet. They are the contractors in the VA Department of Rail and Public Transportation's study of potential diversion of I-81 freight to rail. The presentation was given at the ASHTO Conference. The study has been elusive--due out in the spring and then the summer. Now it is due out in November, AFTER the 60-day comment period ends. It appears that the Reebie study indicates up to over a 28% potential diversion of through-state freight traffic to rail. This is the evidence that you have been looking for to see that the rail option is feasible. We request that Commissioner Shucet extend the PPTA comment period to allow you and other supervisors and councils throughout the 81 corridor to view this important document--so vital to the future of our county and region. It is our hope that the County will also make this request. I would ask if the Multimodal Task Force committee has been given presentations about the Virginia-focused portions on the ASSHTO Freight Rail Bottom Line Report and the Draft Reebie Study. Both bodies of work call for substantial rail upgrades before large- scale multimodal transportation can take effect. The study shows the triangulation pattern of trucks between the Southeast, Midwest and Northeast. The traffic flows are significant for both the I-81 corridor and the US-29 corridor -bolstering the argument for upgrading BOTH rail corridors. The other findings also support our Steel Interstate model: 1. The rail service must equal or exceed truck performance. 2. Intermodal will cost less than trucking, due to fuel efficiencies and labor productivity. annie krochalis Page 1 11/11/2003 3. Double tracking, curve straightening and train signalization upgrades are essential IN THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR (and a significant portion of the necessary capital improvements) before rail can become an effective diversion option. Raising train average speeds increases the amount of diversion. Despite whatever additional changes are being considered for the final report, there's no reason the state should be repressing this initial Reebie report. There is much in the ASSHTO Freight Rail Bottom Line Report that focuses on Virginia's three north-south Interstate corridors. This information should be on tour, just like the STAR and Fluor proposals are being paraded. The Commonwealth is missing a great opportunity by not disseminating these findings. The Reebie preliminary conclusion stands: "Public investment in rail IMX service appears to produce material relief of highways in practical time frames. Effort required to organize finance & multi- jurisdictional cooperation should pay off." My second concern is the impact on our citizens in the proposals for 181. In the attached analysis of the proposal from STAR, I have extrapolated the data for Roanoke County. I am summarizing that: there are 16.80 miles of 181 in the County; there are 6.3 miles of 8 lanes, 7.2 miles of 12 lanes, and 3.3 miles of 10 lanes; there are 8 reconstructed interchanges, 8 new bridges, 6 sets of collector distributor roads, 1 full truck flyover, and 1 loop ; there are 566 property takings and 63 dwellings/businesses disturbed. All of these changes are outside the current property boundaries. I am sure that all of us are able to see that this conflicts with our land use plan, and therefore should be reviewed by the Planning Commission, and requires a public hearing at the County level. Do the affected landowners realize the impact? The TIP recently released references figures much like those presented by STAR. I am concerned that the County, and all localities, have full information on the alternatives to congestion on 181. This includes the potential diversion of 25 to 28 % of truck traffic to rail. I hope that the County will work for the disclosure of all information necessary to the comment process and for full disclosure to all our citizens impacted by displacement or other disruption. Again, thank you for this opportunity to comment. annie krochalis Page 2 0 11/11/2003 3 /~~ N ~ y W U C a O ~ ~ ~ ~ y p ~ a O U ~ a~ .~ X X X X X 1C X X X X X X X X K X X X X X X X X X X X X X X c O 'c v ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 a ~ o d c w ~ to ~ ~ N C_ O O (70 In M O N O c 3 `~ Y ^ 7 m ~ (U O d to U ~ N O COD ~ O tlD7 ~ ~ O d ~ y N N N N N to N N N (~ N N N N N N to N N Cn O N N N N N d N N N N N CU N (U ~ N tU N N 0 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C: C C C C 0 0 ~ c eo 0o ao w o o eo ao o co ca m m m m m m m m m ca m m m m m co co co ~ J N N N N N N N ' N N N N N N N N N N N r N N d ` r 0 r 0 d' 0 M 0 C 0 (D 0 C17 0 0 I~ 0 M 0 0 O 0 V 0 N 0 V L ~ N O O. O r O O N 0 0 m C N J N y C -Y O a O (D O O O M O I~ O M O OC) O CT O CD O (P O O O O O 'd' O CD O O N ~ 'O C W ~ ~ M ~ M ~ M r ~' M r tf) M CO M ~ M W M r N M O d' r ~ r M ~ M <Y `' ~ 'd' r (U a 0 r d cM- C C CO N y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o ~ a l0 (D O M n M W (P (D (T O O <Y (D d ~ N c 'p~ ~ o M M ~ M v M ~ M Sri M cD M y ~ M oo M ao M N o ~ d' to ri ~ ri ~' N - [6 (n fU ~ N O Q C _ ~ J m p O CO CO N ~ O M L J = _ w ~ a N Z O (U ~ (U (U y CU N C (U ~ in ~ ~ ~ m r d rn 0 ~ o m t m o~ o ~ rn `o U y .c rn -`OC v~ ~ _ C -Y O ~ 'p J U L ~ U V L 9 U Y U L :p U L ~ U O c W .~ ~• lL w ~ C ~ ~ C ~ O N C ~ C ~ ~ ~ U ~~ _ CU ~ C ~ U ~ ~ T I U ~Q N I U ~? N ~ U ~ ~ U ? N O C CT ~ O ~ ~O _~ V 0 + .. C N C O C G1 0 ~ O G ' ° ~ ~ ~ . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N O O U E o ` U o - ~ o c ~ m o a o v a c X ~ N O ~ a J ~ a c ~ fU ~ c O (n ~ N d N d O _ (U d ~ Y N d O ' ' ~ ~ U a W d ~ ~ ~ u. ~ ~ U ~ Q U o ~ d j o ~ p ~ ~ O _T U c ~' ~ U Y c o U ~ m ~ O ~ N CO ~ ~ r O r (P ~ M G ' C-- C r CD M M r M M ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ C9 . - N C ~ O Q d N e - a d C N d N ~ Q. C ~ ~ ~ d ~ W U . ~ ~ ~ Q' ~ ~ J O_' ~ d' ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~' ~ N i C I O S X X X X X X X X M M fP ~ O O N N N N N N (0 (0 c0 c0 f6 c0 '0 ~ - 0 r 0 ~ 0 O O '0 0 0 0 O O O .- N ~- M 00 O~ N 10 0 0 0 O CO 10 0 0 0 O O O r M ~ h ~ M M O O O O O O O O ~ M 'd' I~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ V V ~ ~ C ~ m ~ U ~ ' ~. .O C ~ U r r d G ~ v 3 ~ a~ ~ z ~ (D T ~' ~ C 0 °' a o ~ ~ U 1- Glimpse of rail study reinforces I-81 congestion view By MIKE STILL BRISTOL HERALD COURIER Oct 27, 11:27 PM EST A preliminary glimpse of a rail marketing study commissioned by Virginia's Department of Rail and Public Transportation supports claims that Interstate 81 in Virginia is choked with high volumes of truck traffic. But state rail department officials say the study -not slated for public release until next month - is undergoing review before any specific cost projections for rail improvements are released. State officials have cited the rail study as important in determining how the I-81 corridor should be upgraded. Two private firms are competing for that project, but haven't included rail as part of their main proposals. Local governments are currently commenting on the two proposals, with a deadline of Nov. 4. The rail study wasn't scheduled to be released until after that deadline. A summary of study findings was presented to the American Association of State and Highway Transportation officials in September by Reebie Associates, the firm contracted by the state rail department, according to a computer slide presentation found at http~//freight transportation orq/doc/nyBryan.ppt. Joseph Bryan, the Reebie representative listed on the slide presentation, confirmed that he made the presentation, but referred questions to the state rail department. Reebie's study, according to the presentation, showed that Virginia has generally higher tonnages of long-haul truck traffic on I-81 than in the other four northernmost states along the I-81 corridor -New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Tennessee. In Virginia, Frederick County's section of I-81 sees about 160 million tons of long-haul truck freight annually. In Wythe County, long-haul truck tonnage reaches about 120 million tons a year. The lowest annual long-haul tonnage on Virginia's 1-81 corridor is between Washington County, Va. ,and nearby Sullivan County, Tenn., where it drops to about 76 million tons a year. In Pennsylvania, long-haul truck tonnage can range from about 10 million to 120 million tons a year, depending on the locality, according to the presentation. Tonnage along New York's I-81 corridor can range from about 6 million to 42 million tons a year, depending on the locality. "I think the study clearly demonstrates that we do have congestion on I-81," state Sen. William Wampler Jr., R-Bristol, said Monday after reviewing the Reebie presentation. "This study helps justify why we need to plan for intermodal solutions in conjunction with upgrading I-81." Reebie's presentation cites mixes of four rail/truck transport systems to deal with I-81 congestion: * "Double stack" loading of freight containers on special rail flat cars; * Trailer-on-flatcar loading of truck trailers; * Expressway, a Canadian Pacific Rail-style system of rail cars carrying tractor-trailer rigs on scheduled runs between localities; 9 * and similar "rolling highway" rail lines. George Conner, the state rail department's assistant director for rail, said Monday that the complete study is under review now because some early assumptions on needed equipment and costs are being confirmed. One of those assumptions, Conner noted, was that special, reinforced truck trailers might be needed for some of the options. Canadian experience with its Expressway system has shown that special trailers are not needed. "Our problem was ... we've got to make sure everyone agrees with the assumptions," Conner added. The Reebie presentation also outlined several improvements for Virginia's freight rail system in the I-81 region: full double track; 36 miles of new construction; improved signaling; and intermodal terminals for on- and off-loading of containers, trailers and tractor-trailer rigs. The Reebie presentation mentions no actual dollar amounts for those improvements, but it does recommend three levels of public-sector investment to ease capital spending in any rail upgrade: 24 percent for track upgrades, construction and maintenance; 42 percent when terminal functions are included in an upgrade; and 56 percent when platforms and maintenance are included. A plan to divert truck loads to rail could also divert between 2.8 million to 3.5 million truck loads annually from I-81, according to Reebie's September figures. That translates into 25 to 28 percent of I-81 truck traffic. While Reebie's presentation did not specifically mention where rail upgrades should be built, Wampler said a recommendation may already have come from the General Assembly. "Anytime you upgrade freight rail, it only enhances the opportunity to institute passenger rail," Wampler said, adding that the General Assembly approved $9.2 million in 2001 to make needed rail improvements for passenger rail service from Bristol to Richmond and Washington, D.C. "What remains is an executive branch that needs to pick up the ball and run with it," Wampler said. mstill(a~bristolnews.com ~ (276) 645-2512 Daily News, Weather and more from the Bristol Herald Courier and NewsChannel 11 Terms & Conditions ~ ©2003 Media General. Inc. 9 VDRPT Marketing Study of VIRGINIA I-81: I-81/I-95 Corridor Briefing for AASHTO Standing Committee on Rail Transportation Joseph Bryan, Reebie Associates September, 2003 STUDY MOTIVATION 2 Acts of VA Legislature Sought Rail-Based Solutions for: Projected Congestion Safety Concerns & Perceptions 4 STEPS OF ANALYSIS Primary Market Research Intermodal Product Design Traffic Diversion Analysis Rail Improvements Assessment MARKET SURVEY Interviewed Shippers, 3PLs, Truck Lines Primary Purchase Criteria: Reliability, Price, Transit Time Rate reductions & on-time performance shift traffic Truck Line decisions also reflect asset utilization 28% of I-81 truck traffic from large or super motor carriers e I-81 TRUCK TRAFFIC MIX By LOH VA Section MARKET SEGMENTATION Intermodally Incompatible Equipment Traffic handled by Small and Mid-sized motor carriers Traffic moving less than 100 miles in Corridor and/or lacking Intermodal density Long-haul dry-van - intermodal compatible -large and super carrier -dense lane traffic Double Stack & TOFC Double Stack & TOFC + Expressway Double Stack & TOFC + Expressway + Rolling Highway Intermodal Product Offerings Expanding the Product Portfolio: PRODUCT STRATEGY Menu of Services Full Over-the-Road Equivalent, Not Inferior Good Trailer Service - TOFC, Expressway-style Appeal to Motor Carriers Mimic Highway Network Balance Target Large Network Carriers as Diversion Mechanism POTENTIAL RAIL IMPROVEMENTS Full double track Reduced curvature Bi-directional TC signaling Frequent crossovers 36-mile new construction IMX terminals Improvements serve product strategy MODERATING CAPITAL INTENSITY Track upgrades, terminal construction, + maintenance = 24% Add terminal function = 42% Add platform acquisition + maintenance = 56% Large portions are capital costs Public Investment Options: TRAFFIC DIVERSION (Schematic) Rail traffic builds with time, speed, & investment KEY IMX PRODUCT PROPOSITION Open Technology Competitive Service Compelling Economic Advantage Aided by: Confluent volume Network effects CORE FINDINGS -PRELIMINARY Public investment in rail IMX service appears to produce material relief of highways in practical time frames Effort required to organize finance &multi-jurisdictional cooperation should pay off Reebie Associates Transportation Management Consultants 2777 Summer Street, Suite 401 Stamford, CT 06905-4310 U.S.A. Telephone: 203-705-0455 Fax: 203-705-0456 www.reebie.com Source, Reebie web-site AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: ~~,~~r.~~lr`t ~~, ~~ ORDINANCECITIZEN COMMENTS -~ ~ % P~' ~ ~ ~~d~~~s~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ADDRESS: ~j ~~ l l~~e~ ~f~'-~ !~ti, ~~J ~ r r~~s~ ~ `~~Ji PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~~1L ~ ~l~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION:~~ 1 L fir; ~t,~.~'t 6 9 My name is Kristin Peckman. I live at 8131 Webster Dr, in the Hollins Magisterial District. I was a student in the Citizens Planning Academy this past summer, and am a member of RAIL Solution, a citizens' group advocating a rail solution to the congestion and safety problems along I-81. I am speaking to a subject that is on the agenda for the work session this afternoon, namely Roanoke County's response to VDOT on the STAR and Fluor proposals to widen I-81. Anthony Ford has tackled a monumental task of reading and digesting two very complex proposals which approach the topic in very different styles, with different levels of detail in different areas. Mr. Ford's draft, which I have viewed on the Roanoke County web site, attempts to answer VDOT's five questions fairly and as comprehensively as the short 60-day time frame allows-along with his other duties, including updating the Comprehensive Plan. We have to take issue, however, with his response to Question 2: "Does this proposal, on its own merits, warrant consideration by VDOT's Commissioner for negotiation of a comprehensive agreement?" Mr. Ford answers YES to both proposals, based on the fact that action must be taken to improve safety and mobility along the I-81 corridor, and VDOT does not have the resources to make the needed improvements along I-81 in a timely manner. His reasoning makes sense in support of the PPTA concept in general, but not to support either of the CURRENT proposals. The question asks about the specific proposal (Star's or Fluor's), and neither one of the two proposals, when looked at closely, actually improves either safety or mobility on I-81. The Star proposal separates cars from trucks in many places by no more than a rumble strip, yet it invites more trucks to use I-81 by devoting two lanes to trucks alone. The Fluor proposal separates cars from trucks by only a painted line. As to mobility, the Star proposal (the one that adds the most lanes, to a total of 12 in our area) itself states that additional lanes will be needed only six years after completion of the project in 2018. During construction, which will last unti12011 for the Fluor proposal, and until 2018 for the Star one, mobility will only be reduced. k Virginia is at a critical fork in the road on this key transportation issue. It is well acknowledged that we can't pave our way out of congestion. You have yourselves passed a resolution stating that "rail freight and passenger service parallel to I-81" should "complement limited highway-widening and move a lar e volume of the long-distance freight traffic from trucks on I-81 to freight trains on dual track, high-speed rails parallel to I-81." Yet neither of the two proposals provides any freight or passenger rail upgrades south of Riverton Junction (Front Royal). Both proposals spend only $110 million on rail upgrades which they claim will take ~ to 500,000 (Fluor) or 560,000 (Star) truckloads of freight off I-81. Those claims depend on NS track to Atlanta, which is unlikely to be able to support that much additional traffic in atime-competitive manner. As Mr. Ford's draft states for both proposals, "This proposal does not adequately address rail freight potential in the whole I-81 corridor." This alone should be reason to reject both proposals. Mr. Ford's draft also mentions, under Question 5, that the results of the freight rail diversion study by Reebie and Associates, commissioned by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, which was due out in May, has not yet been released. VDOT should not even be asking you to comment on these proposals before the results of this study have been released. In Virginia, we need to start asking the questions differently. Instead of "How should we widen I-81?", we need to be asking "How can we move people and goods most efficiently?" Neither proposal responds adequately to this question. I ask you to amend this draft to answer NO to Question #2. Additional comments on next page. 9 The 1998 Comprehensive Plan states in its Vision section under "Quality of Life": "Proactive steps must be taken to manage growth in a positive way - to act conservatively and with deliberation when making decisions that will affect our high quality of life and that of our children's children." In Chapter 4, Community Facilities: 25. "Adopt strategies to reduce motor vehicle emissions in order to help the region attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards." This need is reinforced by the recent adoption of the Early Action Compact. 37. "Support establishment of high-speed passenger rail service between the Roanoke Valley Region and Washington, D.C. and Richmond." o_~ GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Unaudited Balance at June 30, 2003 $8,977,656 6.60% July 1, 2003 Explore Park Loan Repayment $25,000 Balance at October 28, 2003 6.62%I Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $9,002,656 $9,002,656 $9,002,656 6.62 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 2003 - 2004 General Fund Revenues $135,971,831 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $8,498,239 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge ~/' County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\10-28-report-General.xls 10/22/2003 (~- a CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Unaudited Balance at June 30, 2003 $360,172.56 Balance at October 28, 2003 $360,172.56 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge ~~~ County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\10-28-report-capital.xls 10/22/2003 0-3 RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2003-2004 Original Budget $107,940.00 July 8, 2003 Appropriation towards Roanoke Regional Airport Alliance (8,193.00) July 22, 2003 Appropriation towards Project 50 Capital Campaign (10,000.00)I July 22, 2003 Reserve towards Project 50 Capital Campaign (5,000.00)I August 12, 2003 Appropriation for debris removal and stablilization (15,000.00) Balance at October 28, 2003 $69,747.00 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge ~ ~ County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-Reports\MonthlyReports\10-28-report-Board Contingency.xls 10/22/2003 o-~ FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service 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 Savings from 2001-02 debt fund FY 2002-2003 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service FY 2003-2004 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service Balance at October 28, 2003 $670,000.00 1,113,043.00 2,000,000.00 321,772.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000 (1,219,855) 780,145.00 495,363.00 2,000,000 (1,801,579) 198,421.00 2,000,000 (465,400) 116,594 1,651,194.00 2,000,000 (2,592,125) (592,125.00) 2,000,000 (2,2o2,72s) (2o2,72s.oo) $8,435,088.00 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 July 1, 2002 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle July 1, 2002 Transfer to Operating in origina12002-03 Budget July 1, 2003 Transfer to Operating in origina12003-04 Budget Balance at October 28, 2003 $1,500,000.00 (290,000.00) 1,500,000.00 (1,858,135.00) (35,047.00) (566,818.00) (250,000.00) Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge +F , County Administrator M:\Finance\Common\Board-reports\MonthlyReports\10-28-report-future capital.xls 10/22/2003 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. O - 5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid -September 2003 SUBMITTED BY: Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors Payroll 9/12/2003 Payroll 9/26/2003 Manual Checks Voids Grand Total Direct Deposit $ - $ 804,063.40 772,365.73 Checks Total - $ 4,830,821.69 141,158.41 945,221.81 141,022.06 913,387.79 277.05 277.05 $ 6,689,708.34 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. D-~ _o 0 N r 0 ~ .. p, Q R O bL ~. d O C ee O a O C 7 O U o w -, y 7 C l ~i 7 U C ca .b a~ w i:~ W O C ~~+ G y N O~ O '/1 O GO O~ '!1 M M ~--~ O D\ M O r '~'1 00 Ul O ~O M V1 M N~ V W M~ '/1 O~ ' O N of O r O O r N N M --^ ~^ D\ 00 00 ^ M N N V1 O N 00 M^ O ~D ~~ 00 ~--~ N M ~~ O o? "' [~ O M O 7 ~O O~ O l~ M M M ~ U 00 Vl N [~ V N l~ 00 ~O '/l 00 ~ Q ~ ~ d ~ .-. ^ N N ~--~ ^ --' N ^ M N -" ~--~ .-. .-. O N N •--~ ~ --~ O M 7 ~ y > cE 7 ~ ~ ~ d a ~ ~" 00 N O '~1 O ---~ Ch O l~ ~O 00 Q1 V O~ Ul ~ [~ O N ~ N ~ ~ M M N o0 OO W 00 O ~O [~ V O M O Q~ l~ 00 00 ~O D\ N [~ 00 ~-• ~ V~ V l~ M 7 O M N M ~O N~ n M D\ T v1 O l~ u Vl ~ O M n N N W~ O W V~ O~ 00 V 7 M a w O n O~ O O~~ V ^~ M [~ ~ ~O ~ M o0 00 O Q\ ,N. u n D\ O ~ O v1 ~O [~ 00 M '~1 l~ l~ t'7 7 N ^ ~O M l~ N O .--. N O M ~ V'1 V 00 ^~ ~O ~O 00 ~ O\ O O ^ l~ ~ O '~l R ~O ~O ~ O ~ W N 00 00 M M V' V --~ M V'~ V N ~O ~ M ~ ~ O W M O~ 1y. y M W M Vl .-~ N N N O ~O Q\ 7~ ~. ~-• •-• h~ N M N Vl ^ W V1 ~O I~ W O ~ [~ M N 'rj V'1 V '--' N N N M M N ~ ~ ~!1 N N 00 V'l ~ ~ O M ~ N ^ O~ ~D ^ N --~ M O l~ 00 -~ 00 O 00 O l~ ~ (~ V1 V1 M M a~+ N Vl ~ O N N ^ M O l~ N 00 ^ 00 Vl N O N ~O Vl O~ t~ Q~ ~O M 00 V ^~ O\ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ O ~O l~ oo ^ M ~ ^ v1 O O ^ [~ N ~O oo l~ M a n n ~ ~ 00 ,-. ,-• ~ N ~ ~ 00 00 ~ N O V M V' M t~ ^-' ~ a 'n l~ ~ M ^ V ao [~ l~ ~ N D\ OO N ~ O M O V ^, '~ A = V D\ ~ M M~ N r~ V r~ N O~ ~O U oo O 7 O~ 7 ~D 'n [~ ^ N .--~ .-. (~ M 00 N eLtl °1 N ^ ^ ^ ~ a M cr O~ ~O O '/l M 00 [~ l~ M ~O l~ M O~ '!1 V M O ~-+ O N N M O l~ 00 00 [~ 7 N O ^ h W ~O [~ V ~ 00 O [~ ^ 00 N ^ Vl ~D O M O ~ ~D ~O 00 00 ~ M ~ O --~ W N N D\ r V ~O M V an N^ I~ ^ 00 00 Vl a1 O vl M O 00 O N O ~ ~ vi l~ Vl '!1 O~ '!1 00 N ^ ~ O N ^ N 'rl N M o0 I~ ~O 00 'n o0 M ~O ~O C C ; ~~ N ~ 00 N ^~ N^ V N V M .-. .-. N M C 7 M O 61 ^ ^ ~ a b 7 C W b 0 •L a ,_., 0 0 0 0 0 0^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [~ 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 l~ O O D\ D\ M 0 0 0~ 0 a\ O O O O O O O M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [~ O O ^ V O O O O 0 0 0 'n ~ O R O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l~ O^ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0^ l~ O oo ~O O V O ~O ^~ O v1 O^ ~ oO O a w O O O r ~" b O O O O O vi O O vl O O O M 'n O oo ri ~O vi o0 ~ O N N~~ N v'i vi V O ~D O V ~O ~t ~ O O O W n~ M O^ V ~O Q\ W ~^ N [~ ~ V V V M O V D\ M M O D\ W ~O '~1 O ~O M --~ 00 O M Vl ^ M '!~ V M (~ '7 ~O ~O N N ~O l~ D1 M M ~ ^ ~O '~1 ~O l~ D1 O D\ ~ N ~O ~O V ~-' ^^ N N N V^ M N ^ vl N Z f. O w ~ ~ ° ~ ~ 3 ~ G o N~ ~ b ~' ~ ~ °' ~' a x~ O x ~ G F' 'b v ''-~ o v c~a ° ~ v~ -o F~ ~ 0] w H ~ a • °- ~ °o ~ w ti i ° ° cn ~- ~ b ° ~ ~ o d ax~i ~' Uo a~i O ~ v°Ji ,, j ~ [-" R; 'b w ~ W b~A ~ ~ aC ~ ~ 0~. C4 " is a~'i ~ ~ ~ u oA d c0 ~ N r~-i ~ ~ .» N k . ~ ~ y ~ tom. ° b ~ ~ i4-. ~ F: N 7 b N p . V C O ro p •~ . G C7 H c .° .a F• a ° ~ ° ~ ~ ° o. ~ ~ •~ o U o 0 0 ~ a ~ o U o °' ~ U ~ o°n c ° ~' C .. v ~ ~ v :~ ~ °~ [-~ is cO o ~ cc o ~ a> a~ ~ b H ~ ~, U fs, ,~ o W y . ~ 'ia ~ is ti . ~ ~ o ~ ~' «: ~ a`i ~ b ti ~ ~ y a~i a~i ~ ~ ~ v o U w ~ .~ ~ .~ ~ coa ~ a'"i ~ a°i ca o o ~ w ° ro "' o ro X ^ cGO ~ a°'i =? ,~ S v a~i .~ .~ ' ~ `" v o ,~ ~ e cs:aaaa.aU Ww~E-~~x[-~Od.aawUaiz.c~;aUUr~~a;Zc~3o300F- a w O_ ^_ N M V O N M V v1 ~O l~ 00 Q\ O^ N V [^ oo a\ O N oO O^~ O 7 M O ~O N M N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M V V 7~ 'n '~ 'n ~O ~O ~O l~ 00 0o D\ O~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N M O O N I r d ~ ~ _ ~ cd d O ~ A ~ ~ e b D W ~ ~ d ~ ~ Q L 0.1 W y ~i ld .~ d N ~ u M e ~ i :r ~ C cC N ~ m Cd C CO L ti O C td O a w O T O .y O U M Q O M O~ O .b b G W 7 0 .~ a s C M O d Z I. O w W R Q ~ ~ ~ ` C R ~ a Z C O d ,~' ~i u 0~ 9 7 ~Q N N O~ R O O O n M ~_ N W N M ti 0 F b e IV V ~., ~ M z w G 7 LTi L G 0 0 e 0 w M O O ~ y M i+ ~ O O N CN c v v v lyn L Y Gam, m w [v ~ r ~ ~ O c Q c R; ~ ~ ~ etl Q '~ w ~ ~- w o-ti :; a ,,,, w t E c ~ a u e en o O y ~ ~ (~ d O 7 d ?: i ° " a ' [ a E 7 u W G ~ G ~ ."~ td ' ~G .~ L d .,,~i O C ~R W W O C ', O U N N (V ~ (' i z v. _- v C d V r E A 7 ~ C C a W W ~ ~+ M O O M O 'O 'O C W b ~L a r G O 0 d s L w° u C ~ c E W p u G O w u ~. i, .~+ ~ c c y o y 07 ~o c w L d C 0 0 .. '~ C a w H ~~L.~W. p Y _ ~G Op O ~ .-i n N N n ~ ~ 00 00 00 ~ M O O ~ N M oo U1 .-i v'l N N V vl O M O~ N v1 p~ 7 0 0 l~ 00 N ~p O O O ~--~ vi O. v1 O a0 vl ~ In O V N O O~ M V ~ [~ oo h n ~ r Vl ~ W N (~ ~ N N ~--~ N N N N M- N ~--~ N N V' N V N N M N ^~ M O --^ N [~ N v1 t? v1 Q~ t7 [~ 00 M O~ l~ M N I~ ~O O O~ O V' N O h ~ 00 v1 ~ 00 M V 00 O O~ ~O ~O M --~ fit; O O M M N ~ O ~D M O~ ~ N l~ N V ~O M N N V t~ oo O~ - t~ V O ~O l~ o0 00 ~ M M ~O O~ ~O M l~ O~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ^-~ ~ - l~ t~ V l~ -. ~O 00 O O~ ~ O vi N l~ Q` - N N 00 ,-. ~ M O f~ [~ O 00 V O l~ 01 ~--~ ~D M - p~ ~, V N V [~ ~ M OQ h (~ 00 r1 i!1 r N O vl V1 M ~ O V1 ~ V l~ V .r ~ R [~ M o0 M O M O Iry V1 ~-+ [~ - 00 O M M ~/1 00 ~O - V1 ~--~ O~ ~ ~/1 N ~O O~ M ~O N O N 7 0o vi M -~ v1 O M O N N M N vl N o0 - V V N O ~- M ~O ~O .r I~ ~D 'V' 00 N N ~i b N N ~ ~ O N M ~ M [~ V1 l~ W ~ O o0 O M O~ O O ~ O V 00 O ~O v1 r ~--~ V O ~ O 00 O4 ~--~ V'1 V l~ O~ (~ l~ M N ~O l~ ~ [^ O M ~D - ~D 1~ N V ~ ~• N ~ vl N t~l pp W p O O O M O l~ l~ O v'1 O 00 00 O N 00 ~ ~O l~ N 00 ~O M V M ~O V1 O l~ M ~/'1 M ~' O~ M 00 V1 -~ ~O M n N ~O O M ~p 7 00 .-;, ~O Vl O [~ V 7 ~, V 01 ~O l~ ~ V ~D O 00 V M 01 W ~ O 00 .r ~ ~ V Vl M ~--~ Vl 00 W ~ ~--~ Vl h N ~ "'^ 00 ~O M 00 .-. ~p 00 O M Vl O O~ - O~ [~ •-.• ~O Vl .-. .-. M 00 M N ^~ O ti N .-. M .-. ~ N C - [~ 00 N ~"~ 00 V ~O O fy N M ~-. ~-+ ~p ry d' N ~O O P O O O N O O O N O vl v'~ 00 O 00 ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O M O t7 O O O vi O --~ O ~ O~ [~ ~O O ~O ~ 0 0 [~ O O O O l~ M O O O O O M O O~ O N O - y1 O~ O O~ ~p O O ~O O O O O ~O ~O l~ ~ O ~ ~--~ ~O O M V O 00 00 ~/1 ~!1 N O M O O h ~A _ l~ O V O ~ O O N O~ ~-+ ~ ~O N N ~O O~ O~ Q~ 00 N ~ 00 00 M ~ 00 N .-~ ~D V N M N .~ ~ V1 M - r ~O M [~ ~p 00 M .N h ~ [~ M N O M W 00 ~ e} [~ O ~O vl N ~O O ~p ~O O~ V' Q N O ~ ~--~ ~O N U O [~ 00 l~ N V O Q M O ~--~ ~ N~ O M ~O ~O [~ O l~ l~ O O M ~G ~-+ 00 d' O~ [~ N O ~ O~ O N O 00 O~ N V ~O O~ 00 l~ _ ~t M ~O ~ ~ N l~ O N N ~' _ ~O M h ~ N _ ~O M ~ oo O O~ [~ ~O O oo ty, _ O V o0 0o M ~D ~n ~ ~O O 7 .~r ~O 00 .--. b ~ M N 7 l~ ~--~ ~O O M M 00 I~ Y1 M .~ N n N M N W - ..-i ~ ~ ~ N r O~ ~--~ O M ~O V' `D V1 .--~ 00 V1 V V M [~ ~O ~ .-i l~ Yl ~ 00 V N 00 N N N [~ ti l~ M l~ [~ O~ N ~ N v1 V [~ 00 M O ~--~ O ~n O p~ O O oo O O O O 00 T O~ ~ M M M l~ N ~/? O V N 00 N M M O O ~O O O O~ O O O O O~ ~O ,--~ l~ ~O O~ 00 l~ O [~ oo N 00 ~ n ~ ~ ~ 7 O M v~ O M ~n [~ M [~ ~!1 ~p V ~O rl ~ O 00 N r _ O~~ M O N O V oo ~ N h O~ V1 O l~ ~ Vl ~--~ l ~ M Vl O~ M ti V V'1 .-. M 00 ~D p~ V N O 7 V1 l~ ~n ~O N 7 7 v~ T .-~ M ~O O N vl. --~ N ~O N N O Oi ~O M O~ -~ l~ r 00 O 7 M [~ oo ~ --~ N ^-~ O~ 'R V' O ~O oo l~ 00 M vl M O [~ M ~ [~ N --~ N ~O O ~O [~ N N N M O M ~ -~ O l~ N O e{ N l~ r -~ M 00 00 ~--~ .r O W Vl ~ 7 M N .~ M N -~ O ~--~ N .w A L i h ~~ ~ E c° d ~ o C ti .+ ~ U y ° C u G~ ~ w ~ ~ Q O F U w i~.i o H C H o ~ ~ ~ ~ y N ~ :_ .U ~~ y 3 o ~ a ~ Y d ~ o b~ ~~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ r o c a ~ ,a ~ i>~ U i r a i N h _U _ U_ ~ C7 ~ ti ~.. ,gU a oU `nA~~~ w o~ xx n ~Q x ~ ~ ~ ti y ~ ti ~~ ~' ~ v ° G ~ ro W cd N C , ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ y ~ y tiY~ . c ~ _ a~ . ~ cC G ..U+ ~ cG N ~ ~ O O '~ O ~ ~ N p ~C O . N ~ ~ C Q 4 C ti ~ ~ ~ j 7 ..]C7W c UO c au,UQ c t C c7a~W ~C7 0 ~ O O ~ ~arnUaScn c - N M O O O N O O N M R O O O O ~--~ N M V vl ~O O O O O O O M~ wl ~O 1~ 00 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J-b N M r O a. q R ~O .~ L d o ' O CE h ~ O Y C 7 O U Q N N b ~ k. -~ :; d w ~ '° E ° d ~ v u e °° L W W W m A M O O M O '~ c w 7 V 0.i s c 0 0 s O W 7 u E °' .~ G u d ~ C ~ u w ~_ E A '~ u .~. y C ~, a w d {j dJ Y~ v e ~ e E u ~ ~ d ~. Z 9 C y ~ a W b0 Ci .0 G w' L d C O 'fl G 7 W N O~ 1~ O ^' ~ W V'~ [~ ^ O~ M 0 0 0 O O M N ~ N ,-. l~ p~ O~ oo ~O ~n .~ v1 O O~ O O M 00 O N O M 0 7 N N ~ O ~O Iry n --~ ~ V M ~ N N ~O N N ~ O~ M ^ O~ M O N [~ O~ O O ~p l~ N ul O O V 00 O o0 00 O~ ~!1 M O O~ M O ~O O Q M ~O O O O o0 00 O l~ r ~ ^ oo O ~O N M O N O [~ v1 O O ~O O~ N O~ .~ 00 ~ N --~ 00 v1 O O O ~O 00 ^-~ O~ O O 7 M O~ N ~ ~ O O l~ l ; ~D l~ l~ O O M ~--~ l~ O O 7 [ ~ ~O v1 t~ N oo ~ P .--~ oo N m ~O O~ ^ oo O ^ rn O~ v'i ~ N l~ 00 vl .~ N o0 N M M M N O [~ O~ ~O V~ ~O vi M 7 M 00 N M ~O ^ 7 ~O ~ .~-i W ~.j .-. ~ .-• N ~ ~ O 00 .r ~" i O~ ~--~ O O O M 00 vl O O ~O N O N N M r O O O OO ~~ O q ~ M~ O O^ ry O N y V~ O ~ ~ ~ M M ~ O O ~t l~ M O ~ ~O o0 ~O 00 ~ O~ N l~ •--~ 7 M O M O ~ ~ ~ N ~ 00 c} N o0 ~ O N N ~ ~ N N ~ N l~ ,.. ~o r, ^ rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o in ~n o o ~q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O ~D O ~O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 C N r ~ ~ ~ O N N O^ vi vi O O ~O oo N O ~O ~O N O~ O O O (~ O O O N ^ o o y oo rn N o o ~o ~n cn o 0 o V) 0 0 o r, 0o vi c M ~ ~ o0 0 7 ~ ri ~ri o 0 o M o 0 o r O~ V O 7 O ~O oo O ~D N O O~ ~ ~ fn O o0 M N O~ l~ N ~O o0 0o N ~ O ~ ~ O ~O 00 M M [~ ^ N "'~ N .... M .-. ~ 00 M O O M ~O O O O ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N M~ O l~ N O N O 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N V' O DO N ~ ~O O ~ ~ O O l~ O O [ ~ N M Iry .~ V1 O~ ^ ~O _ M vl ~ ~ _ O O O O ~ ~D O~ ~O 1n .r M l~ l~ OQ ^ V O O ~D 0 0 7 0 0 [~ .--i ~D N p~ [~ vl ~O l~ O~ O~ O~ V t~ O~ O vi O~ O ^ O~ V1 vi l~ N N V1 00 V1 O~ ~O 00 ~ 00 00 V M 7 O [~ O~ O~ V' 00 M 00 M O ^ V^ vl ~n N M V ~O ^ ~O ~O V ti ~ M N Vl ~ ^" N V ~ ~ M .~-i R L ~ y 7 U ~ aCi E ¢ 0. a ~ ~ a a a c ~ d ~ ~ C a~+ $ a, ~ > U c c a+ d ~ G o~~ d A .-. '~' ~ ,~ o ~ 6~ ~ ~ ~ O O y c O ~ L ~ C y O x .C w c[a w 5~ d w w O ~ • a •G ~ ~ ~ a ~ J ro ~ ~, ~, d U h ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ y N b Y ~ A Lei ~. y ~ `~ ~ N Q o c ~ v $ ~ ~ ~ c H ~ `~ a i ~ W a ~ aq •~ •" ~ U a°~i ~ ~ •~ U ~ Z [ ~ ~ F 0. ~ N i O cry P ' 7 O ~ O U O O E X (0 ~ O O O . C. ...7 U c G.. U W U c W Q~ [-~ ~ U c ~~ p '. N M N M ~/1 N M V ~O l~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~O ~O ~O l~ l~ ~ ~ W W 00 00 00 00 Q~ O~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O E 0 F b m L v ~, w ~ 'c E ° v - La i u o ~ r i r~ o $ a ~ ~ N a f~ W ~ GO r ~ O 9 d m '~ v a °' ° E d u p v C w v ~ G m r'~ v u C d ~ ~ ~ a w .. E o `~ ~ E O G L d W d [s ~ ~' y Ci O u V ~ G L .~ 7 ~ O ~ O ~ e °1 C y O M ~ W ~ Cd ^O O '~ • C ~ N d ~ C y^ ~ d ~ C ~ y O R O ~ C ~ W ~ W V £ a ~ y,., O y^ C4 t a~'+ lOn C o ~ ~ ~" O U ~ o a W y `~' O k, ~ d OC 7 ^C s u 9 C ' w i c u C7 ~ o o ~ `o N N r 7 , O {i .-. kr M O O ~% ~ O N O O ~N CN F y v y tom. ~ ~ G C ~ 0. m w til S C O ~ 0 c ~i ~ ~ W ~ a" w ~' w S ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~-7 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program SUBMITTED BY: Robert C. Jernigan Risk Manager APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator 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 report including the First Quarter that ended September 30, 2003. Please refer to Attachment A -Auto, and Attachment B - General Liability. o-~ Z a~0 f~ N O r ~ } ~ N M ~ to Q N d W ~ ~ Q' i W i l1i w2' ~' d o ~ U `~ 0 U y 0 U ~' 0 U ~' 0 U a O - a O -- --- M O -- - O ~ ~_ N Z U M ~ ~ > ~ U ¢ U > U > U > U > U U W m -- H ~ ~ ~ a a w~ ~ U ' W M ~ N r O ~ O F N V= Q O t a~ U L V) W ~ Y Z Q p 2 ~ C ~ N W (] C V) ~' U ~e ~ U m Q d m m 'a > N ° 2 N U 2 ~ y a 0 ~ L a~ ~ L o N N ~ ~ o ~ t6 a C N a L Y ~ ~ in ~ f0 Y 2 in > L o U N Z E ~ L •~ .C O ~ v in C m U _c E c U L > L 2 in - I ~ J W J ° Q f" Z ~ (%j W N W ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ E a o ~ p ~ ' i ' ~ ~ ~ ~ - - d ~ F- ~- LZLfi ~ a p d ~ U a a ao in z __ Q I-' M W N ~ ~ O Q h O M N O W O M N O ~ O M N ~ ~ O M N_ ~ m O M N N m O M N N ~ O ~ ~ W W W Q 1 i ~ Cc N O Q O O CO O N O M O OO O O O J ~ I ~ ~. .Z ~~ ~ M M ~ M ~ M ~ M d• M ~ M I LL4i } O a~ m m d ti it ~ z °o ro o W o 0 N 0 ~ N a w W ~ N - ~ N W CC _._ I ~ ~ h- `~ ~ V C a ~ y ~' U C a ~ N O z Q g p U Q > Q > Q > Q ~ I i - I ~ -- M ~ ___ __ ~ -- m ~ ~ a w W a W ~ I I I w H ~ ~,,, ~ N ~ ~ J m Q m ~ r o V H W Z Q Z T LL W ~ J ' W ~ Q I ~ 0 _ J ~ W Z ~ ~ DO Z O m d c ~ M m ~' ~ 's c m E °~ m ~ ~ O o m ~ °' 'a ~ N_ n ~ V i y ~ Q W Q U ~ ~ o m ~ E z U ~ ¢ ~ O ~ o a v~ y ~ ~- .N U - m ~ ~ a 7 a I ~ i i¢- i I cn LL Z ~, U N ~ ~ _U ~ i i a ~ W W ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~U ~ ~ ~ __ I ~ M Z W W O (] Q N U d ~ Q ~ M O N 0 w M O N 0 in M O N 0 rn~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I I ~ I ~ W. W ~ W ~ I 1 I ~ o g z v ~ v ~ `'~ M v ~ - ~ O H Q M M N M W } a~ m m ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C~- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work session to discuss the Interstate 81 Public Private Transportation Act (PPTA) Improvement Projects, specifically the Detailed Proposal review comments. SUBMITTED BY: Anthony W. Ford Traffic Engineer APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ ~°~ County Administrator ` . COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This work session is an opportunity for County staff to inform the Board on the progress of the Virginia Department of Transportation's Public Private Transportation Act (PPTA) review process as it pertains to the Interstate 81 Corridor Improvement Project. VDOT has requested that affected localities along the Interstate 81 corridor evaluate the proposals to help them determine whether or not they merit advancement to the next stage in the PPTA evaluation and to provide comments on the detailed proposals. Staff will explain the PPTA evaluation process and schedule and inform the Board as to how some of the surrounding localities are handling the task that VDOT has given them. VDOT is not requesting a resolution or formal support for one proposal or the other at this time. They maintain that the affected localities will have opportunities in the future to further voice their concerns and will play an important role in the public participation component of the environmental review of the proposals. County staff has reviewed comments, resolutions, studies, etc. that the County has previously submitted pertinent to the Interstate 81 corridor and will explain how the two submitted proposals address the County's concerns and desires for the corridor. In doing (~_ i this and with the addition of the Board's comments, staff hopes to come up with answers/comments to address the questions posed by VDOT's PPTA committee. A draft copy of the County's review comments for both proposals is attached. C~- i Roanoke County Interstate 81 PPTA Improvement Project Detailed Proposal Review Comments for Proposal by ® ~ STAR Solutions 1. Are the proposed improvements compatible with any local comprehensive plans that exist for your locality? YES, to the extent that awell-designed, built, and maintained transportation infrastructure improves safety and supports economic development. A. The County of Roanoke's 1998 Community Plan includes the following items relative to the proposal: i. Pursue increased State and Federal support for all types of transportation improvements. Examine modifications to the funding formulas that will bring more funds into the western • NO portion of the Salem Transportation District. ii. Monitor and correct safety problems associated with existing transportation facilities and services. iii. Develop and implement a responsible financial plan that identifies existing and new funding mechanisms, including private funding initiatives, to achieve the County's transportation system objectives (We are not implying that this proposal includes a more responsible financial plan, but does include private funding initiatives to achieve its goal.). iv. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) is the use of high technology to solve transportation problems. VDOT will be developing further applications of ITS that will enhance the quality of life and promote State-wide economic development. v. Upgrade existing roadways to correct unsafe conditions. vi. Identify potential public-private partnerships that will enhance economic development in Roanoke County (the I-81 Corridor has been identified as economic opportunity area). A. The proposal fails to sufficiently improve rail transportation (or at least fails to provide the detail that would indicate otherwise). The County of Roanoke's 1998 Community Plan includes the following items relative to rail systems: i. Work towards a more balanced transportation system -one that is multimodal. B. Property impacts along I-81 Corridor. STAR Solutions 10/24/2003 C~-i i. I-81 running through Rural Preserve area (as designated on County's Future Land Use Map). ii. May lose potential Core area (commercial property) near Dixie Caverns area. iii. Most of I-81 goes through Neighborhood Conservation and Development areas (as designated on County's Future Land Use Map). iv. County has performed a study on the Corridor and found that any widening or right-of--way acquisition could create non-conforming parcels. v. This particular proposal seems to have more impacts on the aforementioned properties due to increased widening and interchange improvements. C. Impacts to the environment are unknown at this time. The County of Roanoke's 1998 Community Plan includes the following items relative to the environment: i. Scenic Viewsheds: One of the policies of the Community Plan is to protect scenic viewsheds, mountain sides, and ridgetops within the County. 2. Does this proposal, on its own merits, warrant consideration by VDOT's Commissioner for negotiation of a comprehensive agreement? • YES, VDOT does not have the financial resources to make the needed improvements along I-81 in a timely manner. That is why public-private partnership warrants consideration. Action must be taken to improve safety and enhance mobility along the I-81 corridor. 3. Are there portions of this proposal that create specific advantages and/or benefits for your locality? • Mobility and safety improved along I-81. • Jobs created due to construction. • Addresses long range capacity issues; would not have to come back in 10-15 years to widen again. • Financial plan currently permitted by law in Virginia. 2 STAR Solutions 10/24/2003 q-i 4. Are there portions of this proposal that create specific disadvantages and/or drawbacks for your locality? • Potential traffic impacts on secondary roads and intersections such as Rte. 311, Kessler Mill Rd., Plantation Rd., Williamson Rd., and Rte. 11/460, to name a few. • Stormwater management issues; more impervious area would necessitate the need for more stormwater basins along the Corridor. • Potential business displacement and subsequent loss of tax revenue for the County. • Large truck plazas could be detrimental to regional air quality. • The potential impact on viewshed is significant. • Truck only tolls may unfairly impact select users, businesses and industries. 5. Are there any other comments you wish VDOT to consider? • VDOT, under STAR's proposal, will still be responsible for a portion of the maintenance along I-81. Will the funding be available? • The environmental impact is unknown at this time. • The Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on June 24, 2003, resolving that they support the development and promotion of rail freight and passenger service parallel to I-81, to complement limited highway-widening and to move a large volume of the long distance freight traffic from trucks on I-81 to freight trains on dual track, high speed rails parallel to I-81. This proposal does not adequately address rail freight potential in the whole I-81 Corridor. • The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT) is currently studying the potential for freight rail diversion. This study is not complete, as far as we know. We withhold further comment on the rail diversion plan until report findings are studied. • Roanoke County wants to cooperate with VDOT and/or the consultant on the following issues: stormwater management (regional basins), utility crossings, frontage roads, public safety during construction, sound barriers, and interchange designs for economic development purposes (for example, Exit 132, interchange for County's Center for Research and Technology. Must provide truck access to property.) • A limitation on the State's liability must be established and whatever financial liability is placed upon the State should not restrict or limit the State's abilities to fund other transportation improvements. 3 STAR Solutions 10/24/2003 Q-i Roanoke County Interstate 81 PPTA Improvement Project Detailed Proposal Review Comments for Proposal by 4 FLUOR Virginia, Inc. 1. Are the proposed improvements compatible with any local comprehensive plans that exist for your locality? YES, to the extent that awell-designed, built, and maintained transportation infrastructure improves safety and supports economic development. A. The County of Roanoke's 1998 Community Plan includes the following items relative to the proposal: i. Pursue increased State and Federal support for all types of transportation improvements. Examine modifications to the funding formulas that will bring more funds into the western portion of the Salem Transportation District. ii. Monitor and correct safety problems associated with existing transportation facilities and services. iii. Develop and implement a responsible financial plan that identifies existing and new funding mechanisms, including private funding initiatives, to achieve the County's transportation system objectives (We are not implying that this proposal includes a more responsible financial plan, but does include private funding initiatives to achieve its goal. ). iv. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) is the use of high technology to solve transportation problems. VDOT will be developing further applications of ITS that will enhance the quality of life and promote State-wide economic development. v. Upgrade existing roadways to correct unsafe conditions. vi. Identify potential public-private partnerships that will enhance economic development in Roanoke County (the I- 81 Corridor has been identified as economic opportunity area). • NO A. The proposal fails to sufficiently improve rail transportation (or at least fails to provide the detail that would indicate otherwise). The County of Roanoke's 1998 Community Plan includes the following items relative to rail systems: i. Work towards a more balanced transportation system -one that is multimodal. ("While FLUOR's proposed near term Fluor 10/24/2003 Q _, improvements will alleviate a significant infrastructure bottleneck with Norfolk Southern 's rail network, the ability to increase intermodal traffic is also dependent upon factors outside the scope of the proposed near term improvements. ") B. Property impacts along I-81 Corridor. i. I-81 running through Rural Preserve area (as designated on County's Future Land Use Map). ii. May lose potential Core area (commercial property) near Dixie Caverns area. iii. Most of I-81 goes through Neighborhood Conservation and Development areas (as designated on County's Future Land Use Map). iv. County has performed a study on the Corridor and found that any widening orright-of--way acquisition could create non-conforming parcels. C. Impacts to the environment are unknown at this time. The County of Roanoke's 1998 Community Plan includes the following items relative to the environment: i. Scenic Viewsheds: One of the policies of the Community Plan is to protect scenic viewsheds, mountain sides, and ridgetops within the County. 2. Does this proposal, on its own merits, warrant consideration by VDOT's Commissioner for negotiation of a comprehensive agreement? • YES, VDOT does not have the financial resources to make the needed improvements along I-81 in a timely manner. That is why public-private partnership warrants consideration. Action must be taken to improve safety and enhance mobility along the I-81 corridor. 3. Are there portions of this proposal that create specific advantages and/or benefits for your locality? • Proposed electrified truck parking locations could enhance air quality. Roanoke County is currently working with area MPO on air quality issues. FLUOR recognizes the possibility of Roanoke County being designated a non-attainment area. • Mobility and safety improved along I-81. • Jobs created due to construction. • This proposal does not require the use of State and Federal funds. Fluor 10/24/2003 C1-I 4. Are there portions of this proposal that create specific disadvantages and/or drawbacks for your locality? • Potential traffic impacts on secondary roads and intersections such as Rte. 311, Kessler Mill Rd., Plantation Rd., Williamson Rd., and Rte. 11/460, to name a few. (FLUOR admits, "The introduction of tolls will potentially cause diversion of traffic to untolled roads, because drivers will attempt to escape the payment of tolls. Such diversion could increase traffic volume on other roads, with attendant adverse effects on traffic patterns, property access, and community cohesion.") • Stormwater management issues; more impervious area would necessitate the need for more stormwater basins along the Corridor. • Potential business displacement and subsequent loss of tax revenue for the County. • All users of I-81 would be required to pay tolls for use of roadway. • Current financial plan (i.e. tolling passenger cars) not permitted by law in Virginia. 5. Are there any other comments you wish VDOT to consider? • VDOT, under FLUOR's proposal, will still be responsible for maintenance along I-81. There would be more roadway and infrastructure to maintain, and VDOT would have to increase I-81 maintenance funds. Is this likely? • The environmental impact is unknown at this time. • The Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on June 24, 2003, resolving that they support the development and promotion of rail freight and passenger service parallel to I-81, to complement limited highway widening and to move a large volume of the long distance freight traffic from trucks on I-81 to freight trains on dual tracks, high speed rails parallel to I-81. This proposal does not adequately address rail freight potential in the whole I-81 Corridor. • The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT) is currently studying the potential for freight rail diversion. This study is not complete, as far as we know. We withhold further comment on the rail diversion plan until report findings are studied. • Roanoke County wants to cooperate with VDOT and/or the consultant on the following issues: stormwater management (regional basins), utility crossings, frontage roads, public safety during construction, sound barriers, and interchange designs for economic development purposes (for example, Exit 132, interchange for County's Center for Research and Technology. Must provide truck access to property.) • A limitation on the State's liability must be established and whatever financial liability is placed upon the State should not restrict or limit the State's abilities to fund other transportation improvements. Fluor 10/24/2003 Interstate 81 PPTA Improvement Project Detailed Proposal Review Comments for Proposals submitted by STAR Solutions FLUOR Yrginia, Inc. Roanoke Co., Dcpt of Community Development October 2003 STAR Solutions Proposal ~Ir ~~;' ~:~~ . ~I,~,„~ :~, ~~ (~,~ :: r~ k ,Ma r-`.....r. -) I ,. ~ t ... STAR's typical sections 501: NBL I.(ixwir4ryer•, TT'i'y~rN L•n•r, T~udrl•m• OrcrrlPw~m I l•n! r 1III raarOU NOm '-NVrr mnn IypkN S•erbn 1Yb1 7 G•n•rH Maps+• L•n~ NOAH R•ann4eiaoul~ uWloudNrr Gv yrvb _ Gi•rul huY laver GuJ[Lnw 7twr1 _ ICG'Olaw '=Rn9n 6i6• '=RuYie9rP 1'yplcal Section With C•IlectvdDi•trihutvr (Ci0) Lans• 4-i 1 0 FLUOR Virginia, Inc. Proposal '~vnn- '%~ _,.y~.. yh y~~ FLUOR, FLUOR's typical sections Exi>tiny ~~,'~ ~ ^ ,,......... ~i II.u~ ,., ..,. M 9'V ,. Widen to c7 tnnu> v PPTA Implementation Guidelines ^ 4-Phase Evaluation and Selection Process . Phase 1: Initial Review Committee (call for desie s) ^ Pltase 2: CTB Approval (call for more detailed proposals) ^ Pltase 3: Public-Private Trans. Advisory Pane] Recommendation . Phase 4: Commonwealth Trans. Commissioner Approval ~: :JV "x~F ..- 2 ~ 0 PPTA Implementation Guidelines ^ Phase 3: Public-Private Transportation Advisory Panel Recommendation ^ Proposal Evaluation and Selection Criteria . 1. Qualifications and Expeiimce . 2. Project Characteristics . 3. P~rojectFinancing . 4. Public Support . 5. Project CotitpadUility ^ Provide recommendation to Commissioner (by end of year '03) . PPTA review panel will meet 4 times . t"meeting Oct. '03, 2id meeting in Nov. '03, 3"' and 4'^ in Dec. '03 Local Governments' Role VDOT's PPTA team requesting comments on the Detailed Proposals from local-affected jurisdictions Proposals evaluated to determine whether or not they merit advancement to the next stage in the PPTA evaluation . "This is not a request for a public hearing or a resolution or for debating the merits of one possible solution or another.' . Therefore. not casting a vote for one proposal or the other at this time. County and citizens will have additional opportunities to comment during the environmental review Comment form for I-81 Proposals Compatibility with our Comp. Plans "~ . Does proposal _ ; _ _ ~ warrant consideration for negotiation of _ _ ,~,•. ^~ eomprehenstva agreamen C/ '- - Advantages andlor benefits for County? ~ . - ~ Disadvantages andlor ~ drawbacks for Countyi _ \\\\ ' - Other comments to eonardaR 3 Questions/Comments -~ ~~~~ \`•U.tti Detailed Proposal Review Comments for Proposals submitted by STAR Solutions FLUOR Vrginia, Inc. Roanoke Co., Dept. of Community Development October 2003 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. Q-~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session with Legislative Liaison to consider Initiatives for the 2004 Session of the Virginia General Assembly SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: A. R. "Pete" Giesen, Roanoke County's Legislative Liaison will be present to discuss with the Board issues facing the General Assembly in 2004 and assist in determining the Board's legislative initiatives for the 2004 session. This evening the Board will hold a public hearing on amending the County Charter to authorize the County to levy a tax on cigarettes and tobacco products. If the Board approves this amendment, it will be submitted to our local legislators in order to find a sponsor for the 2004 session. Cities are authorized to levy this tax under their charters. The General assembly has authorized only two counties, Arlington and Fairfax, to levy this tax, and it is capped at 5 cents per pack. The City of Roanoke increased its tax from 17- cents to 27-cents during the past year and generated over $2 million; Salem's 15-cent levy generated $600,000 for a portion of last year. A 5-cent levy in Roanoke County is estimated to generate $200,000 annually, although staff hopes that any County levy would not be limited to this amount but be consistent with Salem's rate. The Board may want to consider additional legislative initiatives: 1) Support granting counties equal taxing authority with cities and towns. 2) Support the JLARC recommendations to address the shortfall in state funding for K-12 education and to fully fund the state Board of Education proposals. The estimated annual cost of funding both the JLARC recommendations and Board of Education proposals is $870 million. 3) Support tax restructuring that grants localities additional revenue authority and increases local revenue diversification. 4) Support amending Sec. 15.2-1716 (reimbursement of expenses, DUI incidents) to increase the flat fee from $100 to $250, and to assess this fee as part of the court costs in the criminal/traffic proceedings. 5) Support additional state funding for transportation, and in particular, funding for improvements to I-81. 6) Support legislation that would fund the Smart Road project from statewide funds instead of from the Salem District. This project represents an economic benefit to the entire Commonwealth, therefore funding should not come solely from this region's highway allocation. 7) Oppose revisions to a merged state/local telecommunications tax that would be collected by the state and redistributed back to localities; oppose telecommunications tax reform that is not part of a comprehensive tax restructuring program; oppose efforts to reduce the amount or control of local governments over the E-911 tax. 8) Oppose the proposal to impose a state surcharge on tipping fees for each ton of solid waste received by any municipal solid waste disposal facility. A resolution for the County's 2004 Legislative Program will be prepared for adoption at your November 18, 2003 meeting, based upon your decisions at this work session. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C~- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session on Public Safety Building Proposal Review under the Public Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) SUBMITTED BY: Dan O'Donnell Assistant County Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~ ~~~- County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On September 15, 2003 the County received two unsolicited "phase I" proposals for design and construction of a new Public Safety Building in addition to the original proposal submitted fast June by Northrop-Grumman Corporation. The purpose of the work session is for staff to present their findings and recommendations for consideration by the Board of Supervisors concerning moving the project forward. In accordance with the PPEA regulations, the County Administrator may make a recommendation to move one or more of the proposals on to "phase II" proposal development. Mr. Hodge will be presenting a formal recommendation resolution to the Board in the evening session of the October 28 meeting, and this work session will provide the Board Members the opportunity to discuss the contents of the proposals and the recommendation with the staff involved in the proposal analysis. Q -3 FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of moving the project forward to phase two is minimal as there is no obligation on the part of the County to proceed with construction until after the execution of a comprehensive agreement with a chosen development firm. If firms are approved by the Board for phase two proposal development, they must deposit a total of $50,000 with the County to be used for costs associated with analysis and refinement of phase two plans. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C~ -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work session on the progress of the Police Department accreditation SUBMITTED BY: James R. Lavinder Chief of Police APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge Lt' ~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Police Department requests a short work session to inform Board members of our progress toward national accreditation. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. Q- 5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work session to brief the Board of Supervisors on the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program SUBMITTED BY: Richard E. Burch Fire/Rescue Chief APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~r~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Fire/Rescue Department in conjunction with Roanoke City, City of Salem and the Town of Vinton are participating in the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program sponsored through the Virginia Department of Emergency Management. The CERT Program is designed to provide training to citizens in the Roanoke Valley on disaster preparedness, fire safety, medical care and urban search and rescue. The goal of the CERT program is to increase the general public's ability to assist with the response and aftermath of a man-made or natural disaster. The U.S. Department of Homeland Defense funds the program and requires participation to be eligible for any other grants pertaining to homeland security. FISCAL IMPACT: The County only experiences minimal fiscal impact with in-kind donation of staff time to coordinate and train citizens. The County must continue to participate in order to be eligible for grant funding from the Department of Homeland Defense. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the continued participation with Roanoke City, City of Salem and the Town of Vinton in providing CERT training to citizens of the community. ;..f:; ;~ ~; ''~:: ~~~ ~;, '> ,r - ti' ~i. >?., ~~~. ~~ .~ o U ~ ~ ~ U O L. ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~a C~ O U G •~ i-I ~ w° ~ O +~ b a~ .~ '1 'C ~"~ .~ ~ '~ ,ry +' •~ ~ y ~ o v s~ Q w w v ~~ ~ IH ~~ o ~ .~ N ~ +~-~ O~ U [-~ ~a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, Q E-" ~ a~ .~ ~x ~~ o ~ ~" ~ ~ a~ O~ ~ ~ ~~ N s~ ~~ ~~ Q .N ~~ .ti ~~ ~v ~. S/ s~ ~ ~~ N U '~ c~ U y~ y H _~ o W ~ p U N U b .~ ~ ~ i-I ~ ~" O N ~ ~ ~' o H Q H a~ U sa W w 0 0 0 N O a~ w D ~" iii ~ ~ o ~, .., ~ U ~~ Vo •5 a ~ ~' . N ~ O .l ~ ~l ~ ~ .~ v b~~A ~~~ .~~~ ~ ~ a~i v ~ '~J 5 ~ '~ ~ ~ G ~~ W~ w h.C C C .y ~~'- r ~ ~rA i ~ y y • • U ~'. bA a, N W .~ 0 U r'1 R~ N ~ w U 4 ~ o ~ ~ 'v~ r!~ .t M 0 00 N 0 c~- 5 ~,,. • ~ s, ,:, O ~' • V• ;€ f f ~ ~ O "~ ~ ~ ~ y-- ~: ~ ~ O ~ O r ~: .- ~ •~ ~ Q. ~ ~ t!~ U~~ O O ~ ~ ~Q~~~~ N ~~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ 'L ~ ~ W ~ ~ N ~ O O - O N '- •- ~ ~ ~ O ~ U= ~~ Cn'i E"~ O ~ V- ~ O ~ O O ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ > ~ •- L Q ~ W ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~a~~~~o~ ~ O Q ~ C~ ~ +.~ U ~ ~~r~ ~. N r~ LJ /~\ ~ V ~ ~ O ~~ .,O •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p0 4) Q. ~? ~ ~ ~ ~ U v ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ cn ~ -~~L~_ ~o ~o~ 0 ~ L ._~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p .N N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~' N N ~ ~.~a~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ .. ~ . ~ C~ ~ ~ O ~ Oj ~ cn .. ~ O ~ ~~ p~~~U_Qv ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U o ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .U C6 ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ l ~~ ~ O ~. O ~ ~ to v O N ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ N ai ~ ~ ~ ~ L- O ~ O .a? W t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ._ ~ ~ O • ~~, ~; ; m ~~ r--~ C~ CC3 .~ ~Q 4~ • O U_ .L . _., C~ L _~ U .~ c~ •O a~ ~-. O ~ _ U -~--+ U O ~ ~ . - ~ O ~ U U ~ •~ U a~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ° c~ c~ ~ ~ ~ O O .~ .- O O ~ ~ U I- m U .~ Q O ~.-+ i.. O O U r ~_ •o ~, ~ o '- U •U ~ ~ ca ~ ~ ~ • G~ . r..i . ~..i b!J . ~-, O '--~ ~--~ O H N O N • O O O 0 d- N .~ c~ -~ C~ O O ~~ ~~--+ L--~ ~ O ~ ._ y.. .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O ~ ~ ~ t/~ - p ~ ~ O ~ O ~- f,F} ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ U ~ '~ ~ ~~ U > ~ ~ -~--~ -~ ~ ~ ~ - U ~ ~ ._ 4- ~ .~ U ~ ~ O O 4- ~ ~ ~ L O ~ O ~ ~o ~. U~.oUW cv~~ ~~vUU ~- -- U ._ ._ ~ .. U ~ .cn ._ O ~.~c~~ ~ moo ~ ~ ~ ~'= LU N ~ M ~o UU=~~- ~ ~ i O ~ Cn DC~ ~. • i{ - `' ..r., ~ ~ ~~ O F ~ ~ ^ ~ :Y ~ ~ Q .-~ N ~ ~ -- ~ 0.. L- C6 U , ~ ~ . ~ . O ~, ~, o o ~ ~ ~ c~ o ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. _ -~ O C6 (~ V V C~ ~ ~ , ~ , ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J D .~ W ~v ~. .~ L L .o .~ C~ ~_ ._ C~ U Cn .~ ~~: • '~ O O N f s.. ,i ~ O O .~ .~ L . -~-~ C~ ~ O o • ~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ O .- 4) 4~ ~ C~ 4~ ,,,,r 4~ c~ ~Ln V ..: ~~,;r ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ O CCS cn ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ -, ~ ~ M ~ U O ~ ~ .~ ~ N ~ O ,~ .. U ~ ~ N 00 U O ~ . ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ _ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ O O U ~ ~ Z U ~ ~. O ~ ~ ~ -~-~ O -~ C~ I~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O U +~ Q~ N L O ~ ~ •~-+ X U . .,~ O C6 U U U ~ U Z C6 O ~ L U c~ ~ ~ a~ ._ ,~~ ~ c~ OC u- ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ._ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ U ._ ~ O Q ~ i ~ s- O O ~ ~ Q ~ '.~ ~ p O ~ ~ ~ ~ O .o ~ o C~ L ~ i ~ .. ~ '~ C.~..,.~ ~ U ~ d' ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ .L ~ ~ ~ ~ U o ~~ ~ v C~ ~ ~ 07 ~ ~ ~ ~ m c~ -~ ~ O O u.. ~ 1 ' ~ 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work session concerning recovery of DUI expenses SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On March 12, 2002, the Board of Supervisor amended the Roanoke County Code by the addition of Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired." This section authorizes the County to attempt to recover reasonable expenses incurred in providing appropriate emergency response to accidents or incidents arising from the operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train, or water craft while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In determining "reasonable expenses" a locality may bill a flat fee of $100 or a minute-by- minute accounting of the actual costs incurred, but liability shall not exceed $1,000. On October 14, 2003, the Board considered at first reading an ordinance to expand this ordinance to include additional traffic offenses: reckless driving, driving without a license and leaving the scene of an accident. The 2003 session of the General Assembly expanded the coverage of this legislation to include these additional offenses. The Board requested a work session on this ordinance to consider two issues: expanding the coverage of this ordinance, and the costs and benefits of collection activities. Administratively Ihave advised County staff to limit collection activities only to charges involving accidents. The number of cases involving accidents for 2002 is as follows: Year 2002 Accidents Involving Charges DUI 43 Drivin without a license $ Reckless 175 Leave the scene 7 Total Char es 233 ~-~ The number of cases involving "incidents" is as follows: Year 2002 Incidents DUI 203 Drivin without a license 176 Reckless 316 Leave the scene 7 Total Char es 702 Of the 1467 traffic accident reports, 175 charges were filed (12%) alleging reckless driving. Staff has surveyed other localities concerning their collection activities. No other local government in this region has adopted such an ordinance. Chesterfield, Loudoun and Virginia Beach use the flat fee approach, having determined that the minute-by-minute accounting is not cost effective, and in many instances, results in a lower cost recovery than the flat fee. This conclusion is consistent with Roanoke County's data. For example, using an average of $.57 per minute ($34 per hour for two police officers) fora "simple" DUI incident the time expended at the scene of arrest is on average 20 minutes. One officer could be involved for up to 3 hours in some instances (transport to magistrate and jail, paperwork, interviewing witnesses, etc.). The following administrative costs are not recoverable: monitoring cases to conviction (since only convictions are eligible for cost recovery), retrieving the data from the CAD system for minute-by-minute accounting, separating out volunteer fire and rescue time, preparing and mailing demand letters, preparing and handling collection cases in general district court, and other costs of collection. As in all collection matters there is a significant number of judgments that are uncollectable. The Treasurer advises me that he places a higher priority on the collection of delinquent taxes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following: (i) do not amend Sec. 2-7 at this time, (ii) monitor the use of this expanded legislation in other localities to determine its suitability for Roanoke County (iii) continue to collect reasonable expenses from DUI accidents, (iv) use the $100 flat fee to minimize administrative costs and expenses, and (v) use minute-by-minute accounting in those rare situations when justified by the expense of the emergency response. _ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION 102803-7 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H Iton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Meeting File AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 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. 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION 102803-8 PROCEEDING TO THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UNDER THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2002 WHEREAS, the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA) allows the Roanoke County to create apublic-private partnership to develop projects for public use; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 051304-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted procedures for the implementation of the PPEA by Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems had submitted an unsolicited proposal under the provisions of the PPEA to construct an emergency communications/public safety center for Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 062403-1 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County accepted the Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems unsolicited proposal for publication and conceptual phase consideration and it invited the submission of competing preliminary proposals; and WHEREAS, the SafetyFirst Consortium and the Public Facility Consortium, LLC have submitted proposals pursuant to these procedures; and WHEREAS, the County Administrator has reviewed these proposals and has recommended to the Board of Supervisors that it proceed to review three competing proposals at the detailed design phase. 1 .~ t 1. That there is a public need for an emergency communications/public safety center for Roanoke County. 2. That it chooses to accept the following proposals for detailed Phase 2 proposal review pursuant to Section VI. B. of the County's procedures: Northrop- Grumman Mission Systems, SafetyFirst Consortium, and Public Facility Consortium, LLC. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution moving forward to the detailed design phase the following three proposals: Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems, SafetyFirst Consortium, and Public Facility Consortium, LLC. This motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H Iton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner 2 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request for approval of a resolution proceeding to the Detailed Design Phase for the construction of a new Public Safety Communications Center under the Public-Private Education and Facilities Infrastructure Act of 2002 SUBMITTED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell Assistant County Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ /~~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: We are pleased to have received three excellent proposals. Dan and the team members did a thorough and commendable job of defining the needs for the new Public Safety Center and working with those making proposals. Following the work session with the Board, staff and I will make a recommendation on the teams to be chosen for the next phase. It is important for us to continue the process in order to finalize the scope and cost of the project. As a first step in phase 2, we will need to identify a site for the new facility. We will evaluate current County facilities and those properties offered by the teams in their proposals. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On September 15, the County received proposals from two development groups, Safety First and Public Facilities Consortium in response to a published notice of acceptance of an unsolicited proposal from Northrop-Grumman Corporation for the development of a Public Safety Communications Center/Public Safety Building. The proposals were developed in accordance with the provisions of the Public-Private Educational Infrastructure and Facilities Act of 2002 (PPEA). County Administrator Hodge and the appropriate staff have reviewed all three proposals and are prepared to make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors concerning sending any or all of the proposals onto the phase 2 or detailed design phase of the PPEA process. The details of the proposal review process and the recommendation will be presented in a work session earlier in the afternoon. Under the provisions of the PPEA legislation, the Board must pass a formal resolution should it wish to move the project forward. S- FISCAL IMPACT: At this stage in the proposal process, there is no fiscal impact on the County other than the staff time spent on reviewing the future phase 2 proposals. Firms chosen to develop phase two proposals must submit a total of $50,000 to defray the cost of the reviews for the County, should they wish to continue in the PPEA development process. ALTERNATIVES: Under the PPEA legislation, there are several possible alternatives: 1) Reject all proposals and discontinue the project development process. 2) Choose to move only one proposal forward to the detailed design phase. 3) Choose to move multiple proposals forward to the detailed design phase. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative three, moving multiple proposals forward to the detailed design stage. The specific proposals recommended by the staff and Mr. Hodge to be moved forward will be discussed in the work session in the afternoon segment of the Board of Supervisor's meeting. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION PROCEEDING TO THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER UNDER THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2002 ~i WHEREAS, the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA) allows the Roanoke County to create apublic-private partnership to develop projects for public use; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 051304-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted procedures for the implementation of the PPEA by Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems had submitted an unsolicited proposal under the provisions of the PPEA to construct an emergency communications/public safety center for Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, by Resolution 062403-1 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County accepted the Northrop-Grumman Mission Systems unsolicited proposal for publication and conceptual phase consideration and it invited the submission of competing preliminary proposals; and WHEREAS, the SafetyFirst Consortium and the Public Facility Consortium, LLC have submitted proposals pursuant to these procedures; and WHEREAS, the County Administrator has reviewed these proposals and has recommended to the Board of Supervisors that it proceed to review two competing proposals at the detailed design phase. 1 S- 1. That there is a public need for an emergency communications/public safety center for Roanoke County. 2. That it chooses to accept the following proposals for detailed Phase 2 proposal review pursuant to Section VI. B. of the County's procedures: 2 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Public hearing on proposed Charter amendment to Roanoke County Charter SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Q~~,,~.~„~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On September 23, 2003, the Board of Supervisors authorized the publication of a legal notice scheduling a public hearing for 7:00 p.m. on October 28, 2003, seeking citizen comment on the proposed amendment to the Roanoke County Charter. This notice was published on October 14, 2003. Sec. 15.2-2-2 of the State Code sets out the procedure for a locality to request an amendment to its existing Charter. The locality must publish in a newspaper of general circulation the text or an informative summary of the charter amendment. This publication must also provide at least ten days notice of the time and place of a hearing on this charter amendment. Upon completion of the public hearing and adoption of the amendments the locality may request the General Assembly to grant it an amendment to its existing charter. The full text of the proposed amendment is attached to this report. A summary of the proposed Charter amendment is as follows: Sec. 2.02 -Taxing powers. - In addition to the powers granted by other sections of the charter and general law, the county shall have the additional power to levy and collect taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products, pursuant to Section 58.1-3832 of the Code of Virginia. It is further recommended that the Board propose to the General Assembly that any tax revenues derived from a local ordinance implementing this new taxing power be appropriated for public safety and emergency response services as determined by the Board of Supervisors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: t~ Staff recommends that the Board hold the public hearing as scheduled. _._... • ~ .~ 1. That Section 2.02 be amended and reenacted as follows: § 2.02. Taxing powers. --In addition to the powers granted by other sections of this Charter and general law, the county shall have the power to raise annually by taxes and assessments, as permitted and limited by general law, in the county such sums of money as the board of supervisors shall deem necessary to pay the debts and defray the expenses of the county in such manner as the board of supervisors shall deem expedient. In addition to, but not as a limitation upon, this general grant of power the county shall have power to levy and collect ad valorum taxes on real estate and tangible personal property and machinery and tools; to levy and collect taxes for admission to or other charge for any public amusement, entertainment, performance, exhibition, sport or athletic event in the county, which taxes may be added to and collected with the price of such admission or other charge; to levy and collect taxes on hotel and motel rooms not to exceed five percent of the amount charged for the occupancy thereof; to levy and collect taxes on the sale of meals, including nonalcoholic beverages, only as provided for by general law and such tax shall apply also to food prepared on premises and sold to take out, such tax is subject to limitations as may be imposed by general law; to levy and collect taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products, pursuant to Section 58.1-3832; to levy and collect privilege taxes, local general retail sales and use taxes as provided by law; unless prohibited by law, to require licenses, prohibit the conduct of any business, profession, vocation or calling without such license, require taxes to be paid on such licenses in respect of all businesses, professions, vocations and callings not exempted by prohibition of general law; to franchise any business or calling so as to protect the public interest; and to require licenses of all owners of vehicles of all kinds for the privilege of using the streets and other public places in the county, require taxes to be paid on such licenses and prohibit the use of streets, alleys and other public places in the county without such license. In addition to the other pourers conferred bylaw, the County of Roanoke shall have the power to impose, levy, and collect, in such manner as its board may deed expedient, a consumer or subscriber tax at a rate or rates not exceeding those authorized by general law upon the amount paid for the use of gas, electricity, telephone, and any other public utility service within the county, or upon the amount paid for any one or more of such public utility services, and may provide that such tax shall be added to and collected with bills rendered consumers and subscribers for such services. (Acts of Assembly, 1989 session, Ch. 119, approved 3-6-89; Acts of Assembly, 1993 session, Ch. 3, approved 2-9-93) 2. That the tax revenues derived from a local ordinance which implements the Charter amendment authoriang a tax on cigarettes and tobacco products shall be appropriated br public safety and emergency response services as determined by the Board of Supervisors. t AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-9 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO MJH DEVELOPMENT TO CONSTRUCT AMINI-WAREHOUSE FACILITY AND OFFICES TO BE LOCATED ONE-HALF MILE FROM PLANTATION ROAD ON ANGEL LANE (TAX MAP NO. 17.00-1-2) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, MJH Development has filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a mini-warehouse facility and offices to be located one-half mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane (Tax Map No. 17.00-1-2) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on October 7, 2003; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on September 23, 2003; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on October 28, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to MJH Development to construct amini-warehouse facility and offices to be located one-half mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1 (1) Development of the site shall be in sufficient conformity to the August 20, 2003 plan developed by Providence Engineering. (2) , (3) The color of the buildings and doors shall be non-reflective and of earth- tone colors. Appropriate groundcover, approved by planning staff during Site Plan review, shall be provided on all slopes 3:1 or greater within the limits of disturbance. (4) A 10' wide landscaping strip shall be provided between I-81 and the mini- warehouse building labeled 4800 S.F. Within this landscaping strip, Leyland Cypress trees shall be planted at a minimum of 10' in height at the time of planting and no more than 10' on center. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Church to approve the ordinance with conditions but with the deletion of Condition #2. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 2 A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. olton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Real Estate Evaluation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 3 COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants name: MJH Development Existing Zoning:I-1 Rezoning: Proposed Special Use Tax Map No.17.00-1-2 ~; ~M~, ~~ Cnro Reaano/r Vt - PETITIONER: MJH Development CASE NUMBER: 23-10/2003 Planning Commission Hearing Date: October 7, 2003 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: October 28, 2003 A. REQUEST The petition of MJH Development to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct mini warehouse facility and offices located 1/2 mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No comments from citizens. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Chris Lowe presented the staff report. Discussion from the Planning Commission consisted of concerns with Suggested Condition #2, relating to access to I-81 for the adjacent I-1 English property. Mr. Shawn Goldsmith, project engineer from Providence Engineering, commented that his client does not wish to grant an access easement to the English Property. Mr. Goldsmith and his client (who was not present), had concerns about the cost of an access road to the adjacent English property. Mr. Witt explained that if Mr. English wanted to utilize this proposed easement, then he would be responsible for development costs. Ms. Hooker also made note that this was for a Special Use Permit and the Planning Commission has a responsibility and the right to add conditions so that the surrounding neighborhoods are protected from future detrimental projects. Mr. Ross commented that if the Planning Commission was going to add the condition for an access easement to the English property, then they should strike Suggested Condition #3 requiring the extension to be built to VDOT standards. This would allow for a private drive. D. CONDITIONS Amended Conditions 1. Development of the site shall be in sufficient conformity to the August 20, 2003 plan developed by Providence Engineering. 2. The applicant shall provide an easement, if one does not currently exist, on their land for the extension of Angel Lane to the adjoining I-1 English property. 3. The color of the buildings and doors shall be non-reflective and of earth-tone colors. Appropriate groundcover, approved by planning staff during Site Plan review, shall be provided on all slopes 3:1 or greater within the limits of disturbance. 4. A 10' wide landscaping strip shall be provided between I-81 and the mini-warehouse building labeled 4800 S.F. Within this landscaping strip, Leyland Cypress trees shall be planted at a minimum of 10' in height at the time of planting and no more than 10' on center. - -~, E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Ms. Hooker made the motion to recommend approval for the SUP with the amended conditions listed above. The motion passed 5-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid Roanoke County Planning Commission ~J~~ STAFF REPORT Petitioner: MJH Development Request: Special Use Permit for Mini-Warehouse ` Location: Angel Lane -Near Hollins Exit on I-81 Magisterial District: Catawba Suggested The staff suggest the following conditions: Conditions: - 1. Development of the site shall be in sufficient conformity to the August 20, 2003 plan developed by Providence Engineering. 2. The applicant should provide an easement, if one does not currently exist, on their land for the extension of Angel Lane to the adjoining property. 3. The extension of Angel Lane should be designed and constructed to VDOT standards for this classification of roadway. The proposed extension of Angel Lane should match the characteristics of the existing roadway, should VDOT ever decide to accept the extension and include it in its maintenance plan. 4. The color of the buildings and doors shall be nonreflective and of earthtone colors. 5. A 10' wide landscaping strip shall be provided between I-81 and the mini-warehouse building labeled 4800 S.F. Within this landscaping strip, Leyland Cypress trees shall be planted at a minimum of 10' in height at the time of planting and no more than 10' on center. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for a Special Use Permit to allow mini-warehouse use for the parcel. Currently the plans for the site are amini-warehouse project consisting of 4 buildings. Also 2 office buildings both being 2 stories are also planned and permitted in I-1. The development will encompass 4.5 acres of the 50.6 acres of the site. The petitioner intends to leave the slopes in excess of 33% (3:1) undeveloped. The site is zoned I-1 yet designated Transition in the Roanoke County 1998 Community Plan. 1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Site Plan Review required. Mini-warehouse use and design standards. VDOT approval required. 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Back round -Currently the property is vacant. The property fronts Interstate 81. AEP owns a .s substation parcel adjoining the property. The petitioner's goal is to develop mini-warehouse storage and two office buildings on the site. Currently existing sewer lines are about 1200' east ~~''~ _ on Angel Lane. Existing water is about 3700' east and the petitioner would have to acquire an easement from the adjoining English property. Topo raphy/Ve etation -The property slopes significantly from north to south from one property line to the other. The property is vegetated and has both mature and young trees. This site has experienced timbering in the past. An existing 50' Roanoke Gas easement runs from east to west along the southern property line. Access to the site will be along this easement. Surrounding Neighborhood -The property to the north is owned by Roanoke City and is part of the Carvins Cove watershed. To the south is I-81. To the east of the property are 70 + acres owned by the Church of God. To the west is the 57 acre property of Robert English, which is also zoned I- l . 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Background -The petitioner's goal is to develop mini-warehouse storage and two office buildings for the site. Public sewer is within 1200 feet east of the site, and the petitioner plans to extend sewer along Angel Lane. There are no plans to extend water to the site, so a private well will be utilized to service the facilities. Site Layout/Architecture -The petitioner plans to develop a 4.5 acre portion of the 50.6 acre parcel. The portion of the site that has a slope of 33% (3:1) or greater is intended to remain undeveloped, which will minimize the impacts on forested areas. The location of the layout and the physical boundaries will keep visibility of the development at a minimum with the exception of the power substation and the cellular tower site. The site layout proposes 4 buildings for mini- warehouse storage (with two of those buildings forming an "L" shape) and two buildings for 2 story general/professional offices. Access/Traffic Circulation -V DOT states that a commercial entrance permit will be required and comments will be made during site plan review. V DOT also notes that preliminary I-81 plans indicate Angel Lane will be impacted, thus this development could potentially be impacted in the future. The Roanoke County Traffic Engineer feels that the proximity of I-81 facilitates the transportation activities that the site will produce. The site is within 3/4 mile of the Exit 146 Interchange on I-81 and there is an adequate service road providing access to the site. Approximately 200 trips per day are estimated upon completion of the development. As of a 1997 traffic count there is currently 235 trips per day. He also suggests two conditions be placed in the permit. (1) The applicant should provide an easement, if one does not currently exist, on their land for the extension of Angel Lane to the adjoining I-1 zoned property, and (2) The extension of Angel Lane should be designed and constructed to VDOT standards for this classification of roadway. The proposed extension of Angel Lane should match the characteristics of the existing roadway, should VDOT ever decide to accept the extension and include it in its maintenance plan. Condition (1) is important because the only other access to the 2 57 acre, I-1 tract to the west is Loch Haven Drive. This would not be an appropriate access for industrial traffic to the property. Fire & Rescue/LTtilities -Public water and sanitary sewer are not currently available to this property. Both public water and sewer of adequate capacity may be provided by extensions of public facilities. Fire and Rescue does not believe the call volume will be an area of significant increase, but do have concerns about what type of storage will be taking place and water availability. Some storage potentially could require fire suppression. While they do not oppose the Special Use Permit, they are interested in continued plans. Department of Economic Development -The Department of Economic Development supports commercial activity that conforms to the Community Plan and is compatible with the surrounding land use. They have not objections to the proposed Special Use Permit as long as the proposed development does not eliminate future access, by way of Angel Lane/I-81 service road, to the adjacent I-1 zoned property owned by Robert English. 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The site is designated as Transition in the 1998 Community Plan. Transition land use areas encourage the orderly development of highway frontage parcels. Transition areas are suitable for office, institutional, and small scale, coordinated retail uses. This rezoning Special Use Permit for mini-warehouses would conform to the current Roanoke County 1998 Community Plan, if the recommended conditions are approved. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS This is a request for a Special Use Permit to allow mini-warehouse use. The site is designated Transition in the Roanoke County 1998 Community Plan and does conform to these standards. If the staff's suggested conditions are implemented, then impacts on the neighborhood with this Special Use Permit should be minimal and no negative impacts would be anticipated. CASE NUMBER: 23-10/2003 PREPARED BY: Chris Lowe HEARING PC: October 7, 2003 BOS: October 28, 2003 DATES: 3 County of Roanoke F®r Staff IJse ®~al Commaanity Devel® meat Ia Date received: Received by: Plammmmi~ag ~ Zommimmg R ~ Qf ~.L_ ... Application fee: PCBZA date: 5204 Bernard Drive y Cl Q ~ ~ ~ 0 -'t P ~ BOX 29$00 Placards issued: BOS date: Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 ~~ ~' ~ ~'~ i b (540) 772-2068 FAX. (540) 776-7155 Case Number ~ ~ -'~} 1~jn'~ Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY ©F THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/S/W V/AA R/S/W VlAA R/S/W V/AA x Consultation x 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan x Application fee x Application x Metes and bounds description N/A Proffers, if applicable x Justification N/A Water and sewer application x Adjoining property owners ' I hereby certify that I am either the owner of th or the o 's a r c ntract purchaser and am acting with the lmowledge and consent of the owner. (~~~ ,. ~ Owner's Signature JUSTIFICATICIN FOR REZONING, SPECIAL tiSE PERMIT (3R '6dAIVER REQUEST ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) ^ Rezoning D Special Use ^ Variance ^ Waiver ^ Administrative Appeal Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: 540-977-4113 MJH Development Work: 539 Parkview Dr. Cell #: Blue Ridge, VA 24064 Fax No.: Owner's name/address w/zip Phone #: 540-977-4113 John Bane Work: 539 Parkview Dr. Blue Ridge, VA 24064 Fax No. #: Property Location: Magisterial District: Catawba Near Hollins Exit 146 on I-81 Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: O 17.00-01-02.00-0000 Existing Zoning: I-1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: 50.62 Existing Land Use: Vacant REZONING SPECL~I. USE PERIYIITAND W.4Il~`ER APPLICANTS (R/S/VV) Proposed Zoning: I-1 w/ SUP Proposed Land Use: mini warehouse facility, offices Does the parcel meet the rnmunum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes El No ^ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes II No ^ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIltST If rezoning request, aze conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ^ No ^ VARUi~'VCE, T3~AIVER AND AD~YIINISTRATIijEAPPEAL APPLICAN?'S (ij/1W/AA) i Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Sections}; of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to 2 • ~ ~'..~ Applicant MJH Development The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver requests to determine the need an~ 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 Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. As stated in the Roanoke County Ordinance (Section 30-61-1), the purpose of the I-1 zone is to accommodate light industrial activities while maintaining accessibility to urban areas. The proposed usage of the parcel is for mini warehouse storage and offices. This facility will serve urban areas and needs a convenient location. The site's easy access to Interstate I-81 facilitates the transportation activities that the site will produce. Due to the location of the site, the proposed use(s) will not add to fret is congestion or large vehicles in more densely used areas. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The proposed project will provide general and/or professional office space, thereby encouraging economic growth. The added revenue will also provide the County with more tax income. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. The goal ofthe owner is to only develop the 4.5 acre portion ofthe entire 50.6 acre parcel. The portion ofthe site that has a slope greater than 33% is intended to remain undeveloped, which will minimize the impacts on forested areas. Other than slight increases in daily traffic on Angel Lane, the proposed development will have virtually no impacts on adjoining proper!~es. Due to its location and physical boundaries, the proposed development will not be visible from any of the adjoining properties except the unmanned power substation and cellular tower site. Since public sanitary sewer is located 1200 feet away along Angel Lane, an extension of public sewer would be necessary. The estimated water demand is a nominal 1000 gallons per day on the size of the facilities and the proposed use(s). A private well would be necessary since public water currently is not located within the vicinity ofthe property. The proposed development will have no impacts on schools, parks and recreation or fire and rescue (since fire protection will not be available due to the Lack of public water service] The southern portion of the site has an existing adequate drainage channel, which would be an ideal location for storm water management discharge. Erosion and Sediment Control measures will be provided to mitigate the impacts on the downstream properties. The proposed use(s) for this site also do not produce significant noise or air pollution as is the potential of most other industrial sites. J[7ST7F'1CATION FOR V~#RIANCE REQUEST ', CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST - -- - A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by' so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations, The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan maybe altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Flanning Division staff may exempt same of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALI~APPLICANTS ~/ a. Applicant name and name of development b. Date, scale and north arrow c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties e. 1?hysical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties g. All property lines and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights i. Location, widths and names of alI existing or platted streets or other public ways within ar adjacent to the development j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional information required for REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS V k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers ~/ m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals ~// n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections ~/ o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants N~a p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed ~~ q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule all items requiredya-tie checklist above are complete. Signature of 8 Date 6 N 5~1'+•2tP0' W E i ' o ~ 5 i -- PRQI] st~BAtR = ]sFr (IAINI-WnRENOUSE) 90E SETBACK - tOFf ' ~ wmaiN sEreADlc . 73FT ~ locovEacsoz ~ AtAfxFA~` \ rerArt sE]exx - IvT ~ PERYRiED taES (sFS zawNC oROInANCE 7-R coNPIETE ten: ~ Y WAAENWSE (NT01 SPECiN. DSE PERWn ` OFFl IOOOSF '' ` NIN-STD - 2 /IIGR \ 2 SPGS 1N 706 IB/If5 7 SPC~00 UHTS TNENEAFfE]I i t eLD4s a ~.t ]OSF44,1704J.I1,86(fiF NDEVe10PEO PROPERT'( ` BLDOS a a835F-B,t90~ WOODLAND ` AL YB11 WARk310N5E BLDG AREM24.BOOSF Ale/l-WP1rE71W5E 181115 (6!.)°1B0 UNII5.3 SPACE NCN r t EIAPLl1'/PF'.3 SPATES ~~~~ / 11 B ~ x ] NICCf.14.0005F fK OFFICE BLDG APFA.I4.000SF OlFICC BIDO MRM74.OOM19f/t.000SfltYMY 3P/CE4 ICTib. s _ / /' '~ ~rtE wE3L. Islet eE seam : srnw~DE rNac nwwem sv+R~ ctutmr sexth uLSr eE ocrE3lDm ro s7E ~ O ° cT m AND enErlD PawDt FROM PDLFS w15tE /' i wrvron LDrAmx sPNNC, ~ Ne3D wtrr ~ . ]elvwc 18ars ac 7looom•A~ ~ . PH.[!1P E BIKE ~ TAX H4iLE1 17.A0-1? - ~~ -- . y`h ~ • .~,~ ~ '%l i i~ i ~ /' /, /•. / /• /` / /. ~ SIOPYYIAIEIt LLAIIIGpIpf / PONO PFR RIB. COIWIIT IROYT4 / J ~~ FYSf~ P0801ifP NDEVELOPED PROPERTY / / /~ /. ~ , ~, .~ ,. -~.e .~ ...: ~~ _,m _~ -~o~` g,~ f =-= 3 / r %/ ,~ ~~ ~ B~ ~ ~~ ~~ R,p,Yi• ~~;- ,~~~ - ~ rxrPAnrE to ortrE a wro-staroaE touPUx-~ ~ i I -~ .~. -- / ~' ~`'~!`. r /'i y "' ~' eawPCr 7o e e .~-/~ ~' 6' PVC SMI. 5!W ..~i >tx.E PNWOSf ~~ ADJOINERS M711F7i5 NAPE 20F1E PARCJiLJ L A PI10.1P E BANE I-1 1]AD-1-1 B APPALACN4W POWDi C011PAt1Y 1-1 17.80-1-21 C APPAV478AN POWER COAPANT I-1 17.00-i-3 0 CIAIBCII OF C00 C-2 1600-1-e E CN18e:li' Of 000 C-3 1600-1-18 f CfIY @ MOMIGQ q-] I&00-1-9 6 IeIBFRf A. LTWaJ9N I-1 17.00-1-I E PR Q ! /I~EI V C'E ENGf~ VE€R/l V ~ CQIVSULTIN~' ENGINEERS 87 9 Nall Road Boones Mill, Virginia 24065 (540) 334-4294 Fax: (540} 334-4293 Email: providence@metwood.com CONCEPT PLAN FOR MJH DEVELOPMENT ROANOKE COUNTY, VA Design: 3CG Sheet No. Drawn: 3CGf $~5 Checked: SCG Date: 08-20-09 Comm. No.: SCALE:1 "=400' ~~ 9• F METES & BOUNDS FOR M1H DEVELOPME~+tT ROANOKE QO~[J1~iTY, VA Design: 3CG Sheet No. Drawn: 3CG/H~ Checked: SCG Date: OS-20-p.9 Comm. No.: PR C ~ ~f ~ ?ENS 'E ~N~f i ~ I /SERI / 1 /C; CQNSULTING ENGINEERS 87 9 Naff Road Boones Milf, Virginia 24065 (540) 334-4294 Fax: (540) 334-4293 Email: providence@metwcod.com ~,. ~! ~:,,;~ ~~ ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants name: MJH Development Existing Zoning:I-1 Rezoning: Proposed Special Use Tax Map No.17.00-1-2 -i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO MJH DEVELOPMENT TO CONSTRUCT AMINI-WAREHOUSE FACILITY AND OFFICES TO BE LOCATED ONE-HALF MILE FROM PLANTATION ROAD ON ANGEL LANE (TAX MAP NO. 17.00-1-2) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, MJH Development has filed a petition for a special use permit to construct a mini-warehouse facility and offices to be located one-half mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane (Tax Map No. 17.00-1-2) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on October 7, 2003; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on September 23, 2003; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on October 28, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to MJH Development to construct amini-warehouse facility and offices to be located one-half mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1 U"~ (1) Development of the site shall be in sufficient conformity to the August 20, 2003 plan developed by Providence Engineering. (2) The applicant shall provide an easement, if one does not currently exist, on their land for the extension of Angel Lane to the adjoining I-1 English property. (3) The color of the buildings and doors shall be non-reflective and of earth- tone colors. Appropriate groundcover, approved by planning staff during Site Plan review, shall be provided on all slopes 3:1 or greater within the limits of disturbance. (4) A 10' wide landscaping strip shall be provided between I-81 and the mini- warehouse building labeled 4800 S.F. Within this landscaping strip, Leyland Cypress trees shall be planted at a minimum of 10' in height at the time of planting and no more than 10' on center. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 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 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-10 TO VACATE PORTIONS OF A 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, A 15' WATER LINE EASEMENT, AND A 5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT UPON LOTS 15 AND 16, ON THE PLAT OF SECTION NO. 2, QUAIL RIDGE, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 3, AND RESUBDIVIDED BY PLAT OF SECTION NO. 2, QUAIL RIDGE, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 197, LOCATED IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by subdivision plat for `Section No. 2, "QUAIL RIDGE"', dated October 4, 2002, and of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 26, page 3, the developer, R & J Enterprises, LLC, dedicated and created a "NEW 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT " and a "NEW 15' WATER LINE EASEMENT", both shown in the Detail on Sheet 3 of said plat, and a "5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT" shown on Sheet 2 of said plat; and, WHEREAS, by re-subdivision plat for `Section No. 2, "QUAIL RIDGE"', dated July 25, 2003, and of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 26, page 197, a portion of the 24' right-of-way for Quail Ridge Circle was vacated, a portion of the 5' public utility easement was relocated, and Lots 14, 15, and 16 were reconfigured to larger and more desirable lot s; and, WHEREAS, as a result of the resubdivision, portions of the 15' sanitary sewer easement and 15' water line easement are no longer required; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioner-Developer, R & J Enterprises, LLC, has requested that the unnecessary portions of the sanitary sewer easement, the water line easement, and the public utility easement, as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto, be vacated pursuant to §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, 1 ~ , WHEREAS, these vacations will not involve any cost to the County, will not interfere with the provision of public services, and have been approved by the affected public utility companies and County departments; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the "15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO BE VACATED", the "15' WATER LINE EASEMENT TO BE VACATED", and the "5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED", described and shown cross-hatched on Exhibit A attached hereto, said easements having been dedicated and created by subdivision plat for `Section No. 2, "QUAIL RIDGE"', dated October 4, 2002, and recorded in Plat Book 26, page 3, located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioner, R & J Enterprises, LLC. 3. 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 the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 2 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~'~~ ~~ ~~ Brenda J. Holton, 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 3 I• • 15' WATB4 LJ1E EASBL(eNT TO ETE VACA7ID CORNER BEARING DISTANCE W1-W2 N 345327" W 15.00' W2-W3 N 55U633' E 71.30' W3-W4 S 353'27" E 15.00' W4-W5 S 55'06'33." W 15.47' W5-W6 S 347134' E 7;46' W6-W7 S 55'06'33" W 10.00' W7-W8 N 3421'34' W 7.46' . W8-W] S 55'0633" W' 45.84'- AREA = 1,144 S.F. s PueLic urnfTi~ eAseuevT' 7l7 ~ V,4CA7ID CORNER BEARING OfSTANCE U1-U2 N 34 53'27' W 5.00' U2-U3 N 55633" E 81.30' U3-U4 IV 34 53'27" W 24.00' U4-U5 N 55 r76'33' E 5.00' U5-U6 S 345327" E 28.00' U6-Ui S 5506'33''W 86.30' AREA = 552 S.F. LEGEND EK = DQSTING P.B. = PLAT~OOK PG =PAGE S F. =SQUARE FEET R/1Y =RIGHT OF WAY ® 7O BE VACATED • `. '~ . Exhibit A IX aSE (P.B. 26, PC. 3) LOT i 6 •Z --------------~ ~~~j~ oasnNc 2a`•A/w udcaiEn--~-~ ~1~iu:: R ~ P.B. 26, PG. 197 I CIRCLE ~ 3 _ J ~ a1 5 4 ~p~P6 QG. LOT 15 ~ ~Qpry EJQ97DNQ 15' 8A11PTARY &EWEEI EA861~11T 717 ~ VACA7ID Fx 15' W.C.E {N2 LOT 16 (P.B. 26, P& 3) Etl511NG 24' A/W YACd - - P.6 26_ PCB 197 - - iirrm~ii QUAIL:, fflIDG~ ' 0 1 ~'~ // W4 gRCLE ^.Ex (4Anx ecowoF>: - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~p1 Va~~ ~ ~ W5 p~~`'QG~ LOT 15 ~ 4y6 ~~~ti6' Q0' Fxi§7r~ is wAia~ ce+~!/dsa®vr ~ Tt~ BE VACA7ID ' 1JEW 5' P.U.E Lor is ~ ~ (j(jgjL ~ Exrsnxc z4' A/W .udcala:v LIZ P.B. 26, PG 197 ~ - ~ ~1 (Pa 2 P~ 3) ~ LOT 15 ~\ p~P\,QG, EX/3T>nlLi, 5' Pl~L1C UTIJTY. ~~ rye. EA9I~HVT' 710 bl: V,4G17S7 .- Q;,.... N01FS: i. THE INTENT OF 'TFI1S PLAT 1S TO VACATE A PORTION OF 7NitEF E4SEMENTS AND DOES NOT CONSITIUTE A BOUNDARY SURVEY. PLAT SHOWING ~L,~g 0~ VACATION OF A PORTION OF EXISTING ~ °r - ~ ~' 15' SANITARY SEWER EASE1tfE1VT p ~, 7~~~ 24~ tao5 11M0-n-tY x ; 15 WATER LINE EASEMENT Ho ~E ~ 5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 41 CREATED IN "QU,4IL RIDGE°, SECTION No. 2; P:B: 26, PG. 3 SITiJATID AT THE TERMINUS OF QUAIL RIDGE CIRCLE ,q~ otz" CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT .. ROANOKE COUNTY; Va{GIlVLA DATE: SE TEMBER 26 2003 P C LUIvISDEN ASSOCIATES P , . . , scALE: ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS-PLANNERS _ ~" ¢~ VIRG[NIA ROANOKE contra nlo : , . . 2001-014 4664 BRAMBLETON AVENUE PHONE: (540) 774-4411 CADD FILE: F:\?_001\01014\SUR\iIACATE.DWG P.O. BOX 20669 FAX: (540) 772-9445 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA. 24018 E-MAIL: MAIL@LUMSDENPC.COM 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 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of an ordinance to vacate portions of a 15' sanitary sewer easement, a 15' water line easement, and a 5' public utility easement upon Lots 15 and 16, Plat Of Section No. 2, Quail Ridge, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 3, and resubdivided by Plat Of Section No. 2, Quail Ridge, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 197, Cave Spring Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey Director, Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~y-"` / ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: R & J Enterprises, LLC is requesting that a portion of the 5' Public Utility Easement, a 15' Water Line Easement and a 15-foot Sanitary Sewer Easement dedicated in Plat Book 26, Page 3, Quail Ridge Section No. 2 and in Plat Book 26, Page 197, Quail Ridge Section No. 2 be vacated as shown on the attached plat. The 5' public utility easement has been relocated by dedication on the resubdivision plat of Quail Ridge, Section No. 2, recorded in Plat Book 26, Page 197. The lots were reconfigured to make the lots larger and more desirable and the easements are being vacated to accommodate these new lots. Local utility companies have been notified of the proposed public utility easement vacation and none had any objections. Utility Department Staff has reviewed and approved the proposed vacation of the water line and sewer line easements. 1 u-a FISCAL IMPACT: The costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of R & J Enterprises, LLC. ALTERNATIVES: That the Board approve the second reading and adopt the proposed ordinance to vacate the easement shown on the attached plat, Exhibit A. 2. That the Board decline to adopt the proposed ordinance and not vacate the easements as shown on the attached plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Alternative #1. 2 ~ ~ °` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE TO VACATE PORTIONS OF A 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, A 15' WATER LINE EASEMENT, AND A 5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT UPON LOTS 15 AND 16, ON THE PLAT OF SECTION NO. 2, QUAIL RIDGE, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 3, AND RESUBDIVIDED BY PLAT OF SECTION NO. 2, QUAIL RIDGE, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 197, LOCATED IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by subdivision plat for `Section No. 2, "QUAIL RIDGE"', dated October 4, 2002, and of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 26, page 3, the developer, R & J Enterprises, LLC, dedicated and created a "NEW 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT " and a "NEW 15' WATER LINE EASEMENT", both shown in the Detail on Sheet 3 of said plat, and a "5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT" shown on Sheet 2 of said plat; and, WHEREAS, by re-subdivision plat for `Section No. 2, "QUAIL RIDGE"', dated July 25, 2003, and of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 26, page 197, a portion of the 24' right-of-way for Quail Ridge Circle was vacated, a portion of the 5' public utility easement was relocated, and Lots 14, 15, and 16 were reconfigured to larger and more desirable lot s; and, WHEREAS, as a result of the resubdivision, portions of the 15' sanitary sewer easement and 15' water line easement are no longer required; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioner-Developer, R & J Enterprises, LLC, has requested that the unnecessary portions of the sanitary sewer easement, the water line easement, and the public utility easement, as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto, be vacated pursuant to §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, ~~~~ WHEREAS, these vacations will not involve any cost to the County, will not interfere with the provision of public services, and have been approved by the affected public utility companies and County departments; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by § 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the "15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO BE VACATED", the "15' WATER LINE EASEMENT TO BE VACATED", and the "5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED", described and shown cross-hatched on Exhibit A attached hereto, said easements having been dedicated and created by subdivision plat for `Section No. 2, "QUAIL RIDGE"', dated October 4, 2002, and recorded in Plat Book 26, page 3, located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioner, R & J Enterprises, LLC. 3. That the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be 2 ~1- ~ necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with § 15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 3 ~~ fS WA713i LAE EASBI~ VT 77D BE VACATID CORNER BEARING DISTANCE W1-W2 N 3453'27" W 15.00' W2-W3 N 55'06:33" E 71.30•' W3-W4 S 35327" E 15.00' W4-W5 S 55 O6 ;33' W 15.47' W5-W6 S 347134" E 7.,46' W6-W7 S 55716'33" W 10.00' W7-WB N 342134' W 7.46' . W8-Wi S 55'D6;33' W' 45.84' AREA = 1,144 S.F. 5' PLB11C UT1LIfY EA~Ni' li0 ~ VACAT® CORNER BE.4R/NG DISTANCE Ui-U2 N 345327" W 5.00' U2-U3 N 55'06 33" E 81.30' U3-U4 N 3453'27' W 24.00' U4-U5 N 55'06'33' E 5.00' U5-U6 S 345327" E 29.00' U6-Ui S 55716'33' 'W 86.30' AREA = 552 S F. E)L =EXISTING P.B. = PLAT..BOOK P~ =PAGE SF. =SQUARE FEET R/W = RIGNT OF iVAY ® TD eE uACATm IX SSE (P.B. 26, PCB 3) LOT 16 ~v-~e 2 -------------~ ~srtfu- R EXISTING 24'•R/W VACATED--y ~~ P.S 26, P& f97 I •~ ---... ._.._. ~._ 3 I . -------~ ~pF,~~1 5 4 ~Q~P6Qcr LOT 15 ~ \ Qe. EJQBTINQ 15' BANT,dRYBEW@i EASHI~BVT ltd BE VACATffi Ex 1s` w.c..E W2 LOT 16 (P.B. 26, P~ 3) EXfSTTNG 24' R/W VACA P.B. 26; PG 197 QIIAg:, R~ ' 0 1 W4 1g1 IX WATER BLOWDFF VaL~ ~ - ~ - - W5 p~~`'Q~ Lor 15 ~ ws ~~~ti6~ Q~, ~oeT~vo ~ w,dia~ cnio= Fasaevr ~ Tri eF ~ACATID NEW 5' P.U.E LOT 16 ~ ~ ~~Il.. EXISTING 24' R/W VACATID U2 P.B. 26, PCB 197 ~, - 1 EX. 5' P.U.E ~ 1°~ . (P.B. 26, PG. 3) ~ LOT 1$ ~ \ ~P~QG- ~~ 6 F.10Ji1YQ.9 PI~BLIC UILTY ~~ ti EA98L®YT TO BE V,4G41ID Q'~. NOTES: i. THE INTENT OF THIS PLAT !S TO VACATE A PORTION OF THREE EASEMENTS AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A BOUNDARY SURVEY. PLAT SHOtMNG ~yTH 0~ VACATION OF A POR770N OF EXISTING o~~ ' > 2G zo r~~ " 15' SANITARY SEWER E~lSE1ffENT 'ep ~ ' ~ ~' 15 WATER LI1VE EASEMENT 71MOTHY ~ Ho ~ ~ b' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT 4~ CRE,471=D 1N °QU,41L RIDGE", SEC7101V No. 2; P:B: 26, PG. 3 SITUATED AT THE 1~RMINUS OF QUAIL RIDGE CIRCLE 04 ~ CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROA.2VOKE COUNTY; VIRGIlYIA DATE: ,SEPTEMBER 26, zoos LtJ1VISDEN ASSOCIATES, P.C. SCALE: _ ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS-PLANNERS COMM. NO.: ~" ¢~ ROANOKE, VIRGINIA • 2001-014 4664 BRAMBLETON AVENUE Pf-IONE: (540) 774-4411 CADD FILE: P.O. BOX 20669 FAX: (540) 772-9445 F:\?007\01014\SUR\VACATE.DWG ROANOKE VIRGINIA 24016 E-MAIL: MAIL@LUMSDENPC.COM c• Exhibit A AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-11 AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 10-FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED BETWEEN LOTS 22, 23, 24 AND 25, TINKER KNOLL, PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 1, IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by subdivision plat entitled "TINKER KNOLL", dated February 7, 1947, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 1, certain public easements were created, including a 10' utility easement located between Lots 22, 23, 24, and 25; and, WHEREAS, the petitioners, Donald W. Beckner, Jr., and Donna L. Beckner, husband and wife, are the owners of Lot 24, Tinker Knoll, and the adjacent owners, James Robert Hill and Debbie Rodey Hill (Lot 22), Kathyleen H. Damewood (Lot 23), and Wynn B. Brua (Lot 25), have joined in petitioners' request to vacate the easement; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioners have requested that said portion of the utility easement be vacated by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, pursuant to §15.2- 2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and, WHEREAS, there has been no objection raised by the appropriate public utility companies entitled to use the subject easement; 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 14, 2003; the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2003. 1 THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the public utility easement, being ten feet (10') in width and extending between Lots 22, 23 and 24, and further extending between Lots 24 and 25, in Tinker Knoll Subdivision, in the Hollins Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as shown on the subdivision plat entitled "TINKER KNOLL", dated February 7, 1947, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 3, page 1, and as further shown as "10' Public Utility Easement" on Exhibit A attached hereto, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioners. 3. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as maybe necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None 2 A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, 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 3 ~ ~ ~~ O 3 • ~O' ~~ :~ .~ s 15. ~~ ,6 ~^ - ~~ ~"'~ ~~ ~ ~2 10' lic Utility ~ ,~~ °~ ;~ Easemen ~S6 ~ 1 ~' ~ ~~ ' ~8S 2 2. 2 q w Lot z5 ('~ ~`~ 17 . J ~ ~, J _ ,l~ Lot 22 ~~ ~~~> ~`~~ ``~.,. X02 0 Lot 24 ~o _``~``~ ``~ ~~~ goo ~ 18. ~ ^~°` ~ ~. ~ ~o Lot 23 OIINERS ~~ ,~Q ~ Lot 22 Property of ~O~' James Robert and Debbie Rodsy EiIZ Lot 23 Property of ~ 60 ,1 5 Kathyleen H. Damewood ~- Lot 24 Property of ~~ Donald )f. Jr. and Donna L. Deokner Lot 25 Property of `~ llynn 9. Bruce ~ ~ N ROANOFfE COUNTY Plat showing ex~,stinq 10' Public Ut~,lity DEPARTMENT OF Easement along of Lots 22, 23, 24, 25 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (Plat Book 3, Pq 1 of TINKER KNOLL) o Tox Map No.27.f0-4-f,f9,f8,22 Date 09-22-03 Soale: 1'=60' E%H..IBIT A ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ - 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of ordinance to vacate portion of an existing 10- foot public utility easement between Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25 dedicated in Plat Book 3, Page 1, Tinker Knoll, Hollins Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey Director, Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: e1.~.~,-~ °~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Donald W. Jr. and Donna L. Beckner (Lot 24 -Tinker Knoll), James Robert and Debbie Rodey Hill (Lot 22 -Tinker Knoll), Wynn B. Brua (Lot 25 -Tinker Knoll), and Kathyleen H. Damewood (Lot 23 -Tinker Knoll) are requesting that a portion of the existing 10' Public Utility Easement shown on the map of Tinker Knoll recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 1 and on the attached plat be vacated. The plat reserved easements along the sides and rears of certain lots for the installation and maintenance of utilities. Donald W. Jr. and Donna L. Beckner would like to build a utility building/garage on their property and are unable to do so with the easement along the side and rear of their property. Local utility companies have been notified of the proposed easement vacation and none had any objections. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of Donald W. Jr. and Donna L. Beckner. ~~- 3 ALTERNATIVES: That the Board approve the second reading and adopt the proposed ordinance to vacate the portion of the 10' Public Utility Easement as shown on the attached plat. 2. That the Board not vacate the portion of the 10' Public Utility Easement as shown on the attached plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Alternative #1. 2 Lt- 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 10-FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED BETWEEN LOTS 22, 23, 24 AND 25, TINKER KNOLL, PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 1, IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by subdivision plat entitled "TINKER KNOLL", dated February 7, 1947, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 1, certain public easements were created, including a 10' utility easement located between Lots 22, 23, 24, and 25; and, WHEREAS, the petitioners, Donald W. Beckner, Jr., and Donna L. Beckner, husband and wife, are the owners of Lot 24, Tinker Knoll, and the adjacent owners, James Robert Hill and Debbie Rodey Hill (Lot 22), Kathyleen H. Damewood (Lot 23), and Wynn B. Brua (Lot 25), have joined in petitioners' request to vacate the easement; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioners have requested that said portion of the utility easement be vacated by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, pursuant to §15.2- 2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and, WHEREAS, there has been no objection raised by the appropriate public utility companies entitled to use the subject easement; 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 1 ~~-3 14, 2003; the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2003. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the public utility easement, being ten feet (10') in width and extending between Lots 22, 23 and 24, and further extending between Lots 24 and 25, in Tinker Knoll Subdivision, in the Hollins Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as shown on the subdivision plat entitled "TINKER KNOLL", dated February 7, 1947, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 3, page 1, and as further shown as "10' Public Utility Easement" on Exhibit A attached hereto, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to § 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioners. 3. 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 the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with §15.2-2272.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). 2 ~ Plat showing existing 10' Public Utility ROANOKE COUNTY Easement along of Lots 22, 23, 24, 25 DEPARTMENT OF (plat Book 3, Pg 1 of TINKER KNOLL) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax yap No.27. f0-4-1,19,18,2,2 ~ , Date 09-,22-03 Soabs: 1 =60 ffiIBIT A ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~- ~}"~~- ~ b~ --~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading and Public Hearing of ordinances approving the revised cable television franchise, and authorizing the execution of a cable television franchise agreement by and between the County of Roanoke, Virginia and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications Roanoke SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Joseph B. Obenshain Senior Assistant County Attorney Elmer C. Hodge ~,+•^~ County Administrator I~-~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County entered into a cable television franchise agreement with Cox Cable Roanoke, Inc. as of May 1, 1991. This agreement was authorized by ordinance 42391-15 which also enacted the Roanoke Valley Cable Television ordinance as part of the Roanoke County Code. This action was taken in conjunction with similar ordinances by Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton following joint negotiations with Cox Cable Roanoke, Inc. for a franchise for a term of twelve (12) years. Subsequently, Cox Cable Roanoke, Inc. has changed its corporate name to CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke ("Cox" ). Following receipt of a request from Cox, representatives of Roanoke County, Roanoke City, and the Town of Vinton have conducted several negotiating sessions with officials of Cox which have resulted in the terms of a franchise agreement acceptable to all three jurisdictions and Cox. As part of these negotiations, after considerable discussion and input from an outside consultant retained by Roanoke City, agreement was also reached on the terms of a revised cable television franchise ordinance. This new ordinance will incorporate current legal requirements for operation of a local cable television franchise l l-`I (a•b~ and will update the prior ordinance adopted in April, 1991. By ordinance adopted on April 22, 2003, the Board of Supervisors extended the County's current cable television franchise with Cox for a term of six (6) months from May 1, 2003, in order to permit the completion of the negotiating and drafting of a new franchise agreement and cable television franchise ordinance. The essential provisions of the new cable television franchise agreement between the County of Roanoke and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a/ Cox Communications Roanoke, are the following: 1. The term of the franchise will be for fifteen (15) years commencing on November 1, 2003 and expiring on October 31, 2018. 2. A capital grant for the acquisition and replacement of equipment for operation of our governmental and educational access television facilities ("RVTV") totaling $1,150,000.00 will be paid by Cox on the following schedule: a. $ 575,00 will be paid on or before May 1, 2004; b. $ 345,000 will be paid on or before November 1, 2006; and c. $ 230,000 will be paid on or before November 1, 2008. These payments will be made to Roanoke County as the fiscal agent for the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee ("Committee") as in the past. These funds are intended to provide the necessary capital funding for RVTV, but Roanoke County, Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton will still need to provide the operational funding for the governmental and educational access operations. 3. Cox will continue to carry RVTV on channel 3 on Cox's system lineup and Cox will continue to provide a public access channel for both videos and community bulletin board announcements at no charge to users. Cox will also provide an additional Educational/ Governmental Access ("EG Access") channel within 120 days of a request from the Committee and up to four (4) additional EG Access channels upon the showing of a need for such channels by the Committee. 4. Cox will continue to pay Roanoke County a franchise fee in the amount of 5% of its gross revenues from customers and business in the County, in accordance with Section 17 of the revised cable television franchise ordinance. (The amount of franchise fee payments that the County received from Cox for the period from July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003, was approximately $700,000.00.) 5. Cable service, including the basic service tier and the most widely subscribed-to tier of cable programming service, will continue to be provided to all building occupied by the three local governments without charge. Similar cable service and one high speed data connection will be provided to each of the County's public libraries, to each public school and each private school having at least 50 students. ~~~-tic ~b~ 6. The current Institutional Network, with up to 25 insertion points, with the capacity for 4 upstream channels for transmission over the EG Access channels (which may be encoded/scrambled) will be maintained to the same standard as all of Cox's other channels with the possibility for five (5) more insertion points if the need is established. 7. Cox will not itemize on subscribers' bills the amounts representing the costs of providing the service to local government and school buildings, the institutional network and the Capital Grant. The Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee has indicated its support of the terms of this Cable Television Franchise Agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the revised ordinance and new cable television franchise agreement will permit the County of Roanoke, City of Roanoke, and Town of Vinton to continue to receive a franchise fee of 5% of gross revenues and a capital grant of $1,150,000, as outlined above. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board vote separately to approve (1) the revised cable television franchise ordinance, and (2) the ordinance authorizing execution of the new cable television franchise agreement. ~ , ~ r cc: File Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney Robert R. Altice, Chairman, Roanoke Regional Cable TV Committee Mike Pedelty, Director, Public Relations, Cox Communications Mary F. Parker, Clerk, Roanoke City Council Carolyn S. Ross, Clerk, Vinton Town Council Elaine Simpson, Government Access Director T ~ ~ ~ ~ , AT A REGULAR MEETING OFTHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-12 PROVIDING FOR ONE OR MORE NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISES TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN ONE OR MORE CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEMS WITHIN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable law, policies and procedures are established in this Ordinance whereby the County of Roanoke, Virginia ("County"), may grant certain entities, their successors and assigns, anon-exclusive franchise, or may renew or extend an existing franchise, to erect, operate and maintain poles, cables and all other electrical equipment, structures, or fixtures necessary to the construction, operation and maintenance of a Cable Television System under, over, upon and across the streets, alleys, sidewalks, and rights-of- way of the County to provide Cable Service to the residents and citizens of the County, and to the persons, firms, and corporations doing business therein, and to use the property of other entities in furtherance and support of the objectives of this Ordinance and any franchise granted hereunder upon such arrangements and under such conditions as to which the entities may agree. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the term "Franchise" shall apply, unless otherwise distinguished, to an initial franchise, an extended franchise or a renewed franchise; and WHEREAS, the provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all cable television Franchises granted, extended or renewed after the effective date of this Ordinance, and shall also apply to all Cable Television Franchisees existing as of the effective date in the event and as of the date of any extension or renewal of an existing Franchise requested by such Franchisee. WHEREAS, the first reading of this revised cable television franchise ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing was held on October 28, 2003. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: + f , i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1. Short Title ........................................................................................... 4 Section 2. Definitions ........................................................................................... 4 y ................................................................................ Section 3. Grant of Authorit 9 Section 4. Applications for Grant, Renewal, Transfer, or Modification of Franchises ..................................................................................................... 11 (a) Written Application .............................................................................. 11 (b) Application for Grant of a Franchise other than a Cable Act Renewal Franchise ............................................................................ 11 (c) Application for Grant of a Renewal Franchise ..................................... 14 (d) Contents of Applications ..................................................................... 14 (e) Application for Modification of a Franchise ......................................... 18 (f) Application for Consent to Transfer of a Franchise .............................. 18 Section 5. Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee .................... 19 Section 6. Rates ................................................................................................ 22 Section 7. PEG Access ...................................................................................... 23 Section 8. System Operation ............................................................................. 23 Section 9. Indemnification and Insurance .......................................................... 24 Section 10. Maintenance and Service Complaint Procedures .......................... . 26 Section 11. Filings with City .............................................................................. . 34 Section 12. Construction and Installation of the System ................................... . 35 Section 13. Emergency Alert System ............................................................... . 39 Section 14. Limits on Rights of Way ................................................................. . 40 Section 15. Approval Required for Franchise Transfer ..................................... . 40 Section 16. County Right in Franchise .............................................................. .41 Section 17. Franchise Fee ................................................................................. 43 Section 18. Records and Reports ...................................................................... 45 Section 19. Franchise Revocation ................................................................... .. 45 Section 20. Hearing Requirements for Matters Affecting Franchises .............. .. 48 ~ r ~ ~ TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section 21. Costs .............................................................................................. 48 Section 22. Open Video System Operation .......................................................49 Section 23. Severability .....................................................................................49 Section 24. Acceptance of Franchise ................................................................ 50 Section 25. Franchisee to Abide by Applicable Laws ........................................ 51 Section 26. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions .............. 51 Section 27. Effective Date ................................................................................. 52 Appendix A. FCC Customer Service Standards 3 1 ~ ~ ~ i CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE Section 1. Short Title. This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE." Section 2. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance the following terms, phrases, words, and their derivations shall have the meanings given herein. Terms of art not otherwise defined herein, whether capitalized or not, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in Title VI (Cable Communications) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§521, et seq. (hereinafter the "Cable Act"). When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not merely directory. (a) "Board" shall mean the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia. (b) "Cable," whether capitalized or not, shall mean the closed transmission paths by which video programming and other Cable Services are transmitted through and along a Franchisee's Cable System, and shall include coaxial cable, optical fiber and any other closed transmission path utilized therefor. (c) "Cable Service" shall have the same meaning as ascribed to the term "cable service" in the Cable Act. 4 (d) "Cable Television System" (or "CATV", or "Cable System", sometimes hereinafter referred to as "System") shall have the same meaning as ascribed to the term "cable system" in the Cable Act. (e) "Chief Executive" shall mean the administrator of a county, manager of a city, or manager of a town, as the context may require. (f) "City" shall mean the City of Roanoke, Virginia. (g) "Council" shall mean the City Council of the City of Roanoke or the Town Council of the Town of Vinton, as the context may require. (h) "County" shall mean the County of Roanoke, Virginia. (i) "EG" shall mean the educational and governmental access component of PEG Access as defined in Section 2(w) hereof. (j) "Elementary and Secondary Schools", whether capitalized or not, shall mean all public institutions operated for the purposes of teaching students enrolled in the elementary (including kindergarten), middle and high school grades. (k) "FCC" shall mean the Federal Communications Commission or its successor. (I) "Franchise" shall mean the grant of authority, embodied in a franchise agreement between the County and a particular Franchisee, authorizing that Franchisee to construct, own, operate and maintain a cable system and provide cable service in the Service Area defined by that agreement. (m) "Franchise Area," for the purposes of establishing any entitlement to regulate rates charged by a Franchisee pursuant to the Cable Act, or any subsequently adopted counterpart thereof or governing regulatory provision relating thereto, shall mean and be 5 { ~ ' deemed as being coterminous with a Franchisee's Service Area; provided, however, that until a Franchisee offers Cable Service throughout such Service Area, a Franchisee's Franchise Area shall be such lesser portion of its Service Area to which it offers Cable Service. (n) "Franchisee" shall mean the grantee of rights under a Franchise granted pursuant to this Ordinance. (o) "Governing Body" shall mean the Board or a Council, as the context may require. (p) "Gross Revenues" shall mean all revenues derived from the operation of a Franchisee's System to provide Cable Service within its Service Area. This definition shall be construed as broadly as permitted by the Cable Act or any other applicable law. By way of example and not limitation, and unless otherwise defined in a Franchise, "Gross Revenues" shall include charges for basic service, cable programming services, per-channel or per-event services, other charges for video programming, installation and reconnection fees, leased channel fees, converter rental fees, advertising and home shopping revenues, late fees, and revenues for carriage of programming on the System, to the extent such items are considered "revenue" under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). "Gross Revenues" shall not include (1) any tax or fee imposed on cable Subscribers (but not on Franchisee) by the County or any governmental authority and collected by the Franchisee on behalf of such governmental entity (provided, however, that the fee imposed by Section 17 of this Ordinance shall not be construed to be such a tax or fee); (2) the revenues of any parent or affiliate of Franchisee to the extent, and only to the extent, the revenues of such parent or affiliate are costs of the Franchisee and recovered by Franchisee through charges to Subscribers that are included in Gross Revenues on which franchise fees are paid; and (3) actual bad debt, refunds 6 t ~ t or credits, provided any such bad debt subsequently collected shall be considered "Gross Revenues" in the period collected. In the event any revenues derived by Franchisee or its parent or affiliates relate to the System in conjunction with other cable systems outside the Service Area owned or operated by Franchisee, its parent or its affiliate, then such revenues shall be fairly pro-rated among the various systems, and the portion of such revenues attributable to the Franchisee's System in the County based on such apro-ration shall be considered "Gross Revenues". (q) "Higher Education Center" or "Roanoke Higher Education Center" shall mean the Higher Education Center providing extension services and located in the City. (r) "Home" shall mean any single family dwelling unit, whether a house, apartment, trailer or mobile home, rented room or otherwise. (s) "Local Government" shall mean, as the context may require, the City, the County, or the Town, or all of them collectively. (t) "Local Government Occupied Buildings" shall mean those buildings owned in whole or in part by the County, the City, or the Town, as the context may require, or occupied in whole or in part by Local Government officials or other persons in furtherance of Local Government objectives, and shall include, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, all volunteer and paid fire and/or rescue companies located within the County, City or Town. (u) "Non-Subscriber Services" shall mean services provided to persons other than a Subscriber or User of the services provided by or carried on a Franchisee's Cable System. (v) "Person" shall mean any individual, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company, trust, or entity of any kind, but shall not include the County, the City, or the Town. 7 \ Y T i (w) "PEG Access" shall mean public, educational and/or governmental use as provided in the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §531). (x) "PEG Access Channels" shall refer to the channel capacity on a System devoted to PEG Access. (y) "Public Schools", whether capitalized or not, shall mean all buildings operated by the School Board or School Division of the County, City or Town for the purposes of teaching and learning. (z) "Residential Subscriber" shall mean a purchaser in good standing of any service that the Franchisee delivers to any Home, provided that service is not utilized in connection with a business, trade, or profession. (aa) "Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee" (or "CATV Committee" or "Committee") shall mean the committee comprised of individuals from the County, the City and the Town, having responsibilities as set forth in this Ordinance concerning any cable television system which provides service within or to any portion of all of the aforesaid three jurisdictions. (bb) "Senior Citizen" shall mean any Residential Subscriber who is sixty-five (65) years of age or older. (cc) "Service Area" shall mean the geographical area in the County, City or Town, as the context may require, in which a Franchisee is authorized by a Franchise to construct its System and to provide Cable Service . 8 (dd) "Signals" shall mean and refer to all frequencies, and the modulating intelligence (including digital modulation) imposed or carried thereon, provided by or permitted to be inserted by a Franchisee on the Cable System operated by such Franchisee. (ee) "Streets" shall mean all public streets, roads, avenues, highways, boulevards, concourses, driveways, bridges, tunnels, parkways, alleys, and all other public rights-of-way within or belonging to the County, City or Town; as the context may require. (ff) "Subscriber" or "User" shall mean any person or entity lawfully receiving any service provided by or carried on a Franchisee's Cable System. (gg) "Town" shall mean the Town of Vinton, Virginia. (hh) "VDOT" shall mean the Virginia Department of Transportation. Section 3. Grant of Authority. (a) The County shall have the authority, subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of §15.2-2108 of the Code of Virginia and the Cable Act, to grant to such applicant, who shall thereafter be a Franchisee hereunder, a nonexclusive initial, extended or renewed Franchise upon such terms as the County and such applicant may agree. The Franchise shall authorize such Franchisee, within its Service Area, to construct, erect, operate and maintain, in, upon, along, across, above, over and under the Streets of the County, poles, wires, cable, underground conduits, manholes, and such other conductors and fixtures for the maintenance and operation of a Cable Television System to provide Cable Service, subject to such applicant's agreement and obligation to provide Cable Service within the Franchisee's Service Area and to otherwise comply with all provisions of this Ordinance and the terms of any agreement relating to the initial grant, extension or renewal of the Franchise. Any Franchise 9 granted hereunder shall authorize the Franchisee to use the Streets to construct, erect, operate, and maintain a Cable System to provide Cable Service and for no other purpose. (b) No Franchisee shall, as to rates, charges, service, facilities, rules, regulations or in any other respect, make or grant any preference or advantage to any person, nor subject any person to any prejudice or disadvantage; provided that nothing in any Franchise granted hereunder shall be deemed to prohibit the establishment of a graduated scale of charges (i) to "Senior Citizen" Subscribers, (ii) for multiple installations at the same Home or building, or (iii) to prohibit Franchisee's provision of free or discounted service to its own employees or to governmental or school facilities. (c) Any Franchise granted hereunder as an initial authorization and any renewal or extension thereof shall be governed by the provisions of the Cable Act, any amendments or superseding legislation and other applicable law, and shall be for a term as defined in the franchise agreement between the County and the Franchisee, such term not to exceed fifteen (15) years. (d) No person shall construct, install, maintain or operate a Cable System within, along, over or under any Street or otherwise use the County's Streets to provide Cable Service unless pursuant to (i) a Franchise existing as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, or (ii) a Franchise granted by the County pursuant to the provisions of this Ordinance. Section 4. Applications for Grant Renewal Transfer or Modification of Franchises. (a) Written Application. 10 (1) A written application shall be filed with the County for (A) grant of an initial Franchise; (B) renewal of a Franchise; (C) modification of a franchise agreement pursuant to this Ordinance or the Cable Act; and (D) consent to a transfer of a Franchise. An applicant shall demonstrate in its application compliance with all requirements of this Ordinance and all applicable laws. (2) To be acceptable for filing, a signed original of the application shall be submitted together with five (5) copies. The application must be accompanied by any required application filing fee, conform to any applicable request for proposals or invitation for bid, and contain all required information. All applications shall include the names and addresses of persons authorized to act on behalf of the applicant with respect to the application. (3) An applicant for an initial or a renewal Franchise or transfer of a Franchise hereunder shall include in its application all information requested by the County or its designated representative, subject to the provisions of governing law or regulations, as the County deems reasonably appropriate to allow it to evaluate such applicant's application. (4) All applications accepted for filing shall be made available by the County for public inspection. (b) Application for Grant of a Franchise other than a Cable Act Renewal Franchise. (1) An application for the grant of a new Franchise may be filed pursuant to a request for proposals ("RFP") or invitation for bid ("IFB") issued by the County or on an unsolicited basis. The County, upon receipt of an unsolicited application, may issue an RFP or IFB. If the County elects to issue an RFP or IFB upon receipt of an unsolicited application, the applicant may submit an amended application in response to the RFP or IFB, or may inform the 11 County that its unsolicited application should be considered in response to the RFP or IFB, or may withdraw its unsolicited application. An application which does not conform to the requirements of an RFP or IFB may be considered non-responsive and denied on that basis. The applicant shall respond within the time directed by the County, providing the information and material set forth in subsection 4(d). The procedures, instructions, and requirements set forth in the RFP or IFB shall be followed by each applicant as if set forth and required herein. The County or its designee may seek additional information from any applicant and establish deadlines for the submission of such information. (2) In evaluating an application for a Franchise, the County may consider, among other things, the following factors: (A) The extent to which the applicant has substantially complied with applicable law and the material terms of any existing cable Franchise in the County, City or Town. (B) Whether the quality of the applicant's service under any existing Franchise in the County, City, or Town, including signal quality, responsiveness to customer complaints, billing practices, and the like, has been reasonable in light of the needs and interests of the communities served. (C) Whether the applicant has the financial, technical, and legal qualifications to build, operate and maintain the System and provide the Cable Service it proposes. (D) Whether the application satisfies any minimum requirements established by the County and is otherwise reasonable to meet the future cable-related needs 12 and interests of the community, taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests. (E) Whether the applicant proposes to provide adequate PEG Access channel capacity, facilities, or financial support. (F) Whether issuance of a Franchise is warranted in the public interest considering the immediate and future effect on the Streets and private and public property that would be used by the Cable System, including the extent to which installation or maintenance as planned would require replacement of Streets or property or involve disruption of property, public services, or use of the Streets and the comparative superiority or inferiority of competing applications. (G) Whether the applicant or an affiliate of the applicant owns or controls any other Cable System in the County, or whether the granting of the application may eliminate or reduce competition in the delivery of Cable Service in the County. (3) If the County finds that it is in the public interest to issue a Franchise considering the factors set forth above, and subject to the applicant's entry into an appropriate franchise agreement with County, it shall grant a Franchise to the applicant. If the County denies a Franchise, it will issue a written decision explaining why the Franchise was denied. Prior to deciding whether or not to issue a Franchise, the County may hold one or more public hearings or implement other procedures under which comments from the public on an application may be received. The County also may grant or deny a request for a Franchise based on its review of an application without further proceedings and may reject any application that is incomplete or fails to respond to an RFP or IFB. The County also reserves the right to 13 reject all responses to an RFP or IFB. This Ordinance is not intended and shall not be interpreted to grant any applicant or existing Franchisee standing to challenge the issuance of a franchise to another. (c) Application for Grant of a Renewal Franchise. The Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §546) shall apply to applications for renewal of an existing Franchise. If neither a Franchisee nor the County initiates the renewal process of the Cable Act in a timely manner, or is unable to initiate the renewal process set forth in 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)-(g) (including, for example, if the provisions are repealed), and except as to applications submitted pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(h), the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section shall apply, and a renewal request shall be evaluated using the same criteria as any other request for a Franchise. (d) Contents of Applications. Unless otherwise specified by the County, an RFP or IFB for the grant of a Franchise, including for a renewal franchise under 47 U.S.C. § 546(c), shall require, and any application submitted (other than an application submitted pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(h)) shall contain, at a minimum, the following information: (1) Name and address of the applicant and identification of the ownership and control of the applicant, including: the names and addresses of the ten (10) largest holders of an ownership interest in the applicant and affiliates of the applicant, and all persons with five (5) percent or more ownership interest in the applicant and its affiliates; the persons who control the applicant and its affiliates; all officers and directors of the applicant and its affiliates; and any other business affiliation and cable system ownership interest of each named person. 14 (2) A demonstration of the applicant's technical ability to construct and/or operate the proposed cable system, including identification of key personnel. (3) A demonstration of the applicant's legal qualifications to construct and/or operate the proposed cable system, including but not limited to a demonstration that the applicant meets the following criteria: (A) That the applicant has not submitted an application for an initial or renewal Franchise to the County, which was denied, or as to which any challenges to such franchising decision were finally resolved adversely to the applicant, within three (3) years preceding the submission of the application. (B) That the applicant has not had any cable television franchise validly revoked by any franchising authority within three (3) years preceding the submission of the application. (C) That the applicant has the necessary authority under Virginia law to operate a cable system. (D) That the applicant holds or is qualified to obtain, any necessary federal licenses or waivers required to operate the System proposed in the application, and that the applicant is otherwise qualified to own and operate the System under federal law. (E) That the applicant, or any of its officers, directors, partners, or shareholders holding greater than a ten (10) percent interest have not, during the ten (10) years preceding the submission of the application, been convicted of any act or omission of such character that the applicant cannot reasonably be relied upon to deal truthfully with the County or Subscribers or to substantially comply with obligations under applicable law, including 15 obligations under consumer protection laws and laws prohibiting anticompetitive acts, fraud, racketeering, or other similar conduct. (F) That the applicant certifies that the information contained on its application is truthful and complete. (G) That no elected official of the County holds a controlling interest in the applicant or in any affiliate of the applicant. (4) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the County shall provide an opportunity to an applicant to show that it would be inappropriate to deny it a Franchise under subsection (d)(3)(B) or (E) above by virtue of the particular circumstances surrounding the matter in question, and to demonstrate the steps taken by the applicant to cure the harms flowing therefrom and prevent their recurrence, the lack of involvement of the applicant's principals, or the remoteness of the matter from the operation of cable television systems. (5) A statement prepared by a certified public accountant regarding the applicant's financial ability to complete the construction and operation of the Cable System proposed in the application. (6) A description of the applicant's prior experience in owning or operating Cable Systems, and the identification of communities in which the applicant or any of its principals have, or have had, a cable franchise or franchise or any material interest therein; provided, however that an applicant that holds an existing Franchise with the County and is seeking renewal of that Franchise need not provide such information. (7) Identification of the area of the County to be served by the proposed Cable System, including a description of the proposed Service Area's boundaries. 16 (8) A description of the physical facilities proposed, including channel capacity, technical design, performance characteristics, headend location, and PEG Access facilities. (9) Where applicable, a description of the construction of the proposed System, including an estimate of plant mileage and its location, the proposed construction schedule, and general information on the availability of space in existing conduits and poles to accommodate the proposed System. (10) A demonstration of how the applicant will reasonably meet the future cable-related needs and interests of the community, including descriptions of how the applicant will meet the needs described in any recent community needs assessment conducted by or for the County, and how the applicant will provide adequate PEG Access channel capacity, facilities, or financial support to meet the community's needs and interests, and how such capacity, facilities, and financial support will be funded. (11) Any other information as may be lawful and reasonably necessary to demonstrate an applicant's ability to comply with the requirements of this Ordinance. (12) Information that the County may lawfully request of the applicant that is relevant to the County's consideration of the application. (13) An affidavit or declaration of the applicant or authorized officer certifying the truth and accuracy of the information in the application, acknowledging the enforceability of application commitments to the extent they are incorporated into a Franchise, and certifying that the applicant meets all federal and state law requirements to construct, erect, operate, and maintain a Cable System. 17 (e) Application for Modification of a Franchise. An application for modification of a Franchise shall include, at minimum, the following information: (1) The specific modification of the Franchise requested; (2) The justification for the requested modification, including the impact, if any, of the requested modification on Subscribers and others, and the financial impact on the applicant if the modification is approved or disapproved, demonstrated through, among other things, submission of financial pro formas; (3) A statement whether the modification is sought pursuant to the Cable Act, (47 U.S.C. § 545), and, if so, a demonstration that the requested modification meets the standards set forth in the Act; (4) Any other information that the applicant believes is necessary for the County to make an informed determination on the application for modification; and (5) An affidavit or declaration of the applicant or authorized officer certifying the truth and accuracy of the information in the application. (f) Application for Consent to Transfer of a Franchise. (1) An application for the County's consent to the transfer of a Franchise or the transfer of control of a Franchisee shall include, at a minimum, the following information: (A) A completed FCC Form 394, or any successor form; and (B) With respect to the proposed transferee, the information set forth in the following subsections of Section 4(d) of this section, "Contents of Applications": (1 ), (2), 18 (3), (6), (11), (12), and (13), and where any changes in such information are contemplated, the information set forth in subsections 4(d) (7), (8), (9), and (10). (2) In determining whether a transfer application should be granted, denied, or granted subject to conditions, the County may consider the legal, financial, and technical qualifications of the transferee to operate the Cable System; any potential impact of the transfer on Subscriber rates or services; whether the incumbent Franchisee is in substantial compliance with its Franchise and, if not, whether the incumbent or the transferee furnishes adequate cure or assurance of cure; whether the transferee owns or controls any other Cable System in the County; and whether transfer of the System or control of the Franchisee to the transferee or approval of the transfer would otherwise adversely affect Subscribers, the public, or the County's interests under this Ordinance, the Franchise, or other applicable law. No transfer application shall be granted unless the transferee agrees in writing that it will abide by and accept all terms of this Ordinance and the Franchise, and that it will assume the obligations, liabilities, and responsibility for all acts and omissions, known and unknown, of the previous Franchisee for all purposes. Section 5. Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee. As of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, the County, the City and the Town have, pursuant to ordinances duly adopted by each of them, jointly established a committee known as the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee (the "CATV Committee"). By adoption of this Ordinance, the County does hereby affirm its continued participation in and support of the CATV Committee, which shall comprise eleven (11) members and have the duties and responsibilities as set forth below: 19 (a) Members. One member shall be provided from each of the Governing Bodies of the County, the City and the Town; three members shall be the Chief Executives (or their designees) from each of the County, the City and the Town; one member shall be appointed by each of the Roanoke County and Roanoke City School Boards; and one member-at-large shall be appointed by each of the Governing Bodies of the County, the City and the Town. (b) Chairperson. The CATV Committee shall select a chairperson from its membership, who shall serve for a period of one year or such other term as the CATV Committee may deem appropriate. (c) Terms of Office. The terms of office of the three at-large members shall be for three years each, provided that such terms shall be staggered, with a continuation of the staggered sequence established by the CATV Committee prior to the adoption of this Ordinance; members from the Governing Bodies of each of the jurisdictions and those appointed by their respective School Boards shall serve for such terms as are determined by their respective appointing authorities. (d) Meetings. Meetings of the CATV Committee shall be held not less than once per year and at such more frequent times as the Chairperson or the Committee shall determine; a quorum shall consist of five members. The Committee may adopt such procedures and bylaws as it deems necessary for the proper exercise of its responsibilities. (e) Scope. The CATV Committee shall fulfill its responsibilities with respect to any Franchisee or applicant for a Franchise as to which the Cable Service provided or proposed shall extend within or to any portion of all of the three jurisdictions addressed herein. 20 (f) Franchisee Attendance. The General Manager (or his or her designee) of each Franchisee within the scope of the CATV Committee's responsibilities shall be afforded the opportunity to attend each meeting of the CATV Committee, with at least ten (10) days advance notice to be provided whenever reasonably possible, except when the CATV Committee holds a closed meeting. (g) Powers and Duties. The CATV Committee shall: (i) Advise the affected Governing Bodies concerning any applications for Franchises. (ii) Provide for the development, administration, and operation of EG access facilities and programming for the County, City and Town as provided for in this Ordinance and any franchise agreements. The administration of all such EG activities shall be undertaken by the Committee. (iii) Monitor each Franchisee's compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance and any Franchise granted hereunder, and advise affected Governing Bodies of matters that may constitute grounds for a monetary forfeiture or Franchise revocation. (iv) Advise the affected Governing Bodies concerning the regulations of Cable rates. (v) Receive, record and consider Subscriber complaints that have not been resolved by a Franchisee; attempt to resolve and respond to all such complaints, maintaining a record of all resolutions; and report annually to each Governing Body the results of its actions with respect to such complaints. 21 (vi) Review any proposed transfer of a Franchise and recommend whether such transfer should be approved. (vii) Coordinate review of each Franchisee's records as may be required by this Ordinance. (viii) Encourage the use of such EG access channels and facilities as are required under this Ordinance or any Franchise by the widest range of institutions, groups and individuals within the Service Areas of the respective Franchisees, consistent with applicable law. (ix) Review budgets prepared by departments within affected jurisdictions for EG channel usage, and coordinate the expenditure of any capital grant funds provided by any Franchisee to maximize the potential and provide for the full development of EG channel usage. (x) Advise the Governing Bodies of the jurisdictions addressed herein as to proposed rules and procedures under which a Franchisee may use unused EG channel capacity for the provision of other services, and under which such Franchisee use shall cease. (xi) Coordinate programming and activities on EG channels, develop appropriate policies and procedures therefor, and assist in preparation and review of budgets for all cablecasting activities on EG channels. (xii) Maintain records in accordance with statutory requirements. Section 6. Rates. The County specifically retains all rights to regulate rates for Cable Service charged by any Franchisee, subject to the provisions of relevant federal and state laws and the rules and regulations of administrative agencies with authority. 22 Section 7. PEG Access. PEG Access channel capacity, facilities and support requirements shall be specified in the Franchise between the County and the Franchisee, and shall be sufficient to satisfy the County's cable-related community needs and interests. Section 8. System Operation. (a) Every Franchisee shall operate its Cable System as required by the FCC's rules and regulations, including, without limitation, ensuring compliance with all applicable provisions of 47 C.F.R. §76.601, et seq. (FCC Technical Standards), and any amendments thereto, throughout the entire Service Area. Upon request, every Franchisee shall submit to the County copies of all performance test data required pursuant to 47 C.F.R. §76.601 and any other performance tests that may be required by subsequent amendment of the FCC's rules and regulations. (b) Unless otherwise provided for in a Franchise, within six months after receipt of written request from the County, a Franchisee shall interconnect its System with the Cable System of any overlapping or adjacent cable operator in the County, City or Town. Such interconnection, including bidirectional capability, shall be performed on terms mutually and reasonably acceptable to the Franchisee and the other operator, including arrangements to share equitably the cost of design, installation, and all necessary equipment, hardware, and accessories to accomplish the interconnection. Section 9. Indemnification and Insurance. 23 (a) Every Franchisee, as a condition to its entitlement to hold or continue to hold a Franchise hereunder, shall save the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from all loss or damages of any kind, including reasonable attorney's fees, sustained by the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers on account of any suit, judgment, execution, claim, or demand whatsoever, resulting from any acts or omissions on the part of the Franchisee, its contractors, subcontractors or agents in the construction, maintenance or operation of its Cable Television System or the provision of Cable Service in the County; provided, however, that the County shall give to an indemnifying Franchisee written notice of any such suit, judgment, execution, claim or demand made to which the immediately foregoing indemnification provisions apply. (b) Each Franchisee shall take out and maintain throughout the term of its Franchise commercial general liability insurance against personal injury with coverage of not less than $5,000,000 for injury to any person and $5,000,000 for any one accident, and insurance against property damage, including damage to County property, in an amount not less than $5,000,000, and shall maintain comprehensive automobile liability insurance, including non-owned and hired car as well as owned vehicles coverage, with minimum bodily injury coverage for each occurrence of $2,000,000 and property damage coverage of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. X, C, and U general liability insurance exclusions must be deleted. The above limits may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella insurance following the form of the primary insurance. The above policies shall be written by a company licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which shall be rated not less than "A" by Best's 24 rating service, and the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds thereunder, and an endorsement to that effect from the insurer must be received by the County within thirty (30) days of commencement of a Franchise. A certificate of these policies shall be furnished to the County as a condition to the grant of any Franchise hereunder. The County reserves the right, no more frequently than once every three years, and upon six months advance notice to a Franchisee, to require an increase in the immediately foregoing minimum basic coverages by an amount not to exceed the amount necessary to compensate for the County's increased general liability insurance coverage, or the County's increased self-insured exposure, for the three years immediately preceding the date of such notice from the County. (c) Every Franchisee shall obtain workers' compensation insurance as required by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, with such insurance to be written by a company licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which company shall be rated not less than "A" by Best's rating service. Such policy shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers. (d) Each Franchisee shall ensure that its contractors, subcontractors and agents maintain commercial general liability insurance coverage sufficient to protect the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers from any loss arising from work performed on such Franchisee's behalf. (e) No insurance policy shall be cancelable or non-renewable until thirty (30) days after receipt by the County of notice of intention to cancel or non-renew. 25 Section 10. Maintenance and Service Complaint Procedures. (a) System Maintenance. Throughout the term of its Franchise, every Franchisee shall maintain all parts of its Cable System in good working condition. (b) FCC Standards. Each Franchisee shall, at minimum, comply with the customer service standards established by the FCC at 47 C.F.R. §76.309(c), or any subsequently adopted amendments thereto. These rules are hereby adopted as if incorporated herein (see Appendix A). No Franchisee shall adopt standards less stringent than those imposed by the FCC, and nothing herein shall prevent a Franchisee, or the County, from adopting standards that are more stringent than those imposed by the FCC. The County may, at its sole discretion, and upon ninety (90) days written notice to a Franchisee, inform a Franchisee of its intent to enforce, and may enforce against such Franchisee, the additional customer service standards contained in subsections (b)(1) through (9) below, or any other customer service standard deemed reasonably necessary by the County at its sole discretion. (1) Installation Time. Within all areas served by the System, and meeting the density requirements of Section 12(c), service to all requesting potential Subscribers requiring an aerial installation shall be provided within five (5) business days after receipt of the request for service, and service to requesting potential Subscribers requiring an underground installation shall be provided within ten (10) business days after such request, unless Franchisee is prevented by reasons beyond its control or later installation is requested by the Subscriber. 26 (2) Repair Procedure. Franchisee shall have a local listed telephone number for receipt of requests for repairs at any time, twenty four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week. Franchisee responses to such requests shall occur within twenty four (24) hours after Franchisee's receipt of such a request, oral or written, excluding Sundays and holidays. Verification of the problem and Franchisee's best efforts to resolve the problem shall occur within forty eight (48) hours. In any event, resolution should occur within five (5) business days. Those matters requiring additional maintenance, repair, or technical adjustments that require more than five (5) business days to complete shall be reported in writing to the Subscriber and, if requested, to the County. The County may require reasonable documentation to be provided by Franchisee to substantiate a request for additional time to resolve any such complaint. (3) Responsiveness. Franchisee shall respond seven (7) days a week within two hours to any outage affecting five (5) or more subscribers due to the same event or occurrence ("Area Outage") which occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., and by not later than 11:00 am the following day to any Area Outage which occurs between 9:00 p.m., and 7:00 a.m., the following day. Such response shall mean actual commencement of trouble shooting and repairs, plus contact with the complaining Subscriber(s), if reasonably possible under the circumstances. (4) Mean time between failures. The average time between Area Outages shall not exceed twenty four (24) hours in any twelve (12) month period. It shall be computed by dividing the operating time by the number of Area Outages. 27 (5) Mean time to repair. The average time to complete repair to System outages shall not exceed two (2) hours in any twelve (12) month period. It shall be computed by dividing the total time for repairs by the number of repair orders. (6) Subscriber Down Time. Annual subscriber down time shall not exceed an average of four (4) hours per Subscriber. (7) Mean Time to Install. Mean time to install shall be eight (8) business days for underground installations and four (4) business days for aerial installations. (8) Service Call (Repairs). Seventy percent (70%) of all repair requests shall be acted upon within twenty four (24) hours; ninety percent (90%) within ninety six (96) hours. All requests shall be resolved within five (5) business days unless good and sufficient cause exists. Any service call not resolved within five (5) business days shall be reported in writing to the CATV Committee by Franchisee within two (2) business days thereafter. (9) Telephone Waiting Time. During normal business hours, ninety percent (90%) of all telephone calls shall be picked up on or before the fourth ring and no caller shall be allowed to wait for more than ten (10) rings. Waiting time shall not exceed an average of thirty (30) seconds total for any caller, and no caller shall be transferred except for specialized services. (c) Complaint Policy and Records. (1) Complaint Policy. Franchisee shall promulgate written policy statements and procedures for reporting and resolving Subscriber complaints. Franchisee shall furnish a copy of the policy to each new Subscriber upon installation and thereafter to all 28 Subscribers at least annually, and to the County and all Subscribers at such time as there is any change in such policy. (2) Complaint Records. Franchisee shall maintain records showing the date of receipt of all written complaints received (including those received via electronic mail) and identifying the Subscriber, the nature of the complaint, and the date action was taken by Franchisee in response thereto, together with a description of such action. Such records shall be kept available at Franchisee's local office for at least two (2) years from date of receipt, for inspection by the County as it may at any time and from time to time reasonably request, during business hours and upon reasonable notice. A periodic log of all complaints and resolutions, by category, shall be provided to the County and the CATV Committee or its designee upon request. Complaints that remain unresolved for a period of ten (10) working days or more shall be reduced to writing by the Franchisee and submitted to the County or its designee for appropriate action. (3) Complaint Notice. Franchisee shall provide written notice detailing all actions taken to resolve complaints submitted to the County within five (5) business days from written or telephone notification by the County of the complaint. Franchisee shall provide service-call and outage reports to the County or the CATV Committee upon request. (d) Free Basic Service. Franchisee shall provide basic tier service and the most widely subscribed-to tier of cable programming service without charge to each Local Government Occupied Building, fire station, police station, any other County-owned or County- occupied buildings (excluding housing units and buildings owned by the County but not used for 29 governmental or educational purposes), all Elementary and Secondary Schools, public library, state-accredited private schools with at least fifty (50) students, and public, private or community college academic buildings within its Service Area, as requested by County. One standard drop into such building(s) and into a room or office designated by the recipient, one converter (if needed) per building, and continued delivery of the required service throughout the term of the Franchise shall constitute compliance. Any attached identified structures shall be treated as separate buildings. This subsection shall apply to any building meeting the classifications listed, regardless whether such building existed as of the effective date of this Ordinance or was constructed or occupied after the effective date hereof. The Service recipient shall be responsible for securing Franchisee's right of access to the building(s) at no cost to the Franchisee. (e) Emergency Communications. At least one person in responsible charge of Franchisee's operations in the Service Area shall be available by local telephone during such hours as Franchisee's business office is closed, and the telephone number of such person shall be supplied in advance to the County's chief executive official, the presiding officer of the Board, the County's Police and Fire Departments, and the Emergency 911 Center. (f) Subscriber Antennas. Notwithstanding any disconnection of Subscribers' existing antennas and downleads to receivers connected to the Cable System, the Cable System shall be designed so that physical removal of antennas and downleads will not be required to receive Service, and so that the Subscriber may utilize such antennas at any time in place of the Cable System service. 30 (g) Parental Guidance Control. Consistent with the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §544(d)(2)(A)), Franchisee shall make available to any Subscriber so requesting, at reasonable cost, a "parental guidance control" or "lockout key" which will permit the Subscriber to eliminate intelligible audio and video reception of any or all of the premium service channels. Franchisee shall notify all Subscribers of the availability of such parental-control devices. (h) Call Recording Service for Current Known Outages. Franchisee shall provide a telephone number which provides a recorded message of access to an employee or agent or Franchisee, on a twenty four (24) hour basis. The recorded message shall describe current known System deficiencies and outages and thereafter accept recorded messages from Subscribers, who may leave their names; request service; report outages; and request credit for down time. (i) Preventative Maintenance. Franchisee shall establish and adhere to a preventive maintenance policy directed toward maximizing the reliability and maintainability of the Cable System with respect to its delivery of Cable Service to Subscribers at or above the technical standards established by the FCC. When it is necessary to interrupt Cable Service for the purpose of making repairs, adjustments, installations or other maintenance activities, Franchisee shall do so at such times as will cause the least inconvenience to its Subscribers, generally between the hours of 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. the next morning. (j) Repair Capability. Franchisee shall maintain sufficient qualified technicians, service vehicles, and test and repair equipment to provide repair service within the parameters set forth below. 31 (k) Notice. Except in an emergency, or when System maintenance or repair occurs between the hours of 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m., Franchisee shall give Subscribers at least twenty-four (24) hours' notice of any interruption of Cable Service for purposes of maintenance or repair. In an emergency, Franchisee shall give such notice as is reasonable in the circumstances. Notice given on the Alphanumeric Channels shall be considered sufficient. When Subscriber channels will be interrupted, normal scheduled service and repair shall be performed between the hours of 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. the next morning. (I) Refund for Outage. For any continuous service interruption or loss of service in excess of twenty-four (24) hours, Franchisee shall make apro-rated refund of such Subscriber's regular monthly charge for the service to each Subscriber so affected, upon request of such Subscriber. The twenty-four (24) hour period shall commence when Franchisee learns of such outage whether through Subscriber notification or notification by Franchisee's maintenance personnel. Such refunds shall be prorated by multiplying the applicable monthly service rate by a fraction whose numerator equals the number of days of the outage and whose denominator equals the number of days in the month of the outage. For purposes of this paragraph, an outage shall be defined as a Subscriber's receipt of less than two thirds (2/3) of the authorized basic service and most widely subscribed to tier of cable programming service channels, or loss of any premium channel. Franchisee shall not be required to grant a refund in the event that an outage is caused by any Subscriber. (m) Billing Practices. Franchisee shall maintain written billing practices and policies and shall furnish a copy thereof to the County, the CATV Committee, and all Subscribers, and to each new Subscriber. The County and all Subscribers shall be notified in writing thirty (30) days 32 in advance of any changes. Franchisee shall comply with all relevant state and federal laws and regulations with respect to its billing practices. (n) Pro-rated Service. In the event a Subscriber's service is terminated for any reason, monthly charges for service shall be pro-rated on a daily basis. Where advance payment has been made by a Subscriber, the appropriate refund shall be made by Franchisee to the Subscriber within thirty (30) days of such termination, unless the amount is less than $5.00, which amount shall be refunded only upon the Subscriber's request. (o) Disconnection for Non-Payment. Franchisee shall have the right to disconnect a Subscriber for failure to pay an overdue account provided that: (1) Franchisee's billing practices and policy statements have set forth in writing the conditions under which an account will be considered overdue; and (2) Franchisee provides written notice of its intent to disconnect at least fifteen (15) days prior to the proposed disconnection; and (3) The Subscriber's account is at least thirty (30) days delinquent computed from the first day of service for which payment has not been made. (p) Installation of Eauipment. Unless otherwise provided by law, Franchisee shall not install its System on private property without first securing written permission of the owner or tenant in possession of such property or the written permission of the holder of any easement for utility lines or similar purposes, and in accordance with law. Upon request, Franchisee shall inform owners and tenants of the functions of all equipment installed on private property. (q) Monitoring and Privacy. Unless otherwise provided by law, neither Franchisee nor any of its offices, employees, agents or contractors shall, without prior written consent of all affected 33 parties, tap, monitor or arrange for the tapping or monitoring of any drop, outlet or receiver for any purpose whatsoever other than legitimate technical performance testing of the Cable System or the monitoring of subscriber cable service, or where such tapping or monitoring is required by law. Franchisee shall comply with relevant federal and state statutes regarding the monitoring of Service and providing Subscriber information to government entities. Franchisee shall at all times comply with the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §551) with regard to the protection of Subscriber privacy. (r) Subscriber Lists or Information. Unless otherwise provided by law, Franchisee shall not sell, disclose, or otherwise make available, or permit the use of, lists of the names or addresses of its Subscribers, or any list or other information which identifies individual Subscriber viewing habits, to any person or entity for any purpose whatsoever without the consent of such Subscriber, all in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Cable Act and applicable law. This provision shall not prevent Franchisee from performing such acts as may be necessary for the purpose of service related activities, including surveys. Section 11. Filings with County. (a) In addition to other filings that may be set forth herein, every Franchisee shall maintain, and file with the County Administrator upon request, true and accurate strand maps (in either electronic or, if the Franchisee and County otherwise agree, in hard copy) of all existing and proposed installations in the Streets. The County hereby reserves the right to reject any proposed installation that does not conform to its ordinances, regulations or practices concerning construction in the Streets. The County may order and direct the Franchisee, at Franchisee's sole cost, to move the location or alter the construction of any existing installation 34 to facilitate or accommodate the installation, alteration, repair or changing of the grade or location of a street, or the construction, alteration, repair or installation of any other public works or the construction of public improvements in, on, or under the Streets. Every Franchisee shall also maintain and, upon request, make available at its local office, for review and copying by the County, true and accurate "as built" maps of all existing installations. (b) Every Franchisee shall file annually with the County Administrator a statement setting forth the names and addresses of all its directors and officers and the position that each holds, which statement may consist of the Franchisee's annual report. (c) Upon request, a Franchisee shall file with the County Administrator copies of rules, regulations, terms and conditions adopted by the Franchisee for the conduct of its business. Section 12. Construction and Installation of the System. (a) The County shall have the right to inspect all construction or installation work performed by a Franchisee within the Service Area, and to make such inspections as the County deems necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of this Ordinance, other pertinent provisions of law and any Franchise granted hereunder. No poles, underground conduits, or other wire or cable-holding structures shall be erected by a Franchisee without prior approval of the County or its duly authorized personnel, or, unless such consent is not required by applicable law, by abutting property owners where the County does not own, or hold some other right of way property interests in, the area in which such structures are to be erected. To the extent possible, a Franchisee shall use existing poles and underground conduits throughout the County. Any poles, underground conduits or other fixtures that a Franchisee is authorized by 35 the County to install must be placed in a manner so that they do not interfere with or obstruct the usual travel on the public Streets or interfere with any existing utility services. At the time any trench is opened for installation or maintenance of conduit or underground cable, a Franchisee shall give the County at least ten (10) days advance written notice of such work and inform the County of the incremental cost of installing one additional conduit for the exclusive use of the County of such dimension as specified by the County, and unless the County otherwise directs Franchisee in writing, Franchise shall install such conduit at a charge no greater than the actual incremental cost of labor and materials for such additional conduit. All construction activities of a Franchisee shall be conducted in a workmanlike manner that will cause minimum interference with the rights and reasonable convenience of the public's and other utilities' use of the Streets and of the property owners directly affected thereby. Every Franchisee shall maintain all structures, cable and related Cable System equipment that are located in, over, under, and upon the Streets in a safe, suitable, substantial condition and in good order and repair at all times. (b) All construction, installation and repair by a Franchisee shall be effectuated in a manner that is consistent with the FCC's rules, relevant local building codes, zoning ordinances and laws, all County and other governmental laws, codes or ordinances relating to public works or the Streets, and other regulatory requirements, the National Electrical Safety Code, and other standards of general applicability to Cable Systems. No Franchisee shall commence any construction without obtaining all local zoning and other approvals, permits and other licenses generally applicable to other entities performing such construction, and paying all costs and fees normally imposed or charged therefor. 36 (c) A Franchisee shall be required to extend energized trunk cable and make Cable Service available to any and all portions of the County within the limits of its defined Service Area with a density of at least twenty (20) Homes per linear mile for aerial installations and thirty (30) Homes per linear mile for underground installations. For purposes of calculating this density requirement, all Homes within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any Street or other right- of-way suitable for cable trunk installation shall be counted in density determinations, and shall be considered as satisfying the 20 or 30 Homes- per-mile density requirement, as appropriate. In the event that the owner of any Home or other structure within a Franchisee's Service Area not meeting the density requirement is willing to agree in writing to pay the excess cost of extending Cable Service to that location, then a Franchisee so requested by such owner shall provide Cable Service to such Home or other structure, provided that such owner's payment obligation shall only apply to the actual costs incurred, without markup, in extending cable more than 150 feet from any trunk line. (d) In case of any disturbance of pavement, sidewalk, driveway or other surface, a Franchisee shall, at its sole cost and expense and in a manner approved by the County or as required by any applicable County policy or standards generally applicable to similar construction in the Streets, replace and restore all paving, sidewalk, driveway or surface disturbed in as good condition as before such work was commenced. (e) In the event that at any time during the period of a Franchise, the County or VDOT shall elect to alter or change the grade, width, or other characteristic of any Street, alley or other public way, the affected Franchisee, upon reasonable notice by the County or VDOT, at 37 Franchisee's sole cost, shall remove, relay, and relocate its poles, wires, cables, underground conduits, manholes and other fixtures or equipment as directed by the County or VDOT. (f) No Franchisee shall place any poles or other fixtures where the same will interfere with any gas, electric or telephone fixture, water hydrant, main, or sewer, and all such poles or other fixtures placed in any Street shall be placed in accordance with the County's requirements or as established by any applicable County policy or standards. (g) A Franchisee shall, on the request of any person holding a building moving permit issued by the County, temporarily raise or lower its wires or Cable to permit the moving of buildings. The expense of such temporary removal, raising or lowering of wires or cable shall be paid by the person requesting the same, and the Franchisee shall have the authority to require such payment in advance. The Franchisee shall be given not less than seven (7) days advance notice to arrange for such temporary wire or cable changes. (h) Every Franchisee shall have the authority to trim trees upon and overhanging Streets, alleys, sidewalks and public rights-of-way of the County so as to prevent the branches of such trees from coming in contact with the wires and cables of the Franchisee, provided that all trimming shall be done in accordance with the ANSI 300, American National Standard for Tree Care Operation (or any such successor standard), and under the supervision and direction of the County or VDOT and at the sole expense of the Franchisee. The County or VDOT specifically reserves the right to prohibit the trimming of any tree where the County or VDOT deems that such trimming would be inappropriate. An explanation for the denial shall be provided in writing. 38 (i) No Franchisee shall install above-ground facilities in any portion of its Service Area where all public utility lines are underground, or in any area of the County designated as an underground utility area, and every Franchisee shall be obligated to relocate its existing facilities underground in any portion of its Service Area within ninety (90) days after all public utility lines in that portion of its Service Area have been placed underground, provided, however, that Franchisee may request a partial waiver of this requirement with respect to certain ground- mounted appurtenances, such as Subscriber taps, line extenders, System passive devices (splitters, directional couplers, etc.), amplifiers, power supplies, network reliability units, pedestals, or other related equipment. Q) Vehicles owned or leased by a Franchisee and used in the installation, construction or repair of the Franchisee's System or installation or repair on Subscribers' premises shall be marked with the Franchisee's identity, and all employees, contractors and subcontractors of a Franchisee shall carry identification, to be produced upon request, which shall provide the employee, contractor, or subcontractor's name, local business address and local business telephone number . Section 13. Emergency Alert System. Every Franchisee shall comply with the federal Emergency Alert System ("EAS") standards established by Part 11 of the FCC's Rules (47 C.F.R. §11) and any state or local EAS plan approved thereunder. In addition, and to the extent not preempted by federal law or regulation, each Franchisee shall provide for use by such authorized persons as are designated by the County, an emergency override capability whereby the audio or video portion of programming carried on all channels may be interrupted for the insertion of emergency 39 information. The County may grant relief from the requirements of the foregoing sentence if the County determines in its sole discretion that a Franchisee's compliance with the federal EAS standards and/or any state or local EAS plan approved thereunder will provide the same functional capability to disseminate emergency information to Subscribers. Section 14. Limits on Rights of Way. This Ordinance shall not be construed to mean that the County, by granting any Franchise hereunder, provides any Franchisee the right to use any Street, right-of-way or property controlled by VDOT or by any person other than the County. Every Franchisee hereunder shall be required to comply with any and all VDOT regulations and requirements set forth for the use of such Streets or rights-of-way controlled by VDOT and may be required to separately obtain from private parties and others necessary consents, not otherwise preempted by federal or state statute or regulation, to use any other rights-of-way not controlled by or vested in the County prior to the installation of any Cable on, under or over the property so affected. Section 15. Approval Required for Franchise Transfer. No Franchisee shall sell, assign, transfer or lease its plant or Cable System to another person, nor transfer any rights under a Franchise to another person, nor may control of a Franchisee be transferred, without the Franchisee having first made written application pursuant to Section 4(f), above, for Board's consent to such transfer and without prior Board approval of such transfer on such reasonable terms and conditions as the Board may impose. No sale, transfer, assignment or lease shall thereafter be effective until the vendee, assignee, transferee or lessee has filed in the office of the County Administrator an instrument, duly executed, 40 reciting the fact of such sale, assignment, transfer or lease, accepting and agreeing to be bound by the provisions of this Ordinance and a Franchise granted pursuant hereto, and agreeing to perform all the conditions that may be imposed by the Board pursuant to its consent. Consent for the transfer, sale, assignment or lease shall not unreasonably be withheld; provided, however, that any costs incurred by the County in evaluating and/or approving such transfer, sale, assignment or lease, not to exceed $5,000.00, shall be paid within 30 days after the submission of an invoice therefor by the County, and no such transfer, sale, assignment or lease shall become effective until such payment is made. . Section 16. County Right in Franchise. (a) The right is hereby reserved by the County to adopt, in addition to the provisions herein contained and in existing applicable ordinances, such additional regulations as it shall find necessary and that are a lawful exercise of its police power. (b) The County shall have the right to supervise, inspect and approve or disapprove all construction or installation work performed by a Franchisee in the Streets, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance and other County laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations, and to make such inspections as it shall find necessary to ensure compliance with applicable County laws, ordinances, resolutions or regulations. (c) All Streets, rights-of-way, and easements that a Franchisee is permitted to use hereunder shall remain the property of the County or VDOT, as appropriate. Until such time as poles or other equipment are actually installed by a Franchisee, and in the event of future removal of such poles or other equipment, such rights shall remain vested in or immediately 41 revert to the County or VDOT and, in the event of removal, a Franchisee's rights therein shall automatically be canceled. (d) At the time a Franchise becomes effective, the County may require the Franchisee to furnish to the County aCounty-approved security, in such form and with such sureties as shall be acceptable to the County, guaranteeing the payment of all sums which may at any time become due from the Franchisee to the County under the terms of this Ordinance and any Franchise granted, and further guaranteeing the faithful performance of all obligations of the Franchisee under the terms of this Ordinance and the agreement reflecting the grant of the Franchise. The amount of the security shall be $300,000 unless a franchise agreement otherwise provides. In the event of default under this Ordinance or a Franchise granted pursuant to this Ordinance, the County shall not assume any liability, obligation or responsibility, but shall instead be entitled, without prejudice to any other remedy available to the County, to levy on and collect from such security all amounts necessary to render the County whole. (e) If at any time after the date a Franchisee's Cable System is activated to provide Cable Service, the Franchisee shall fail materially to comply with the terms of this Ordinance or any Franchise granted, and shall continue to fail to comply or fail to commence taking steps reasonably calculated to cause such compliance for a period of thirty (30) days after receiving notice in writing of non-compliance from the County, the Franchisee shall be assessed a monetary forfeiture by the Office of the County Administrator of not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each day's failure to comply from the date of the first non-compliance, with each day's failure to comply being a separate and distinct offense. The provisions of this sub- section shall not apply if non-compliance is occasioned by events beyond the control of the 42 Franchisee, provided that such events were not proximately caused by the Franchisee's acts or failure to act. In the event the Franchisee shall in good faith contest its liability or the amount of any forfeiture imposed under this Section, no further forfeiture need be paid until such liability is established by the Board of Supervisors, and should such liability be established by the Board of Supervisors, such determination shall be final, and the Franchisee shall have thirty (30) days within which to comply and within which to pay all forfeitures assessed. In the event the Franchisee does not then comply and pay all forfeitures assessed, the County shall have the option (i) to initiate judicial collection proceedings; (ii) to collect upon any security posted; and/or (iii) implement procedures to revoke the Franchise and declare the security forfeited. Section 17. Franchise Fee. (a) Unless a lesser amount is specified in a Franchise, each Franchisee shall pay the County on a quarterly basis a fee (a "Franchise Fee") equal to five percent (5%) of its Gross Revenues derived from the immediately preceding calendar quarter. The Franchise Fee for each calendar quarter shall be paid to the County no later than thirty (30) days after the end of the calendar quarter on which such fee is based. Such payment shall be accompanied by a report, in a form acceptable to the County, itemizing the revenue sources on which the fee payment was calculated and showing how the payment amount was calculated. Any payment made after the date on which it is due shall be subject to a five percent (5%) late payment fee plus interest at the rate that the County is then currently charging for late payments owed to the County. Each Franchise Fee payment shall be accompanied by a summary report showing Gross Revenues received by the franchisee from its operations within the County during the 43 preceding quarter and such other information as the County shall reasonably request with respect to the Franchisee's service within the County. (b) The County shall have the right to verify by an audit conducted by an independent auditor of its own choosing, that a Franchisee has paid the correct amount of Franchise Fee, and if such audit discloses that a Franchisee's reporting of its Gross Revenues for the audit period has been understated by three percent (3%) or more, said Franchisee shall compensate the County for its reasonable audit expenses. The Franchisee shall grant the County or its auditors access to all relevant documents, records and information relevant to determining whether the Franchisee has paid the correct Franchise Fee. Consistent and material under-reporting of a Franchisee's Gross Revenues over two or more consecutive calendar quarters shall be grounds for revocation of a Franchise. (c) In addition to the audit process of Section 17(b), each Franchisee shall, not less than annually, submit a report from an independent certified public accounting firm reasonably acceptable to the County, certifying to the accuracy of all Franchise Fee payments made for the immediately foregoing four quarters and the compliance of those payments with the requirements of this Ordinance and any Franchise granted hereunder. This annual report shall be in a form consistent with the form specified to accompany quarterly payments under section 17(a). (d) In the event that federal, state, or other regulatory agencies permit a greater or lesser Franchise Fee than set forth in this Ordinance, such payment obligation may be increased or decreased to the maximum amount permissible, upon approval of such increase or 44 decrease by the Board of Supervisors and not less than ninety (90) days advance notice to each affected Franchisee. (e) Consistent with applicable law, no fee, tax or other payment required to be made by a Cable System operator to the County, including payment of a Business, Professional or Occupational License fee or tax, shall be deemed as part of the Franchise Fee payable to the County hereunder, so long as such fee, tax or other payment obligation is imposed on a non- discriminatory basis on other similarly situated entities doing business within the County. Section 18. Records and Reports. The County and its representatives shall have access during normal business hours to a Franchisee's plans, maps, electronic data, documents, contracts, and engineering, accounting, financial, and statistical data, and, subject to the Subscriber privacy provisions of Section 631 of the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. § 551), customer and service records relating to the Cable System and its operation within the County by the Franchisee and to all other records required to be kept hereunder. The County may review, copy, and audit any such records, documents or electronic data. Section 19. Franchise Revocation. (a) Whenever any Franchisee shall refuse, neglect or willfully fail to construct, operate or maintain its Cable System or to provide Cable Service to its Subscribers in substantial accordance with the terms of this Ordinance or any applicable rule or regulation, or materially breaches its Franchise Agreement, or materially violates this Ordinance or other law, ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, or practices any fraud or deceit upon the County or its Subscribers within the County, or fails to pay Franchise Fees, or if such Franchisee becomes 45 insolvent, as adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction, or is unwilling or unable to pay its uncontested debts, or is adjudged bankrupt, or seeks relief under the bankruptcy laws of the United States or any state, then the Franchise may be revoked. (b) In the event the County believes that grounds for revocation exist or have existed, it may notify the affected Franchisee in writing, setting forth the facts on which such belief is grounded. If, within thirty (30) days following such written notification, the Franchisee has not furnished reasonably satisfactory evidence to the County that corrective action has been taken or is being actively and expeditiously pursued to completion, or that the alleged violations did not occur, or that the alleged violations were beyond the Franchisee's control, the County may call and give notice of a hearing, pursuant to the hearing requirements set forth in Section 20 of this Ordinance to consider revocation of the Franchisee's Franchise. If the County, following such hearing, finds that grounds for revocation exist, the Board may by resolution or ordinance duly adopted revoke for cause the Franchise granted to such Franchisee. (c) In the event that the Franchise has been revoked, the County shall, to the extent then permitted by existing law, have the option to: (i) acquire, at fair market value excluding any value attributable to the Franchise itself, all the assets of the Franchisee's System located within the County; or (ii) require the sale, at fair market value excluding any value attributable to the Franchise itself, of all such assets of the Franchisee's System to another person; or (iii) require the removal of all such assets from the County, at Franchisee's sole expense (or, if Franchisee fails to do so, the County may remove those assets at Franchise's sole expense); or 46 (iv) if such assets are abandoned or deemed abandoned under applicable law, succeed to ownership or title thereof. Unless some later date is agreed to by the Franchisee, such option must be exercised by the County within one (1) year from the date of the revocation of the Franchise, or the entry of the final judgment by a court reviewing the question of the revocation, or the entry of a final order upon appeal of same, whichever is later. In any Franchise revocation proceeding, if the County and a Franchisee cannot agree upon the fair market value excluding any value attributable to the Franchise itself of the Franchisee's assets located within the County, then the County and the Franchisee shall each at their own cost select a different independent appraiser (each of whom shall be an active member of and be certified by the Appraisal Institute or its successor) who shall each provide an appraisal of the value at issue. If the greater appraised value does not exceed the lesser appraised value by more than ten percent (10°/0) of such lesser value, then the two appraised values shall be averaged and the resultant value shall be binding upon the County and the Franchisee; if the greater appraised value exceeds the lesser appraised value by more than ten percent (10°/0), then the two previously chosen appraisers shall together choose a third independent appraiser, who shall have no knowledge of the prior appraised values, and who shall provide an appraisal of the value, which shall be binding upon the County and the Franchisee. Any valuation determined in accordance with the immediately foregoing procedures shall conclusively be deemed as an equitable price, as specified at 47 U.S.C. § 547. (c) The revocation of a Franchisee's rights as set forth herein shall in no way affect any other rights the County may have under the Franchise with such Franchisee or under this 47 Ordinance or any other provision of law or ordinance. Notwithstanding the pendency or culmination of any proceedings terminating a Franchise, the County may nonetheless by Board action extend for a period of not more than two (2) years beyond the proposed or actual date of termination the entitlement of the affected Franchisee to operate the Cable System, during which period all provisions of this Ordinance and the applicable Franchise Agreement shall govern such operations. Section 20. Hearing Requirements for Matters Affecting Franchises. Whenever a requirement is set forth herein for a public hearing or meeting to be called concerning any matter related to the evaluation, modification, renewal, revocation or termination of any Franchise issued pursuant to this Ordinance, such hearing or meeting shall not be held unless, in addition to any applicable notice requirements of Virginia law, the County shall have advised the Franchisee in writing, at least thirty (30) days prior to such hearing or meeting, and provided notice to the public as required by law. In addition, the County may require the affected Franchisee to, and when so required the Franchisee shall, give notice of such hearing, and any continuation thereof, by announcement on its Cable System in such manner, on such channels and at such times as both parties shall find to be reasonable under the circumstances. Any such hearing may be adjourned from time to time as legally permitted without further notice other than the announcement, at the time of adjournment, of the time and place of the continued hearing and such announcement, if any, as the County may require the Franchisee to make on its Cable System. Section 21. Costs. 48 The County may require that each applicant for an initial, renewal, modification or transfer of a Franchise compensate the County for its direct, out of pocket costs incurred in the award of a Franchise hereunder, including the County's expenses incurred for special counsel or consultants retained to assist it in such award. A bill for such costs as are then determinable may be presented to the Franchisee by the County upon the franchisee's filing of its acceptance of a Franchise hereunder, and if so presented shall be paid at that time, and such additional costs as are determined as payable by the County shall thereafter be paid within fourteen (14) days of presentment to the Franchisee. Section 22. Open Video System Operation. In the event that any person shall obtain certification from the FCC as an Open Video System ("OVS") operator and thereafter offeror continue to provide service within the County as an OVS operator, then all portions of this Ordinance which are, or may lawfully be, applicable under governing statute or regulation to OVS operators, including payment of required fees, which may otherwise be imposed upon cable television operators (including, without limitation, franchise fees), shall apply without interruption or abatement to such person except to the extent expressly prohibited by law or regulation. Section 23. Severability. (a) All terms and conditions of this Ordinance and any Franchise are subject to the rules and regulations of, and to any required approval of, federal and state agencies. If any provision of this Ordinance or any Franchise granted hereunder is held by any court or federal or state agency of competent jurisdiction to be invalid as conflicting with any federal or state law, 49 rule or regulation now or hereafter to become in effect, or is held by such court or agency to be modified in any way in order to conform to the requirement of any such law, rule or regulation, such provision shall be considered a separate, distinct and independent part of this Ordinance or the Franchise, and such holding shall not affect the validity and enforceability of any other provisions of this Ordinance or the Franchise. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any part of this Ordinance or any Franchise is found to be invalid by the FCC or any court of competent jurisdiction, then the parties shall renegotiate such part to preserve, to the extent permitted by law, the benefit of the parties' original bargain. In the event that such law, rule or regulation is subsequently repealed, rescinded, amended or otherwise changed, so that the provision hereof which had been held invalid or modified is no longer in conflict with the law, rules, and regulations then in effect, said provision shall thereupon return immediately to full force and effect, at the option of the County. Section 24 Acceptance of Franchise. No Franchise shall be deemed as granted or renewed pursuant to this Ordinance unless such grant or renewal be approved by the Board and, within fourteen (14) days after its receipt of a Franchise provided by the County, the applicant therefor acknowledges its acceptance of the provisions of this Ordinance and accepts and executes the Franchise, files such acknowledgement, acceptance and agreement with the County, and provides payment of all sums due hereunder and submits all documentation required hereunder. 50 Section 25. Franchisee to Abide by Applicable Laws. By accepting a Franchise and executing a Franchise Agreement, a Franchisee agrees that it will abide by all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations. Section 26. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof concerning cable television that are inconsistent with or contravene this Ordinance or any Franchise granted thereunder are hereby repealed as of the effective date of this Ordinance. 51 Section 27. Effective Date. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be October 31, 2003. Appendix A: FCC Customer Service Standards 47 C.F.R. § 76.309. 52 APPENDIX A FCC CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARDS 47 C.F.R. §76.309 76.309 Customer service obligations (a) A cable franchise authority may enforce the customer service standards set forth in section (c) of this rule against cable operators. The franchise authority must provide affected cable operators ninety (90) days written notice of its intent to enforce the standards. (b) Nothing in this rule should be construed to prevent or prohibit: (1) A franchising authority and a cable operator from agreeing to customer service requirements that exceed the standards set forth in section (c) of this rule; (2) A franchising authority from enforcing, through the end of the franchise term, pre-existing customer service requirements that exceed the standards set forth in section (c) of this rule and are contained in current franchise agreements; (3) Any State or any franchising authority from enacting or enforcing any consumer protection law, to the extent not specifically preempted herein; or (4) The establishment or enforcement of any State or municipal law or regulation concerning customer service that imposes customer service requirements that exceed, or address matters not addressed by, the standards set forth in section (c) of this rule. (c) Effective July 1, 1993, a cable operator shall be subject to the following customer service standards: (1) Cable system office hours and telephone availability. (i) The cable operator will maintain a local, toll-free or collect call telephone access line which will be available to its subscribers 24 hours a day, seven days a week. (A) Trained company representatives will be available to respond to customer telephone inquiries during normal business hours. (B) After normal business hours, the access line may be answered by a service or an automated response system, including an answering machine. Inquiries received after normal business hours must be responded to by a trained company representative on the next business day. (ii) Under normal operating conditions, telephone answer time by a customer representative, including wait time, shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds when the connection is made. If the call needs to be transferred, transfer time shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds. These standards shall be met no less than ninety (90) percent of the time under normal operating conditions, measured on a quarterly basis. (iii) The operator will not be required to acquire equipment or perform surveys to measure compliance with the telephone answering standards above unless an historical record of complaints indicates a clear failure to comply. (iv) Under normal operating conditions, the customer will receive a busy signal less than three (3) percent of the time. (v) Customer service center and bill payment locations will be open at least during normal business hours and will be conveniently located. (2) Installations, outages and service calls. Under normal operating conditions, each of the following four standards will be met no less than ninety five (95) percent of the time measured on a quarterly basis: (i) Standard installations will be performed within seven (7) business days after an order has been placed. "Standard" installations are those that are located up to 125 feet from the existing distribution system. (ii) Excluding conditions beyond the control of the operator, the cable operator will begin working on "service interruptions" promptly and in no event later than 24 hours after the interruption becomes known. The cable operator must begin actions to correct other service problems the next business day after notification of the service problem. (iii) The "appointment window" alternatives for installations, service calls, and other installation activities will be either a specific time or, at maximum, afour-hour time block during 2 t normal business hours. (The operator may schedule service calls and other installation activities outside of normal business hours for the express convenience of the customer.) (iv) An operator may not cancel an appointment with a customer after the close of business on the business day prior to the scheduled appointment. (v) If a cable operator representative is running late for an appointment with a customer and will not be able to keep the appointment as scheduled, the customer will be contacted. The appointment will be rescheduled, as necessary, at a time which is convenient for the customer. (3) Communications between cable operators and cable subscribers. (i) Refunds. Refund checks will be issued promptly, but no later than either- (A) The customer's next billing cycle following resolution of the request or thirty (30) days, whichever is earlier, or (B) The return of the equipment supplied by the cable operator if service is terminated. (ii) Credits. Credits for service will be issued no later than the customer's next billing cycle following the determination that a credit is warranted. (4) Definitions. (i) Normal Business Hours. The term "normal business hours" means those hours during which most similar businesses in the community are open to serve customers. In all cases, "normal business hours" must include some evening hours at least one night per week and/or some weekend hours. ~~ (ii) Normal Operating Conditions. The term normal operating conditions means those service conditions which are within the control of the cable operator. Those conditions which are not within the control of the cable operator include, but are not limited to, natural disasters, civil disturbances, power outages, telephone network outages, and severe or unusual weather conditions. Those conditions which are ordinarily within the control of the cable operator include, but are not limited to, special promotions, pay-per-view events rate increases, regular peak or seasonal demand periods, and maintenance or upgrade of the cable system. n e f (iii) Service Interruption. The term "service interruption" means the loss of picture or sound on one or more cable channels. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney Robert R. Altice, Chairman, Roanoke Regional Cable TV Committee Mike Pedelty, Director, Public Relations, Cox Communications Mary F. Parker, Clerk, Roanoke City Council Carolyn S. Ross, Clerk, Vinton Town Council Elaine Simpson, Government Access Director 4 ~. ~~ u- 4 ~a) AT A REGULAR MEETING OFTHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR ONE OR MORE NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISES TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN ONE OR MORE CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEMS WITHIN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable law, policies and procedures are established in this Ordinance whereby the County of Roanoke, Virginia ("County"), may grant certain entities, their successors and assigns, anon-exclusive franchise, or may renew or extend an existing franchise, to erect, operate and maintain poles, cables and all other electrical equipment, structures, or fixtures necessary to the construction, operation and maintenance of a Cable Television System under, over, upon and across the streets, alleys, sidewalks, and rights-of- way of the County to provide Cable Service to the residents and citizens of the County, and to the persons, firms, and corporations doing business therein, and to use the property of other entities in furtherance and support of the objectives of this Ordinance and any franchise granted hereunder upon such arrangements and under such conditions as to which the entities may agree. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the term "Franchise" shall apply, unless otherwise distinguished, to an initial franchise, an extended franchise or a renewed franchise; and WHEREAS, the provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all cable television Franchises granted, extended or renewed after the effective date of this Ordinance, and shall also apply to all Cable Television Franchisees existing as of the effective date in the event and as of the date of any extension or renewal of an existing Franchise requested by such Franchisee. WHEREAS, the first reading of this revised cable television franchise ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing was held on October 28, 2003. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: t t ~~ ~~... TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1. Short Title ........................................................................................... 4 Section 2. Definitions ...........................................................................................4 Section 3. Grant of Authority ................................................................................ 9 Section 4. Applications for Grant, Renewal, Transfer, or Modification of Franchises ..................................................................................................... 11 (a) Written Application .............................................................................. 11 (b) Application for Grant of a Franchise other than a Cable Act Renewal Franchise ............................................................................ 11 (c) Application for Grant of a Renewal Franchise ..................................... 14 (d) Contents of Applications ..................................................................... 14 (e) Application for Modification of a Franchise ......................................... 18 (f) Application for Consent to Transfer of a Franchise .............................. 18 Section 5. Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee .................... 19 Section 6. Rates ................................................................................................ 22 Section 7. PEG Access ...................................................................................... 23 Section 8. System Operation ............................................................................. 23 Section 9. Indemnification and Insurance .......................................................... 24 Section 10. Maintenance and Service Complaint Procedures . .......................... 26 Section 11. Filings with City ............................................................................... 34 Section 12. Construction and Installation of the System .................................... 35 Section 13. Emergency Alert System ................................................................ 39 Section 14. Limits on Rights of Way .................................................................. 40 Section 15. Approval Required for Franchise Transfer ......................................40 Section 16. County Right in Franchise ...............................................................41 Section 17. Franchise Fee .................................................................................43 Section 18. Records and Reports ...................................................................... 45 Section 19. Franchise Revocation .....................................................................45 Section 20. Hearing Requirements for Matters Affecting Franchises ................ 48 .~ ~- ~`~,. TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section 21. Costs .............................................................................................. 48 Section 22. Open Video System Operation ....................................................... 49 Section 23. Severability ..................................................................................... 49 Section 24. Acceptance of Franchise ................................................................ 50 Section 25. Franchisee to Abide by Applicable Laws ........................................ 51 Section 26. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions .............. 51 Section 27. Effective Date ................................................................................. 52 Appendix A. FCC Customer Service Standards 3 .~ CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE Section 1. Short Title. This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE." Section 2. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance the following terms, phrases, words, and their derivations shall have the meanings given herein. Terms of art not otherwise defined herein, whether capitalized or not, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in Title VI (Cable Communications) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§521, et seq. (hereinafter the "Cable Act"). When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not merely directory. (a) "Board" shall mean the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia. (b) "Cable," whether capitalized or not, shall mean the closed transmission paths by which video programming and other Cable Services are transmitted through and along a Franchisee's Cable System, and shall include coaxial cable, optical fiber and any other closed transmission path utilized therefor. (c) "Cable Service" shall have the same meaning as ascribed to the term "cable service" in the Cable Act. 4 '". ~" ~ ~ (d) "Cable Television System" (or "CATV", or "Cable System", sometimes hereinafter referred to as "System") shall have the same meaning as ascribed to the term "cable system" in the Cable Act. (e) "Chief Executive" shall mean the administrator of a county, manager of a city, or manager of a town, as the context may require. (f) "City" shall mean the City of Roanoke, Virginia. (g) "Council" shall mean the City Council of the City of Roanoke or the Town Council of the Town of Vinton, as the context may require. (h) "County" shall mean the County of Roanoke, Virginia. (i) "EG" shall mean the educational and governmental access component of PEG Access as defined in Section 2(w) hereof. (j) "Elementary and Secondary Schools", whether capitalized or not, shall mean all public institutions operated for the purposes of teaching students enrolled in the elementary (including kindergarten), middle and high school grades. (k) "FCC" shall mean the Federal Communications Commission or its successor. (I) "Franchise" shall mean the grant of authority, embodied in a franchise agreement between the County and a particular Franchisee, authorizing that Franchisee to construct, own, operate and maintain a cable system and provide cable service in the Service Area defined by that agreement. (m) "Franchise Area," for the purposes of establishing any entitlement to regulate rates charged by a Franchisee pursuant to the Cable Act, or any subsequently adopted counterpart thereof or governing regulatory provision relating thereto, shall mean and be 5 deemed as being coterminous with a Franchisee's Service Area; provided, however, that until a Franchisee offers Cable Service throughout such Service Area, a Franchisee's Franchise Area shall be such lesser portion of its Service Area to which it offers Cable Service. (n) "Franchisee" shall mean the grantee of rights under a Franchise granted pursuant to this Ordinance. (o) "Governing Body" shall mean the Board or a Council, as the context may require. (p) "Gross Revenues" shall mean all revenues derived from the operation of a Franchisee's System to provide Cable Service within its Service Area. This definition shall be construed as broadly as permitted by the Cable Act or any other applicable law. By way of example and not limitation, and unless otherwise defined in a Franchise, "Gross Revenues" shall include charges for basic service, cable programming services, per-channel or per-event services, other charges for video programming, installation and reconnection fees, leased channel fees, converter rental fees, advertising and home shopping revenues, late fees, and revenues for carriage of programming on the System, to the extent such items are considered "revenue" under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). "Gross Revenues" shall not include (1) any tax or fee imposed on cable Subscribers (but not on Franchisee) by the County or any governmental authority and collected by the Franchisee on behalf of such governmental entity (provided, however, that the fee imposed by Section 17 of this Ordinance shall not be construed to be such a tax or fee); (2) the revenues of any parent or affiliate of Franchisee to the extent, and only to the extent, the revenues of such parent or affiliate are costs of the Franchisee and recovered by Franchisee through charges to Subscribers that are included in Gross Revenues on which franchise fees are paid; and (3) actual bad debt, refunds 6 t i J or credits, provided any such bad debt subsequently collected shall be considered "Gross Revenues" in the period collected. In the event any- revenues derived by Franchisee or its parent or affiliates relate to the System in conjunction with other cable systems outside the Service Area owned or operated by Franchisee, its parent or its affiliate, then such revenues shall be fairly pro-rated among the various systems, and the portion of such revenues attributable to the Franchisee's System in the County based on such apro-ration shall be considered "Gross Revenues". (q) "Higher Education Center" or "Roanoke Higher Education Center" shall mean the Higher Education Center providing extension services and located in the City. (r) "Home" shall mean any single family dwelling unit, whether a house, apartment, trailer or mobile home, rented room or otherwise. (s) "Local Government" shall mean, as the context may require, the City, the County, or the Town, or all of them collectively. (t) "Local Government Occupied Buildings" shall mean those buildings owned in whole or in part by the County, the City, or the Town, as the context may require, or occupied in whole or in part by Local Government officials or other persons in furtherance of Local Government objectives, and shall include, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, all volunteer and paid fire and/or rescue companies located within the County, City or Town. (u) "Non-Subscriber Services" shall mean services provided to persons other than a Subscriber or User of the services provided by or carried on a Franchisee's Cable System. (v) "Person" shall mean any individual, firm, partnership, association, corporation, company, trust, or entity of any kind, but shall not include the County, the City, or the Town. 7 ~- ~ . (w) "PEG Access" shall mean public, educational and/or governmental use as provided in the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §531). (x) "PEG Access Channels" shall refer to the channel capacity on a System devoted to PEG Access. (y) "Public Schools", whether capitalized or not, shall mean all buildings operated by the School Board or School Division of the County, City or Town for the purposes of teaching and learning. (z) "Residential Subscriber" shall mean a purchaser in good standing of any service that the Franchisee delivers to any Home, provided that service is not utilized in connection with a business, trade, or profession. (aa) "Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee" (or "CATV Committee" or "Committee") shall mean the committee comprised of individuals from the County, the City and the Town, having responsibilities as set forth in this Ordinance concerning any cable television system which provides service within or to any portion of all of the aforesaid three jurisdictions. (bb) "Senior Citizen" shall mean any Residential Subscriber who is sixty-five (65) years. of age or older. (cc) "Service Area" shall mean the geographical area in the County, City or Town, as the context may require, in which a Franchisee is authorized by a Franchise to construct its System and to provide Cable Service . 8 ~- ~, a. (dd) "Signals" shall mean and refer to all frequencies, and the modulating intelligence (including digital modulation) imposed or carried thereon, provided by or permitted to be inserted by a Franchisee on the Cable System operated by such Franchisee. (ee) "Streets" shall mean all public streets, roads, avenues, highways, boulevards, concourses, driveways, bridges, tunnels, parkways, alleys, and all other public rights-of-way within or belonging to the County, City or Town, as the context may require. (ff) "Subscriber" or "User" shall mean any person or entity lawfully receiving any service provided by or carried on a Franchisee's Cable System. (gg) "Town" shall mean the Town of Vinton, Virginia. (hh) "VDOT" shall mean the Virginia Department of Transportation. Section 3. Grant of Authority. (a) The County shall have the authority, subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of §15.2-2108 of the Code of Virginia and the Cable Act, to grant to such applicant, who shall thereafter be a Franchisee hereunder, a nonexclusive initial, extended or renewed Franchise upon such terms as the County and such applicant may agree. The Franchise shall authorize such Franchisee, within its Service Area, to construct, erect, operate and maintain, in, upon, along, across, above, over and under the Streets of the County, poles, wires, cable, underground conduits, manholes, and such other conductors and fixtures for the maintenance and operation of a Cable Television System to provide Cable Service, subject to such applicant's agreement and obligation to provide Cable Service within the Franchisee's Service Area and to otherwise comply with all provisions of this Ordinance and the terms of any agreement relating to the initial grant, extension or renewal of the Franchise. Any Franchise 9 granted hereunder shall authorize the Franchisee to use the Streets to construct, erect, operate, and maintain a Cable System to provide Cable Service and for no other purpose. (b) No Franchisee shall, as to rates, charges, service, facilities, rules, regulations or in any other respect, make or grant any preference or advantage to any person, nor subject any person to any prejudice or disadvantage; provided that nothing in any Franchise granted hereunder shall be deemed to prohibit the establishment of a graduated scale of charges (i) to "Senior Citizen" Subscribers, (ii) for multiple installations at the same Home or building, or (iii) to prohibit Franchisee's provision of free or discounted service to its own employees or to governmental or school facilities. (c) Any Franchise granted hereunder as an initial authorization and any renewal or extension thereof shall be governed by the provisions of the Cable Act, any amendments or superseding legislation and other applicable law, and shall be for a term as defined in the franchise agreement between the County and the Franchisee, such term not to exceed fifteen (15) years. (d) No person shall construct, install, maintain or operate a Cable System within, along, over or under any Street or otherwise use the County's Streets to provide Cable Service unless pursuant to (i) a Franchise existing as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, or (ii) a Franchise granted by the County pursuant to the provisions of this Ordinance. Section 4. Applications for Grant Renewal Transfer or Modification of Franchises. (a) Written Application. 10 U- 4.u (1) A written application shall be filed with the County for (A) grant of an initial Franchise; (B) renewal of a Franchise; (C) modification of a franchise agreement pursuant to this Ordinance or the Cable Act; and (D) consent to a transfer of a Franchise. An applicant shall demonstrate in its application compliance with all requirements of this Ordinance and all applicable laws. (2) To be acceptable for filing, a signed original of the application shall be submitted together with five (5) copies. The application must be accompanied by any required application filing fee, conform to any applicable request for proposals or invitation for bid, and contain all required information. All applications shall include the names and addresses of persons authorized to act on behalf of the applicant with respect to the application. (3) An applicant for an initial or a renewal Franchise or transfer of a Franchise hereunder shall include in its application all information requested by the County or its designated representative, subject to the provisions of governing law or regulations, as the County deems reasonably appropriate to allow it to evaluate such applicant's application. (4) All applications accepted for filing shall be made available by the County for public inspection. (b) Application for Grant of a Franchise other than a Cable Act Renewal Franchise. (1) An application for the grant of a new Franchise may be filed pursuant to a request for proposals ("RFP") or invitation for bid ("IFB") issued by the County or on an unsolicited basis. The County, upon receipt of an unsolicited application, may issue an RFP or IFB. If the County elects to issue an RFP or IFB upon receipt of an unsolicited application, the applicant may submit an amended application in response to the RFP or IFB, or may inform the 11 County that its unsolicited application should be considered in response to the RFP or IFB, or may withdraw its unsolicited application. An application which does not conform to the requirements of an RFP or IFB may be considered non-responsive and denied on that basis. The applicant shall respond within the time directed by the County, providing the information and material set forth in subsection 4(d). The procedures, instructions, and requirements set forth in the RFP or IFB shall be followed by each applicant as if set forth and required herein. The County or its designee may seek additional information from any applicant and establish deadlines for the submission of such information. (2) In evaluating an application for a Franchise, the County may consider, among other things, the following factors: (A) The extent to which the applicant has substantially complied with applicable law and the material terms of any existing cable Franchise in the County, City or Town. (B) Whether the quality of the applicant's service under any existing Franchise in the County, City, or Town, including signal quality, responsiveness to customer complaints, billing practices, and the like, has been reasonable in light of the needs and interests of the communities served. (C) Whether the applicant has the financial, technical, and legal qualifications to build, operate and maintain the System and provide the Cable Service it proposes. (D) Whether the application satisfies any minimum requirements established by the County and is otherwise reasonable to meet the future cable-related needs 12 ~~- ~~ ~Q and interests of the community, taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests. (E) Whether the applicant proposes to provide adequate PEG Access channel capacity, facilities, or financial support. (F) Whether issuance of a Franchise is warranted in the public interest considering the immediate and future effect on the Streets and private and public property that would be used by the Cable System, including the extent to which installation or maintenance as planned would require replacement of Streets or property or involve disruption of property, public services, or use of the Streets and the comparative superiority or inferiority of competing applications. (G) Whether the applicant or an affiliate of the applicant owns or controls any other Cable System in the County, or whether the granting of the application may eliminate or reduce competition in the delivery of Cable Service in the County. (3) If the County finds that it is in the public interest to issue a Franchise considering the factors set forth above, and subject to the applicant's entry into an appropriate franchise agreement with County, it shall grant a Franchise to the applicant. If the County denies a Franchise, it will issue a written decision explaining why the Franchise was denied. Prior to deciding whether or not to issue a Franchise, the County may hold one or more public hearings or implement other procedures under which comments from the public on an application may be received. The County also may grant or deny a request for a Franchise based on its review of an application without further proceedings and may reject any application that is incomplete or fails to respond to an RFP or IFB. The County also reserves the right to 13 ~~ ~0. reject all responses to an RFP or IFB. This Ordinance is not intended and shall not be interpreted to grant any applicant or existing Franchisee standing to challenge the issuance of a franchise to another. (c) Application for Grant of a Renewal Franchise. The Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §546) shall apply to applications for renewal of an existing Franchise. If neither a Franchisee nor the County initiates the renewal process of the Cable Act in a timely manner, or is unable to initiate the renewal process set forth in 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)-(g) (including, for example, if the provisions are repealed), and except as to applications submitted pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(h), the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section shall apply, and a renewal request shall be evaluated using the same criteria as any other request for a Franchise. (d) Contents of Applications. Unless otherwise specified by the County, an RFP or IFB for the grant of a Franchise, including for a renewal franchise under 47 U.S.C. § 546(c), shall require, and any application submitted (other than an application submitted pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(h)) shall contain, at a minimum, the following information: (1) Name and address of the applicant and identification of the ownership and control of the applicant, including: the names and addresses of the ten (10) largest holders of an ownership interest in the applicant and affiliates of the applicant, and all persons with five (5) percent or more ownership interest in the applicant and its affiliates; the persons who control the applicant and its affiliates; all officers and directors of the applicant and its affiliates; and any other business affiliation and cable system ownership interest of each named person. 14 ~~~ ~t~ (2) A demonstration of the applicant's technical ability to construct and/or operate the proposed cable system, including identification of key personnel. (3) A demonstration of the applicant's legal qualifications to construct and/or operate the proposed cable system, including but not limited to a demonstration that the applicant meets the following criteria: (A) That the applicant has not submitted an application for an initial or renewal Franchise to the County, which was denied, or as to which any challenges to such franchising decision were finally resolved adversely to the applicant, within three (3) years preceding the submission of the application. (B) That the applicant has not had any cable television franchise validly revoked by any franchising authority within three (3) years preceding the submission of the application. (C) That the applicant has the necessary authority under Virginia law to operate a cable system. (D) That the applicant holds or is qualified to obtain, any necessary federal licenses or waivers required to operate the System proposed in the application, and that the applicant is otherwise qualified to own and operate the System under federal law. (E) That the applicant, or any of its officers, directors, partners, or shareholders holding greater than a ten (10) percent interest have not, during the ten (10) years preceding the submission of the application, been convicted of any act or omission of such character that the applicant cannot reasonably be relied upon to deal truthfully with the County or Subscribers or to substantially comply with obligations under applicable law, including 15 ~ ~--~~. obligations under consumer protection laws and laws prohibiting anticompetitive acts, fraud, racketeering, or other similar conduct. (F) That the applicant certifies that the information contained on its application is truthful and complete. (G) That no elected official of the County holds a controlling interest in the applicant or in any affiliate of the applicant. (4) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the County shall provide an opportunity to an applicant to show that it would be inappropriate to deny it a Franchise under subsection (d)(3)(B) or (E) above by virtue of the particular circumstances surrounding the matter in question, and to demonstrate the steps taken by the applicant to cure the harms flowing therefrom and prevent their recurrence, the lack of involvement of the applicant's principals, or the remoteness of the matter from the operation of cable television systems. (5) A statement prepared by a certified public accountant regarding the applicant's financial ability to complete the construction and operation of the Cable System proposed in the application. (6) A description of the applicant's prior experience in owning or operating Cable Systems, and the identification of communities in which the applicant or any of its principals have, or have had, a cable franchise or franchise or any material interest therein; provided, however that an applicant that holds an existing Franchise with the County and is seeking renewal of that Franchise need not provide such information. (7) Identification of the area of the County to be served by the proposed Cable System, including a description of the proposed Service Area's boundaries. 16 l~-~t:Q (8) A description of the physical facilities proposed, including channel capacity, technical design, performance characteristics, headend location, and PEG Access facilities. (9) Where applicable, a description of the construction of the proposed System, including an estimate of plant mileage and its location, the proposed construction schedule, and general information on the availability of space in existing conduits and poles to accommodate the proposed System. (10) A demonstration of how the applicant will reasonably meet the future cable-related needs and interests of the community, including descriptions of how the applicant will meet the needs described in any recent community needs assessment conducted by or for the County, and how the applicant will provide adequate PEG Access channel capacity, facilities, or financial support to meet the community's needs and interests, and how such capacity, facilities, and financial support will be funded. (11) Any other information as may be lawful and reasonably necessary to demonstrate an applicant's ability to comply with the requirements of this Ordinance. (12) Information that the County may lawfully request of the applicant that is relevant to the County's consideration of the application. (13) An affidavit or declaration of the applicant or authorized officer certifying the truth and accuracy of the information in the application, acknowledging the enforceability of application commitments to the extent they are incorporated into a Franchise, and certifying that the applicant meets all federal and state law requirements to construct, erect, operate, and maintain a Cable System. 17 i ~- ~~~ . (e) Application for Modification of a Franchise. An application for modification of a Franchise shall include, at minimum, the following information: (1) The specific modification of the Franchise requested; (2) The justification for the requested modification, including the impact, if any, of the requested modification on Subscribers and others, and the financial impact on the applicant if the modification is approved or disapproved, demonstrated through, among other things, submission of financial pro formas; (3) A statement whether the modification is sought pursuant to the Cable Act, (47 U.S.C. § 545), and, if so, a demonstration that the requested modification meets the standards set forth in the Act; (4) Any other information that the applicant believes is necessary for the County to make an informed determination on the application for modification; and (5) An affidavit or declaration of the applicant or authorized officer certifying the truth and accuracy of the information in the application. (f) Application for Consent to Transfer of a Franchise. (1) An application for the County's consent to the transfer of a Franchise or the transfer of control of a Franchisee shall include, at a minimum, the following information: (A) A completed FCC Form 394, or any successor form; and (B) With respect to the proposed transferee, the information set forth in the following subsections of Section 4(d) of this section, "Contents of Applications": (1), (2), 18 V~-~(~~ (3), (6), (11), (12), and (13), and where any changes in such information are contemplated, the information set forth in subsections 4(d) (7), (8), (9), and (10). (2) In determining whether a transfer application should be granted, denied, or granted subject to conditions, the County may consider the legal, financial, and technical qualifications of the transferee to operate the Cable System; any potential impact of the transfer on Subscriber rates or services; whether the incumbent Franchisee is in substantial compliance with its Franchise and, if not, whether the incumbent or the transferee furnishes adequate cure or assurance of cure; whether the transferee owns or controls any other Cable System in the County; and whether transfer of the System or control of the Franchisee to the transferee or approval of the transfer would otherwise adversely affect Subscribers, the public, or the County's interests under this Ordinance, the Franchise, or other applicable law. No transfer application shall be granted unless the transferee agrees in writing that it will abide by and accept all terms of this Ordinance and the Franchise, and that it will assume the obligations, liabilities, and responsibility for all acts and omissions, known and unknown, of the previous Franchisee for all purposes. Section 5. Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee. As of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, the County, the City and the Town have, pursuant to ordinances duly adopted by each of them, jointly established a committee known as the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee (the "CATV Committee"). By adoption of this Ordinance, the County does hereby affirm its continued participation in and support of the CATV Committee, which shall comprise eleven (11) members and have the duties and responsibilities as set forth below: 19 ~- ~(~ (a) Members. One member shall be provided from each of the Governing Bodies of the County, the City and the Town; three members shall be the Chief Executives (or their designees) from each of the County, the City and the Town; one member shall be appointed by each of the Roanoke County and Roanoke City School Boards; and one member-at-large shall be appointed by each of the Governing Bodies of the County, the City and the Town. (b) Chairperson. The CATV Committee shall select a chairperson from its membership, who shall serve for a period of one year or such other term as the CATV Committee may deem appropriate. (c) Terms of Office. The terms of office of the three at-large members shall be for three years each, provided that such terms shall be staggered, with a continuation of the staggered sequence established by the CATV Committee prior to the adoption of this Ordinance; members from the Governing Bodies of each of the jurisdictions and those appointed by their respective School Boards shall serve for such terms as are determined by their respective appointing authorities. (d) Meetings. Meetings of the CATV Committee shall be held not less than once per year and at such more frequent times as the Chairperson or the Committee shall determine; a quorum shall consist of five members. The Committee may adopt such procedures and bylaws as it deems necessary for the proper exercise of its responsibilities. (e) Scope. The CATV Committee shall fulfill its responsibilities with respect to any Franchisee or applicant for a Franchise as to which the Cable Service provided or proposed shall extend within or to any portion of all of the three jurisdictions addressed herein. 20 (f) Franchisee Attendance. The General Manager (or his or her designee) of each Franchisee within the scope of the CATV Committee's responsibilities shall be afforded the opportunity to attend each meeting of the CATV Committee, with at least ten (10) days advance notice to be provided whenever reasonably possible, except when the CATV Committee holds a closed meeting. (g) Powers and Duties. The CATV Committee shall: (i) Advise the affected Governing Bodies concerning any applications for Franchises. (ii) Provide for the development, administration, and operation of EG access facilities and programming for the County, City and Town as provided for in this Ordinance and any franchise agreements. The administration of all such EG activities shall be undertaken by the Committee. (iii) Monitor each Franchisee's compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance and any Franchise granted hereunder, and advise affected Governing Bodies of matters that may constitute grounds for a monetary forfeiture or Franchise revocation. (iv) Advise the affected Governing Bodies concerning the regulations of Cable rates. (v) Receive, record and consider Subscriber complaints that have not been resolved by a Franchisee; attempt to resolve and respond to all such complaints, maintaining a record of all resolutions; and report annually to each Governing Body the results of its actions with respect to such complaints. 21 ~- ~~ (vi) Review any proposed transfer of a Franchise and recommend whether such transfer should be approved. (vii) Coordinate review of each Franchisee's records as may be required by this Ordinance. (viii) Encourage the use of such EG access channels and facilities as are required under this Ordinance or any Franchise by the widest range of institutions, groups and individuals within the Service Areas of the respective Franchisees, consistent with applicable law. (ix) Review budgets prepared by departments within affected jurisdictions for EG channel usage, and coordinate the expenditure of any capital grant funds provided by any Franchisee to maximize the potential and provide for the full development of EG channel usage. (x) Advise the Governing Bodies of the jurisdictions addressed herein as to proposed rules and procedures under which a Franchisee may use unused EG channel capacity for the provision of other services, and under which such Franchisee use shall cease. (xi) Coordinate programming and activities on EG channels, develop appropriate policies and procedures therefor, and assist in preparation and review of budgets for all cablecasting activities on EG channels. (xii) Maintain records in accordance with statutory requirements. Section 6. Rates. The County specifically retains all rights to regulate rates for Cable Service charged by any Franchisee, subject to the provisions of relevant federal and state laws and the rules and regulations of administrative agencies with authority. 22 r Section 7. PEG Access. u ~.~, PEG Access channel capacity, facilities and support requirements shall be specified in the Franchise between the County and the Franchisee, and shall be sufficient to satisfy the County's cable-related community needs and interests. Section 8. stem Operation. (a) Every Franchisee shall operate its Cable System as required by the FCC's rules and regulations, including, without limitation, ensuring compliance with all applicable provisions of 47 C.F.R. §76.601, et seq. (FCC Technical Standards), and any amendments thereto, throughout the entire Service Area. Upon request, every Franchisee shall submit to the County copies of all performance test data required pursuant to 47 C.F.R. §76.601 and any other performance tests that may be required by subsequent amendment of the FCC's rules and regulations. (b) Unless otherwise provided for in a Franchise, within six months after receipt of written request from the County, a Franchisee shall interconnect its System with the Cable System of any overlapping or adjacent cable operator in the County, City or Town. Such interconnection, including bidirectional capability, shall be performed on terms mutually and reasonably acceptable to the Franchisee and the other operator, including arrangements to share equitably the cost of design, installation, and all necessary equipment, hardware, and accessories to accomplish the interconnection. Section 9. Indemnification and Insurance. 23 ~l- ~~.~ (a) Every Franchisee, as a condition to its entitlement to hold or continue to hold a Franchise hereunder, shall save the ,County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from all loss or damages of any kind, including reasonable attorney's fees, sustained by the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers on account of any suit, judgment, execution, claim, or demand whatsoever, resulting from any acts or omissions on the part of the Franchisee, its contractors, subcontractors or agents in the construction, maintenance or operation of its Cable Television System or the provision of Cable Service in the County; provided, however, that the County shall give to an indemnifying Franchisee written notice of any such suit, judgment, execution, claim or demand made to which the immediately foregoing indemnification provisions apply. (b) Each Franchisee shall take out and maintain throughout the term of its Franchise commercial general liability insurance against personal injury with coverage of not less than $5,000,000 for injury to any person and $5,000,000 for any one accident, and insurance against property damage, including damage to County property, in an amount not less than $5,000,000, and shall maintain comprehensive automobile liability insurance, including non-owned and hired car as well as owned vehicles coverage, with minimum bodily injury coverage for each occurrence of $2,000,000 and property damage coverage of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. X, C, and U general liability insurance exclusions must be deleted. The above limits may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella insurance following the form of the primary insurance. The above policies shall be written by a company licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which shall be rated not less than "A" by Best's 24 ~e_~.a rating service, and the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds thereunder, and an endorsement to that effect from the insurer must be received by the County within thirty (30) days of commencement of a Franchise. A certificate of these policies shall be furnished to the County as a condition to the grant of any Franchise hereunder. The County reserves the right, no more frequently than once every three years, and upon six months advance notice to a Franchisee, to require an increase in the immediately foregoing minimum basic coverages by an amount not to exceed the amount necessary to compensate for the County's increased general liability insurance coverage, or the County's increased self-insured exposure, for the three years immediately preceding the date of such notice from the County. (c) Every Franchisee shall obtain workers' compensation insurance as required by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, with such insurance to be written by a company licensed to do business in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which company shall be rated not less than "A" by Best's rating service. Such policy shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers. (d) Each Franchisee shall ensure that its contractors, subcontractors and agents maintain commercial general liability insurance coverage sufficient to protect the County, the CATV Committee, and their officers, representatives, employees, agents and volunteers from any loss arising from work performed on such Franchisee's behalf. (e) No insurance policy shall be cancelable or non-renewable until thirty (30) days after receipt by the County of notice of intention to cancel or non-renew. 25 a Section 10. Maintenance and Service Complaint Procedures. (a) System Maintenance. Throughout the term of its Franchise, every Franchisee shall maintain all parts of its Cable System in good working condition. (b) FCC Standards. Each Franchisee shall, at minimum, comply with the customer service standards established by the FCC at 47 C.F.R. §76.309(c), or any subsequently adopted amendments thereto. These rules are hereby adopted as if incorporated herein (see Appendix A). No Franchisee shall adopt standards less stringent than those imposed by the FCC, and nothing herein shall prevent a Franchisee, or the County, from adopting standards that are more stringent than those imposed by the FCC. The County may, at its sole discretion, and upon ninety (90) days written notice to a Franchisee, inform a Franchisee of its intent to enforce, and may enforce against such Franchisee, the additional customer service standards contained in subsections (b)(1) through (9) below, or any other customer service standard deemed reasonably necessary by the County at its sole discretion. (1) Installation Time. Within all areas served by the System, and meeting the density requirements of Section 12(c), service to all requesting potential Subscribers requiring an aerial installation shall be provided within five (5) business days after receipt of the request for service, and service to requesting potential Subscribers requiring an underground installation shall be provided within ten (10) business days after such request, unless Franchisee is prevented by reasons beyond its control or later installation is requested by the Subscriber. 26 (2) Repair Procedure. Franchisee shall have a local listed telephone number for receipt of requests for repairs at any time, twenty four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week. Franchisee responses to such requests shall occur within twenty four (24) hours after Franchisee's receipt of such a request, oral or written, excluding Sundays and holidays. Verification of the problem and Franchisee's best efforts to resolve the problem shall occur within forty eight (48) hours. In any event, resolution should occur within five (5) business days. Those matters requiring additional maintenance, repair, or technical adjustments that require more than five (5) business days to complete shall be reported in writing to the Subscriber and, if requested, to the County. The County may require reasonable documentation to be provided by Franchisee to substantiate a request for additional time to resolve any such complaint. (3) Responsiveness. Franchisee shall respond seven (7) days a week within two hours to any outage affecting five (5) or more subscribers due to the same event or occurrence ("Area Outage") which occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., and by not later than 11:00 am the following day to any Area Outage which occurs between 9:00 p.m., and 7:00 a.m., the following day. Such response shall mean actual commencement of trouble shooting and repairs, plus contact with the complaining Subscriber(s), if reasonably possible under the circumstances. (4) Mean time between failures. The average time between Area Outages shall not exceed twenty four (24) hours in any twelve (12) month period. It shall be computed by dividing the operating time by the number of Area Outages. 27 (5) Mean time to repair. The average time to complete repair to System outages shall not exceed two (2) hours in any twelve (12) month period. It shall be computed by dividing the total time for repairs by the number of repair orders. (6) Subscriber Down Time. Annual subscriber down time shall not exceed an average of four (4) hours per Subscriber. (7) Mean Time to Install. Mean time to install shall be eight (8) business days for underground installations and four (4) business days for aerial installations. (8) Service Call (Repairs). Seventy percent (70%) of all repair requests shall be acted upon within twenty four (24) hours; ninety percent (90%) within ninety six (96) hours. All requests shall be resolved within five (5) business days unless good and sufficient cause exists. Any service call not resolved within five (5) business days shall be reported in writing to the CATV Committee by Franchisee within two (2) business days thereafter. (9) Telephone Waiting Time. During normal business hours, ninety percent (90%) of all telephone calls shall be picked up on or before the fourth ring and no caller shall be allowed to wait for more than ten (10) rings. Waiting time shall not exceed an average of thirty (30) seconds total for any caller, and no caller shall be transferred except for specialized services. (c) Complaint Policy and Records. (1) Complaint Policy. Franchisee shall promulgate written policy statements and procedures for reporting and resolving Subscriber complaints. Franchisee shall furnish a copy of the policy to each new Subscriber upon installation and thereafter to all 28 u-~~ ~ Subscribers at least annually, and to the County and all Subscribers at such time as there is any change in such policy. (2) Complaint Records. Franchisee shall maintain records showing the date of receipt of all written complaints received (including those received via electronic mail) and identifying the Subscriber, the nature of the complaint, and the date action was taken by Franchisee in response thereto, together with a description of such action. Such records shall be kept available at Franchisee's local office for at least two (2) years from date of receipt, for inspection by the County as it may at any time and from time to time reasonably request, during business hours and upon reasonable notice. A periodic log of all complaints and resolutions, by category, shall be provided to the County and the CATV Committee or its designee upon request. Complaints that remain unresolved for a period of ten (10) working days or more shall be reduced to writing by the Franchisee and submitted to the County or its designee for appropriate action. (3) Complaint Notice. Franchisee shall provide written notice detailing all actions taken to resolve complaints submitted to the County within five (5) business days from written or telephone notification by the County of the complaint. Franchisee shall provide service-call and outage reports to the County or the CATV Committee upon request. (d) Free Basic Service. Franchisee shall provide basic tier service and the most widely subscribed-to tier of cable programming service without charge to each Local Government Occupied Building, fire station, police station, any other County-owned or County- occupied buildings (excluding housing units and buildings owned by the County but not used for 29 ~4~~ governmental or educational purposes), all Elementary and Secondary Schools, public library, state-accredited private schools with at least fifty (50) students, and public, private or community college academic buildings within its Service Area, as requested by County. One standard drop into such building(s) and into a room or office designated by the recipient, one converter (if needed) per building, and continued delivery of the required service throughout the term of the Franchise shall constitute compliance. Any attached identified structures shall be treated as separate buildings. This subsection shall apply to any building meeting the classifications listed, regardless whether such building existed as of the effective date of this Ordinance or was constructed or occupied after the effective date hereof. The Service recipient shall be responsible for securing Franchisee's right of access to the building(s) at no cost to the Franchisee. (e) Emergency Communications. At least one person in responsible charge of Franchisee's operations in the Service Area shall be available by local telephone during such hours as Franchisee's business office is closed, and the telephone number of such person shall be supplied in advance to the County's chief executive official, the presiding officer of the Board, the County's Police and Fire Departments, and the Emergency 911 Center. (f) Subscriber Antennas. Notwithstanding any disconnection of Subscribers' existing antennas and downleads to receivers connected to the Cable System, the Cable System shall be designed so that physical removal of antennas and downleads will not be required to receive Service, and so that the Subscriber may utilize such antennas at any time in place of the Cable System service. 30 U- ~~~ (g) Parental Guidance Control. Consistent with the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §544(d)(2)(A)), Franchisee shall make available to any Subscriber so requesting, at reasonable cost, a "parental guidance control" or "lockout key" which will permit the Subscriber to eliminate intelligible audio and video reception of any or all of the premium service channels. Franchisee shall notify all Subscribers of the availability of such parental-control devices. (h) Call Recording Service for Current Known Outages. Franchisee shall provide a telephone number which provides a recorded message of access to an employee or agent or Franchisee, on a twenty four (24) hour basis. The recorded message shall describe current known System deficiencies and outages and thereafter accept recorded messages from Subscribers, who may leave their names; request service; report outages; and request credit for down time. (i) Preventative Maintenance. Franchisee shall establish and adhere to a preventive maintenance policy directed toward maximizing the reliability and maintainability of the Cable System with respect to its delivery of Cable Service to Subscribers at or above the technical standards established by the FCC. When it is necessary to interrupt Cable Service for the purpose of making repairs, adjustments, installations or other maintenance activities, Franchisee shall do so at such times as will cause the least inconvenience to its Subscribers, generally between the hours of 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. the next morning. Q) Repair Capability. Franchisee shall maintain sufficient qualified technicians, service vehicles, and test and repair equipment to provide repair service within the parameters set forth below. 31 ~' i{,0. (k) Notice. Except in an emergency, or when System maintenance or repair occurs between the hours of 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m., Franchisee shall give Subscribers at least twenty-four (24) hours' notice of any interruption of Cable Service for purposes of maintenance or repair. In an emergency, Franchisee shall give such notice as is reasonable in the circumstances. Notice given on the Alphanumeric Channels shall be considered sufficient. When Subscriber channels will be interrupted, normal scheduled service and repair shall be performed between the hours of 11:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. the next morning. (I) Refund for Outage. For any continuous service interruption or loss of service in excess of twenty-four (24) hours, Franchisee shall make apro-rated refund of such Subscriber's regular monthly charge for the service to each Subscriber so affected, upon request of such Subscriber. The twenty-four (24) hour period shall commence when Franchisee learns of such outage whether through Subscriber notification or notification by Franchisee's maintenance personnel. Such refunds shall be prorated by multiplying the applicable monthly service rate by a fraction whose numerator equals the number of days of the outage and whose denominator equals the number of days in the month of the outage. For purposes of this paragraph, an outage shall be defined as a Subscriber's receipt of less than two thirds (2/3) of the authorized basic service and most widely subscribed to tier of cable programming service channels, or loss of any premium channel. Franchisee shall not be required to grant a refund in the event that an outage is caused by any Subscriber. (m) Billing Practices. Franchisee shall maintain written billing practices and policies and shall furnish a copy thereof to the County, the CATV Committee, and all Subscribers, and to each new Subscriber. The County and all Subscribers shall be notified in writing thirty (30) days 32 l~ ~~~~ in advance of any changes. Franchisee shall comply with all relevant state and federal laws and regulations with respect to its billing practices. (n) Pro-rated Service. In the event a Subscriber's service is terminated for any reason, monthly charges for service shall be pro-rated on a daily basis. Where advance payment has been made by a Subscriber, the appropriate refund shall be made by Franchisee to the Subscriber within thirty (30) days of such termination, unless the amount is less than $5.00, which amount shall be refunded only upon the Subscriber's request. (o) Disconnection for Non-Payment. Franchisee shall have the right to disconnect a Subscriber for failure to pay an overdue account provided that: (1) Franchisee's billing practices and policy statements have set forth in writing the conditions under which an account will be considered overdue; and (2) Franchisee provides written notice of its intent to disconnect at least fifteen (15) days prior to the proposed disconnection; and (3) The Subscriber's account is at least thirty (30) days delinquent computed from the first day of service for which payment has not been made. (p) Installation of Equipment. Unless otherwise provided by law, Franchisee shall not install its System on private property without first securing written permission of the owner or tenant in possession of such property or the written permission of the holder of any easement for utility lines or similar purposes, and in accordance with law. Upon request, Franchisee shall inform owners and tenants of the functions of all equipment installed on private property. (q) Monitoring and Privacy. Unless otherwise provided by law, neither Franchisee nor any of its offices, employees, agents or contractors shall, without prior written consent of all affected 33 t~- < 4.G parties, tap, monitor or arrange for the tapping or monitoring of any drop, outlet or receiver for any purpose whatsoever other than legitimate technical performance testing of the Cable System or the monitoring of subscriber cable service, or where such tapping or monitoring is required by law. Franchisee shall comply with relevant federal and state statutes regarding the monitoring of Service and providing Subscriber information to government entities. Franchisee shall at all times comply with the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. §551) with regard to the protection of Subscriber privacy. (r) Subscriber Lists or Information. Unless otherwise provided by law, Franchisee shall not sell, disclose, or otherwise make available, or permit the use of, lists of the names or addresses of its Subscribers, or any list or other information which identifies individual Subscriber viewing habits, to any person or entity for any purpose whatsoever without the consent of such Subscriber, all in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Cable Act and applicable law. This provision shall not prevent Franchisee from performing such acts as may be necessary for the purpose of service related activities, including surveys. Section 11. Filings with County. (a) In addition to other filings that may be set forth herein, every Franchisee shall maintain, and file with the County Administrator upon request, true and accurate strand maps (in either electronic or, if the Franchisee and County otherwise agree, in hard copy) of all existing and proposed installations in the Streets. The County hereby reserves the right to reject any proposed installation that does not conform to its ordinances, regulations or practices concerning construction in the Streets. The County may order and direct the Franchisee, at Franchisee's sole cost, to move the location or alter the construction of any existing installation 34 U-L~~, to facilitate or accommodate the installation, alteration, repair or changing of the grade or location of a street, or the construction, alteration, repair or installation of any other public works or the construction of public improvements in, on, or under the Streets. Every Franchisee shall also maintain and, upon request, make available at its local office, for review and copying by the County, true and accurate "as built" maps of all existing installations. (b) Every Franchisee shall file annually with the County Administrator a statement setting forth the names and addresses of all its directors and officers and the position that each holds, which statement may consist of the Franchisee's annual report. (c) Upon request, a Franchisee shall file with the County Administrator copies of rules, regulations, terms and conditions adopted by the Franchisee for the conduct of its business. Section 12. Construction and Installation of the System. (a) The County shall have the right to inspect all construction or installation work performed by a Franchisee within the Service Area, and to make such inspections as the County deems necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of this Ordinance, other pertinent provisions of law and any Franchise granted hereunder. No poles, underground conduits, or other wire or cable-holding structures shall be erected by a Franchisee without prior approval of the County or its duly authorized personnel, or, unless such consent is not required by applicable law, by abutting property owners where the County does not own, or hold some other right of way property interests in, the area in which such structures are to be erected. To the extent possible, a Franchisee shall use existing poles and underground conduits throughout the County. Any poles, underground conduits or other fixtures that a Franchisee is authorized by 35 the County to install must be placed in a manner so that they do not interfere with or obstruct the usual travel on the public Streets or interfere with any existing utility services. At the time any trench is opened for installation or maintenance of conduit or underground cable, a Franchisee shall give the County at least ten (10) days advance written notice of such work and inform the County of the incremental cost of installing one additional conduit for the exclusive use of the County of such dimension as specified by the County, and unless the County otherwise directs Franchisee in writing, Franchise shall install such conduit at a charge no greater than the actual incremental cost of labor and materials for such additional conduit. All construction activities of a Franchisee shall be conducted in a workmanlike manner that will cause minimum interference with the rights and reasonable convenience of the public's and other utilities' use of the Streets and of the property owners directly affected thereby. Every Franchisee shall maintain all structures, cable and related Cable System equipment that are located in, over, under, and upon the Streets in a safe, suitable, substantial condition and in good order and repair at all times. (b) All construction, installation and repair by a Franchisee shall be effectuated in a manner that is consistent with the FCC's rules, relevant local building codes, zoning ordinances and laws, all County and other governmental laws, codes or ordinances relating to public works or the Streets, and other regulatory requirements, the National Electrical Safety Code, and other standards of general applicability to Cable Systems. No Franchisee shall commence any construction without obtaining all local zoning and other approvals, permits and other licenses generally applicable to other entities performing such construction, and paying all costs and fees normally imposed or charged therefor. 36 ~l-+~~. (c) A Franchisee shall be required to extend. energized trunk cable and make Cable Service available to any and all portions of the County within the limits of its defined Service Area with a density of at least twenty (20) Homes per linear mile for aerial installations and thirty (30) Homes per linear mile for underground installations. For purposes of calculating this density requirement, all Homes within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any Street or other right- of-way suitable for cable trunk installation shall be counted in density determinations, and shall be considered as satisfying the 20 or 30 Homes- per-mile density requirement, as appropriate. In the event that the owner of any Home or other structure within a Franchisee's Service Area not meeting the density requirement is willing to agree in writing to pay the excess cost of extending Cable Service to that location, then a Franchisee so requested by such owner shall provide Cable Service to such Home or other structure, provided that such owner's payment obligation shall only apply to the actual costs incurred, without markup, in extending cable more than 150 feet from any trunk line. (d) In case of any disturbance of pavement, sidewalk, driveway or other surface, a Franchisee shall, at its sole cost and expense and in a manner approved by the County or as required by any applicable County policy or standards generally applicable to similar construction in the Streets, replace and restore all paving, sidewalk, driveway or surface disturbed in as good condition as before such work was commenced. (e) In the event that at any time during the period of a Franchise, the County or VDOT shall elect to alter or change the grade, width, or other characteristic of any Street, alley or other public way, the affected Franchisee, upon reasonable notice by the County or VDOT, at 37 U ~;q Franchisee's sole cost, shall remove, relay, and relocate its poles, wires, cables, underground conduits, manholes and other fixtures or equipment as directed by the County or VDOT. (f) No Franchisee shall place any poles or other fixtures where the same will interfere with any gas, electric or telephone fixture, water hydrant, main, or sewer, and all such poles or other fixtures placed in any Street shall be placed in accordance with the County's requirements or as established by any applicable County policy or standards. (g) A Franchisee shall, on the request of any person holding a building moving permit issued by the County, temporarily raise or lower its wires or Cable to permit the moving of buildings. The expense of such temporary removal, raising or lowering of wires or cable shall be paid by the person requesting the same, and the Franchisee shall have the authority to require such payment in advance. The Franchisee shall be given not less than seven (7) days advance notice to arrange for such temporary wire or cable changes. (h) Every Franchisee shall have the authority to trim trees upon and overhanging Streets, alleys, sidewalks and public rights-of-way of the County so as to prevent the branches of such trees from coming in contact with the wires and cables of the Franchisee, provided that all trimming shall be done in accordance with the ANSI 300, American National Standard for Tree Care Operation (or any such successor standard), and under the supervision and direction of the County or VDOT and at the sole expense of the Franchisee. The County or VDOT specifically reserves the right to prohibit the trimming of any tree where the County or VDOT deems that such trimming would be inappropriate. An explanation for the denial shall be provided in writing. 38 (i) No Franchisee shall install above-ground facilities in any portion of its Service Area where all public utility lines are underground, or in any area of the County designated as an underground utility area, and every Franchisee shall be obligated to relocate its existing facilities underground in any portion of its Service Area within ninety (90) days after all public utility lines in that portion of its Service Area have been placed underground, provided, however, that Franchisee may request a partial waiver of this requirement with respect to certain ground- mounted appurtenances, such as Subscriber taps, line extenders, System passive devices (splitters, directional couplers, etc.), amplifiers, power supplies, network reliability units, pedestals, or other related equipment. Q) Vehicles owned or leased by a Franchisee and used in the installation, construction or repair of the Franchisee's System or installation or repair on Subscribers' premises shall be marked with the Franchisee's identity, and all employees, contractors and subcontractors of a Franchisee shall carry identification, to be produced upon request, which shall provide the employee, contractor, or subcontractor's name, local business address and local business telephone number . Section 13. Emergency Alert System. Every Franchisee shall comply with the federal Emergency Alert System ("EAS") standards established by Part 11 of the FCC's Rules (47 C.F.R. §11) and any state or local EAS plan approved thereunder. In addition, and to the extent not preempted by federal law or regulation, each Franchisee shall provide for use by such authorized persons as are designated by the County, an emergency override capability whereby the audio or video portion of programming carried on all channels may be interrupted for the insertion of emergency 39 L1- 4. q information. The County may grant relief from the requirements of the foregoing sentence if the County determines in its sole discretion that a Franchisee's compliance with the federal EAS standards and/or any state or local EAS plan approved thereunder will provide the same functional capability to disseminate emergency information to Subscribers. Section 14. Limits on Rights of Way. This Ordinance shall not be construed to mean that the County, by granting any Franchise hereunder, provides any Franchisee the right to use any Street, right-of-way or property controlled by VDOT or by any person other than the County. Every Franchisee hereunder shall be required to comply with any and all VDOT regulations and requirements set forth for the use of such Streets or rights-of-way controlled by VDOT and may be required to separately obtain from private parties and others necessary consents, not otherwise preempted by federal or state statute or regulation, to use any other rights-of-way not controlled by or vested in the County prior to the installation of any Cable on, under or over the property so affected. Section 15. Approval Required for Franchise Transfer. No Franchisee shall sell, assign, transfer or lease its plant or Cable System to another person, nor transfer any rights under a Franchise to another person, nor may control of a Franchisee be transferred, without the Franchisee having first made written application pursuant to Section 4(f), above, for Board's consent to such transfer and without prior Board approval of such transfer on such reasonable terms and conditions as the Board may impose. No sale, transfer, assignment or lease shall thereafter be effective until the vendee, assignee, transferee or lessee has filed in the office of the County Administrator an instrument, duly executed, 40 ~- `~~~ reciting the fact of such sale, assignment, transfer or lease, accepting and agreeing to be bound by the provisions of this Ordinance and a Franchise granted pursuant hereto, and agreeing to perform all the conditions that may be imposed by the Board pursuant to its consent. Consent for the transfer, sale, assignment or lease shall not unreasonably be withheld; provided, however, that any costs incurred by the County in evaluating and/or approving such transfer, sale, assignment or lease, not to exceed $5,000.00, shall be paid within 30 days after the submission of an invoice therefor by the County, and no such transfer, sale, assignment or lease shall become effective until such payment is made. . Section 16. County Right in Franchise. (a) The right is hereby reserved by the County to adopt, in addition to the provisions herein contained and in existing applicable ordinances, such additional regulations as it shall find necessary and that are a lawful exercise of its police power. (b) The County shall have the right to supervise, inspect and approve or disapprove all construction or installation work performed by a Franchisee in the Streets, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance and other County laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations, and to make such inspections as it shall find necessary to ensure compliance with applicable County laws, ordinances, resolutions or regulations. (c) All Streets, rights-of-way, and easements that a Franchisee is permitted to use hereunder shall remain the property of the County or VDOT, as appropriate. Until such time as poles or other equipment are actually installed by a Franchisee, and in the event of future removal of such poles or other equipment, such rights shall remain vested in or immediately 41 U-~~a revert to the County or VDOT and, in the event of removal, a Franchisee's rights therein shall automatically be canceled. (d) At the time a Franchise becomes effective, the County may require the Franchisee to furnish to the County aCounty-approved security, in such form and with such sureties as shall be acceptable to the County, guaranteeing the payment of all sums which may at any time become due from the Franchisee to the County under the terms of this Ordinance and any Franchise granted, and further guaranteeing the faithful performance of all obligations of the Franchisee under the terms of this Ordinance and the agreement reflecting the grant of the Franchise. The amount of the security shall be $300,000 unless a franchise agreement otherwise provides. In the event of default under this Ordinance or a Franchise granted pursuant to this Ordinance, the County shall not assume any liability, obligation or responsibility, but shall instead be entitled, without prejudice to any other remedy available to the County, to levy on and collect from such security all amounts necessary to render the County whole. (e) If at any time after the date a Franchisee's Cable System is activated to provide Cable Service, the Franchisee shall fail materially to comply with the terms of this Ordinance or any Franchise granted, and shall continue to fail to comply or fail to commence taking steps reasonably calculated to cause such compliance for a period of thirty (30) days after receiving notice in writing of non-compliance from the County, the Franchisee shall be assessed a monetary forfeiture by the Office of the County Administrator of not less than $100.00 nor more than $1,000.00 for each day's failure to comply from the date of the first non-compliance, with each day's failure to comply being a separate and distinct offense. The provisions of this sub- section shall not apply if non-compliance is occasioned by events beyond the control of the 42 U~~Lq Franchisee, provided that such events were not proximately caused by the Franchisee's acts or failure to act. In the event the Franchisee shall in good faith contest its liability or the amount of any forfeiture imposed under this Section, no further forfeiture need be paid until such liability is established by the Board of Supervisors, and should such liability be established by the Board of Supervisors, such determination shall be final, and the Franchisee shall have thirty (30) days within which to comply and within which to pay all forfeitures assessed. In the event the Franchisee does not then comply and pay all forfeitures assessed, the County shall have the option (i) to initiate judicial collection proceedings; (ii) to collect upon any security posted; and/or (iii) implement procedures to revoke the Franchise and declare the security forfeited. Section 17. Franchise Fee. (a) Unless a lesser amount is specified in a Franchise, each Franchisee shall pay the County on a quarterly basis a fee (a "Franchise Fee") equal to five percent (5%) of its Gross Revenues derived from the immediately preceding calendar quarter. The Franchise Fee for each calendar quarter shall be paid to the County no later than thirty (30) days after the end of the calendar quarter on which such fee is based. Such payment shall be accompanied by a report, in a form acceptable to the County, itemizing the revenue sources on which the fee payment was calculated and showing how the payment amount was calculated. Any payment made after the date on which it is due shall be subject to a five percent (5%) late payment fee plus interest at the rate that the County is then currently charging for late payments owed to the County. Each Franchise Fee payment shall be accompanied by a summary report showing Gross Revenues received by the franchisee from its operations within the County during the 43 L \-~ l,n preceding quarter and such other information as the County shall reasonably request with respect to the Franchisee's service within the County. (b) The County shall have the right to verify by an audit conducted by an independent auditor of its own choosing, that a Franchisee has paid the correct amount of Franchise Fee, and if such audit discloses that a Franchisee's reporting of its Gross Revenues for the audit period has been understated by three percent (3%) or more, said Franchisee shall compensate the County for its reasonable audit expenses. The Franchisee shall grant the County or its auditors access to all relevant documents, records and information relevant to determining whether the Franchisee has paid the correct Franchise Fee. Consistent and material under-reporting of a Franchisee's Gross Revenues over two or more consecutive calendar quarters shall be grounds for revocation of a Franchise. (c) In addition to the audit process of Section 17(b), each Franchisee shall, not less than annually, submit a report from an independent certified public accounting firm reasonably acceptable to the County, certifying to the accuracy of all Franchise Fee payments made for the immediately foregoing four quarters and the compliance of those payments with the requirements of this Ordinance and any Franchise granted hereunder. This annual report shall be in a form consistent with the form specified to accompany quarterly payments under section 17(a). (d) In the event that federal, state, or other regulatory agencies permit a greater or lesser Franchise Fee than set forth in this Ordinance, such payment obligation may be increased or decreased to the maximum amount permissible, upon approval of such increase or 44 t decrease by the Board of Supervisors and not less than ninety (90) days advance notice to each affected Franchisee. (e) Consistent with applicable law, no fee, tax or other payment required to be made by a Cable System operator to the County, including payment of a Business, Professional or Occupational License fee or tax, shall be deemed as part of the Franchise Fee payable to the County hereunder, so long as such fee, tax or other payment obligation is imposed on a non- discriminatory basis on other similarly situated entities doing business within the County. Section 18. Records and Reports. The County and its representatives shall have access during normal business hours to a Franchisee's plans, maps, electronic data, documents, contracts, and engineering, accounting, financial, and statistical data, and, subject to the Subscriber privacy provisions of Section 631 of the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. § 551), customer and service records relating to the Cable System and its operation within the County by the Franchisee and to all other records required to be kept hereunder. The County may review, copy, and audit any such records, documents or electronic data. Section 19. Franchise Revocation. (a) Whenever any Franchisee shall refuse, neglect or willfully fail to construct, operate or maintain its Cable System or to provide Cable Service to its Subscribers in substantial accordance with the terms of this Ordinance or any applicable rule or regulation, or materially breaches its Franchise Agreement, or materially violates this Ordinance or other law, ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, or practices any fraud or deceit upon the County or its Subscribers within the County, or fails to pay Franchise Fees, or if such Franchisee becomes 45 U-`{.n insolvent, as adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction, or is unwilling or unable to pay its uncontested debts, or is adjudged bankrupt, or seeks relief under the bankruptcy laws of the United States or any state, then the Franchise may be revoked. (b) In the event the County believes that grounds for revocation exist or have existed, it may notify the affected Franchisee in writing, setting forth the facts on which such belief is grounded. If, within thirty (30) days following such written notification, the Franchisee has not furnished reasonably satisfactory evidence to the County that corrective action has been taken or is being actively and expeditiously pursued to completion, or that the alleged violations did not occur, or that the alleged violations were beyond the Franchisee's control, the County may call and give notice of a hearing, pursuant to the hearing requirements set forth in Section 20 of this Ordinance to consider revocation of the Franchisee's Franchise. If the County, following such hearing, finds that grounds for revocation exist, the Board may by resolution or ordinance duly adopted revoke for cause the Franchise granted to such Franchisee. (c) In the event that the Franchise has been revoked, the County shall, to the extent then permitted by existing law, have the option to: (i) acquire, at fair market value excluding any value attributable to the Franchise itself, all the assets of the Franchisee's System located within the County; or (ii) require the sale, at fair market value excluding any value attributable to the Franchise itself, of all such assets of the Franchisee's System to another person; or (iii) require the removal of all such assets from the County, at Franchisee's sole expense (or, if Franchisee fails to do so, the County may remove those assets at Franchise's sole expense); or 46 ~, (iv) if such assets are abandoned or deemed abandoned under applicable law, succeed to ownership or title thereof. Unless some later date is agreed to by the Franchisee, such option must be exercised by the County within one (1) year from the date of the revocation of the Franchise, or the entry of the final judgment by a court reviewing the question of the revocation, or the entry of a final order upon appeal of same, whichever is later. In any Franchise revocation proceeding, if the County and a Franchisee cannot agree upon the fair market value excluding any value attributable to the Franchise itself of the Franchisee's assets located within the County, then the County and the Franchisee shall each at their own cost select a different independent appraiser (each of whom shall be an active member of and be certified by the Appraisal Institute or its successor) who shall each provide an appraisal of the value at issue. If the greater appraised value does not exceed the lesser appraised value by more than ten percent (10%) of such lesser value, then the two appraised values shall be averaged and the resultant value shall be binding upon the County and the Franchisee; if the greater appraised value exceeds the lesser appraised value by more than ten percent (10%), then the two previously chosen appraisers shall together choose a third independent appraiser, who shall have no knowledge of the prior appraised values, and who shall provide an appraisal of the value, which shall be binding upon the County and the Franchisee. Any valuation determined in accordance with the immediately foregoing procedures shall conclusively be deemed as an equitable price, as specified at 47 U.S.C. § 547. (c) The revocation of a Franchisee's rights as set forth herein shall in no way affect any other rights the County may have under the Franchise with such Franchisee or under this 47 L1-~+a Ordinance or any other provision of law or ordinance. Notwithstanding the pendency or culmination of any proceedings terminating a Franchise, the County may nonetheless by Board action extend for a period of not more than two (2) years beyond the proposed or actual date of termination the entitlement of the affected Franchisee to operate the Cable System, during which period all provisions of this Ordinance and the applicable Franchise Agreement shall govern such operations. Section 20. Hearing Requirements for Matters Affecting Franchises. Whenever a requirement is set forth herein for a public hearing or meeting to be called concerning any matter related to the evaluation, modification, renewal, revocation or termination of any Franchise issued pursuant to this Ordinance, such hearing or meeting shall not be held unless, in addition to any applicable notice requirements of Virginia law, the County shall have advised the Franchisee in writing, at least thirty (30) days prior to such hearing or meeting, and provided notice to the public as required by law. In addition, the County may require the affected Franchisee to, and when so required the Franchisee shall, give notice of such hearing, and any continuation thereof, by announcement on its Cable System in such manner, on such channels and at such times as both parties shall find to be reasonable under the circumstances. Any such hearing may be adjourned from time to time as legally permitted without further notice other than the announcement, at the time of adjournment, of the time and place of the continued hearing and such announcement, if any, as the County may require the Franchisee to make on its Cable System. Section 21. Costs. 48 The County may require that each applicant for an initial, renewal, modification or transfer of a Franchise compensate the County for its direct, out of pocket costs incurred in the award of a Franchise hereunder, including the County's expenses incurred for special counsel or consultants retained to assist it in such award. A bill for such costs as are then determinable may be presented to the Franchisee by the County upon the franchisee's filing of its acceptance of a Franchise hereunder, and if so presented shall be paid at that time, and such additional costs as are determined as payable by the County shall thereafter be paid within fourteen (14) days of presentment to the Franchisee. Section 22. Open Video System Operation. In the event that any person shall obtain certification from the FCC as an Open Video System ("OVS") operator and thereafter offer or continue to provide service within the County as an OVS operator, then all portions of this Ordinance which are, or may lawfully be, applicable under governing statute or regulation to OVS operators, including payment of required fees, which may otherwise be imposed upon cable television operators (including, without limitation, franchise fees), shall apply without interruption or abatement to such person except to the extent expressly prohibited by law or regulation. Section 23. Severability. (a) All terms and conditions of this Ordinance and any Franchise are subject to the rules and regulations of, and to any required approval of, federal and state agencies. If any provision of this Ordinance or any Franchise granted hereunder is held by any court or federal or state agency of competent jurisdiction to be invalid as conflicting with any federal or state law, 49 ~~~4a rule or regulation now or hereafter to become in effect, or is held by such court or agency to be modified in any way in order to conform to the requirement of any such law, rule or regulation, such provision shall be considered a separate, distinct and independent part of this Ordinance or the Franchise, and such holding shall not affect the validity and enforceability of any other provisions of this Ordinance or the Franchise. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any part of this Ordinance or any Franchise is found to be invalid by the FCC or any court of competent jurisdiction, then the parties shall renegotiate such part to preserve, to the extent permitted by law, the benefit of the parties' original bargain. In the event that such law, rule or regulation is subsequently repealed, rescinded, amended or otherwise changed, so that the provision hereof which had been held invalid or modified is no longer in conflict with the law, rules, and regulations then in effect, said provision shall thereupon return immediately to full force and effect, at the option of the County. Section 24 Acceptance of Franchise. No Franchise shall be deemed as granted or renewed pursuant to this Ordinance unless such grant or renewal be approved by the Board and, within fourteen (14) days after its receipt of a Franchise provided by the County, the applicant therefor acknowledges its acceptance of the provisions of this Ordinance and accepts and executes the Franchise, files such acknowledgement, acceptance and agreement with the County, and provides payment of all sums due hereunder and submits all documentation required hereunder. 50 ~_~~~ Section 25. Franchisee to Abide by Applicable Laws. By accepting a Franchise and executing a Franchise Agreement, a Franchisee agrees that it will abide by all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations. Section 26. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof concerning cable television that are inconsistent with or contravene this Ordinance or any Franchise granted thereunder are hereby repealed as of the effective date of this Ordinance. 51 U~-`~.q Section 27. Effective Date. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be October 31, 2003. Appendix A: FCC Customer Service Standards 47 C.F.R. § 76.309. 52 ~,.,% ~ "" APPENDIX A FCC CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARDS 47 C.F.R. §76.309 76.309 Customer service obligations (a) A cable franchise authority may enforce the customer service standards set forth in section (c) of this rule against cable operators. The franchise authority must provide affected cable operators ninety (90) days written notice of its intent to enforce the standards. (b) Nothing in this rule should be construed to prevent or prohibit: (1) A franchising authority and a cable operator from agreeing to customer service requirements that exceed the standards set forth in section (c) of this rule; (2) A franchising authority from enforcing, through the end of the franchise term, pre-existing customer service requirements that exceed the standards set forth in section (c) of this rule and are contained in current franchise agreements; (3) Any State or any franchising authority from enacting or enforcing any consumer protection law, to the extent not specifically preempted herein; or (4) The establishment or enforcement of any State or municipal law or regulation concerning customer service that imposes customer service requirements that exceed, or address matters not addressed by, the standards set forth in section (c) of this rule. (c) Effective July 1, 1993, a cable operator shall be subject to the following customer service standards: (1) Cable system office hours and telephone availability. (i) The cable operator will maintain a local, toll-free or collect call telephone access line which will be available to its subscribers 24 hours a day, seven days a week. ~.~~ ~~.q (A) Trained company representatives will be available to respond to customer telephone inquiries during normal business hours. (B) After normal business hours, the access line may be answered by a service or an automated response system, including an answering machine. Inquiries received after normal business hours must be responded to by a trained company representative on the next business day. (ii) Under normal operating conditions, telephone answer time by a customer representative, including wait time, shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds when the connection is made. If the call needs to be transferred, transfer time shall not exceed thirty (30) seconds. These standards shall be met no less than ninety (90) percent of the time under normal operating conditions, measured on a quarterly basis. ~~ ~~.q (iii) The operator will not be required to acquire equipment or perform surveys to measure compliance with the telephone answering standards above unless an historical record of complaints indicates a clear failure to comply. (iv) Under normal operating conditions, the customer will receive a busy signal less than three (3) percent of the time. (v) Customer service center and bill payment locations will be open at least during normal business hours and will be conveniently located. (2) Installations, outages and service calls. Under normal operating conditions, each of the following four standards will be met no less than ninety five (95) percent of the time measured on a quarterly basis: (i) Standard installations will be performed within seven (7) business days after an order has been placed. "Standard" installations are those that are located up to 125 feet from the existing distribution system. (ii) Excluding conditions beyond the control of the operator, the cable operator will begin working on "service interruptions" promptly and in no event later than 24 hours after the interruption becomes known. The cable operator must begin actions to correct other service problems the next business day after notification of the service problem. (iii) The "appointment window" alternatives for installations, service calls, and other installation activities will be either a specific time or, at maximum, afour-hour time block during normal business hours. (The operator may schedule service calls and other installation activities outside of normal business hours for the express convenience of the customer.) (iv) An operator may not cancel an appointment with a customer after the close of business on the business day prior to the scheduled appointment. (v) If a cable operator representative is running late for an appointment with a customer and will not be able to keep the appointment as scheduled, the customer will be contacted. The appointment will be rescheduled, as necessary, at a time which is convenient for the customer. (3) Communications between cable operators and cable subscribers. (i) Refunds. Refund checks will be issued promptly, but no later than either- 3 U-`/,~ (A) The customer's next billing cycle following resolution of the request or thirty (30) days, whichever is earlier, or (B) The return of the equipment supplied by the cable operator if service is terminated. (ii) Credits. Credits for service will be issued no later than the customer's next billing cycle following the determination that a credit is warranted. (4) Definitions. ~~ ~~ (i) Normal Business Hours. The term normal business hours means those hours during which most similar businesses in the community are open to serve customers. In all cases, "normal business hours" must include some evening hours at least one night per week and/or some weekend hours. ~~ ~~ (ii) Normal Operating Conditions. The term normal operating conditions means those service conditions which are within the control of the cable operator. Those conditions which are not within the control of the cable operator include, but are not limited to, natural disasters, civil disturbances, power outages, telephone network outages, and severe or unusual weather conditions. Those conditions which are ordinarily within the control of the cable operator include, but are not limited to, special promotions, pay-per-view events rate increases, regular peak or seasonal demand periods, and maintenance or upgrade of the cable system. (iii) Service Interruption. The term "service interruption" means the loss of picture or sound on one or more cable channels. G:\ATTORNEY\JBO\AGENDA\Final Cable Ordinance County Version 102803.doc 4 AGENDA ITEM NO~ `" ~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~ ~_ ~,~ `~u 1 ~ . ~it~h -~ ~~rc v- ~~e I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~" ~ ~,,,, o ~ ~ ~~ r ~- ~ ~ ADDRESS: '3 t [~R .7 I-1 ~;, e4., wo~~J L-.~ ~ R t~,~ y'p _ ~a Li ~~i ~~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~ ~.~ _ ~ ~ ~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: 1Z ;,~. r ~. kP I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ , s~ r~ 6 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-13 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA AND COXCOM, INC., d/b/a COX COMMUNICATIONS, ROANOKE WHEREAS, by Agreement dated May 1, 1991, the County entered into a Cable Television Franchise Agreement for a term of 12 years with Cox Cable Roanoke, Inc., predecessor in interest to CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke (Cox), which was authorized by Ordinance No. 42391-15; and WHEREAS, representatives of the County, along with representatives of Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton, have been renegotiating a renewal agreement with Cox; and WHEREAS, on April 22, 2003, by Ordinance No. 42203-7, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors extended the 1991 Cable Television Franchise Agreement for six months, until October 31, 2003, to allow the renewal negotiations to be completed; and WHEREAS, such negotiations have been completed and a Cable Television Franchise Agreement acceptable to the County of Roanoke, and also to the City of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton, has been reached, subject to approval by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Cox is prohibited by federal law from operating a cable television system within any jurisdiction without a franchise agreement or extension as defined by federal law; and 1 WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance and on the County's adoption of a revised Cable Television Franchise Ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing of this ordinance and the revised Cable Television Franchise Ordinance was held on October 28, 2003, at which public hearing citizens and parties in interest were afforded an opportunity to be heard on such matters; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has previously passed a revised Cable Television Franchise Ordinance that becomes effective on October 31, 2003. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the terms of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement by and between the County of Roanoke, Virginia and CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a/ Cox Communications, Roanoke, as of November 1, 2003, attached hereto. 2. The County Administrator is authorized to execute, on behalf of the County, a Cable Television Franchise Agreement by and between the County and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke in a form substantially similar to the one attached hereto, and in a form approved by the County Attorney. Such Agreement will provide for a term of 15 years, from November 1, 2003 through October 31, 20018, a Franchise Fee Payment to the County of 5% of Cox's gross revenues, a capital grant for educational and/or governmental access equipment and facilities for allocation among the County, Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton in the total amount of $1,150,000.00 to be paid in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Agreement mentioned above, and such other terms and conditions as are deemed to be in the best 2 i c interest of the County of Roanoke. 3. The County Administrator is further authorized to take such further actions and execute such additional documents as may be necessary to implement and administer such Cable Television Franchise Agreement. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: .J Brenda J. olton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney Robert R. Altice, Chairman, Roanoke Regional Cable TV Committee Mike Pedelty, Director, Public Relations, Cox Communications Mary F. Parker, Clerk, Roanoke City Council Carolyn S. Ross, Clerk, Vinton Town Council Elaine Simpson, Government Access Director 3 u-~~b~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA AND COXCOM, INC., d/b/a COX COMMUNICATIONS, ROANOKE WHEREAS, by Agreement dated May 1, 1991, the County entered into a Cable Television Franchise Agreement for a term of 12 years with Cox Cable Roanoke, Inc., predecessor in interest to CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke (Cox), which was authorized by Ordinance No. 42391-15; and WHEREAS, representatives of the County, along with representatives of Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton, have been renegotiating a renewal agreement with Cox; and WHEREAS, on April 22, 2003, by Ordinance No. 42203-7, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors extended the 1991 Cable Television Franchise Agreement for six months, until October 31, 2003, to allow the renewal negotiations to be completed; and WHEREAS, such negotiations have been completed and a Cable Television Franchise Agreement acceptable to the County of Roanoke, and also to the City of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton, has been reached, subject to approval by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Cox is prohibited by federal law from operating a cable television system within any jurisdiction without a franchise agreement or extension as defined by federal law; and 1 ~~~ ~~~~ WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance and on the County's adoption of a revised Cable Television Franchise Ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing of this ordinance and the revised Cable Television Franchise Ordinance was held on October 28, 2003, at which public hearing citizens and parties in interest were afforded an opportunity to be heard on such matters; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has previously passed a revised Cable Television Franchise Ordinance that becomes effective on October 31, 2003. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the terms of the Cable Television Franchise Agreement by and between the County of Roanoke, Virginia and CoxCom, Inc. d/b/a/ Cox Communications, Roanoke, as of November 1, 2003, attached hereto. 2. The County Administrator is authorized to execute, on behalf of the County, a Cable Television Franchise Agreement by and between the County and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke in a form substantially similar to the one attached hereto, and in a form approved by the County Attorney. Such Agreement will provide for a term of 15 years, from November 1, 2003 through October 31, 20018, a Franchise Fee Payment to the County of 5% of Cox's gross revenues, a capital grant for educational and/or governmental access equipment and facilities for allocation among the County, Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton in the total amount of $1,150,000.00 to be paid in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Agreement mentioned above, and such other terms and conditions as are deemed to be in the best 2 ~~~ t '~. interest of the County of Roanoke. 3. The County Administrator is further authorized to take such further actions and execute such additional documents as may be necessary to implement and administer such Cable Television Franchise Agreement. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from its passage. 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-14 TO AMEND THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON A 99.38-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE (McDONALD FARM) LOCATED AT THE 2100 BLOCK OF HARDY ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 71.11-1-1) IN THE VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, WITH A ZONING CLASSIFICATION PTD WITH CONDITIONS, UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE TOWN OF VINTON WHEREAS, the first reading ofthis ordinance was held on September 23, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing were held October 28, 2003; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on October 7, 2003; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required bylaw. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That in October of 1999 the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 99.38 acres, as described herein, and located at the 2100 block of Hardy Road (Tax Map Number 71.11-1-1) in the Vinton Magisterial District, was changed from the zoning classification of R-1, Low Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of PTD, Planned Technology Development District, with the following conditions: All submitted materials, including "Protective Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the McDonald Farm" in addition to the following proffers: (1) On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., all exterior building materials shall be residential in character. The exterior wall materials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood, vinyl or aluminum siding and 1 other materials customarily found on residential structures. Exterior colors shall be predominantly earth tone colors. On Parcels "G"and "H" roof pitch shall be no less than a 4/12 pitch and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth tone colors. (2) Buildings on Parcel "A" identified on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., shall be oriented inward on a central, landscaped parking area. No customer parking shall be permitted to the rear of the buildings. (3) Any residential, civic, office, commercial, industrial or miscellaneous use types listed in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, that require a Special Use Permit, shall also require a Special Use Permit under this Planned Technology District rezoning, except as amended by the "Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the McDonald Farm". (4) Broadcasting Towers shall be prohibited. 2. That revision of the proffered conditions is taken upon the application of The Town of Vinton. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following revised condition (1) which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc.,~e~ct ~+or~,~h,~n hurrvc°T°c~i~°.,+i~l in nhor~ntor~Trh~ ~ s s ~~~~~~~~~• o„+;~~ ~.+r„~+„ro~• Exterior colors shall be predominantly earth tone colors. n„ o~rno~c ~~~~~ ~n,+ ~~u~~ rnnf ni+nh ohnll ho nn loe•o +hnn n Viand roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth tone colors. 2 All other proffers remain in effect. 4. That said real estate is a 99.388 acre tract known as The McDonald Farm (Tax Map No. 71.11-1-1) and more fully described on Exhibit 1 attached to this ordinance. 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 Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /~'Lptc.cQR. Brenda J. olton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 3 Exhibit 1 Description of a 99.388 Acre Tract Situate on Hardy Road (Route 634) Roanoke County, Virginia ~ - s BEGINNING at an iron pin set on the southerly side of Hardy Road (Route 634), said point being the northeast corner of the property owned by Trustees of the First Church of God (D.B. 992, Pg. 119) and the Northwest corner of the property herein described; Thence along the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road, S 49°28'45" E, 144.50 feet to a iron pin set; Thence continuing with same with a curve to the left whose radius is 1934.86 feet and an arc length of 664.14 feet (chord = S 59°18'45" E, 660.88 feet) to a iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 69°08'45" E, 295.47 feet to an i"ron pin found on the northwest corner of Lot 1, Frank E. McDonald, Jr. Subdivision (D.B. 779, Pg. 141); Thence leaving the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road and along the westerly boundary line of said Lot 1, S 88°29'46'' W, 19.77 feet to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 22°38'46" W, 272.30 feet to an iron pin found on the southwest corner of Lot l; Thence along the southerly boundary line of the Frank E. McDonald, Jr. Subdivision; N 88°29'46" E, 174.18 feet to an iron pin found; Thence continuing with same, S 75°30' 14" E, 120.94 feet to an iron pin found; Thence continuing with same, S 69°08' 14" E, 720.00 feet to an iron pin found on the southeast corner of the property owned by Trustees of Blue Ridge Baptist Church; Thence along the easterly boundary line of Blue Ridge Baptist Church, N 20°51'46" E, 200.14 feet to an iron pin found on the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road; Thence along said right- of-way, S 69°08'45" E, 3.34 feet to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 68°55'32" E, 145.24 feet to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same with a curve to the left whose radius is 1942.43 feet and an arc length of 305.12 feet (chord = S 77°22'30" E, 304.81 feet) to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 87°00'56" E, 116.32 feet to an iron pin set on the northwest corner of the property owned by Trustees of Blue Ridge Baptist Church; Thence leaving the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road and along the westerly boundary line of Blue Ridge Baptist Church, S 08°36'21" W, 238.43 feet to an iron pin found on the northerly boundary line of a cemetery; Thence with said cemetery, S 84°42'46" W, 33.00 feet to an iron pin found; Thence continuing with same, S 07°40'23" W, 255.41 feet to an iron pin set on the southwest comer of said cemetery; Thence along the southerly boundary line of said cemetery, N 88°21' 13" E, 261.16 feet to an iron pin found on the southeast corner of said cemetery; Thence along the westerly boundary of Blue Ridge Baptist Church, S 24°24' 17" E, 119.08 feet to an iron pin found on the northerly right-of--way of the Blue Ridge Parkway; Thence along the northerly right-of--way of the Blue Ridge Parkway, S 49°05'23" W, 616.63 feet to a USDA NPS monument; Thence continuing with same, S 80°15'58" W, 1349.87 feet to a USDA NPS monument; Thence continuing with same, S 77°32'33" W, 1160.32 feet to a USPS NPS monument; Thence Leaving the ,northerly right-of--way of the Blue Ridge Parkway and along the easterly boundary line Section 7, Montgomery Village (P.B. 8, Pg. 62), N 37°57'52" W, 137.72 feet to an old pin found; Thence along the easterly boundary of Section 7, Montgomery Village, Section 4, Montgomery Village (P.B. 8, Pg. 17} and F. W. Finney Construction Corp. (D.B. 886, 6 . Exhibit 1 Pg. 738), N 00°17'59" W, 1332.49 feet to an iron pin found; Thence along the easterly boundary line of said Finney Construction Corp. and Section 1, Montgomery Village (P.B. 7, Pg. 53), N 18°45'21" E, 488.34 feet to an iron pin found; Thence along the easterly boundary line of the property owned by Trustees of the Belmont Church of God of Roanoke City (D.B. 884, Pg. 114 and The Trustees of the First Church of God (D.B. 992, Pg. I19), N 22°22'55" E, 628.43 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 99.388 Acres. y 0 ~, ~, a • • Z Z~ ~ W W ~ z ~a J LL D ~ W .J ~ Q za 00 o~ U p' UI r--~ bD ~ •.-~ o ~ ~ U~ 3~ °~ ~,,~ x ~_< e 6 ~1 ~ Yes ~ ~~~~x RS B~S~~ -s PETITIONER: Town of Vinton CASE NUMBER: 24-10/2003 Planning Commission Hearing Date: October 7, 2003 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: October 28, 2003 A. REQUEST The petition of the Town of Vinton to rezone 99.38 acres from PTD to PTD with revised proffered conditions, located in the 2100 block of Hardy Road, Vinton Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Two citizens spoke and voiced the following concerns: 1) view of proposed development from Montgomery Village neighborhood; 2) safety and maintenance of the pond; 3) screening and buffering between Vinton Business Center and Montgomery Village properties; 4) traffic on Hardy Road and on Feather Road. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Ms. Janet Scheid presented the staff report. Mr. Thomason asked about National Park Service thoughts on the proposed development. Ms. Scheid said that officials from the Parkway office have been involved in the discussions about viewshed protection and are comfortable with decisions that have been made. The Town of Vinton is requesting that the following paragraph in the proffered covenants be revised: Page 4, 4(a): On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., all exterior building materials shall be residential in character. The exterior wall materials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood, vinyl or aluminum siding and other materials customarily found on residential structures. Exterior colors shall be predominately earth tone colors. On Parcels "G" and "H" roof pitch shall be no less than 4/12 pitch and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth-tone colors. The paragraph would be revised to read: On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., exterior colors shall be predominately earth tone colors and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth-tone colors. D. CONDITIONS All other proffers remain in effect. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Azar made the motion to recommend approval for the rezoning. The motion passed 5-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. f ~ ~~ v ^. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission ~- `„~,,, MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DATE: October 2, 2003 TO: Planning Commission FROM: .lanet Scheid, Chief Planner RE: Vinton Business Center -Change of Proffered Conditions Background In 1999 the 100-acre property known as the McDonald Farm, and owned by the Town of Vinton, was rezoned to allow commercial and industrial development. The Town, with citizen input, wrote a set of site and architectural standards that would guide the development of the property. These guidelines and covenants were adopted by the Board of Supervisors as part of the rezoning package. Several of the conditions placed on the property were in response to a proposed view shed map that the Blue Ridge Parkway was developing. This proposed view shed area is delineated on the attached map as the yellow area. These conditions were intended to protect the Parkway from incompatible development on the ridge area of the McDonald Farm. These specific conditions only applied to the parcels known as "G" and "H" on the property and do not affect other areas of the property closer to residential properties. These conditions stated in Proffer #1 are as follows: 1) On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., all exterior building materials shall be residential in character. The exterior wall materials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood, vinyl or aluminum siding and other materials customarily found on residential structures. Exterior colors shall be predominantly earth tone colors. On Parcels "G" and "H" roof pitch shall be no less than 4/12 pitch and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth tone colors. ' Current Petition The National Park Service has recently revised and finalized the view shed map. The final view shed area is delineated on the attached map as the black hatch area. Parcel "H" is no longer in the view shed area. The Town of Vinton is petitioning Roanoke County to revise the Planned Technology District (PTD) "Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for ~ ~ the McDonald Farm" and Proffer #1 as approved by the Board of Supervisors in 1999. The request is to remove the more stringent conditions on Page 4, 4 (a) of the covenants and to remove Proffer #1 that apply to parcel "H" since this area is no longer in the delineated view shed. In ad ition, the Town's request would remove these more stringent conditions from parcel "G". The Town of Vinton has agreed with the National Park Service reque t to place parcel "G" in a conservation or scenic easement that would reserve the existing wetlands, prohibit the construction of buildings but allovv~ the construction of an access road and necessary utilities. In addition, the Town has agreed to increase the required screening and buffering adjoining th church property from a depth of 25 feet to a depth of 50 feet. These two actions ill preserve the view shed. All other conditions, restrictions and covenan effect. Attachment: View Shed Sketch "Protective Covenants, Conditic McDonald Farm" shall remain in full force and Ins and Restrictions for the !~ ; AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE $OARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE l~ ~' ~r COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1999 ORDINANCE 102699-7 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 99.38-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE (McDONALD FARM) LOCATED AT THE 2100 BLOCK OF HARDY ROAD (TAX MAP N0.71.11-1-1) IN THE VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF PTD WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE TOWN OF VINTON WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 28,1999, and the second reading and public hearing were held October 26, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on October 5, 1999; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board cf Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 99.38 acres, as described herein, and located at the 2100 block of Hardy Road (Tax Map Number 71.11-1-1) in the Vinton Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of R-1, Low Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of PTD, Planned Technology Development District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of The Town of Vinton. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing i:he following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: All submitted materials, including "Protective Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the McDonald Farm" in addition to the following proffers: 1 (1) On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., all exterior building materials shall be residential in character. The exterior wall materials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood, vinyl or aluminum siding and other materials customarily found on residential structures. Exterior colors shall be predominantly earth tone colors. On Parcels "G" and "H" roof pitch shall be no less than a 4/12 pitch and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth tone colors. (2) Buildings on Parcel "A" identified on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., shall be oriented inward on a central, landscaped parking area. No customer parking shall be permitted to the rear of the buildings. (3) Any residential, civic, office, commercial, industrial or miscellaneous use types listed in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, that require a Special Use Permit, shall also require a Special Use Permit under this Planned Technology District rezoning, except as amended by the "Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the McDonald Farm". (4) Broadcasting Towers shall be prohibited. 4. That said real estate is a 99.388 acre tract known as The McDonald Farm (Tax Map No. 71.11-1-1) and more fully described on Exhibit 1 attached to this ordinance. 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 a 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 Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the 2 following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /~i2a.~-~Q~ Brenda J. H on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Terry Harrington, County Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney B. Clayton Goodman, III, Vinton Town Manager 3 ~~ .._ PROTECTIVE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIOI~tS FOR THE McDONALD FARM Whereas, the Town of Vinton, hereinafter referred to as the "TOWN", is the owner of a certain tract of land known as the McDONALD FARM, which real estate is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, and which real estate is hereinafter referred to as the "PARK"; and Whereas, the TOWN intends to jointly develop with Roanoke County and sell and/or lease parcels of land in the PARK for office, commercial, residential and industrial use in conformance with the standards of the Planned Technology Development District zoning regulations; and Whereas, the TOWN desires to impose upon the PARK certain protective covenants, conditions, and restrictions for the purpose of ensurir_g the orderly development of the PARK, protecting the environment, and providing that the use of the PARK will not adversely affect the health and safety of residents and workers in the vicinity of the PARK, or the use, or development of property within and adjacent to the PARK; and Whereas, the TOWN may designate an agent, an administrative body or Authority~,to administer the protective covenants, conditions and restrictions for the PARK. Now, therefore, the TOWN hereby declares and provides that each and every parcel of real estate within the PARK shall be conveyed subject to the following covenants, conditions, and restrictions which shall be binding upon all purchases or lease of real estate within the PARK, the heirs thereof, successors, or assigns to ensure proper use and appropriate development of each building site and the grounds thereof, to protect the environment and aesthetics of the PARK, to guard against the erection thereof of structures built of improper or unsuitable materials; and in general, to provide for a high quality of development so that each building site will not adversely affect the health or safety of residents ar workers in the area nor be detrimental to the use or development of other proper~aes in the PARK, and Further, that a copy of these Protective Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, and shall be binding upon and running with the land, including each and every parcel, whether sold or leased in whole or in part and by reference 1 V _ ~~ made a part of each and every deed, option, lease or other grant of any interest in --~ and to any parcel thereof as a part of the terms thereof. 1. Property Developrn.ent• The TOWN intends to jointly develop the property with Roanoke County end others in a phased manner as a business park with mixed uses. (a} A Master Development Plan prepared for the TOWN, showing a general arrangement of sites, an access road and water and sewer lines, shall serve as a guide in the overall sale of sites and development of the PARK. The TOWN may alter the size and configuration of these sites provided the standards are maintained and depending upon the specific needs and requirements of businesses desiring to purchase and develop land within the PARK. Said plan shall be maintained on file in the office of the Town Manager and the Roanoke County Director of Economic Development. {b} The TOWN intends to develop the PARK in phases with the assistance of Roanoke County. Tracts of Land within the PARK will be marketed and sold to businesses and developers for development in accordance with the Planned Technology Development District zoning. (c} Any residential, civic, office, commercial, industrial or miscellaneous use type listed in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, that requires a Special Use Permit, shall also require a Special Use Permit under this I~~anned Technology District rezoning. 2. Permitted Uses: Unless otherwise prohibited herein, sites within the PARK shall be used. for the following purposes only: (a} Manufacturing, processing or assembly operations {b) Commercial or industrial flex space (office/warehouse combination) (c) Research or experimental laboratory (d) Commercial or office uses as well as business services incidental to any of the foregoing (e} Retirement housing (f} Assisted living facility (g} Institutional -upon review and approval of the Town 2 ~,~. ~•..~.~, .,~. t 3. Prohibited Uses: Na use of any site, lot or building shall be made which causes or creates, or is likely to cause or create, a hazard or nuisance to adjacent properties, or which would violate the zoning ordinance of Roanoke County. In addition, the following uses are specifically prohibited within the boundaries of the PARK: (a) Acetylene gas manufacturer and wholesale distributor (b) Asphalt manufacturing or refining (c) Birch file or terra cotta manufacturer (d) Cement, lime, plaster manufacturer je) Creosote manufacturing or treatment plants (f) Distillation of bones, coal, petroleum, refuse and tar (g) Explosives, ammunition, fireworks and gun powder manufacture (h) Fat rendering, production of fats and oils from animal or vegetable products by boiling or distillation ~~ (i) Garbage, offal and animal reduction or processing (j) Linseed oil, shellac, turpentine, manufacture or refining (k) Automobile storage for wrecking, dismantling of junk cars for salvaged parts (1) Any use or trade, whic~i, through properly and safely operated with ordinary care and according to good and reasonable practice, causes noxious or offensive odors, gas, fumes, smoke, dust, vibration or noise substantially affecting other uses of property permitted in the PARK (m) Construction yards (n) Recycling centers and stations (o) Scrap and salvage services 3 (p) Surplus sales ,~--- ~" ~., _3 {q) Truck stops (r) Automobile dealership, new and used, auto and truck sales and service establishments (s} Broadcasting tower (t) Other uses not listed or urikriown but with similar impacts of those uses listed above Where it is unclear whether or not a particular use of the PARK is permitted or prohibited hereunder, the TOWN sha11 decide whether or not such use is prohibited, and its decision shall be final and binding upon all persons. 4. Building Standards• All buildings, structures, and improvements shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the following standards, unless an exception is approved in writing by the TOWN: {a) Exterior walls of each building shall be finished with approved tilt-up concrete, concrete panel construction, brick, architectural block, or in fine case of metal, an architectural rendering of an appropriately designed facade must be submitted to the TOWN for its approval. Those buildings having a residential appearance may use exterior wail materials customarily found in residential construction. -~6rr- ` c e acing e ar , - - arcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August , Mattern raig, Inc., all exterior building m s shall be residential in ch The exterior w erials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood, vinyl o um siding and other materials customarily found on ntial structu ~ erior colors shall be predominatel tone colors. On Parcels "G" an of pitch shall b ess than a 4/ 12 pitch and roof materials shall be n- ective, earth-tone colors. Buildings constructed on Parcel "A" will be oriented inward on a central, landscaped paving area. No customer parking shall be permitted to the rear of the buildings. The Town and Roanoke County may amend this if a unique use is presented which would improve and enhanced the Park's development. 4 (b) The height of all buildings, including other structures, will be according to the site components as identified in the Master Development Plan: (i} Sites G: Shall not be more than twenty-five (25} feet. (ii} Site H: Shall not be more than thirty-five (35} feet. (iii} Sites A, C, and I: Shall not be more than forty-five (45) feet. (iv) Sites E and F: Shall not be more than sixty (60) feet. (c) No temporary buildings, travel trailers, mobile homes or storage facilities shall be stored on a lot except as necessary during construction periods but then only for the periods during which actual construction is being pursued. (d) Prefabricated tool or utility sheds shall be prohibited. (e) A colored architectural rendering of the proposed building shall be submitted to and approved by the TOWN. This shall include elevations and material samples so that the TOWN can determine compliance with these co~renants. This approval shall be obtained from the TOWN prior to requesting a building permit from Roanoke County. (#~ Planned expansion or renovation for all buildings or structures must meet or exceed the quality of the initial structure. Where expansion is planned to one side of an existing building, a wail of temporary material may be erected, provided such expansion is performed within the time period prescribed on the approved site plan. If said expansion is not accomplished within the approved time, a permanent wall of suitable materials shall be erected within ninety (90) days. The TOWN may grant a single one-year extension. (g) All electrical and mechanical apparatus, equipment, fixtures (other than lighting fixtures), conduits, ducts, flues, and pipes located on the exterior of any building shall be concealed from view from any public street and shall be architecturally treated in a manner acceptable to the TOWN. Where residential type structures are constructed it may not be feasible to conceal chimneys ar~d -other apparatus and their use may be approved following review and approval from the Town. (h} Parking Lots, loading/unloading areas and lot lighting shall meet the standards of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, as amended. The maximum permitted mounting height for any lighting fixture shall be twenty-five (25) feet. V ~ - ~ _. 5 (i) The TOWN shall not be responsible for maintenance of any site ` ;~ 1 ,~"~` .. ~ improvements. ` (j) Signs shall meet Section 30-'93-i3 (D) which is Commercial District C- i of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, as amended. Freestanding signs shall not be more than ten (10) feet in height. To create apark-like setting, monument type signs will be encouraged. (kj Electrical and telephone services -Reserved. 5. Outside Storage: No materials, supplies, equipment, trash, or refuse shall be stored an the property except inside a building or behind a visual barrier approved by the TOWN which screens the stored matter from view from streets and adjoining sites; which barrier shall not be less than eight (8) feet in height or two (~) feet above the stored matter, whichever is higher, unless written approval from the TOWN allows an exception. The request for this exception ..must come in writing and must be accompanied by engineering plans for review. Except with the prior written approval of the TOWN, storage areas shall not be located between a building and a street. Plans for such storage areas must be submitted to the TOWN for approval prior to installation. 6. Construction Date: If, after one (i) year from the date of purchase of the property from the TOWN, the then record property owner has not .begun in good faith the actual construction of a proposed building, the TOWN shall have the right and option to reacquire the property by refunding the said record property owner the amount of the original purchase price per acre paid to the TOWN for the property, less and except real estate commissions and other related expenses paid by the TOWN; whereupon the said record property owner shall forthwith convey the property back to the TOWN. At any time after the aforementioned one-year period, the TOWN shall have the right to exercise its option to re-acquire the property. Settlement shall take place within sixty (60) days after the TOWN exercises its option. The option shall be exercised by mailing written notice thereof to the record property owner. In the event that the record property owner for any reason fails or refuses to convey title back to the TOWN as required herein, then, in that event, the TOWN shall have the right to enter upon and take possession of said property, together with all necessary rights and causes of action necessary to have title to the property conveyed back to the TOWN or its assigns. The TOWN may grant written exceptions to this section if it determines that it is in the best interest of the PARK development to extend the construction period. 7. Resale of Property: In the event that any owner of unimproved property or any portion thereof shall desire to sell ail or a portion thereof,. the TOWN must approve any subdivision or sale and shall have the first right and option to purchase said property at the same purchase price per acre paid to the TOWN by the original purchaser. Prior to such sale, the property owner shall notify the TOWN by registered or certified mail of its intentions to sell the property 6 or any portion thereof. Said notice shall describe the exact parcel intended to be ~ ,~~~~-- ,~ ._. ~., sold. The TOWN shall have sixtty (6d) days from receipt of said notice in which to ,~ exercise the option, and settlement shall take place within sixth (5tl) days after the date the TOWN exercises its option. The option shall be exercised by mailing written notice thereof to the record property owner at any time within the option period. 8. Subdivisions: No owner of any property in the PARK shall subdivide a site without the prior written consent of the TOWN. No owner of any property may lease an undeveloped site or any portion thereof without the prior written consent of the TOWN. The subdivision of any tract will have to comply with the provisions of the Roanoke County Subdivision Ordinance, as amended. 9. Site Maintenance: Each property owner shall be responsible for maintaining its property in a manner that enhances the appearance of the PARK. The premises shall be kept free of debris and trash of any sort, and lawns and landscaping shall be kept in a state of good repair. Maintenance of landscaping and lawns shall include all necessary planting, cutting, watering, fertilizing, aerating, seeding, spraying, pruning, weeding and required replacements. 10. Damage or Destroyed Buildings: If any building or other improvement in the PARK be damaged or destroyed by fire, storm, explosives, or otherwise, then, in that event, all debris resulting from such damage or destruction shall be cleaned and removed from said property within thirty (3t~) days of the said damage or destruction. If any building or other improvement is to be reconstructed, such construction shall begin within six (6) months of the date of such damage or destructs®p, or the Land shall be graded and restored to substantially the condition, which existed prior to initial construction, 11. Streets: All streets and roadways constructed by the TOWN within the PARK are dedicated to public use, and shall not be private streets, and as such, are dedicated to all owners and lessees of lots in the PARK for the reasonable use and enjoyment of their properties, including the free use thereof for the installation, maintenance, and operation of public utilities. Owners of tracts may construct interior private roadways that connect to public streets upon approval of a site plan by Roanoke County. However, the TOWN reserves a right- of--way of ingress and egress across these streets to its other property, or to any other streets within the PARK- that the TOWN develops in the future, 12. Stormwater Management: The TOWN has identified the location of stormwater management facilities within the PARK. It is the responsibility of the owners of properties upon which these are served, to construct these facilities. The Property Owners Association set forth in Section 15 within will handle maintenance of the regional stormwater management areas. 13. Fuel Storage Tanks• Unless prohibited by law, every tank for the storage of fuel installed outside any building shall be located above the surface of 7 the ground. 14. Trails: The Town inter_ds to jointly develop the trails with Roa-Hoke Countt~ and others. (a) AlI trails shown on the Master Development Plan are reserved for public use and will be constructed at a future time as public and private funds are made available. (b) Trail easements shall be dedicated at time of subdivision and platting. (c) Construction of the trail system shah be phased to coincide with the construction of the various uses in the PARK. The intent is to develop the system in conjunction with the development of the PARK. (d) The TOWN may convey ownership and maintenance responsibilitzy of these trails to a public or private entity in the future. 15. Property Owners Association: After the construction of public improvements at the PARK, the TOWN intends to establish a Property Owners Association to fund and manage the maintenance of stormwater management facilities, landscaping, signs and other improvements. l~. Amendments: Except as provided herein, each of the covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth herein may as to all persons and property be waived, released, rescinded, modified, altered or amended by the TOWN. The TOWN expressly reserves the right, after consultation with Roanoke County to amend these restrictions by document recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. f 17. Liability of TOWN: Each owner, lessee and occupant of property in the PARK shall, and does, hereby indemnify and hold harmless the TOWN, its agents, officers, employees, and representatives from and against any and all claims for injury or death to persons, or damage to or loss to property arising out of the construction, use, operation and/ or maintenance of improvements within the PARK, the use and/or possession of any property, and the conduct of business or any other activities within the PARK. 18. Duration: The covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth herein, along with amendments, shall be in full force and effect immediately upon adoption by resolution of the TOWN and shall be_binding on all property within the PARK and the owners thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns for a period of twenty (2©) years from the date of adoption, after which period said covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be automatically extended for successive periods 8 ~, m a Z Z~ Q W N ~ W ~ ~ p ~ Z ~a Q J L1. ~ ~ W J ~ Q O Z 4. O~ ~~ U ~' v ans ... o ~~ U~ 3~ X73 ~d< ~ ~~s ~. €~>-~ ~ ~~si x ~ 8k3~~ ~i !~ ._ . AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON A 99.38-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE (VINTON BUSINESS CENTER) LOCATED AT THE 2100 BLOCK OF HARDY ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 71.11-1-1) IN THE VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, WITH A ZONING CLASSIFICATION PTD WITH CONDITIONS, UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE TOWN OF VINTON WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 23, 2003, and the second reading and public hearing were held October 28, 2003; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on October 7, 2003; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required bylaw. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That in October of 1999 the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 99.38 acres, as described herein, and located at the 2100 block of Hardy Road (Tax Map Number 71.11-1-1) in the Vinton Magisterial District, was changed from the zoning classification of R-1, Low Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of PTD, Planned Technology Development District, with the following conditions: All submitted materials, including "Protective Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the McDonald Farm" in addition to the following proffers: (1) On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., all exterior building materials shall be residential in character. The 1 `'`~ exterior wall materials shall be limited to brick, stone, wood, vinyl or aluminum siding and other materials customarily found on residential structures. Exterior colors shall be predominantly earth tone colors. On Parcels "G"and "H" roof pitch shall be no less than a 4/12 pitch and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth tone colors. (2) Buildings on Parcel "A" identified on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., shall be oriented inward on a central, landscaped parking area. No customer parking shall be permitted to the rear of the buildings. (3) Any residential, civic, office, commercial, industrial or miscellaneous use types listed in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, that require a Special Use Permit, shall also require a Special Use Permit under this Planned Technology District rezoning, except as amended by the "Protective Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the McDonald Farm". (4) Broadcasting Towers shall be prohibited. 2. That revision of the proffered conditions is taken upon the application of The Town of Vinton. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following revised condition (1) which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) On Parcels "G" and "H" on the concept plan dated August of 1999, Mattern & Craig, Inc., ~-°~~ r°,o; - ~ ~i~d;ng~ate~ials~#aN~e~;Qe~+R ^haTasT^~;~ ;~ n~hor m.~Fori~+l ^i ~ ~~~ri~~i f~~~~$+~~};~, ~.}r„^}„row Exterior colors shall be 2 ,' ,. c~~ ~° 1. predominantly earth tone colors. 4~1skr-and roof materials shall be non-reflective, earth tone colors. All other proffers remain in effect. 4. That said real estate is a 99.388 acre tract known as The McDonald Farm (Tax Map No. 71.11-1-1) and more fully described on Exhibit 1 attached to this ordinance. 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. 3 ` Exhibit 1 Description of a 99.388 Acre Tract Situate on Hardy Road (Route 634} 1 ~ Roanoke County, Virginia `~'~ 4 BEGINNING at an iron pin set on the southerly side of Hardy Road (Route 634), said point being the northeast comer of the property owned by Trustees of the First Church of God (D.B. 992, Pg. 119) and the Northwest corner of the property herein described; Thence along the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road, S 49°28'45'' E, 144.50 feet to a iron pin set; Thence continuing with same with a curve to the left whose radius is 1934.86 feet and an arc length of 664.14 feet (chord = S 59°18'45" E, 660.88 feet) to a iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 69°08'45" E, 295.47 feet to an iron pin found on the northwest corner of Lot 1, Frank E. McDonald, Jr. Subdivision (D.B. 779, Pg. 14I); Thence leaving the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road and along the westerly boundary line of said Lot 1, S 88°29'46'' W, 19.77 feet to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 22°38'46" W, 272.30 feet to an iron pin found on the southwest corner of Lot l; Thence along the southerly boundary line of the Frank E. McDonald, Jr. Subdivision; N 88°29'46" E, 174.18 feet to an iron pin found; Thence continuing with same, S 75°30' 14" E, 120.94 feet to an iron pin found; Thence continuing with same, S 69°08' 14" E, 720.00 feet to an iron pin found on the southeast corner of the property owned by Trustees of Blue Ridge Baptist Church; Thence along the easterly boundary line of Blue Ridge Baptist Church, N 20°SI'46" E, 200.14 feet to an iron pin found on the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road; Thence along said right- of-way, S 69°08'45" E, 3.34 feet to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 68°55'32" E, 145.24 feet to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same with a curve to the left whose radius is 1942.43 feet and an arc length of 305.12 feet (chord = S 77°22'30" E, 304.81 feet) to an iron pin set; Thence continuing with same, S 87°00'56" E, 116.32 feet to an iron pin set on the northwest corner of the property owned by Trustees of Blue Ridge Baptist Church; Thence leaving the southerly right-of--way of Hardy Road and along the westerly boundary line of Biue Ridge Baptist Church, S 08°36'21" W, 238.43 feet to an iron pin found on the northerly boundary line of a cemetery; Thence with said cemetery, S 84°42'46" W, 33.00 feet to an iron pin found; Thence continuing with same, S 07°40'23" W, 255.41 feet to an iron pin set on the southwest corner of said cemetery; Thence along the southerly boundary Iine of said cemetery, N 88°21' 13" E, 261.16 feet to an iron pin found on the southeast corner of said cemetery; Thence along the westerly boundary of Blue Ridge Baptist Church, S 24°24' I7" E, 119.08 feet to an iron pin found on the northerly right-of--way of the Blue Ridge Parkway; Thence along the northerly right-of--way of the Blue Ridge Parkway, S 49°05'23" W, 616.63 feet to a USDA NPS monument; Thence continuing with same, S 80°15'S~8" W, 1349.87 feet to a USDA NPS monument; Thence continuing with same, S 77°32'33" W, 1160.32 feet to a USPS NPS monument; Thence leaving the ,northerly right-of--way of the Blue Ridge Parkway and along the easterly boundary line Section 7, Montgomery Village (P.B. 8, Pg. 62), N 37°57'52" W, 137.72 feet to an oid pin found; Thence along the easterly boundary of Section 7, Montgomery Village, Section 4, Montgomery Village (P.B. 8, Pg. I7) and F. W. Finney Construction Corp. (D.B. 886, a' Exhibit 1 Pg. 738), N 00°17'59" W, 1332.49 feet to an iron pin found; Thence along the easterly (~ ~--- boundary line of said Finney Construction Corp. and Section 1, Montgomery Village "~~~ (P.B. 7, Pg. 53), N 18°45'2I" E, 488.34 feet to an iron pin found; Thence along the easterly boundary line of the property owned by Trustees of the Belmont Church of God of Roanoke City (D.B. 884, Pg. 114 and The Trustees of the First Church of God (D.B. 992, Pg. 119), N 22°22'S~" E, 628.43 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 99.388 Acres. y AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINSTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE 102803-15 AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 30-29-5. COMMERCIAL USE TYPES TO INCLUDE A NEW DEFINITION FOR "OUTPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE CENTER" AND SECTION 30-54- 2(6) C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO ADD "OUTPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE CENTER" AS A USE ALLOWED ONLY BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That Section 30-29-5. Commercial Use Types of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended to read and provide as follows: **** Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center: Establishments with medical staff providing outpatient services related to the diagnosis and treatment of mental health disorders, alcohol, and other substance abuse. These establishments may provide counseling and/or refer patients to more extensive treatment programs, if necessary. Included in this use type are outpatient alcohol treatment centers, outpatient detoxification centers, outpatient drug and substance abuse centers, and outpatient mental health centers. **** 2. That Section 30-54-2. (B) Permitted Uses of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended to read and provide as follows: **** ~ ~ t (B) The following uses are allowed by Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards are listed in Article IV. Use and Design Standards, for those specific uses. 2. Commercial Uses **** Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center **** 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho on, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors 2 cc: File Circuit Court Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge William Broadhurst, Judge Robert P. Doherty, Jr., Judge Jonathan M. Apgar, Judge James R. Swanson, Judge Charles N. Dorsey, 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 Vincent Lilley, Judge Julian H. Raney, Judge Jacqueline F. Ward Talevi, Judge Francis W. Burkart, III, Judge Theresa A. Childress, Clerk Gerald Holt, Sheriff Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Randy Leach, Commonwealth 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 John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer O. Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance David Davis, Court Services Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services Thomas S. Haislip, Director, Parks, Recreation & Tourism William E. Driver Director, Real Estate Valuation Alfred C. Anderson, Treasurer Nancy Horn, Commissioner of Revenue 3 ~ _ ~~ PETITIONER: Roanoke County Planning Commission ` ` CASE NUMBER: 1012003 Planning Commission Hearing Date: October 7, 2003 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: October 28, 2003 A. REQUEST The petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. David Holladay presented the petition. There was no discussion. D. CONDITIONS E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason made a motion to recommend approval of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Motion carried 5-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 5 ~~.f~, County of Roanoke Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: David Holladay, Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator Date: October 7, 2003 Re: Agenda Item H. 3., Petition of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance On September 30, 2003, I issued a zoning administrator's decision to the counsel for the Life Center of Galax, the organization that applied for a business license to open a methadone clinic at 3390 Colonial Avenue. In the letter, I stated "As Zoning Administrator, I have determined that the proposed use is sufficiently different from any use type defined in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, and, per Section 30-29 (B), will require an amendment to the text of the zoning ordinance". Staff suggests that the Planning Commission not amend the zoning ordinance permitted uses and special uses for medical office. Rather, in light of the September 30, 2003 opinion, staff proposes a new definition and appropriate zoning district for the newly defined use type. Due to the intensity of the proposed use, security needs and operational and physical characteristics of the proposed use, staff suggests the new use type be allowed by Special Use Permit in the C2, General Commercial District. Complete text of the suggested amendment would read as follows: Sec. 30-29-5. Commercial Use Types. Oi~tpatientMentaZ~Healthand-Substance Abuse Center: Establishments with medical..staff providing outpatient services related o the diagnosis and: treatment of mental health disorders alcohol, or other substance abuse. These establishments may provide counseling and/or refer patients to more extensive treatment programs, if necessary. Inchided;in this use type are outpatient alcohol treatment centers, outpatient detoxification centers, outpatient drug and substance. abuse centers-, and outpatient mental health centers. Sec. 30-54-2. Permitted Uses. (B) The following uses are allowed only by Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards are listed in Article IV, Use and Design Standards, for those specific uses. 2. Commercial Uses butpatie~nt Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center :O~ ¢pANp~~ G z~~~ ~` ~~ a J .. 7838 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, ARNOLD COVEY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, GEORGE W. 51MPSON, III, P:E. CHIEF PLANNER, JANET SCHEID September 30, 2003 Edward A. Natt Osterhoudt, Prillaman, Natt, Helscher, Yost, Maxwell & Ferguson, PLC P.O. Box 20487 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: .Business License Application for LGC-Roanoke, 3390 Colonial Avenue Dear Mr. Natt, ~r{rr¢,~ r . ~ h ,~~ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS MAPPING/GIS PERMITS PLANNING & ZONING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT In response to the business license application for LGC-Roanoke, a client of yours that wishes to open a methadone clinic at 3390 Colonial Avenue, please be advised ofthe following. The proposed methadone clinic at 3390 Colonial Avenue would be a change of use which, per Section 30-10 ofthe Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, requires a certificate of zoning compliance. As Zoning Administrator, I have determined that the proposed use is sufficiently different from any use type defined in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, and, per Section 30-29 (B), will require an amendment to the text of the zoning ordinance. Until such amendment is made to the zoning ordinance, I cannot certify zoning compliance. When requested by you on S eptember 12, 2002 to render an opinion regarding a methadone clinic, my initial response on September 18, 2002 was to define the use as a Halfway House in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. The use was nat specifically defined in the zoning ordinance, but had operational and physical characteristics of aHalfway House, per the zoning ordinance definition the "rehabilitation, counseling and supervision of persons suffering from alcohol or drug,addiction". On April 24, 2003, you requested an interpretation of a methadone clinic .with respect to the definition of Medical Office in the zoning ordinance. After reviewing the proposed use described in your letter, a methadone clinic was, again, not specifically defined in the zoning ordinance, but had operational and physical characteristics of a Medical Office, per the zoning ordinance definition the "use of the site for facilities which provide diagnosis, minor surgical care and outpatient care on a routine basis, but which does not provide overnight care". On June 5, 2003, my response was that the proposed use described on April 24, 2003 would be defined as a Medical Office in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 • PHONE (540) 772-2080 • FAX (540) 772-2108 ®Recycled Paper Mr. Ed Natt Page 2 ~J~-C On September 23, 2003, LGC-Roanoke requested a business license to operate an opiod treatment center, or methadone clinic, at 3390 Colonial Avenue. After considering new information gathered over the past few weeks, it is my opinion, as Zoning Administrator, that the use is significantly different from Halfway House, Medical Office, or any other use type defined in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, and will require an amendment to the text of the ordinance. The North American Industry Classification System (NAILS) lists a separate and distinct industry classification for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center". This classification offers guidance for a new use type to be defined in the zoning ordinance. In reaching this decision to require a text amendment, the following points have also been considered. These points further demonstrate that the proposed use is not consistent with the definition of a medical office in Section 30-29-4 in the zoning ordinance. 1 Intensity of proposed land use: The descriptions of the unscheduled arrival of patients anywhere between the hours of 5:00 am unti12:00 pm are much different from scheduled appointments at a typical doctors' or dentists' office. The early arrival of patients would have a greater impact to the surrounding neighborhood than typical scheduled visits during regular business hours for office and professional uses found in the C1 district. 2 Security of the proposed facility: When asked on September 18, 2003 about security for the proposed facility, staff from the Life Center of Galax responded that. a security guard would be on premises during operating hours and they were. considering a security fence and gates around the facility. These security measures are not consistent with a typical Medical Office in the C1 zoning district, but more consistent with a use such as.a Hospital in the C2 zoning district. 3 Physician not necessarily on staff: The description of the medical staff at a proposed methadone clinic has changed from the above-referenced September 12, 2002 letter, to the above-referenced Apri124, 2003 letter, and to responses to our questions of Life Center staff: In the September 12, 20021etter, the staff description stated that "Either a physician or licensed nurse would be on duty at all hours of operation." In the April 24, 2003 letter, the staff description stated that "The clinic would be staffed by a licensed physician, as well as licensed nurses." When asked on September 18, 2003 about physician staffing, the Life Center of Galax responded that "There will not necessarily be a physician on staff, at the site, each day." Further review of the varying descriptions of the proposed staff has led to a different analysis of the proposed operation. Per Section 30-29-4 of the zoning ordinance, "Medical offices are operated by doctors, dentists, or similar practitioners licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia." Mr. Ed Natt Page 3 ~A l~ In addition to the above information regarding methadone clinics in general, please be advised of the following regarding the specific site in question. Section 30-15 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance allows conditional zoning. A review of the zoning at 3390 Colonial Avenue shows the zoning classification of C 1 C. On March 28,1989 the property was rezoned from R-1 Single Family Residential District to B-l, Office with Conditions District. Condition #1 states "The rezoned parcel will be used for the construction and operation of medical offices for the practice of family medicine." It is my opinion, as Zoning Administrator, that the operation of a methadone clinic is not the "practice of family medicine", and would violate condition #l . On June 24, 1997, the property was rezoned to amend condition #3, in order to amend a proffered concept plan. While no mention of changing any other conditions was made in the application for rezoning, the word "family" was not included in condition #1 of the revised proffer statement, signed by the applicant. This mistake appears inadvertent, but does not change the applicability of Condition #1 limiting the use of the property to the "practice of family medicine". In conclusion, the proposed methadone clinic at 3390 Colonial Avenue would be a change of use which, per Section 30-10 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, requires a certificate of zoning compliance. The proposed use is sufficiently different from any use type defined in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, and, per Section30-29 (B), will require an amendment to the text of the zoning ordinance. Until such amendment is made to the zoning ordinance, I cannot certify zoning compliance. In addition, the property at 3390 Colonial Avenue was rezoned on March 28, 1989 from R-1 Single Family Residential District to B-l, Office with Conditions District. Condition #1 states "The rezoned parcel will be used for the construction and operation of medical offices for the practice of family medicine." It is my opinion, as Zoning Administrator, that the operation of a methadone clinic is not the "practice of family medicine", and would violate condition #l . Please be advised, per Section 30-24-3, that appeals to the Board of Zoning Appeals maybe takenby any person aggrieved by any decision of the zoning administrator. Appeals must be made within thirty (30) days after the entry of the decision appealed from by filing with the administrator and with the Board of Zoning Appeals, a notice of appeal, specifying the grounds thereof. In addition, please be advised that, per Section 30-15-3, any zoning applicant, or any other person aggrieved by a decision of the administrator made pursuant to the provisions of Section 30-15, mad petition the Board of Supervisors for the review of the decision of the aaministrator. All such petitions for review shall be filed with the administrator within thirty (30) days from the date of the decision for which review is sought. All such petitions shall specify the grounds upon which the petitioner is aggrieved. ~,;' "`~ Ed Natt Page 4 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 772-2092. Sincerely, David Holladay Senior Planner, Zoning Administrator Cc: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors .Elmer Hodge, County Administrator Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner ~~.~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINSTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 30-29-5. COMMERCIAL USE TYPES TO INCLUDE A NEW DEFINITION FOR "OUTPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE CENTER" AND SECTION 30-54-2(B) C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO ADD "OUTPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE CENTER" AS A USE ALLOWED ONLY BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 30-29-5. Commercial Use Types of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended to read and provide as follows: **** Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center.• Establishments with medical staff providing outpatient services related to the diagnosis and treatment of mental health disorders, alcohol, and other substance abuse. These establishments may provide counseling and/or refer patients to more extensive treatment programs, if necessary. Included in this use type are outpatient alcohol treatment centers, outpatient detoxification centers, outpatient drug and substance abuse centers, and outpatient mental health centers. **** 2. That Section 30-54-2. (B) Permitted Uses of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended to read and provide as follows: **** 1 ~.i F (B) The following uses are allowed by Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards are listed in Article IV. Use and Design Standards, for those specific uses. 2. Commercial Uses **** Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center **** 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. v ~ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of an ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code by the amendment of Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response" SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~' /~'~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: In March of 2002, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Ordinance 031202-6 amending the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of a new Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired." This ordinance is authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia. To be liable for emergency expenses in responding to any accident or incident, the person must first be convicted of one of the specified offenses. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The 2003 Session of the Virginia General Assembly expanded Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia to authorize any locality in the Commonwealth to adopt a local ordinance to recover in a separate civil action the reasonable expenses incurred in providing appropriate emergency response to include the following: 1. Reckless driving when such reckless driving is the cause of the accident or incident. 2. Driving without a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license. 3. Improperly leaving the scene of an accident. 1 VI This provision of the State Code limits the reasonable expense to an amount not to exceed $1,000 in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident. The County may bill a flat fee of $100 or aminute-by-minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. To minimize administrative expense the County has billed the flat fee of $100. The attached draft ordinance implements the provisions of this enabling legislation. The first reading of this ordinance was held on October 14, 2003; and the second reading is scheduled for October 28, 2003. This ordinance may be revised by the Board upon further review during the work session scheduled for earlier in this meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: Since this ordinance was adopted the County has attempted to collect the $100 fee from 30 persons convicted of a DUI. We have recovered $1,860 (62%) in DUI fees and $176 (32%) of the $544 spent in court fees. These figures do not include collection costs, such as staff time for collecting the data on actual costs incurred and for court appearances. The County filed 16 civil actions in General District Court to collect the emergency response expenses, using the $100 flat fee amount. The number of additional cases and the amount of additional expenses recovered as a result of this amendment is unknown as this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of the attached ordinance. 2 v-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2003 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 2-7. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Ordinance No. 031202-6 amending the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of a new Section 2.7 "Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired" providing the County with an opportunity to recover its reasonable expenses in providing an appropriate emergency response to such accidents or incidents. This ordinance was authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the 2003 session of the Virginia General expanded Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia to also include reckless driving, driving without a license, and leaving the scene of an accident; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, herebyfinds that the amendment of Section 2.7 to include these violations of State Code is in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 14, 2003; and the second reading was held on October 28, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired be amended to read and provide as follows: 1 Chapter 2. Administration Article I. In General **** Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired, Reckless Driving, Driving Without a License, and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. (a) Any person who is convicted of violation of Section 12-8 of this Code, or of Sections 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, or Section 29.1-738 of the Code of Virginia, when his operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or water craft is the proximate cause of any accident or incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response; or of Section 46.2-852 relating to reckless driving when such reckless driving is the proximate cause of the accident or incident• or of Section 46.2-300 relating to driving with out a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license• or of Section 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident, shall be liable in a separate civil action to the county, for the reasonable expense thereof, in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident. In determining the "reasonable expense," the County may bill a flat fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or aminute-by-minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. (b) As used in this section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all costs of providing law-enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical services. (c) The provisions of this section shall not preempt or limit any remedy available to the commonwealth, the County, or any fire/rescue squad to recover the reasonable 2 ~/ expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident not involving a violation of any of the above mentioned State Code sections as set forth herein. 2. Any expenses recovered shall be deposited into the General Fund and appropriated annually to the Police Department and the Fire & Rescue Department operating budgets based upon an estimate of the proportional expenses incurred in responding to such accidents or incidents. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. G~.~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~E~~STt2..1Lr~r~4 dF 1'~~ !•t ~`~ S~B~~v~s root/ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. 1lVHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: l~I~c~tS SIMM a n- S ADDRESS: 5 2 31 6-{ it ~ ~- ~ 2 ~Qp,9nl 0 /t6 z ~o ~ Z PHONE (OPTIONAL): _~S y°J 5 7 ~ °'y~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: Address to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors • Tuesday October 28, 2003 Good evening. My name is Dallas Simmons and I am a resident of the Pine Hill subdivision in the Bonsack area of the counties of Roanoke and Botetourt. On July 16 an article appeared in the Roanoke Times which in short told of a neighborhood which is located in Botetourt County but is taxed by Roanoke County. This is due to situations agreed upon over 35 years ago by both counties since the few new homes there at that time were so close to the boundary lines. Over the years 15 homes have been built and have been deeded and taxed by Roanoke County. The residents have also received the services provided by that county. Recently, one of the residents went to the county planning office for approval to sub-divide their property in order to construct a home for their elderly mother. They were told that this could not be approved since the land was in Botetourt County. Several residents of the neighborhood were not aware that their homes were in fact located well within Botetourt County when they originally purchased their homes. I constructed my home in 1994 and Roanoke County issued the building permit without any question. However, 2 years ago when applying for a building permit to add a room to my home, Roanoke issued the permit only after the plans were approved by Botetourt County. • The Roanoke Times article stated that both counties would be working to settle this issue and have the citizens involved in the process. Roanoke County Attorney Paul Mahoney was quoted to say that meetings would be held with the residents of Hill Drive before any final decisions were made. To date meetings to include the residents have not been held although according to several conversations with officials from both counties there have been meetings between themselves with final actions being stated. The only official information issued to the residents has been notice that their voting registration has been transferred from Roanoke to Botetourt. Residents have repeatedly called each county representative trying to gain any type of information only to be told that decisions have been made and that Botetourt will start assessing properties beginning January 1, 2005. While many residents will not mind making the changes, the families that have children in the Roanoke County school system are very concerned with the welfare of their children, mine included. These children are being told that they will have to leave the school system they have attended since kindergarten some even close to graduation. Family participation in all school activities has been encouraged in which strong friendships have been formed with other families in that system. Now they will have to start attending another system entirely. I could understand if this was a decision made by the family but this is not the case and • since the Superintendent has made the decision the children will have to suffer. . I am very disillusioned at the way this whole affair has been handled by our elected officials. It would have been very simple to contact the citizens and inform them of the proposals that had been discussed by both localities and receive any suggestions or input we may have. Instead clandestine meetings were held in public facilities so the fagade of a "public meeting" could be presented in future arguments. Is this how we want our youth to learn how government really operates? As our elected representatives you are there to protect the normal citizens' rights and privileges not for personal gain or stature. It seems we are being punished for matters beyond our control. Of course this is one man's opinion and I hope that others share it as well. In closing I would strongly suggest that when an official of the government states that the citizens will be informed and involved in a decision making process that this is indeed what will really happen. Thank you for your time. ~~' AGENDA ITEM NO. ~1.~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~ C' ~i `~~ ~ ~ I : ~-~ ;~- ~:~ C~j ~~ ~ ~(i ~. ~~~i ~ ( Ji.~~J (~.~ I I would Pike the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of hislher point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD ,. , NAME: ~~ ~~ ~~~~f~`~i ~;~r f ~ `:)1 ~'~ll ~~1(".i yl `~ ADDRESS: ~>Z ~ I ~-~~ I I ~~J-tit ~ ~~ ~~(' 1,/~~ ~.~{ ' ~~~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~~ ~ ~'' _ ~1~,` -,l . (-' ~~ 1 GROUP/ORGANIZATION: 6 Gentlemen of the board, • My husband has already has, I believe, made clear to you our unique situation. We are, in effect, a group of citizens who are experiencing taxation without representation. We have paid our taxes in Roanoke County for this year, yet we will not be allowed to vote there next Tuesday. The lack of notification and the fact that we have not been involved on any level with any decisions, has me frustrated and angry, but we are also concerned with a far more personal issue, and that one involves our children. The 7 children that live on Hill Drive that are CURRENTLY, and let me emphasize CURRENTLY enrolled in Roanoke County schools are the real victims here, and I do not believe their best interest is being considered. We have been told, solely through inquiries on our part, that our children may either leave their school system as of January 1st, we may pay the full tuition as of January 1st, or we can move out of our neighborhoods prior to January 1st, 2005. None of these answers are satisfactory, in my opinion. First let me state that I have absolutely no issues with the quality of schools in Botetourt County, in fact, I am a school teacher there. I am very proud of the schools in my system. But my children did not start school there - we were directed to register in Roanoke County when my first one started school 5 years ago. We did not move there recently -our address has never changed. My children could understand if we had • moved, my children could understand if they had been redistricted along with their friends. What my children cannot understand is why they must go to new schools next year because someone else decided to change our taxes. The children of Hill Drive are established in their schools. They are cheerleaders, football players, and SCA representatives. We as parents are homeroom mothers, PTA members, and school volunteers. We only want what will best serve our children, who we feel are the most powerless victims in this situation. We should not have to fight the bureaucracy of two localities to insure what is best for them. We enrolled our children in the local public schools in good faith; and they have established friendships and experienced success where they are. Children who are rooted, who are comfortable, and who feel secure are the children who pertorm the best in school -everything we know about education children supports this fact. Our children are about to lose all of those support strands, and we feel this is completely unfair to them. I strongly urge you to consider these children, and to do the right thing when it comes to their situation. I do not understand why the battle to allow these children to stay where they are has become such a hill to die on for the Roanoke County school board. I want to ask each of you, in the interest of fairness, to work for us to resolve this issue. We feel that we have no power in this issue. Please, personally contact each of your school board representatives, and ask them to work with us to find a just, fair and permanent solution. To be frank, we are asking for k-12 education for all the children of Hill Drive who are CURRENTLY enrolled in the Roanoke County school system. You are the • governmental voices that so recently represented us, and we are asking you to continue to work in the best interest of children, • Mr. Hodge, I am pleading with you to please contact Dr. Webber, and encourage her to work with us. She is an educator, and her decision should not be based upon the taxes, but should be made with her students in mind. The right decision is what is in the best interest of the children, not in who is going to go to where. We are not new residents to the area, asking to come tuition free. We are not families unhappy with our schools, fleeing to a neighboring system. We are simply the parents of 7 children...? children...who simply want to continue doing next year what has been perfectly acceptable for the past 20 years, and that is to stay in Roanoke County schools. It would be the right thing to do far our children, and we desperately need your help. Thank you for your consideration. ~~ti AGENDA ITEM NO. (A~ ~ - -- PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: f~'~= ~,~. ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS -T-T I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ADDRESS: ~ Sc~,~ ~~, c c~ ~-l; ll r~/~ i2~.. PHONE (OPTIONAL): c~ J ~-- (~/~ .~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. I/l/' PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: C' G~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: 1~ /,~-~i ~ /~i~ ~c%t`~ ADDRESS:. ~ lGs `i ~ l~ r~ ~rC f ~ G~r~ ,~~ ~ PHONE (OPTIONAL}: ~ ,~-~~ `f SUS. GROUP/ORGANIZATION: c~ 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. I,t) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~_~ CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: U~ ~~-~. I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at al( times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~.~L-~ ~ ~. ~usT.'~~ ADDRESS: ~ % / 7 ~-/ , LL ~ ~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): 5 ~ ~ y it GROUP/ORGANIZATION: 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE /CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: }-I-~z~~o~5 ~~~ ~~~c~~~-~o,~aS ~~._( ~~1~R1~dr~".~~~~ RQ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS 1=0R THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three {3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Cierk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: (' ~ Q I S ~ - ~ E~--~v ~ ADDRESS: ~~ 7 ~ ~ ~~ n c.,©«ts 1..,,.ti~ . ~ p~ ~-c;n~ 1 PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~i~~~ ~~~ -a~~~ ~y~S~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: 6 . AGENDA ITEM NO. _~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE v CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: C.I~~~,, ~ ._ 12 ~, ~, (~.. ~ C I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three {3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at ail times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments wifih the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD ,. NAME: ~.)~C,~1~~,~_ L I G~~.S ADDRESS: ~ I ~-.~ ~~ ~1 ~ r , ~ ~ V r ~r.,, ~ ~; 1;'~~t . ~ C> i Z PHONE (OP-fIONAL): (j ~ i `i ~~~~~~~~ ~~~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: We the undersigned petition Roanoke County to restore voting registration to the residents of Hill Drive. Voting rights in Roanoke County will then be transferred back to Botetourt County once Personal property and Real estate taxes are assumed by that county • Name Scoff A . Fev9 ~SodL Address ~aO ~e~( /2 2Q~l~,d~~1a2 Si nature Name ~ c~mela C- ~qqu.~ Address I-h I ~ 10't=• -2Uanpl4, V~1 ~4D/a Si natur e Name ,,-~~~, ~, Address,?~~7 1~1 ii D77, ~eGr,o~k2• i~tz Signatur Name a a~ R r~. ~ us i % ~t AddressSJJ7 N~~ VG R°a~~l~ vA•ay~~a Signature j~,~,,,,,~(~. ~,,,, Name ~~~~ ~ ~~~ Address ~ ~ ~ ~~ p ~ ~~~ Signature ~ ~.~~ a. ~~,,`,J Name t~t~ ~-- ~-~--- S a Z~-~ v~ s-- ~P~x ~`- Address a~~~ ~ ~- Signature. ~~L~-~-~~~. _ ~- Name /~6C,yyQ F ~.. /4 vG Hlan~ Address ~ ~, ~~~ ~K Signature ~Y~~. - ,~/L Name ~Y.~ '('''n.t,N"tn.~z Address 5Z,-~ ~~;~ ~,, V~1 • ~ Signature ~,,.,~,, ~~-1~,~,,,, Name ~ vJ. ~s~R2tS J~ Address S2'2.O t..E~ L ~ ~. 2~ V fl. Signature ~.- ~ • 1' r\C?•'w`~ Name S1~r~Yi 3. 2~SS t/ Address S11N 1~1 ~ >~ Dr Sianature ~„ ,,, ll ~,~ Name 1-~9~ ~ti;~e Address 5~t-~ I~I~Ii An Qae~-~~° ~'^ Signature l~a~~ /.~l Address SLi.t /~'~Y~ ,~~-. - Signature~~,, ~~ ~p~_~ Name L~L~tS' /mil MQ'~ Address ! f~ Si nature Name NE Tr+Fi2 ~~. ,~o.~s Address ,$23 I H ~ `~ ~2 nature Name b~ku~a- ~. Robs Address 5~ Z4 h~ i~ ~r Si nature ~.~,r~-C~~SS Name (alber Im'~~,e1 Address BIOS h~/l D~'~vo Si nature C~~ Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature Name Address Si nature O~ FiOANp~~ ~ w' ~ •, ~ z _ c~ a ~~~xr~ ~~ ~~xxY~.~ 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2005 DIANE S. CHILDERS FAX (540) 772-2193 CLERK TO THE BOARD Email: dchilders~co.roanoke.va.us October 31, 2003 Ms. Carole Brackman 5203 Cherokee Hills Drive Salem, VA 24153 Dear Ms. Brackman: BRENDA J. HOLTON, CMC DEPUTY CLERK Email: bholton ~ co.roanoke.va.us The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Industrial Development Authority. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to re-appoint you as a member of the Industrial Development Authority for another four-year term. Your term began on September 26, 2003 and will expire on September 26, 2007. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court prior to your participation on this Authority. On October 30, 2003, we were notified by the Clerk's Office that you had taken the oath of office. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Douglas Chittum, IbA, Secretary e o~ aoaNO~.~ ti "~ 9 2, ~ ~ssa P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2005 DIANE S. CHILDERS FAX (540) 772-2193 CLERK TO THE BOARD Email: dchilders~co.roanoke.va.us October 30, 2003 The Honorable Robert R. Roanoke Regional Cable 311 Pollard Street Vinton, VA 24179 Dear Chairman Altice: Altice, Chairman TV Committee BRENDA J. HOLTON, CMC DEPUTY CLERK Email: bholton~co.roanoke.va.us Enclosed are copies of the following ordinances which were adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at their meeting on October 28, 2003: (1) Ordinance 0-102803-12 approving the revised cable television franchise (2) Ordinance 0-102803-13 approving and authorizing the execution of a cable television franchise agreement by and between the County of Roanoke, Virginia and CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Si cerely, Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney Mike Pedelty, Director, Public Relations, Cox Communications Mary F. Parker, Clerk, Roanoke City Council Carolyn S. Ross, Clerk, Vinton Town Council Elaine Simpson, Government Access Director r i. ~. (.~ of AOANp,~~ ~ •. A Z ' "" c~ y~-"~" ^~ 1838 Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 Joseph McNamara, Chairman Michael W. Altizer Windsor Hills Magisterial District Vinton Magisterial District Richard C. Flora, Vice-Chairman Joseph B. "Butch" Church Hollins Magisterial District Catawba Magisterial District H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix Cave Spring Magisterial District October 30, 2003 Reverend Mark Graham St. John Lutheran Church 4608 Brambleton Avenue Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Pastor Graham: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank you for offering the invocation at our meeting on Tuesday, October 28, 2003. We believe it is most important to ask for divine guidance at these meetings, and the Board is very grateful for your contribution. Thank you again for sharing your time and your words with us. It was good to have you with us. With kindest regards, eph McNamara, Chairman oanoke County Board of Supervisors OFFICE: FAX: VOICE MAIL: (540) 772-2005 {540) 772-2193 (540) 772-2170 E-MAIL: e bos ~ co. roanoke.va. us ~~~^~ . O~ ROANp~~ ti '„ A z c~ z v' a 1838 DIANE S. CHILDERS CLERK TO THE BOARD Email: dchildersC~co.roanoke.va.us C~a~xx~t~ u~ ~u~x~.~C~e P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2005 FAX (540) 772-2193 October 30, 2003 Mr. Fred Altizer, District Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation P. O. Box 3071 Salem, VA 24153 Dear Mr. Altizer: BRENDA J. HOLTON, CMC DEPUTY CLERK Email: bholton~co.roanoke.va.us Attached is a certified copy of Resolution No. 102803-4 requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to continue funding projects currently identified on the plan and adopt those projects identified as "Projects not on plan" for inclusion into the 2004- 2010Interstate and Primary Six Year Program. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, October 28, 2003. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~LJ Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Attachment cc: Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development The Honorable Whittington W, Clement, Secretary of Chairman, Commonwealth Transportation Board Ozlee Ware, Salem District, Commonwealth Transportation The Honorable Ralph Smith, Mayor, City of Roanoke Roanoke Valley Delegation to the General Assembly Senator John Warner Transportation, and Board Senator George Allen Congressman Robert Goodlatte Congressman Frederick Boucher TRANSMIT MESSAGE CONFIRMATION REPORT ~ i NAME:RKE BOARD SUPERVISOR TEL :540 772 2193 DATE:10/31'03 11:57 TRANSMIT: 9P'IP804P3555976P3'133 ~ DURATION PAGE SESS RESULT ~ ~ ~ TYPE MEMORY TX ~ MODE ~ E- 14 ~ 00'58 ~ 03 ~ 716 ~ OK ~ ~ i i i i i i i Board of Supervisors Gieirk's Office ~ ~ ~ ~ - Fax Transmittal To: Jay Smith 804-355-5976 Fr+orr~: Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk to the Board Date: 10/312003 No. of Pagex 3 inGuding cover sheet ,_ -a ~~ Mr. Smith Per your request, I am faxing you a copy of resolution (102803-8) proceeding to the Detailed Design Phase for the construction of a new Public Safety Communications Center under the Public-Private Education Facilities And Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA). This resolution was adopted by the Board at their meeting on October 28, 2003. County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24098 (540) 772-2005 (Phone) (540) 772-2193 (Fax) - _ - ~_ _ Holton -Jay Smith 804-355-5901 Page 1 From: Mary Brandt To: Brenda Holton; Diane Childers Date: 10/29/03 9:58AM Caller: Jay Smith Company: Safety First Phone: 804-355-5901 ['`] Telephoned [ ]Will call again [ ]Wants to see you [ ]Urgent [ ]Please call [ ]Returned your call [ ] Came to see you He is with one of the companies that put in a proposal under PPEA. He would like a copy of the resolution passed last night for Item S-1 when it's ready. He would like it faxed or e-mailed. I told him we would call him if there was a problem otherwise we would send a copy when it's ready. His fax no. is 804-355-5976 and his a-mail is JAYPUBLICAFFAIRSOFFICE.COM Mary Mary V. Brandt Office Support Specialist Board of Supervisors 540-772-2005 mbrandt@co.roanoke.va.us Vaccinate And Vote October 7, 2003 Joseph McNamara, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Chairman McNamara: ~. a ~~ f 3 2UU3 On behalf of the Community Based Immunization Project (CBIP) I am requesting your assistance in promoting our fall program "Vaccinate and Vote". CBIP is a public/private partnership based in Roanoke, VA, and a member of the state organization Project Immunize Virginia. It is comprised of health professionals from Carilion, Roanoke City/Allegheny Health Departments, physicians from the private sector, pharmaceutical representatives, service agencies and volunteers. Our goal is to increase immunization coverage. CBIP requests your partnership in promoting Vaccinate And Vote, a campaign striving to increase adult immunization rates in the Roanoke area. The benefits of partnership are immeasurable. With your help we can protect our community from vaccine preventable diseases and premature deaths. Together we can encourage greater acceptance and use of immunizations as safe and effective means of preventing life- threatening disease and disability. Our current project is to encourage those people 55 years old and older to receive their influenza vaccination on November 4 after they vote. We are sponsoring a Flu Vaccine Clinic at Preston Park on that date, between 9 and 2. With the help of Molly O'Dell, MD, Director, Roanoke and Alleghny Health Districts we are able to offer your Board free flu vaccine. We would like to do this just prior to a regular meeting of your board. We will try to get media coverage of this. We also request that you proclaim October 12-18, 2003 "Adult Immunization Awareness Week." We wilf~~ provide you with facts about the disease that you can include in this proclamation. J This year the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention raised their estimate of deaths caused by influenza in the United States to be about 36,000 per year. From 10 to 20 percent of the US population contracts flu each year resulting in about 114,000 hospitalizations. Certainly many of these would be averted by immunizations. I will phone you soon to follow up our request. We look forward to your help. Sin~ly, ~~ Lin Young f'. Chairperson, Community Based Immunization Project Director Pediatric Services Carilion Roanoke Community Hospital 540-985-9797 I O ' ~ ~ .~1~~ ~, ~-l o l 3 f~~d p~ ,,,yy~ ~ ~~~ M ~,~ ~,~~~~~ fl ~~ ~o ~. ~o ~ w 10/14/03 TLTE 09:06 FAX 540 985 5341 CRCH PICLT X002 a, Nation~a~1 Ad~~Yt Immunization Awa~rercess Week Oe Caber 12~ 1 S, 2U03 Whereas each year t~ sns of thousands of adolescents and adults die fr~pm vacc~fne preventable diseases or their complicatioa7~.s in the United States; and, Whereas the burden of vaccine preventable disearses in America today occurs among adolescents and adults of all ages, and alb! cultures, races, and ethnic and societal groups; and, Whereas safes and of ~'ective vaccines are readily available to protect against disecrse, disability, and death from communicable diseu;.ses, including diphtheria, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, a!nfluenz ac, measles, mumps, pneumococcai diseases, rutrella, tetanus, variceila and shingles; and, Whereas Oct~aber 12- Z 8, 2003 is National Adult Immunization Week, a timF~~ devoted to increasing public knowledge, acceptance, ~cxnd use of vaccines to protect adolescents and adults against serioacs, life-threatening diseases; and, Whereas the annual observance is intended to increase awareness a;nd understanding of vaccine preventable diseases and their pra,~venta?on at local, state, and national levels. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that of Roanoke County Virgi~n.ia wilt observe Qctober 12-18, 2003 as National Adult Immurr~ixation Week. I (We) urge young people and adults to make sure that they and their coved ones are up to date on their imra7.un~txations, Being up to date protects them, their families anti' friends and our community from preventable disease. In Testimonyp Wheret f, I (wej have set my (ourj hand and caused this ~~reat Seal of the County of Roanoke to be af,~aced on this Day of October 2003. 10/14/09 TUE 09:06 FAX 540 985 5941 _ `., CRCH PICLT Um.. l~AI~IILION Medical Center for Children r. o_ sax uru AOANOi~, V.~ 11021 PEDIATRIC IlVTENSIVE CARE FA~C NUN~EIt: 540-985-5341 PONE: 540.985-9791 DATE: !o ~ ~ ~ j o 3 NUMBER OF PAGES; ____, ~ „T_ TO: Y ~X l C~.+ R ~. '~o~,k,, ~.~ ~~ ~~u~, "" ~"`~~ ~la.~c .c,o. d-P~. ~r~a.4~ ~ enc~eQ~ ~e `~i~ ~ ~~co c~irxa~'o~i. U U V ~- ~-~ 1bc infarm;~op coatsina', in this traaunission is confiduitial and may be privilcgcd. You arc ha~by aotii~cd iha# aay m.iasrthorizc+d rcvicw, dissemination, distn'buiion or copying of this uansmissio~a or nny athtx imformstian coaiained lztreia is strictly probibit~d_ If you rxtivcd this transcnissioa in error, please notify us irruncdistc}y by phone, collect and retunt the original message to us by first claw s mail. We will rr~mbursc you for the postage. 1banlc you. e.c ~tOM: 1..~,r; ~o~g Cq~~'~~. C~,,e.~ d _ ~u-1u n} ~,'~. fro From the Internet 10-21-03 ROANOKE & SALEM PROGRAM Sponsored by Project Immunize Virginia & Community Based Immunization Project of Roanoke. For more information please contact Lin Young at 540-985- 9797 or lyoung@carilion.com Volunteers will distribute educational information about flu vaccines and available clinics in the Roanoke areas at several polling sites in Roanoke City, County and the City of Salem on Election Day November 4, 2003. The Vaccinate and Vote Flu Vaccine Clinic will be held at Preston Park Primary School, 3142 Preston Ave NW, Roanoke on Election Day, November 4, 2003 from 9 a.m. - 2 p.m. - - - - - ,_ Brenda Holton - Fwd:`Re: Oct 28th agenda From: Elmer Hodge To: Brenda Holton Date: 10/27/03 7:43AM Subject: Fwd: Re: Oct 28th agenda Brenda, I saw Betty at the mall Friday and suggested that we can do this at 7:00 Tuesday or the next meeting that she can attend. This is a significant achievement and worthy of recognition. The whole agenda is packed but there are out of town guests for the work sessions and the afternoon will be PACKED. Please arrange this with her. Elmer Hodge Roanoke County Administrator 540-772-2004 »> Brenda Holton 10/23/03 04:53PM »> Response from Betty Coleman. Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton(a)co.roanoke.va.us »> Betty Coleman 10/23/03 04:52PM »> Brenda, thanks for your assistance - I will be on vacation that week in November -I'll talk with Nancy, but perhaps we can just skip the presentation. I'll let you know after I speak with Nancy. Thanks again. »> Brenda Holton 10/23/03 04:43PM »> Betty, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Mr. Hodge just notified me that he wants to hold this recognition until the next meeting which is on Nov 18th. We only have one meeting in Nov and will start work on that agenda on Nov 10. I'll get back in touch with you. Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton co.roanoke.va.us »> Betty Coleman 10/22/03 02:49PM »> understand -but hey we're only talking about maybe 3 to 5 min. -let us know. Thanks for your assistance. »> Brenda Holton 10/22/03 02:40PM »> Betty, Page 1 I tried to call you but kept getting busy signals. I know this is a busy time of the year for you all. Mr. Hodge just took a preliminary look at the agenda for the 28th and said that we may have to hold off on ..____ __ Bren~' Holton- Re: Uct 28th agenda ~_ ...~ __ From: Betty Coleman To: Brenda Holton Date: 10/23/03 4:52PM Subject: Re: Oct 28th agenda Pa e 1 Brenda, thanks for your assistance - I will be on vacation that week in November -I'll talk with Nancy, but perhaps we can just skip the presentation. I'll let you know after I speak with Nancy. Thanks again. »> Brenda Holton 10/23/03 04:43PM »> Betty, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Mr. Hodge just notified me that he wants to hold this recognition until the next meeting which is on Nov 18th. We only have one meeting in Nov and will start work on that agenda on Nov 10. I'll get back in touch with you. Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton(a~co.roanoke.va.us »> Betty Coleman 10/22/03 02:49PM »> I understand -but hey we're only talking about maybe 3 to 5 min. -let us know. Thanks for your assistance. »> Brenda Holton 10/22/03 02:40PM »> Betty, I tried to call you but kept getting busy signals. I know this is a busy time of the year for you all. Mr. Hodge just took a preliminary look at the agenda for the 28th and said that we may have to hold off on your recognition until another meeting. The agenda is very heavy with six work sessions, four new business items, briefing, as well as rezonings. I will let you know if we can get it on the agenda for this meeting. Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton(a)co.roanoke.va.us !' Brenc,~a Holton - Re: Oct 28th agenda From: Betty Coleman To: Brenda Holton Date: 10/22/03 2:49PM Subject: Re: Oct 28th agenda understand -but hey we're only talking about maybe 3 to 5 min. -let us know. Thanks for your assistance. »> Brenda Holton 10/22/03 02:40PM »> Betty, tried to call you but kept getting busy signals. I know this is a busy time of the year for you all. -_ _ ___ Page 1 Mr. Hodge just took a preliminary look at the agenda for the 28th and said that we may have to hold off on your recognition until another meeting. The agenda is very heavy with six work sessions, four new business items, briefing, as well as rezonings. I will let you know if we can get it on the agenda for this meeting. Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton(c~co.roanoke.va.us Brenda_Holton~Re: Fwd: Oct 28TH AGENDA Page 1 From: Betty Coleman To: Brenda Holton Date: 10/22/03 9:02AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Oct 28TH AGENDA Brenda, thanks for the fast response. I received a very nice certificate that unfortunately we have not had time to frame. This is what Nancy would like to present at the Board meeting. I will bring you up the press release that was sent from Weldon Cooper as suggested use. Personally, I have been with the County since 1994 -Tax Compliance Deputy until July 2001 when I was appointed Chief Deputy. »> Brenda Holton 10/22/03 08:29AM »> Betty, this is great news. Congratulations on your certification. We are working on the agenda for the 28th now and will need information about the program for the Board report such as length, requirements, date certification received. We also will need some information about you - how long have you worked here, etc . Also, did you receive a plaque? Thanks, Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton(a)co.roanoke.va.us »> Betty Coleman 10/21/03 05:11PM »> »> Betty Coleman 10/21/03 05:09PM »> Diane, I have received my Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue Certification from the Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia and Nancy Horn would like to present this to me at the next Board meeting. Can you get this on the agenda please? Let me know. Thanks Betty Coleman Chief Deputy, Commissioner of the Revenue P.O. Box 20409 Roanoke, VA 24018 Phone: (540) 772-2050 Ext. 113 Fax: (540) 772-2015 email: bcoleman(a~co.roanoke.va.us Brenda Holton -Fwd: 28TH AGENDA __ From: Diane Childers To: bholton@co.roanoke.va.us Date: 10/21/03 7:56PM Subject: Fwd: 28TH AGENDA Brenda, Attached is an email from Betty Coleman containing an agenda item to be added to the October 28th agenda. Can you please review and let Betty know if it is possible to include on the agenda for the 28th? Betty, I am in Virginia Beach attending the Municipal Clerk's Institute this week. Brenda will follow up with you regarding this matter. Congratulations on your certification -that is great news! Thanks! Diane Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 Page 1 CC: bcoleman@co.roanoke.va.us a ,. . . ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C' a, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: October 28, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Recognition of Betty B. Coleman, Chief Deputy, Commissioner of Revenue, for receiving certification as Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue SUBMITTED BY: Nancy Horn Commissioner of Revenue APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ ~f County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the annual meeting of the Commissioner of Revenue Association in August 2003, it was announced that Betty B. Coleman, Chief Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue, had been awarded the title, Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue, under the Master Designation program administered by the University of Virginia's Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service and the School of Continuing and Professional Studies. These designation programs were developed to enhance the professionalism of local government officials and their staff. The Master Designation program takes a minimum of three years to complete and requires a combination of extensive education and governmental experience. Every four years after initial certification, the recipient must complete an additional forty hours of continuing education in order to remain certified. Ms. Coleman has been employed by Roanoke County since 1994 and served as the Tax Compliance Deputy until July 2001 when she was appointed Chief Deputy. c~outrtp of nod CEKTIFICATE OF RECOC><I~IITIOI~I AWARDED TO ~~~4~ ~~ CO~e~rat~l for receiving certification as Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue > The Master Designation program is administered by the University of Virginia's Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service and the School of Continuing and Professional Studies. The program was developed to enhance the professionalism of local government officials and their staff. > The program takes a minimum of three years to complete and requires a combination of extensive education and government experience. The recipient must complete additional training every four years in order to remain certified. > Ms. Coleman has been employed by Roanoke County since 1994 and served as the Tax Compliance Deputy until July 2001 when she was appointed Chief Deputy. Presented this 28t" day of Qctober 2003, Jo e h McNamara, Chairman '~`~ , x.,......57 c. ~ <. Richard C. Flora, Vice-Chairman ~h~~ 2~ Michael W. Altizer Joseph B. "Butch" Church H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix SEP, -44' 43(THU) 14•,47 UVA WCCPS CH' VILLE TEL:804 9825524 P, 441 ~LDON COOPER CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE University of Virginia RELEASE UPON RECEIPT Betty B. Coleman, Chief Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue, Roanoke County, certified as Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue Charlottesville, VA July 1, 2003 Betty B. Coleman, Chief Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue, Roanoke County, has been awarded the title, Master Deputy Commis~oner of the Revenue, under the Master Designation program administered by the University of Virginia's Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service and the School of Continuing and Professional Studies. The designation programs were developed to enhance the professionalism of local government officials and their staff. The program, which takes a minimum of three years to complete, requires a combination of extensive education and govern~rnental experience. A certificate is presented for successful completion of the program. The education process does not, however, end with the completion of the program. Every four years after initial certification, the recipient must cvznplete an additional forty hours of continuing education in order to remain certified. Additional information about the Master Designation program is available from Kate Wood, Director, Certification Programs, at the 'VlreIdon Cooper Center for Public Service, (434) 982-5541 or a-mail kwood@virginia.edu. ~~Zvd3 ~a~..~,~, r~v~c,~. a. ~ C'd,•, ~ 11.x. ~l~~ t.,.~. r-~..~.~ , 9i8 Emmet St. N, Suite 300 * P. O. Sox 4ooao6 * Charlocresvil * TDD 434 98z-HEP.R ~Br~ enda Holton~Re: Fwd: Oct 28TH AGENDA From: Betty Coleman To: Brenda Holton Date: 10/22/03 9:02AM Subject: Re: Fwd: Oct 28TH AGENDA Brenda, thanks for the fast response. I received a very nice certificate that unfortunately we have not had time to frame. This is what Nancy would like to present at the Board meeting. I will bring you up the press release that was sent from Weldon Cooper as suggested use. Personally, I have been with the County since 1994 -Tax Compliance Deputy until July 2001 when I was appointed Chief Deputy. »> Brenda Holton 10/22/03 08:29AM »> Betty, this is great news. Congratulations on your certification. We are working on the agenda for the 28th now and will need information about the program for the Board report such as length, requirements, date certification received. We also will need some information about you - how long have you worked here, etc . Also, did you receive a plaque? Thanks, Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton(a)co.roanoke.va.us »> Betty Coleman 10/21/03 05:11PM »> »> Betty Coleman 10/21/03 05:09PM »> Diane, I have received my Master Deputy Commissioner of the Revenue Certification from the Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia and Nancy Horn would like to present this to me at the next Board meeting. Can you get this on the agenda please? Let me know. Thanks Betty Coleman Chief Deputy, Commissioner of the Revenue P.O. Box 20409 Roanoke, VA 24018 Phone: (540) 772-2050 Ext. 113 Fax: (540) 772-2015 email: bcoleman(v~co.roanoke.va.us Page 1 Diane St. John FOR BEIPIG DESIGPIATED AS A CERTIFIED ELECTIOPIS/REGISTRATIOI~ ADMII~IISTRATOR (CERA) ^ CERA designation is achieved through a multi-year course of study conducted by the Election Center's Professional Education Program and completion of twelve core courses taught by the Master's in Public Administration faculty of Auburn University. ^ Only 200 of the 21,000 election and voter registration officials in the United States have achieved this designation. • Ms. St. John has been an elections official for twenty-six years and currently serves as Registrar for the County of Roanoke. 10th October 2000 Joseph MclYamara Chairman, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Elmer G Bodge, County Administrator Rp4SAC Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Mary Allen County Clerk 5204 Bernard Drive, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Chairman and Members of the Board: ~Sel ~R P O. Bob 13543 ~,oanoke, `(l~ 24035 (540) 982-1427 www.raysac.org October 16, 2003 I realize the time has slipped away and I apologize for the latest of this letter. However, for the tenth year, citizens of the Roanoke Valley will be asked to take a stand against illegal drug use through the observance of Red Ribbon Week. RAYSAC (the Roanoke Area Youth Substance Abuse Coalition) and Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, would like to formally ask the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to proclaim October 25 - November 2 as Red Ribbon Week in your community. The Virginia Federation of Communities for Drug-Free Youth following the murder of Federal Agent Enrique Camarena initiated the Red Ribbon Campaign in 1985 by drug traffickers. Since that time, the red ribbon has been designated as the symbol of intolerance of the illegal use of drugs and a commitment to a drug-free lifestyle. Communities recognize the last week in October as Red Ribbon Week across the country. 1n the Roanoke Valley a number of events are scheduled: • October 26-November 1 School Competitions for the school that best illustrates the spirit of RRW. • Three free parenting workshops, Keeping Your Child Safe From Dangerous Situations, will be held on October 30th , 8:00-9:30 a.m., 12:00-1:30 p.m. and 5:30-7:00 p.m., at the Jefferson Center, Fitzpatrick Hall • Sunday, November 2"d at 7:00 p.m., at the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center, a Candlelight Vigil of Remembrance and Hope will be held to remember those whose lives have been affected by substance abuse. • A number of businesses and agencies throughout the region will sport banners and ribbons in support of this week. RAYSAC is an organization that includes concerned parents, students, teachers, police officers, business people, judges, drug treatment providers, counselors, ministers, and more. Working with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare they are committed to creating a community norm that drug abuse will not be tolerated. Thank you in advance for considering our request for a proclamation. If possible, please present this to your elected officials at a meeting as close to the start of Red Ribbon Week as possible. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 982-1427. The proclamation can be sent to me at 541 Luck Avenue, Suite 230, Roanoke, Virginia, 24016, or please let me know and I will be happy to come by and pick it up. Sincerely, `~'' fj~ Mary Uwtn Parker Secretary/Treasurer ~,oanoke Area youth Sudstance ~L6use _~ _ Coalition __ Ikon Profit Organization - t~r~~C'~~ ~'IZ~~-;~'~°S: "Keeping Your Cl~~1d Safe From Dangerous Situations" October 30, 2003 v.~s~o~.~ ~~~~ ~~ «~~ ~ v~.~ii vJlr's~, ~i 11i~J ~. V 1 i.L~.~'1 8:00 - 9:30 a.m. 12:00 - 1:30 p.m. 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. Workshops and Appetizers Provided FREE of Charge All workshops will cover: Typical Adolescent Development • How to be a "Hands-On" Parent • Why Monitoring Is Important • Supervision Without Invasion • Communicating to Improve Relationships • Teaching Youth How To Avoid Dangerous Situations LOCATION: Jefferson Center, Fitzpatrick Hall X41 i.ucaic Avg., 1'coanoke REGISTRATION: Call ~~40)982-1427 Log on to RAYSAC.org .~+t~ST !(AIOIA/...YOU Can help s#op underage drinking Fund~:d oy a federal grant from the C~ffi~e cf Juvenile Justice end Delinquency Prevention through the 'v'srgirna Ceparment of ~Icohol 3eve:agP Control ar.d by the ~ovarnor's Cffice `or Substance ~;huse Prevpnt'.:,n. ~~ °~E; Brenda. Holton-Grant appropriations for 10/28 Agenda ~ _ ~ W _ Page 1 From: Diane Childers To: ETEAM Date: 10/15/03 4:38PM Subject: Grant appropriations for 10/28 Agenda Due to the fact that we will be appropriating funds in excess of $500,000 at the October 28 board meeting, it will be necessary for us to place an advertisement in the Roanoke Times outlining all the appropriations (including grants) that will be on the agenda. In order for appropriation requests to be included on the October 28 agenda, I will need to receive notification of the amount and a brief description of the item no later than NOON tomorrow. Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 CC: Brenda Chastain; Penny Hodge --- _ € C4ane Childers - Re: CERT ~_._~ From: To: Date: Subject Wanda Riley Joey Stump 10/7/03 9:35AM Re: CERT _. Page.. ~. 10-9$ ac~n/c~a Sorry I haven't gotten back with you sooner, but the staff just met yesterday afternoon to discuss next week's agenda -and it's going to be a bear!! So we're going to wait to do a worksession on CERT. I'll pass your a-mail along to Diane Childers and she will let you know when it's going to be scheduled. »> Joey Stump 10/03/03 02:48PM »> When I participated in the CERT talk with Mr Hodge for RVTV, he asked about doing a work session for the 10/14/04 BOS meeting. Could you see if this is still requested? He mentioned that depending upon other topics he would decide later. No problem either way, let us know. Thanks CC: Diane Childers Starting & Maintaining a CERT Program: Resource Center Page 1 of 1 I~~~ EMI Nome Melp Site Map FEMA Home Section 548 POC GE4"?'' .arugr~m sera in m~r+: ttr~iz 175 ~e~nrtxanit~,~ rrati~y~~vicle, !"tais ~r#e p~`e~ents tt~e best iar~cti~e5 tha sup ~ ~;fc~i {:;E`f ~~ar~~rnt~rs~ti~;~; a ~; t~ ~,t~rt ~rzd m~int.aain tht:.iP ~ar~rtr~arn5, Last Updated: 01/08/2003 16:58:40 ~+, L~'r~~~, ,,r r ~, ~~ i Assessing heeds 1~~ Identifying Resources IS- Gaining Support & Recruiting ta~- Acquiring Training Materlats ~. Taiit~rirtg Training ~ ~ IEstab]ishing a ~ Training Cadre ~~ Delivering Training ~ °!'rainin j la- Maintaining Deco! ~~ , printak~ie Versit Ali Resources Espanol I Privacy Policy I Accessibility ~ Site Help I Site Index ~ Contact Us 16825 South Seton Avenue Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727 http://training.fema.gov/emiweb/CERT/new_CERT/index.htm 10/17/2003 starting & Maintaining a CERT Program: Resource Center _ _. _ OF MOAN ~F ~ ~ ' ~ Z ~ o, _ v a~ 7838 C~n~tz~~ a~ ~.u~x~.o C~ e O~~ice o~ the County Administrator ELMER C. HODGE P.O. Box 29800 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 October 2, 2003 Mr. Chris Helton 3726 Popcorn Lane Salem, VA 24153 Dear Mr. Helton: I received your letter and the citizens' petition ~ k j Road. I have friends who live along this roac '~~2'~~"' of the residents in that area. Roanoke Cou ~~ ~~ temporary solution to this problem by allowing In your letter, you requested that time be Supervisors agenda to discuss this matter. speak regarding this issue would be Communications" portion of the agenda. I the concerns, and I welcome your attendance at t Sincerely, ~ ~~r~~ Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. County Administrator cc: pervisor Joseph B. "Butch" Church Catawba Magisterial District Phone: (540) 772-2004 Fax: (540)772-2193 E-mail: ehodgeC~co.roanoke.va.us ~d ~s a of to ~d se 6 September 17, 2003 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Va. 24018 Attn: Chairman Joseph McNamara Subject: Citizen request for support to improve Harborwood Road and remove an unsafe condition now existing along the road. Gentlemen, Attached is a petition, signed by most residents living along Harborwood Road and other adjoining roads, requesting the Board's help in correcting a very unsafe condition existing near the Green Hill Park. Harborwood Road is very narrow has several very sharp turns adjoining Green Hill Park in the area of 2886 Harborwood Rd. Traffic negotiating the turns frequently will violate the lane dividing line, often resulting in an accident. Many of the truck and trailer rigs using the Equestrian Center cannot negotiate the turns while remaining within their respective lanes. Additionally, an existing stone wall adjacent to the road leaves little room for northbound traffic to maneuver when encountering southbound vehicles at this location, particularly if the vehicles have violated the Lane dividing line. Included in the attached package is State Dept. of Highways accident reports for the previous Four (4) years. The reports reflect a total of 22 accidents, of which, 12 resulted in injury. Previous accident reports (requested for a previous endeavor to upgrade the road) for the years 1987 through 1990 reflected much the same totals with the exception that two (2) accidents resulted in fatalities. Roanoke County officials have had a hand in designating Harborwood Road as a scenic bikeway ,jogging trail for the school track teams, and who knows what else. We recognize that Green Hill Park and the equestrian center have a positive effect on our community. We are asking that the road be improved to accommodate the attractions being sponsored by County officials and others. It is apparent that in a matter of time, a school bus will meet a truck and horse rig entering the curves with disastrous results.. Please reserve time on the agenda for October 14, 2003 for discussion of this matter with the Board of Supervisors. Sincerely, Chris Helton 3726 Popcorn La. Salem, Va 24153 540-389-2999 Copies:l. VDOT Salem Residency Office, Mr. J. A Echols 8s Mr. R.J.Yates 2. Mr. Joe Church, Supervisor Catawba Dist., 3. Mr. Elmer Hodge, County Administrator 4. Morgan Griffith, House of delegates 5. Mr. Emick, Candidate for house of delegates 6. Hon, Rick Boucher, U.S. House of Representatives HARBORWOOD ROAD TRAFFIC THE UNDERSIGNED CITIZENS OF ROANOKE COUNTY LIVING WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF GREEN HILL PARK HEREBY REQUEST THAT ROANOKE COUNTY AND/OR THE STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO CORRECT A DANGEROUS TRAFFIC PROBLEM EXISTING ON HARBORWOOD ROAD NEAR THE ACCESS TO THE GREEN HILL PARK EQUISTRIAN CENTER. SPECIFICALLY; THE CURVE ON HARBORWOOD ROAD ADJOINING GREEN HILL PARK AND NEAR THE ENTRANCE TO GREEN HILL TERRACE SHOULD BE WIDENEDAND STRAIGHTENED SUFFICIENT FOR USE BY THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC OR, AS AN ALTERNATIVE, THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC SHOULD BE ROUTED THROUGH GREEN HILL PARK TO THE HORSE CENTER. ADDRESS ~j~. ~'~ jJ,C~ "~t.1.2 ~ G ~1' ^~ ~ ~ ~- ~ , ~~ c+y-m ~F HARBORWOOD ROAD TRAFFIC THE UNDERSIGNED CITIZENS OF ROANOKE COUNTY LIVING WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF GREEN HILL PARK HEREBY REQUEST THAT ROANOKE COUNTY AND/OR THE STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO CORRECT A DANGEROUS TRAFFIC PROBLEM EXISTING ON HARBORWOOD ROAD NEAR THE ACCESS TO THE GREEN HILL PARK EQUISTRIAN CENTER. SPECIFICALLY; THE CURVE ON HARBORWOOD ROAD ADJOINING GREEN HILL PARK AND NEAR THE ENTRANCE TO GREEN HILL TERRACE SHOULD BE WIDENED AND STRAIGHTENED SUFFICIENT FOR USE BY THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC OR, AS AN ALTERNATIVE, THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC SHOULD BE ROUTED THROUGH GREEN HILL PARK TO THE HORSE CENTER. NAME ADDRESS _ 9f ~--' ~ ~ ~ SriP -e a CJ.~4 ~ ~ ' L°~ ~~' ~ ~ _ ~ t R~. t v ~~tts o`Z'~ /~~~ - v ~ ~~ - ~~. ~~!.~°~ _ v ~i53 _ err ~ .~ ~s3 .~.~ i~3 ~~'~-~ .~zf~ f s~ ~~ z y~~s ~~-.~ `~ I W 6 3~vS dllAA l%)h E'L4iol:dil iLtl. JGy/Nn. V/ii~ /"1/l3 HARBORWOOD ROAD TRAFFIC THE UNDERSIGNED CITIZENS OF ROANOKE COUNTY LIVING WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF GREEN HILL PARK HEREBY REQUEST THAT ROANOKE COUNTY AND/OR THE STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO CORRECT A DANGEROUS TRAFFIC PROBLEM EXISTING ON HARBORWOOD ROAD NEAR THE ACCESS TO THE GREEN HILL PARK EQUISTRIAN CENTER. SPECIFICALLY; THE CURVE ON HARBORWOOD ROAD ADJOINING GREEN HILL PARK AND NEAR THE ENTRANCE TO GREEN HILL TERRACE SHOULD BE WIDENED AND STRAIGHTENED SUFFICIENT FOR USE BY THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC OR, AS AN ALTERNATIVE, THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC SHOULD BE ROUTED THROUGH GREEN HILL PARK TO THE HORSE CENTER. s ~~ ~ ~~ NAME ADDRESS HARBORWOOD ROAD TRAFFIC THE UNDERSIGNED CITIZENS OF ROANOKE COUNTY LIVING WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF GREEN HILL PARK HEREBY REQUEST THAT ROANOKE COUNTY AND/OR THE STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO CORRECT A DANGEROUS TRAFFIC PROBLEM EXISTING ON HARBORWOOD ROAD NEAR THE ACCESS TO THE GREEN HILL PARK EQUISTRIAN CENTER. SPECIFICALLY; THE CURVE ON HARBORWOOD ROAD ADJOINING GREEN HILL PARK AND NEAR THE ENTRANCE TO GREEN HILL TERRACE SHOULD BE WIDENED AND STRAIGHTENED SUFFICIENT FOR USE BY THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC OR, AS AN ALTERNATIVE, THE HORSE TRAILER TRAFFIC SHOULD BE ROUTED THROUGH GREEN HILL PARK TO THE HORSE CENTER. NAM E n ADDRESS ~~ ~. d ^, .~~~,~-- 1 ~ Ica T;~ ~,~- r i'~~~ ~ R nn ~}-at ~ .~~Ye r ~ ~ '~'~ 6 I b i ' I + ~; ' y' l~ ~:. 1~ ~ ~ J ~ 7 4J~ II «4 ~ t' ~n ~ ~1 ), H ~~,J~i U~ [ 1-il ,~~~a j~j `_~ ~~ (;1 ;.) F~ F-~ L++` _ ~' I r+... 6 ,iy, i3 :~ i 'c~ `~ .~{ !f. d ~~ ~ ;; ~~ V + ll ~7 h ~ ~ i ~ ~ C1 ~ I + ~ll i1 +L+ t ~ il' t'f +-` ~~ ~~ ~~ -J •J N V--' t,fl .U ~~ n`' {- ~ trJ N ~. ~l~ ~ I c" C.~ L~ Rl ('~ -J ~~ r ~~ <~ + ~' t~ a ,~ '7i (`` ~ _ ,~ G ~~~ ~;~ ~~ ~ ' c: to ,, ; . ~.. ~, ri `? :' .-I rl ~ hi U~ ((` ~~ ~r1 ~ ~.I ~ ] ~ ~+~ 4 [s~ I ~~.-~ M -}1 ~i ~ir~ i~ l1 . -7 V~ i ~-{ t ' M _ II ~i t~ 1 (~ Y1 L~ r-~ N ,N 1~ ra Y ~_ J. I ~~ ;~ ~ ~ _~ c' ~ t~ Ir n~ r. -. v? ~; hl (T ~ i :1; F-' ~ J ~'; ~-' ~--+ .-. t--+ .~ . , ~^ rj U) V+ 1, R ..4 t. ~~~ . 1 ~:~ -... n rl S]{I 1--1 ~_{ :.> I ~ .I ~1 /'~~ M '-~ 1 (_^ i; ~~ CCC 1 "'"Nr~~~r~~ ... CCC"' 1 ~ ~1 ~. ~ Cl ~ c+ ~; ~r' k`~ ~ ,I~ rr; r i i 1 I I 1 1 1 ~. . , %~ t.n --J i I n N ~ N N r ~ .C. t .' 1-• N I-' H I-• IJ} I~ It+ N ~ `. .. -' r.. tit n~~y ---- _.---- ----- t*J M I 1 I-I ht ,, ,, y ~ ~ H f n r~ ry , ,-' ry ~7 CI Cy ~~ I +MT,1 TI 5 a rv +3 u I VY t ~ ~- i-i ~ Y~ I h ] ~ rY' V f 'F1 ~r. I t'I ~'-~ 6.. (t,~ ~j ~ ~ ~ a -.! 1} ~ ' IH'I ,<J ~ ~• I I(,-7~1 (J11 ~ ~ =J I 1 FJ L`, ~ 1 .y 1 L7 .t+ t I C' •C' N N ~1 ~3 `~~ F~ r~+~~~~~~~ nJ ~~ t-+ ~ K-1 f~ ~ + r7 ~ Cn :'+ C'~ ~~ ~ I1 ~ r c+ ~ + ~' F I I ~~ ' I ~ x '--~ I I I ! I i (~ i-. I ttl :7 ~ I 1~ Jj FJ ~ 1 I~ ~i a/ ~ E-' N 1r- (~1 I-+ lAl fO I N t0 N I-' O~ 1.+ I ~-I =' t+! AJ L ' ~+ (_l ~~ + I --__--- I ~ 1 1 \i> ~1 ~ ~~ ~+ :-1 tH~ ~i+ ~ U ;~ ' + 17t t ~+ M1 ~: N ,~ ,,, D.1 ~nJ :-~ _. ~,f E:1 N - ::-_~~ O O ~~ .~ ~T I_. GJ 1 JJ] (~ 1 F-' N yfa F-'- t J .L~ N N l.r F~ 1~-' ~r t`1 I 1 t/~ 1»r/ FJ A~ r.> 1- 1_ `••) Jti v ~ n) .. L1 ~ -) ,t, .tom IL+ H N N L., I.~~ 1 ' •a. tJ ~1: r- c + 1• `', ~. '~' C ~ _ h 1' ~] [r1 ~ T 'r' ~~ _. V--• T1 ~~ C. r Photo A- shows what a school bus or any vehicle with a long wheelbase must do to navigate the sharpest of the turns in question, This bus also carries my two children to school everyday. Photo B 1-shows a northbound view of the same blind curve, there is exactly 10 feet from the stone wall on the right to the center of the yellow lines. Also notice the hedge that overhangs this wall approx. 1 foot in some places (Photo B2 ), This leaves only 81/2 to 9 feet to navigate the northbound lane. This is barely enough room to negotiate the turn with a full size pickup or suv and not nearly enough room for a large truck or a truck& trailer to make this turn and stay in his or her lane (PhotoA&B2). For this type of vehicle it is about the same in the southbound lane, which is approx. 11 feet from the edge of the road to the center line. The equestrian park and events held there have grown a lot in the past few years and with the latest addition of lights for late evening shows this type of traffic will become more frequent and at unpredictable times. As I stated in my cover letter, It is only a matter of time before disaster strikes here. Photos C,D,E shows all north and southbound traffic, in the two hour time it took to take these pictures I observed several close calls. Notice the trailer traffic southbound to the equestrian center and all other careless traffic riding the center lines and in some cases using some of the northbound lane. ~~ 1 ~- Cr d ~~ l c~ b a ~. ..~ ~ '~~,w ~~~, ~. r# ~., '~ ~ ~ '~ ~ r~ ~ ::.- .~i ~ ~ ~ f'' 1_ : f: DSCF0005 DSCF0006 DSCF0007 DSCF0008 DSCF0009 ~~:' ~y, +-. DSCF0015 DSCF0016 DSCF0017 DSCF0018 DSCF0019 >t ~~ >:-~ w ~ DSCF0020 DSCF0021 DSCF0022 DSCF0023 DSCF0025 ~~ 3. Y jl a 1 ' ~r - ~~ ,~ , ' ~"'~ r~~ DSCF0026 DSCF0027 DSCF0028 DSCF0030 DSCF0031 Y a , a a ,'rye J'S ~ ,. 'K #-f; DSCF0032 DSCF0033 DSCF0034 ~9 DSCF0035 DSCF0036 .~ .. _ . _ .1:~~ ._ ~_ rd~`~ .. DSCF0037 DSCF0038 DSCF0039 DSCF0040 DSCF0043 r y , ~r~ ~ `tv~4'~ T . tv: eeY.~ `. ~~k ,. ~..o~ - , N4 ~ '~ DSCF0075 DSCF0076 DSCF0077 DSCF0078 DSCF0079 ;ti"" ` ~~yyM ~''~L' N •~ __ ~ V-. `. 1 gi K 4~4 ~ ~f ~ DSCF0080 DSCF0081 DSCF0082 DSCF0083 DSCF0084 .su ~`3 . _ ~~ u ~ Y DSCF0085 DSCF0086 DSCF0087 DSCF0089 DSCF0090 T 4' ., f,r ~' ~~~. DSCF0096 DSCF0097 DSCF0098 DSCF0099 DSCF0100 3 ~~ ,o .;i ~ ~ w ~~;n•- o t~ a, _, - ~. ... ,, s- ..o-:~ ...,. "?i, r ' .. j ~ :.;: ~ ;~ !.{ . ' i Y~ ~~ .h ~ I~ DSCF0174 DSCF0175 DSCF0176 DSCF0177 DSCF0178 x x .. . ,- ,= , DSCF0048 DSCF0049 DSCF0050 DSCF0052 DSCF0053 LO x i 1 Q _. k 9 7 ' ~ +~^,,"~ DSCF0054 DSCF0055 DSCF0057 DSCF0058 DSCF0059 `• t } _ .:x ~, , S i r~ DSCF0060 DSCF0062 DSCF0063 DSCF0064 DSCF0066 Notice is hereby given that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia will hold a public hearing regarding the following proposed amendments to the budget in accordance with Virginia Code Section 15.2-2507. 1. Reimbursement of an amount not to exceed $12 million from the Water Fund to the General Fund for debt service payments made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir 2. Appropriation of $80,000 for the purchase of an electronic agenda system 3. Appropriation of $20,990 grant from Va Dept of Emergency Management 4. Appropriation of an amount not to exceed $75,000 for School grants The public hearing, which may be continued or adjourned, will be held at 3:00 pm, or as soon thereafter as the matter is heard, on October 28, 2003, before the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. Dated: October 17, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Direct the bill for publication to: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 E Diane Childers -Franchise Ord legal ad.doc ~ . LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - -- , Page 1 Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, at its meeting on ~C3etober 28, 2003; at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing and second reading on the following matter, to-wit: ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA AND COXCOM, INC., d/b/a COX COMMUNICATIONS, ROANOKE A copy of this ordinance is available for inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors and in the office of the County Attorney at 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia All members of the public interested in this matter may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. Dated: October 8, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Please publish on the following dates: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Invoice to be sent to: County Attorney's Office 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 (540) 772-2071 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers, Clerk Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Diane Childers -Cox Franchise Ord. legal ad Pam ._.. _ __ r ~ _ - From: Vicki Walker To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 10/9/03 8:47AM Subject: Cox Franchise Ord. legal ad Hi Martha, This is the Cox Cable Franchise Ordinance we talked about this morning. This is the one to publish. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks so much. ---Vicki Walker Vicki Walker Legal Secretary (540)772-2071 vwalkerrc7i.co.roanoke.va.us CC: Diane Childers -- Diane Childers - PublicHearingNotice.92003.wpd __ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-1800, et seq. and Section 15.2- 2100, et seq., Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended and the fed~ral Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended, 47 U.S.C. ' 546 (h), e County of Roanoke proposes to grant a renewal of the cable television fr chise held by CoxCom, Inc., d/b/a Cox Communications Roanoke (ACox The renewal franchise will succeed and replace the franchise currently hel by Cox, which will expire on October 31, 2003. The County of Roanoke also proposes to adopt a revised Cable Television Ordinance prior to granting the ab a renewal franchise. A copy of the proposed revised Cable Televi on Ordinance, the renewal franchise agreement between the County of Roano a and Cox and the proposed ordinance authorizing the County to enter into the r newal franchise agreement with Cox, may be reviewed by the public in the O ice of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors, Room 400-F, Roanoke County ministration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia, 24018. Notice is hereby given that the anoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing on the above tter at its regular meeting to be held on CJctober 28, 2003, commencing at 7:0 p.m., local time, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Board o Supervisors Meeting Room, 1ST Floor, Roanoke County Administration Center, 5 04 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. Further information is available in the O 'ce of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors, (540) 772-2003 or from the County A orney=s Office, (540) 772-2071. All parties and inter ted citizens may appear on the above date and be heard and give comme on the matter. If you are a person who needs accommodations for thi hearing, please contact the Clerk=s Office at (540) 772- 2003 before 5:00 p.m. n the Friday before the date of the hearing listed above. Diana Childers, Clerk to Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Note to Publisher.• Please publish t ice in The Roanoke Times, once on Sunday, October 12, 2003 and once on Sunda ,October 19, 2003. Send Publish r-s Affidavit and Bill to: Joseph B. Obenshain, Esq. Senior Assistant County Attorney P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2071 Page 1 I Diane Childers -Public Notice -Cable Television Page 1~ • s From: Sue Bane To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 10/8/03 2:28PM Subject: Public Notice -Cable Television Please publish the attached. Please call if you have any questions. Thanks, Sue Bane Legal Assistant Roanoke County Attorney's Office sbane@co.roanoke.va.us 772-2007 772-2089 (fax) CC: Diane Childers; Joe Obenshain _. _ ~_ Diane-`;hilders - RE Public Notice -Charter Amendment From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Sue Bane' <SBANE@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 10/13/03 9:27AM Subject: RE: Public Notice -Charter Amendment Thanks... ad will run Oct. 14 -cost is 121.90... Bill & aff. will go to Diane Childers.. - Page 1~~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING~~AMENDMENTS TO~~ROANOKE COUNTY CHARTERS Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 2 of Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and specifically Section 15.2-202, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby gives notice of a pubic hearing to be held on October 28, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia, so that the citizens of Roanoke County shall have an opportunity to comment upon the County's request that the General Assembly amend its existing charter. A summary of the text of the proposed charter amendments follows: Sec. 2.02 -Taxing powers. - In addition to the powers granted by other sections of the charter and general law, the county shall have the additional power to levy and collect taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products, pursuant to Section 58.1-3832 of the Code of Virginia. The Roanoke County Charter and a copy of the text of the proposed amendment are available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Paul M. Mahoney~Roanoke County Attorney (2233233) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Sue Bane > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:06 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Cc: Diane Childers; Paul Mahoney > Subject: Public Notice -Charter Amendment > «File: public.notice.charter.amendments.doc» > Please publish the attached Notice on October 14, 2003. > Thanks, > Sue Bane > Legal Assistant > Roanoke County Attorney's Office > sbane@co.roanoke.va.us > 772-2007 > 772-2089 (fax) _ - ------ Diane .~hilders -Fwd: RE: Public Notice -Charter Amendment From: Sue Bane To: Diane Childers Date: 10/14/03 8:56AM Subject: Fwd: RE: Public Notice -Charter Amendment Sue Bane Legal Assistant Roanoke County Attorney's Office sbane@co.roanoke.va.us 772-2007 772-2089 (fax) -- - ~ Page 1 CC: Paul Mahoney ,~Dia;-n; Childers -public.notice.charter.amendments.doc Page. 1 ~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENTS TO ROANOKE COUNTY CHARTER Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 2 of Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and specifically Section 15.2-202, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby gives notice of a pubic hearing to be held on October 28, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. . at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive ,Roanoke, Virginia, so that the citizens of Roanoke County shall have an opportunity to comment upon the County's request that the General Assembly amend its existing charter. A summary of the text of the proposed charter amendments follows: Sec. 2.02 -Taxing powers. - In addition to the powers granted by other sections of the charter and general law, the county shall have the additional power to levy and collect taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products, pursuant to Section 58.1-3832 of the Code of Virginia. The Roanoke County Charter and a copy of the text of the proposed amendment are available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Paul M. Mahoney Roanoke County Attorney Please publish on October 14, 2003. Please send bill to: Diane Childers, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 .. .. _ _. ~ Di r Childers -Public Notice -Charter Amendment From: Sue Bane To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 9/24/03 11:06AM Subject: Public Notice -Charter Amendment --- __ _ ~..: __ Page 1J Please publish the attached Notice on October 14, 2003. Thanks, Sue Bane Legal Assistant Roanoke County Attorney's Office sbane@co. roanoke.va. us 772-2007 772-2089 (fax) CC: Diane Childers; Paul Mahoney Diane Childers - RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic Page 1 oK io - t3 -~3 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> (J,JG To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 10/13/03 10:08AM Subject: RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic (I'm very concerned about this one... I live near this building) thanks Diane... this runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is $184.00 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 28, 2003, 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 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2233283) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance > Abuse Clinic > «File: 10-28-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and > October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact me. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 Diane Childers- RE' MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic Page 2 Diane Childers - Mime.822 ~ _ - ~ Page 1 Received: from RTEMAIL.rt.lcipublishing.com ([216.12.38.93]) by MAIL01.CO.ROANOKE.VA.US; Mon; 13 Oct 2003 10:06:47 -0400 Received: by rtclexch2.rt.lcipublishing.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) id <N717YO7V>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:06:43 -0400 Message-ID: <E86B61DF6F72AD4F811101F1DBCC77650194063E@rtclexch2.rt.lcipublishing.com> From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@co.roanoke.va.us> Subject: RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clin is Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:06:42 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01 C39193.3A778FC0" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001 01 C39193.3A778FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1 " (I'm very concerned about this one... I live near this building) thanks Diane... this runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is $184.00 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 28, 2003, 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 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2233283) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 ane Childers - Mime.822 Page 2 l+ ~' Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance > Abuse Clinic > «File: 10-28-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and > October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact me. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 ------_=_NextPart_001 _01 C39193.3A778FC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset "iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 "> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12"> <TITLE>RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <P><I><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">(I'm very concerned about this one... I live near this building)</FONT></I> </P> <BR> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">thanks Diane... this runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is $184.00</FONT> </P> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">~LEGAL NOTICES^~ROANOKE COUNTY^~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS^^ The Roanoke iLDiane Childers - Mime.822 - ~ ~ ~ .~ _ Page 3 _~' i County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, 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 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit. ^ ^ A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA.^^ Dated: October 10, 2003^Diane S. Childers, Clerk^ (2233283)</FONT><I></I></P> <BR> <BR> <BR> <P><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Martha Fisher Plank</FONT> <BR><B><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">The Roanoke Times</FONT></B> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Legal Advertising Rep.</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Ph.: 540-981-3440</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Fax: 540-981-3415</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Email: legals@roanoke.com</FONT><B></B> </P> <UL> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">----------</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">From:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Diane Childers</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">Sent:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">To:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">legals@roanoke.com</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Axial">Subject:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE='Axial">Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">&It;&It;File: 10-28-Community Development.doc>></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Martha,</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Diane</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Diane S. Childers</FONT> Diane Childers - Mime.822 -_ __ -Page 4 . __ - - -- <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Clerk to the Board</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">County of Roanoke</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Phone: (540) 772-2003 </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Fax: (540) 772-2193</FONT> </P> <BR> <gR> </UL> </BODY> </HTML> ------ = NextPart_001_01C39193.3A778FC0-- Diane Childers - RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic Page 1 oK ~0-~3-~3 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> ~ To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 10/ 13/03 10: OOAM Subject: RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic This runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is 147.20.. Thanks 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 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Town of Vinton to rezone 99.38 acres from PTD to PTD with revised proffered conditions, located in the 2100 block of Hardy Road, Vinton Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2233278) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance > Abuse Clinic > «File: 10-28-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and > October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact me. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 Diane Childers - Mime.822 Page 1 C:~_ - - _ W W ~_ Received: from RTEMAIL.rt.lcipublishing.com ([216.12.38.93]) by MAIL01.CO.ROANOKE.VA.US; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:59:46 -0400 Received: by rtclexch2.rt.lcipublishing.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) id <N717YO6L>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:59:45 -0400 Message-ID: <E86B61 DF6F72AD4F811101 F1 DBCC77650194063D@rtclexch2.rt.lcipublishing.com> From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@co.roanoke.va.us> Subject: RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clin is Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:59:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01 C39192.41 BD17B0" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001 01 C39192.41 BD17B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1 " This runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is 147.20.. Thanks LEGAL NOTICE ~ROANOKE COUNTY ABOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public he. p.m. on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Vf petition of the Town of Vinton to rezone 99.38 acres from PTD tc revised proffered conditions, located in the 2100 block of Hardy I Vinton Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Depar Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2233278) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com __ - Diane Childers - Mime.822 Page 2 I' ''~ (' > Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance > Abuse Clinic > «File: 10-28-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and > October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact me. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540)772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 ------_=_NextPart 001 _01C39192.41BD1780 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1 " Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 "> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12"> <TITLE>RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">This runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is 147.20.. Thanks</FONT> </P> <BR> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">~LEGAL NOTICES^~ROANOKE COUNTY^~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS^^ The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Town of Vinton to rezone 99.38 acres from PTD to PTD with revised proffered conditions, located in the 2100 block of Hardy Road, Vinton Magisterial District. ^ ^ A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA.^^ Dated: October 10, 2003^Diane S. Childers, Clerk^ (2233278)</FONT></P> <BR> -- - - - - Diane Childers - Mime.822 Page 3 <P><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Martha Fisher Plank</FONT> <BR><B><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">The Roanoke Times</FONT></B> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Legal Advertising Rep.</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Ph.: 540-981-3440</FO NT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Fax: 540-981-3415</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Email: legals@roanoke.com</FONT><B></B> </P> <UL> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">----------</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">From:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Diane Childers</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Sent:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">To:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">legals@roanoke.com</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Subject:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">&It;&It;File: 10-28-Community Development.doc>></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Martha,</FONT> </p> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Diane</FONT> </p> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Diane S. Childers</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Clerk to the Board</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">County of Roanoke</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Phone: (540) 772-2003 </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Fax: (540) 772-2193</FONT> </p> <BR> <BR> </UL> </BODY> </HTML> ------ = NextPart 001 01 C39192.41BD17B0-- ~ Diane Childers - RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clrnic Page 1 OK. IO- -3-03 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> (~C, To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@co.roanoke.va.us> Date: 10/13/03 9:55AM Subject: RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic Diane, this runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is 147.20 I have typed in (1/2) mile from Plantation Rd., not sure how it will show on your email I'm sending. This is correct, right? Thanks for your help! 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 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of MJH Development to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a mini warehouse facility and offices located mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2233266) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance > Abuse Clinic > «File: 10-28-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and > October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact me. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 ~ane Childers - Mime.822 ~~ - _ - - Page 1 Received: from RTEMAIL.rt.lcipublishing.com ([216.12.38.93]) by MAIL01.CO.ROANOKE.VA.US; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:54:42 -0400 Received: by rtclexch2.rt.lcipublishing.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) id <N717YO5G>; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:54:38 -0400 Message-ID: <E86B61 DF6F72AD4F811101 F1 DBCC77650194063C@rtclexch2.rt.lcipublishing.com> From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@co.roanoke.va.us> Subject: RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clin is Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:54:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01 C39191.8A6F9600" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001 _01 C39191.8A6F9600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1 " Diane, this runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is 147.20 I have typed in (1/2) mile from Plantation Rd., not sure how it will show on your email I'm sending. This is correct, right? Thanks for your help! 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 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of MJH Development to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a mini warehouse facility and offices located ^ mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2233266) Martha Fisher Plank The Roanoke Times Legal Advertising Rep. Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com -- ~ Diane Childers - Mime.822 9 ' ._~..__ ~_..-- ~ __ _...1 ~_ - -- - -- - - - -- - > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance > Abuse Clinic > «File: 10-28-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and > October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to > contact me. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 ------_=_NextPart_001_01 C39191.8A6F9600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1 " Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-/NV3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 "> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12"> <TITLE>RE: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Diane, this runs Oct. 14 and 21 -cost is 147.20</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">I have typed in (</FONT><B><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">1/2)</FONT></B> <FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">mile from Plantation Rd., not sure how it will show on your email I'm sending. This is correct, right?</FONT></P> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Thanks for your help!</FONT> </p> <BR> <P><FONT COLOR="#OOOOFF" SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">~LEGAL NOTICES^~ROANOKE COUNTY^~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS^^ The Roanoke ___ _ __ ~ Diane Childers - Mime.822 - _:,_ Page 3 County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of MJH Development to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a mini warehouse facility and offices located ^ mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District. ^ ^ A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. ^ ^ Dated: October 10, 2003^Diane S. Childers, Clerk^ (2233266)</FONT></P> <BR> <P><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Martha Fisher Plank</FONT> <BR><B><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">The Roanoke Times</FONT></B> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Legal Advertising Rep.</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Ph.: 540-981-3440</FO NT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Fax: 540-981-3415</FONT> <BR><FONT COLOR="#FF0000" SIZE=2 FACE="Comic Sans MS">Email: legals@roanoke.com</FONT><B></B> </P> <UL> <p><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">----------</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">From:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Diane Childers</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Sent:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Wednesday, October 8, 2003 10:34 AM</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">To:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">legals@roanoke.com</FONT> <BR><B><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Subject:</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Aria)">&It;&It;File: 10-28-Community Development.doc>></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Martha,</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Diane</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Diane S. Childers</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Clerk to the Board</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">County of Roanoke</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Phone: (540) 772-2003 </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Monaco">Fax: (540) 772-2193</FONT> Diane Childers Mime.822 Page 4 </P> <B R> <gR> </UL> </BODY> </HTML> ------ = NextPart 001 01C39191.8A6F9600-- __ _. _ ,__._T _..__ __ Diane Childers -Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic Page 1 . ; ~ ~ -..- - - -- ~...__~ W -_ From: Diane Childers To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 10/8/03 10:34AM Subject: Ads: MJH Development, Vinton Business Center, Substance Abuse Clinic Martha, Please find attached three legal ads to be published on October 14 and October 21, 2003. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Diane Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 _~ _ _. __ _ _- -_ __ Diane Childers - 10-28-Community Development.doc ~ _ Page 1 `, LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY 1~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of MJH Development to obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a mini warehouse facility and offices located %2 mile from Plantation Road on Angel Lane, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Direct the bill for publication to: MJH Development 539 Parkview Drive Blue Ridge, VA 24064 540/977-4113 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 1 -- _ Diane Childers - 10-28-Community Development.doc Page 2 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, October 28, 2003, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of the Town of Vinton to rezone 99.38 acres from PTD to PTD with revised proffered conditions, located in the 2100 block of Hardy Road, Vinton Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Direct the bill for publication to: Town of Vinton Attn: Clay Goodman 311 South Pollard Street Vinton, VA 24179 540/983-0607 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 2 Diane Childers - 10-28-Community Development.doc Page 3 __ i I~'~~ V 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 28, 2003, 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 30-29-5 Commercial Use Types to include a new definition for "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center", and Section 30-54-2(B) C-2 General Commercial to add "Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center" as a use allowed only by Special Use Permit. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: October 10, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Direct the bill for publication to: Roanoke County Community Development Planning & Zoning P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2068 Attn: Susan Carter SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 3 _._ _ - - Diane Childers -Quail Ridge Leal Ad.doc ~ Page 1 - -- - -- - \ / V LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, at its meeting on `Q~atober 28, 2003,: at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing and second reading on the following matter, to-wit: ORDINANCE TO VACATE PORTIONS OF A 15' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, A 15' WATER LINE EASEMENT, AND A 5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT UPON LOTS 15 AND 16, ON THE PLAT OF SECTION NO. 2, QUAIL RIDGE, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 3, AND RESUBDIVIDED BY PLAT OF SECTION NO. 2, QUAIL RIDGE, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 26, PAGE 197, LOCATED IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT A copy of this ordinance is available for inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors and in the office of the County Attorney at 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia All members of the public interested in this matter may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. Dated: October 9, 2003 Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Please publish on the following dates: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Send invoice to R & J Enterprises, LLC 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Roanoke, VA 24014 776-0606 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers, Clerk Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County P.O. Box 29800 - _ -- - _ __ `Diane Childers -Quail Ridge Legal Ad.doc ~~_.- Roanoke, VA 24018 - - Page 2 J Diane Childers -Quail Ridge iegal ad Page 1 ~ From: Vicki Walker To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 10/9/03 9:10AM Subject: Quail Ridge legal ad Martha, Please run the attached legal ad as indicated. Thanks again! Vicki Vicki Walker Legal Secretary (540) 772-2071 vwalker@co.roanoke.va.us CC: Diane Childers; Vickie Huffman Diane Childers -Tinker Knoli legal ad.doc ~. Page 1 v LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, at its meeting on f~ctober 28, 2003, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing and second reading on the following matter, to-wit: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 10-FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED BETWEEN LOTS 22, 23, 24 AND 25, TINKER KNOLL, PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 1, IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT A copy of this ordinance is available for inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors and in the office of the County Attorney at 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia All members of the public interested in this matter may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. Dated: October 8, 2003 Please publish on the following dates: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Invoice to be paid in person by Donald W. Beckner, Jr. 7413 Deer Branch Road Roanoke, VA 24019 537-3821 Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers, Clerk Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Diane Childers -Tinker Knoll legal ad Page 1 From: Vicki Walker To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 10/8/03 10:44AM Subject: Tinker Knoll legal ad Hi there! Attached is a legal ad to be run as indicated. The fee will be paid by Petitioner, Mr. Beckner. As soon as I send this I will be notifying him that he can contact you directly to make arrangements for payment. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks ! ---- Vicki Walker Vicki Walker Legal Secretary (540)772-2071 vwalker@co.roanoke.va.us CC: Diane Childers; Vickie Huffman ~ ',fir INTEROFFICE MEMO Frorn the Office of the CountyAdnzinistrator 7 722004 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Elmer Hodge ~' ~"" ~~ DATE: October 23, 2003 SUBJECT: Police Department Reaccreditation Attached is information for the work session with the Police Department on Tuesday regarding the reaccreditation. The Roanoke County Police Department attained accredited status by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies in 1992. The department must go through the reassessment for reaccreditation every three years. As part of the. process, an Assessment Team performs an on-site assessment to review policies and to test compliance with the policies. They also meet with individual officials and hold a public hearing. The Assessment Team was here August 2-6, 2003, and the team consisted of the following: Team Leader: Wayne I. McCoy, Chief of Police Blue Springs Police Department, Blue Springs, MO Team Member: Susan E. Wales, Director of Planning and Research Salisbury Police Department, Salisbury, NC Team Member: Raymond A. Bouchard, Deputy Chief Enfield Police Department, Enfield, CT I believe that you will find the report to be very complimentary. I attended the exit presentation in August and have never received such a favorable report on.any department, which is reflected throughout the report. I particularly draw your attention to the Summary and Recommendations on page 42 and the chart shown on page 12. This report has been sent to the CALEA Commission for their review and approval, which takes place Saturday, November 22, in Colorado Springs. Chief Lavinder and his staff are to be commended for the excellent work they have done to desen~e this evaluation. ~,~ ~~- d~~ ~ ~~~ 1 COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ;~ ~ ~~ Incorporated ~~ ,, ~ ~ ~-~ ~~- ~ Li 10302 Eaton Place, Suite 100 • Fairfax, V'u-;inia 22030-2215 • Local (703) 352x4225 • (800) 368-3757 • FAX (703) 591-2206 • caleaCcalea.oxg October 17, 2003 Mr. James Ray Lavinder Chief of Police Roanoke County Police Department 3568 Peters Creek Road Roanoke, VA 24019 Dear Chief Lavinder: This letter is to inform you that your agency has completed all of the requirements as a candidate agency. Compliance with Commission standards has been reviewed and verified by staff and a team of assessors. Consequently, your agency is ready for a reaccreditation hearing at the next Commission Conference scheduled for Colorado Springs, Colorado, November 19-22, 2003. If you agree, staff will schedule the Roanoke County Police Department for a review committee hearing during the morning of November 22, 2003. At the hearing, staff will present file documents, an oral summary of events, and generally, respond to questions from Commissioners. You and/or other members of your agency are invited to attend the hearing and assist with the presentation. While the Commission does not require an agency representative's presence at the hearing, it invites their participation when they are available. If for any reason these dates are not acceptable, we will reschedule your Committee review at the next meeting. Contingent upon the recommendation of the committee, formal presentation for reaccreditation to the full Commission will occur at the Awards Banquet, Saturday evening, November 22, 2003. Several important items have been forwarded to your accreditation manager for response. They include an invitation to participate in the Resource Center, information verification for your accreditation certificate, and a form to reserve seats for your agency at the Awards Banquet. This information should be returned as soon as possible. Please let your Program Manager know if you or other agency members are planning to attend the Colorado Springs Conference. You may contact Wendi Jones at extension 34 with any questions regarding registration. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Sy ester Daughtry, r. ' E cutive Director SD1mlg e "ACCREDITATION RECOGNIZES PROFESSIONAL EXCELLENCE" ASSESSMENT TEA.M'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE 1 TO: Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. FROM: Wayne I. MCCOY, Assessment Team Leader _ ::~ -- ~ [003 DATE: September 29, 2003 - SUBJECT: On-site Assessment Report for the Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department A. Dates of the On-Site Assessment: August 02-06, 2003 B. Assessment Team: 1 2 3 Team Leader: Wayne I. MCCOY Chief of Police Blue Springs Police Department 1100 Smith Street Blue Springs, MO 64015 (816) 228-0165 wmccoy@bluespringsgov.com Team Member: Susan E. WALES Director of Planning and Research Salisbury Police Department 130 East Liberty Street Salisbury, NC 28144 (704) 638-5342 swale@ci.salisbury.nc.us Team Member: Raymond A. BOUCHARD Deputy Chief Enfield Police Department 293 Elm Street Enfield, CT 06082 (860) 763-$916 rbouchard@enfield.org C. CALEA Program Manager and Type ofi On-site: Peg Gant Third re-accreditation, C size (159 personnel) 0 ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 2 D. Agency Profile: The Roancke County, Virginia Police Department, under the direction of Chief James R. Lavinder, was formed in July, 1990, when voters passed a referendum that formed a new county police department that replaced the existing county Sheriffs Department. The agency began its participation in the CALEA process almost immediately to assist in the development of the department. In November 1992, the Roanoke County Police Department became the first agency in Southwestern Virginia to attain accredited status from CALEA, completing the second edition standards. Roanoke County Police Department jurisdiction surrounds the cities of Roanoke and Salem, and includes the town of Vinton. Its scenic landscape and mostly affluent suburban areas encompass a unique and appealing setting. Roanoke County is 251 square miles, with an approximate population of 85,000. The Roanoke County Police Department utilizes a combination of traditional law enforcement services and proactive community efforts to provide comprehensive services to its citizenry in an effective manner. Roanoke County is governed by a five member Board of Supervisors that is elected from five districts. The Board appoints the County Administrator, who has the responsibility for the appointment of the Chief of Police. County Administrator Elmer Hodge has the direct oversight of the Chief of Police. Two Assistant Chiefs who head the major organizational units for the department ably assist Chief Lavinder. Assistant Chief Terrell Holbrook has authority over the Administrative Division, including the Services Division and the Professional Standards Division. The Services Division maintains the responsibility for communications, records, crime prevention, evidence/property, and warrant processing. Assistant Chief Donna Furrow has the responsibility for the Operations Division, which encompasses both Uniform and Criminal Investigations Divisions. The Uniform Division includes the functions of patrol and special operations. Patrol is the largest of the divisions with Captain Philip Patrone providing oversight for the direction of three Lieutenants and eight Sergeants in patrol functions that include SWAT, Crisis Intervention Team, and the Bicycle Patrol. The Special Operations unit includes traffic officers, community services personnel, and School Resource Officers. The Criminal Investigations Division investigates major and minor crimes, conducts vice activities, and maintains oversight for evidence and property processes. The Roanoke County Police Department was originally accredited in November 1992. Since that time the department successfully attained re-accreditation in 1997 and again in 2000. Officer Nancy Short acts as the accreditation manager for the department. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 3 The agency's success will set a high standard that must be met in the future. The agency is responding to growth in the Northwestern part of the county, and has divided the former district in that area into two smaller districts to improve response times. One of the most important challenges for the future will be the hiring and retention of personnel to maintain the quality that has become standard for the county. An additional challenge will be the efforts needed to plan for and develop support for a new police facility that will be needed to maintain the high level of service to the community for years to come. E. Agency Demographics: The Roanoke County Police Department generally reflects the demographics of the county's population. The most recent breakdown of sworn personnel indicates that 2% are African American (two sworn officers), 1 % are Hispanic (one sworn officer) and 2% are classified as Other (two sworn officers). 96% of sworn personnel are identified in the agency's report data as Caucasian (109 officers). No minority officers are in a supervisory position. In addition, there are three minority personnel in non-sworn positions (two African-American, one Other). Roanoke County, Virginia has a very small minority population. Data for the area from the 2000 census indicates that the population includes 93% Caucasian, with 3% African American, 1 % Hispanic, and 3% listed as other. Over 11 % of the agency's sworn officers are female (thirteen officers), with an estimated available work force of 14% in the area based on the national average. Two female officers are in supervisory positions (one Assistant Chief/Executive, one Supervisory). In addition, the most recent demographic report indicated that the agency has thirty-one females in non-sworn positions (nineteen clerical/custodial, one supervisory/technical, and one managerial/professional positions). The agency has developed a detailed recruitment plan that is administered by trained personnel to ensure that opportunities for diversity are available and actively pursued: However, the demographics of the area make recruitment of minority personne! difficult. F. CALEA Agency Annual Report: Each accredited or recognized agency submits an accreditation Annual Report to CALEA on the first and second anniversary of their accredited status. The annual report is a statement by the agency outlining their compliance status and significant events for the previous year. This section reviews, compliance and or non-compliance issues reported by the agency. The Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department completed an annual report in 2001, and submitted its most recent Annual Report for this re-accreditation period in October 2002. In the Annual Report, the agency indicated that they were no longer in 6 ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FNAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 4 compliance with one non-mandatory standard, 42.2.5. This standard indicates that sworn positions in the criminal investigation function are the same as those used in the patrol function for rank and salary schedules. The agency does not have contro{ over this function, which is completed by Roanoke County Department of Human Resources through the County Classification and Pay Plan. In addition, a new accreditation manager, Nancy Short prior to the 2002 report, assumed the accreditation responsibility. G. Pre-assessment Planning: The Roanoke County Police Department maintains contact with other area agencies that are also in the accreditation process. They prepared for the on-site in an organized manner designed to ensure a quality on-site experience. The agency completed a "pre-mock" in advance of the full mock. They have conducted a mock assessment prior to each of their on-sites to assist them in preparation, using experienced assessors to ensure that their procedures are thorough and up to date. For this on-site, the mock assessment was conducted March 3-5, 2003 by three experienced persons closely associated with the accreditation process was just one aspect of a thorough preparation process by the agency for this on-site. The assessment team did not have contact with the mock assessment team. However, the excellent condition of the files would indicate that the mock assessment was completed in a thorough manner. The agency described the mock assessment as a valuable part of preparation for the on-site. H. On-site Assessment Summary: Offsite standards review The assessors were each sent approximately one third of the required list of standards, based on information provided to the agency by the team leader. The packet received from the agency was well organized and contained all of the necessary paperwork. In addition, an excellent introductory document that described the agency, on-site process and community was included in the information received. The team exchanged information to ensure that consistency and thoroughness was maintained. The assessors reviewed 172 "mail-ofl" standards prior to the onsite review. No significant problems were noted during the offsite standards review. 2. Assessor and Agency orientation Lead Assessor Chief Wayne McCoy and Assessor Deputy Chief Raymond A. Bouchard arrived on the afternoon of Saturday, August 2, 2003 and were met promptly at the Roanoke Regional Airport by Accreditation Manager Nancy Short, Sergeant Scott ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 5 Smith and Assistant Chief Terrell Holbrook. Assessors McCoy and Bouchard were transported to the hotel and provided with a vehicle for use during the on-site. Assessor Susan E. Wales, Director of Planning and Research, arrived by private vehicle at the hotel on Saturday afternoon. From our first contact with agency personnel, it was apparent that they were confident and professional in their approach to the process. The greeting was very cordial and their demeanor encouraged initial conversation. Each of the agency representatives demonstrated enthusiasm for the process in general and anticipation for the on-site in particular. The fact that the agency has been involved in the process and the accumulated knowledge of accreditation made the agency personnel especially helpful with questions about the on-site to come. The assessors had previously been provided with a packet of introductory material that assisted in becoming familiar with the Roanoke County Police Department and the surrounding area. We were taken to our accommodations, and contact information was given for any contingency that could occur on a 24-hour per day basis. 3. Agency tours and displays On Sunday, August 3, 2003, Accreditation Manager Nancy Short and Sergeant Scott Smith escorted the assessment team to Roanoke County Police Department headquarters. We were introduced to supervisory, officer and clerical personnel who assisted us in our tour of agency facilities. Roanoke County Police personnel were not only knowledgeable, but they were very hospitable, showing enthusiasm for their own responsibilities and for the organization. The tour was well organized, and an informative display of equipment was presented. During the tour, the assessors reviewed al! observable standards. A helpful list of observable standards was provided by the agency for assessor use. During the building tour, the assessors viewed the Evidence Vault, Records Unit, Communications Center, patrol vehicles, administrative offices, Investigations work areas, locker rooms, spacious fitness center, uniform patrol offices, traffic unit, crime analysis office and SWAT room. Educational materials were evident for the convenience of the public. The agency's ability to make the most of an older building that was not designed to be a police facility is notable. The fact that Roanoke County Police Department personnel look positively on any challenge as an opportunity was evident throughout the on-site. The assessors observed the main emergency generator and a second backup generator, and found them to be securely maintained. All storage areas were organized and well maintained. ASSESSMENT TEAi~1'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 6 During the tour, agency personnel appeared well versed and were knowledgeable in their particular responsibilities as it related to accreditation. Accreditation Manager Nancy Short and Sergeant Scott Smith had carefully scheduled the tour, and each segment was conducted in a timely manner. At the conclusion of the tour, the assessment team was taken to the file work area, which was spacious and well equipped. ~ . 4. Onsite standards review The assessors reviewed all of the mandatory, non-mandatory, and not applicable standards during the on-site. The files were well organized and readily available in the assessor work area. These standards are discussed elsewhere in this report. 5. Panel standards review The agency conducted compliance panel reviews on both Monday and Tuesday mornings, with seven agency employees presenting on Monday and eleven more presenting on Tuesday. The panel participants were well prepared, and very knowledgeable. They provided the assessment team with valuable insight into the operations and actual compliance of the agency. The agency utilized a large variety of people. One of the most helpful aspects was the fact that the presenters represented all ranks within the agency, with an emphasis on those people actually doing the tasks associated with each standard. The most outstanding aspect of the panel review was the enthusiasm of the presenters for their topic and for the work they are doing in the agency. The desire to help the community by bettering existing service was evident in many presentations, including those related to traffic safety, domestic violence prevention, youth outreach programs, accurate records maintenance, case assignment, officer safety, and personnel selection processes. 6. Key activities On Saturday evening, August 2, 2003, Chief McCoy met with Assessors Bouchard and Wales, and traveled in the area to get a perspective on the community prior to the formal start of the on-site. After the completion of the agency tour on Sunday, August 3, 2003 the assessors were taken to the well-organized work area provided for our use. We began our examination of the agency accreditation proof files, focusing on key standards regarding use of force, records maintenance, recruitment, and evidence procedures. The team worked on initial file reviews throughout the afternoon and early evening. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 7 After the telephone's private outside line had been tested, the call-in session was conducted from 12:00 noon until 4:00 p.m. on Sunday. Assessor Wales contacted Officer Francis and observed the completion of evidence packaging and entry into the evidence tracking system. Assessor Wales attended the afternoon roll call to make contact with agency personnel and get insight into the daily operations of the department. During the roll call, two officers still in field training were required to present a topic related to Virginia cods and present it to all persons at the briefing. This provided them with a learning experience, and was used as a refresher for other officers. Assessor Wales interviewed several officers about the field training process. On Sunday night, Assessor McCoy attended the late shift roll call and conducted a ride along observation with Officer Adam P. Arnburgey. Hiring, training, equipment and traffic operations were discussed. Chief McCoy was able to observe traffic stops that encompassed both the issuance of traffic citations and the interaction with suspicious persons. During each ride along of the on-site, the assessors took the opportunity to observe Roanoke County Police Department personnel in interaction with the community, and to examine their knowledge of policy and procedure. In each case during the on-site, the personnel demonstrated knowledge of the accreditation process as well as policy and procedure. On Monday, August 4, 2003, Assessor Bouchard arrived early for the 7:00 a.m. roll call and interaction with day shift personnel, completing observations of roll call sessions for each shift at least once. Assessor Bouchard observed the pass on of information related to communication between shifts. Assessors McCoy and Wales arrived at 8:00 a.m., and were met promptly by agency personnel. A staff introduction and photograph session was conducted with Chief Lavinder and members of his staff, along with all three assessors. The photographs were well done and copies received prior to the end of the on-site. On Monday morning, all three assessors attended compliance panels that were held to address specific standards. Included were important topics such as recruitment, special occurrences, inspections, personnel allocation, crime prevention and records. The assessment team continued examination of agency files throughout the afternoon and early evening on Monday, breaking for the various opportunities for interaction with agency personnel as appropriate. Assessor Bouchard conducted a ride along with Officer Tim W. Sutphin from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. prior to the public hearing. Officer Sutphin resolved a minor right of way access complaint, and demonstrated his knowledge of the accreditation process. ASSESSMENT TEA1'v1'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 8 The public hearing was conducted on Monday evening, with agency personnel having everything ready ahead ofi time. After the hearing, all three assessors returned to the police department to observe a Rape Aggression Defense (RAD) class being conducted. Instructor Betsy Hook demonstrated a sincere desire to assist the women in the class to be safe in their everyday lives. On Tuesday, August 5, 2003 the assessors arrived at 8:00 a.m. to begin work on pending standards prior to the beginning of the second set of compliance panel presentations that occurred at 8:45 a.m. Among others, compliance panel presentations on Tuesday included discussions regarding selection processes, juvenile procedures, evidence collection and storage, victim-witness and trafi:lc enforcement policies. Visits to Records, Communications, ice Unit, and observation of the informant files on Tuesday were helpful to answer assessor questions. By the end of the day, all files had been reviewed, with any needed revisions requested. The few revisions and proof requests that were made by the assessors were promptly addressed by the agency with a spirit of cooperation and professionalism, and all were completed prior to the end of the day on Tuesday. Tuesday afternoon Assessor McCoy conducted a ride along to go to the agency's firing range and "shoot house". This unique facility was built with the cooperation of several area agencies, with much of the work done by officers voluntarily. The cooperative effort of many people and agencies is an example for others to follow. Tuesday was "National Night Out", and the assessors attended two different community celebrations. At each location, the interaction of police and citizens was rewarding, a testament to the relationships built between the agency and its community. Roanoke County Police Department personnel assisted us in scheduling significant opportunities for contact with the following key persons during the on-site assessment: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator James R. "Ray" Lavinder, Chief of Police Nancy Short, Officer and Accreditation Manager Terrell L. Holbrook, Assistant Chief Donna L. Furrow, Assistant Chief Phillip J. Patrone, Captain Kenneth W. Kern, Lieutenant Scott Smith, Sergeant Richard F. Bradford, Sergeant David J. Herrick, Sergeant William D. Byrd, Sergeant Linda D. Payne, Sergeant .e ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 9 Mark Cromer, Sergeant Jimmy Chapman, Sergeant David G. McMillan, Sergeant Harold "Huck" W. Ewers, Sergeant Mark H. Tuck, Detective Katrina L. Moulton, Detective Timothy L. Wyatt, Detective Michael L. Williams, Detective Eddie Atkins, Detective Tim W. Sutphin, Police Officer (Ride Along) Adam P. Amburgey, Police Officer (Ride Along) Betsy R. Hook, Police Officer Billy T. Smith, Police Officer Keith B. Smith, Police Officer Michael R. Frost, Police Officer Daniel J. Walters, Police Officer Shannon C. Dillon, Police Officer Chris R. Brown, Police Officer Wesley D. Campbell, Police Officer Kevin L. Slough, Police Officer Eric J. Chidester, Police Officer Steven M. Short, Police Officer Tim B. VanMarter, Police Officer Blake R. Boardwine, Police Officer Mike T. Cunningham, Police Officer Anna W. Wills, Police Officer T. Lowe, Police Officer Christian L. Kuyper, Police Officer Fred I. Lumb, Police Officer Cyndi K. Grace, Police Officer Russell T. Farris, Police Officer Neil D. Gardner, Police Officer Jerrold T. Greene, Police Officer Kenneth P. Malloch, Police Officer Jason A. McNamara, Police Officer Andrew D. Morris, Police Officer Mark W. Torbert, Police Officer Michael H. Vaughn, Police Offiicer Ronald J. Wygal, Police Officer Keshia L. Tolbert, Police Officer Andrea D. Noel, Police Officer Cynthia D. Jancso, Police Offiicer Richard G. Crosier, Police Officer Steve A. Miller, Police Offiicer Allison D. Palmer, Police Officer 0 ASSESSMENT TEA~'~i'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 10 Travis L. Atkins, Police Officer Adam G. Grubb, Police Officer Pamela G. Martin, Records Manager Ramona P. Kern, Crime Analyst Mia-Jo Nguyen, Accounts Coordinator Patrick B. Shumate, Chief Communication Officer Aleta Coleman, Lead Communication Officer Emily B. Totten, Communication Training Officer Howard W. King, Communication Officer Virginia E. Clemson, Communication Officer Alice M. Sheets, Communication Officer David C. Craighead, Communication Officer Kimberly T. Gillespie, Communication Officer Kelly M. Brain, Communication Officer Jeffrey Z. Rose, Communication Officer Brandy N. Ridgeway, Communication Officer Rebekah D. Craft, Communication Officer Christy V. Woods, Communication Officer Linda C. Bolen, Records Gail A. Campbell, Records Laura E. Deel, Records Frances Haggerty, Part-time John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Glenn Wohltmann, WF1R News talk Radio 960 Many of the persons interviewed were contacted more than once on multiple topics, and this list does not include other personnel who may have been contacted but not interviewed or referenced on a particular topic. On Wednesday, August 6, 2003 the team arrived at the Roanoke County Police Department at 8:00 a.m. The final review of standards was completed, and the assessment team. ensured all paperwork had been completed with all follow-up completed by the agency. An assessor performance review was conducted. The exit interview was conducted prior to the team's departure on Wednesday 7. Public information The public information call-in session was conducted from 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Sunday, August 3, 2003. 8. Team/agencv conflicts There were no conflicts between team or agency personnel. ASSESSMENT TEA1tiI'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 11 9. Exit interview On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 09:30 a.m., an exit interview was conducted with Chief Lavinder, Accreditation Manager Nancy Short, and members of the Roanoke County Police Department staff. Attending the exit interview were Assistant Chief Terrell Holbrook, Assistant Chief Donna Furrow, Captain Phil Patrone, Sergeant Scott Smith, Frances Haggerty, County Administrator Elmer Hodge, and Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss. During the exit interview, a review of standards compliance, observations on various aspects of the agency and expressions of appreciation for the agency's hospitality were given. Feedback was provided, and questions from the agency were addressed. This meeting emphasized the hospitality, preparation, and professionalism of the agency. The high quality of personnel and community support was praised. The cooperation from all members of the agency was highlighted, both from the standpoint of working with the assessment team and in the completion of the process itself. Assessor McCoy noted that the quality of the agency began right from the basics, including an effective organizational structure and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. Specific positive comments were made regarding the use of force policy and training which exceeded required minimums. The positive relationships between the Roanoke County Police Department and other area agencies was discussed, with the examples of the cooperative work done on the outstanding firearms range and the demonstration of support at the public hearing given. An outstanding and constantly updated workload assessment process was reviewed; it is effective because of its continuous updating that helps the agency allocate personnel efficiently. It was noted that the staff inspection process was genuine, and that anything that could be identified as needing improvement was promptly addressed. Assessor McCoy also emphasized the strength of the agency in its relationships with the media, victim-witness efforts, and with citizens. The overall agency efforts in traffic enforcement, education and analysis were highlighted, with specific mention of the traffic unit recognized. Assessor Bouchard then addressed the fact that the personnel sections were well done. The recruitment process is especially sound in that the agency does the work themselves, and uses creative methods of identifying and encouraging diverse personnel, especially as it relates to the recruitment of women. The training and evaluation functions received high marks as well, along with the agency's efforts to support the youth of the community. Finally, Assessor Bouchard made positive comments about the crime prevention efforts and about the methods for ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 12 serving warrants through the daily use of district pouches that contain the warrants and are worked by the district officers. The fact that the agency truly works together as a family in the most positive way was described by Assessor Wales. She identified the value of the constantly updated job task analysis in~giving the employees a sound basis for knowing what is expected from them. Assessor Wales described the sound benefits available to Roanoke County Police employees, such as the non-disciplinary Employee Assistance Program (EAP). The lack of significant numbers of grievances in the agency, and that they had dropped to zero in 2002 were mentioned as an indicator of the way the department is supportive to employees. Discipline was described as positive in the agency, focusing on rewarding outstanding performance from both employees and citizens alike. The criminal investigation function was praised for the enthusiasm and innovation shown at every step of the investigative processes. Whether it was an in-house computer software application, or the ability to find assistance for victims of violence, the agency was at the forefront of providing outstanding service to the community. The functions of Communications, record keeping, and evidence maintenance were recognized for their efficiency and appropriateness. Accreditation Manager Short, Sergeant Smith, Ramona Kern and all of the agency personnel who assisted with the accreditation process vUere praised for their outstanding efforts in on-site preparation and in the coordination of ali activities during the on-site. Chief Lavinder was thanked for his direct participation and support of the process, and his understanding of the standards. The effort, professionalism and helpful attitude of the entire department were recognized. The agency was advised that the assessment team would make a recommendation, but that all final determinations are the responsibility of the commission. An overview of the accreditation on-site process was given, along with a summary of the standards that the agency had addressed. !. Table: Standards Summary TOTAL Mandato M Com liance 290 M Noncom liance 0 Waiver 0 Other-Than-Mandato Com liance 83 O Noncom liance p O Elect 20% 2 Not A licable 69 TOTAL 444 ASSESSMENT TEAi'~i'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGNA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 13 J. File Maintenance: This section reports on the condition of the agency's files presented to verify proof of compliance with accreditation standards. This includes organizing and marking files for review, clerical issues, the adequacy, correctness, and currency of proofs used for compliance. Generally, this section indicates preparation and understanding of the accreditation process. This section does not indicate compliance with standards or report on agency practices. The files.of the Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department were organized and contained a large volume of information. Agency personnel demonstrated a unique level of understanding about both the spirit and the technical aspects of the accreditation process. Additionally, those persons not directly connected with the process itself still had a good understanding and recognized the value to the agency. The agency was consistent in the way they organized each file folder, and the files were presented to the assessors in hanging files that were easy to use. Even prior to our arrival on site, Accreditation Manager Nancy Short contacted the team leader to ensure that the files would be arranged in a manner that was convenient for the assessors. Only seven files were returned to the agency for file maintenance issues. These were returned for additional proofs of compliance that were already in the possession of the agency or for minor clerical issues. K. Performance Activities: The accreditation process has 48 time sensitive issues that require some type of agency action within specific time frames. Included are reports, analysis, reviews, inspections ranging in a time frame from weekly to periodically, or once in three years. These activities are important to agency operations, public safety, and liability concerns. This section reports on, summarizes the quality of the reports, and describes impact on the agency. The assessors reviewed all of the time sensitive standards thoroughly. Roanoke County Police Department personnel are very conscientious, and their ability to get quality reports done on time reflects this diligence. There were no concerns about completion of any of the time sensitive standards, and several are being done above the minimum requirements in ways that enhance the delivery of service to the community. The agency takes the issue of bias based profiling seriously (1.2.9b and 1.2.9d) and has a very complete approach to ensure that every member of the agency is well ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FNAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 14 trained and that no discrepancies exist. Specific training topics each year related to profiling are designed to improve both awareness and performance of agency personnel, with records are carefully maintained and reviewed. The reports and review process for use of force (1.3.6 and 1.3.7) are outstanding, and officers are well aware of their responsibilities. Individual reviews of uses of force were available and appropriate. The agency definition includes situations when even minor force is used and no injury results. The agency exceeds all requirements for use of force training {1.3.11), preferring to conduct it more frequently in less than lethal force than the minimums and using its range facility for firearms training above the average. Annual reports (1.3.13) are exceptionally well done; in the latest annual use of force report the quality was especially high, utilizing graphs and data to support clearly defined conclusions. Accreditation Manager Nancy Short is efficient and organized, and her system for ensuring that reports are done on time is excellent (11.4.3). Typically, all required reports were completed early, or at least by the time that they were due. Since everyone in the agency is very aware of the accreditation process and the need for timely information, there is a lot of effort to ensure that everything is not only done on time, but that it is done well. Crime analysis (15.1.1) is maintained with a high quality monthly report that is distributed to the people who need it the most. Crime analyst Ramona Kern enthusiastically stays ahead of the curve by keeping up to date data and by receiving feedback about what patterns of crime may be emerging. An example of special analysis efforts observed by the assessors was a very thorough study of burglary patterns. The efforts made by the agency in the area of workload assessment (16.1.2) received approval during the panel presentation and generated special mention in the exit interview. The agency used a plan for manpower allocation to develop information that was effective, thorough and is updated regularly. The finance department provides the agency with monthly status reports (17.4.1) with each requirement clearly indicated and easy to locate. The agency uses this information to comply with all requirements of the budget standards. The grievance process (25.1.3) has yielded very few grievances over the three years of this re-accreditation period. Nevertheless, the annual reviews were in place and reviewed any potential changes that could be brought about if they were needed. Employee evaluations (35.1.2) are conducted on time for ali positions, using a quality appraisal form. The review system for pursuit reports (41.2.2) is very thorough. Each incident generates its own report that is reviewed by supervisors who decide if they believe that ASSESSMENT TEA_M'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUIviTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 15 each incident is within policy or not. Then, the use of force/pursuit review committee verifies it again in quarterly review process. The extensive Juvenile enforcement programs are reviewed annually (44.1.3) for efficiency and compliance with guidelines. Special events reports are completed on time; one example was the after action report from a visit of President Bush when he came into Roanoke Airport. The agency is not required to, and elected not to comply with the new standards related to incident command processes (46.1.11 e, f, and g). The agency is very accessible to citizens and media alike, and it is positive to note that the Internal Affairs annual statistical summary is made available in the annual report. Although the number of internal affairs investigations is louver than in many other agencies, the fact that there are a significant percentage of "sustained" conclusions indicates that the agency takes complaints seriously, and is willing to take action when it is appropriate to ensure integrity within the agency. Staff inspections (53.2.1) are conducted more often than required, and quality reports are generated. Assistant Chief Holbrook reviews all materials from staff inspections, and ensures that corrective action is completed promptly when needed. The victim-witness needs assessment (55.1.2) was elected 20 percent by the agency. However, it was evident that agency personnel are sensitive to the needs of the community, both in the direct response by uniformed officers and in the assistance provided by detectives during the follow-up investigations. Crossing guard annual reviews (61.3.5) were conducted promptly prior to the beginning of each year with input from school and department personnel to ensure that any recommendations for change are done to ensure the optimal safety of students and the community. The agency does not have a holding facility (Chapter 72), and the entire chapter is not applicable. The generator that provides an alternate source of power is tested regularly and meets the needs of the agency (81.3.2). Computer access audits are conducted annually as required; no violations have been reported in the three audits conducted during this re-accreditation period (82.1.6). A strong point is the agency's property and evidence handling. Professional packaging, storing and documentation are the norm in the Roanoke County Police Department. The handling of property and evidence is taken seriously, done professionally and documented accurately (84.1.1, 84.1.6x), and all of the required audits are in place (84.1.6c, 84.1.6d). Two changes in a six-month period required inventory audits, and four complete audits were completed within the past three years (84.1.6b). ASSESSMENT TEAIvI'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 16 L. Applied Discretion Compliance Discussion: This section provides specific information on standards found to be in compliance after on-site "adjustments" were made. Adjustments may include modifying agency policies and directives, greating documentation, alteration of the physical plant, deficiencies in performance activities, and "wet ink" issues, where the written directive is newly issued. The agency had one standard in applied discretion. The standard was corrected promptly and professionally by the agency. When employees are notified that they have become the subject of an internal affairs investigation, the agency issues the employee a written statement of the allegations and fhe employee's rights and responsibilities relative to the investigation. The written directive did not require the allegations be included in the notification of the internal affairs investigation. The agency created a revised policy that addressed this issue, and provided for the allegations to be provided in each incident. Dissemination was completed via e-mail prior to the end of the on-site. M. Standards Noncompliance Discussion' This section does not apply. N. Waiver Concurrence/Nonoccurrence Discussion and Recommendation: In unusual situations the Commission may grant the agency a waiver from complying with a standard or parts of a standard. Assessors must verify all Commission approved waivers. No waivers granted by the Commission. O. Standards Status Changed by Assessors• This is primarily a CALEA administrative section that indicates changes to standards applicable to the agency. Changes result from modifications of agency responsibilities and operations, assessor reevaluation of a situation, and revisions of standards by the Commission. The assessors changed seven standards during the on-site. All seven were standards related to the Reserve Officer standards. While policy was in place at the time of this assessment, the agency had previously ended the Reserve Officer program in the year 2000, and indicated that they do not expect to hire any part-time Officers in the foreseeable future. The seven standards include: ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOkE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 17 16.3.1 A written directive establishes and describes the agency's reserve officer program. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (M) compliance to (N/A) at the request of the agency. 16.3.2 The selection criteria for reserves are the same as that for full-time officers. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (M) compliance to (N/A) at the request of the agency. 16.3.3 The agency requires all sworn reserve officers to complete a recruit academy training program. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (M) compliance to (N/A) at the request of the agency. 16.3.4 Uniforms and equipment for reserve officers are the same as those for full-time officers performing like functions. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (O) compliance to (N/A) at the request of the agency. 16.3.5 Reserve Officers receive in-service training equivalent to that statutorily required for full time officers performing like functions. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (M) compliance to (N/A) at the request of the agency. 16.3.6 Reserve Officers are trained in use-of-force policy(s) and tested for firearms proficiency with the same frequency as full-time officers. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 18 expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (M) compliance to (N/A) at the request of the agency. 16.3.7 Reserve Officers are bonded and/or provided with public liability protection equal to that provided to full time officers. During the review of standards, it was observed that the agency did not have any part- time police officers (Reserves) during the three-year assessment period, and does not expect to hire any in the foreseeable future. The status was changed from (M) compliance to (NIA) at the request of the agency. P. 20 Percent Standards: CALEA agencies must be in compliance with at least 80% of applicable other than mandatory (O) standards. The agency is free to choose which standards it will meet based on their unique situation. This section administratively clarifies the standards for the agency, assessors, and CALEA Commissioners. The agency was in compliance with 97.6% of applicable other-than-mandatory (O) standards. The following two standards were placed in the 20 percent category by the agency before the assessment began: 42.2.5 Sworn positions in the criminal investigation function are the same as in patrol. 55.1.2 Sworn Analysis of victim/witness assistance needs and available services. The agency elected to place the following standards in the 20 percent category during the assessment: None. Q. Public Information Activities: Public notice and input are a corner stone of democracy and CAL1=A accreditation. This section reports on the community's opportunity to comment on their law enforcement agency and to bring matters to the attention of the Commission that otherwise may be overlooked. 1. Public Information Session The public information hearing was held on Monday, August 4, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia 24018. The meeting was conducted in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 19 There were approximately 30-40 attendees, including agency personnel. The public hearing was video taped by the agency. There were twelve persons who addressed the assessment team at the public infiormation session regarding the agency. Eleven of the twelve were very positive; one speaker gave overall support for the low crime rate, but had issues with a particular traffic stop that happened some time ago, and was not satisfied with the response to his complaint. The speakers were very positive overall, providing support for the agency's responsiveness to public, involvement with other governmental entities, participation in community affairs, and the general feeling of safety provided by the police department's effective efforts. There were no significant issues raised, or other statements that needed follow-up from the team. Speakers provided specific positive comments that addressed the following chapters: Protection of Constitutional Rights, Firearms (chapter 1), Mutual Aid (chapter 2), Organizational Structure/Communications (chapter 11), Planning and Research (chapter 12), Fiscal Management (chapter 17), Training (chapter 33), Promotional Process (chapter 35}, Follow-up Investigations (chapter 42), Narcotics Investigation (chapter 43), Youth Issues (chapter 44), Community Relationships (chapter 45), Traffic (chapter 61), Prisoner Transportation Safety (chapter 74}, and Communications (chapter 81). 2. Telephone Contacts The open telephone lines were monitored from 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Sunday, August 3, 2003. The line was tested and verified for proper operation and privacy at the beginning and end of the period. No calls were received during the telephone contact period. 3. Correspondence The assessment team received four items of correspondence or later contact. All four were positive comments. A very positive letter was received from Isaac T. Van Patten, PhD, Chair of the Department of Criminal Justice at Radford University, who has worked with the agency as a volunteer police psychologist, and is impressed by agency investigators and the crisis negotiations unit. Police Chief Debra C. Duncan of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University wrote regarding the sharing of information in policy formation, and for providing mock assessors for her agency's efforts in accreditation. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 20 Sergeant W.M. MacBabb, the Assistant Academy Director of the Roanoke Police Academy, wrote to express his appreciation for the partnership between the academy and the Roanoke County Police Department. The academy has used personnel from the Roanoke County as instructors, as well as having many of the officers as students. Steven E. Powell, representing the Virginia State PAC (VACAP), met with the assessors on Sunday, August 3, 2003 to provide input regarding the agency's active participation and willingness to assist other agencies in their efforts to become accredited. 4. Media Interest The Roanoke County Police Department made a thorough effort to ensure that area media was aware of the re-accreditation on-site. Glenn Wohltmann, of WFIR News talk Radio 960 attended the public hearing, and conducted an interview with Lead Assessor McCoy. Excerpts from the interview were played on the air. 5. Public Information Material The Roanoke County Police Department Professional Standards Bureau, with Accreditation Manager Nancy Short, managed the public information plan and Officer Rick Crosier assigned to complete this task. Public notices were distributed between July 18, 2003 and July 25, 2003 to publicize the public hearing and telephone contact sessions. The notices were sent to county and city governmental sites, all county libraries, Tanglewood Mall Substation, and posted on the Roanoke County Police Department Internet Homepage. Copies were also distributed via area groups, including neighborhood watch, Chamber of Commerce, Roanoke Valley Bar Association and many law enforcement agencies. The news release that included information regarding all aspects of the accreditation and on-site processes was released to four-area television stations, placed on the government access channel, eleven radio stations, and four print media outlets. The Roanoke County Police Department public information plan was effective. The radio interview was positive, and reflected well on the agency and C.A.L.E.A. The agency took the additional initiative to complete articles about accreditation on their Internet site. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 21 R. Exemplary Policies/Projects/Procedures: An exemplary project is a unique or extraordinary program, practice, or procedure that enhances some aspect of law enforcement professionalism, or service, or impacts positively on the. community. Exemplary projects do not have to address specific CALEA accreditation standards but they must meet established guidelines with measurable results. Exemplary projects are voluntary and the lack of exemplary projects does not affect an agency's ability to become accredited nor suggest the agency is somehow deficient. The Roanoke County Police Department submitted one exemplary project for the review by the assessment team. The "Crisis Intervention Team" (CIT) project, designed to address a concern about the handling of people with mental illness who are in a crisis, was presented in a detailed document for review. The agency provided specialized training to the CIT members regarding the needs of those in mental crisis. CIT members are assigned calls for situations that occur related to these issues. They officers partner with the Roanoke Valley Mental Health Association and Lewis Gale Hospital's Department of Psychological Medicine to address both the needs of the individual and of the community that are affected. Specific additional issues that were discovered and addressed as the project progressed included the need for specialized confidentiality training and the proper recognition of crisis. Feedback has been obtained by the agency fior evaluation. Responses were positive, indicating that officers were able to better deescalate dangerous situation and meet the needs of those in crisis. Specific support was provided by the local Mental Health Association, local chapter of the National Alliance for the Mentally lil (NAMI), Blue Ridge Behavioral Health Care (BRBH) and individual health care providers. Consistent milestones were described in the CIT annual reports from 2002 and 2003. It is recommended by the assessment team that the project. be accepted as an exemplary project. S. Quality of Law Enforcement Service: Based on chapters in CALEA's standards manual, this section presents a comprehensive view of the agency and indicates the quality of service provided. When appropriate, agency and individual strengths are emphasized and areas of needed improvement discussed. Chapter 1 Law Enforcement Role and Authori~ The Roanoke County Police Department demonstrated outstanding thoroughness in all aspects ofi use of force requirements. Their instructors are well qualified, and the agency plan for use of force training is clear and understandable. Instructor Sergeant ASSE55MENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 22 Mark Cromer has experience in emergency rescue efforts, giving him a unique perspective. Officers must have OC Pepper spray available, and uniformed personnel are required to be trained in impact weapons. Particular attention is given to specialized training in Vascular Neck training, which the department treats as a use of lethal force. All training levels exceed minimum requirements, ensuring that all personnel remain up to date. On each use of force incident, multiple supervisors must determine if the incident is within policy or not, and each must sign to verify their review of policy. In addition to supervisory review, there is a quarterly review committee that examines use of force for the quarter. The use of force summaries are very well done, especially the 2002 annual summary (most recent one completed) which is outstanding in its analysis, statistical detail and presentation format. The agency takes bias-based profiling training very seriously as well. In 2002, all officers received training in "Professional Traffic Stops" addressing this issue. In 2003, the topic was "Constitutional Law and Bias-based Profiling". Instructors are well versed in teaching the topics. The agency annual review showed positive results. Included was a review of training, citizen opinion and preparation for future years. Chapter 2 Agency Jurisdiction and Mutual Aid The maps seen throughout the facility are very clear, and the district maps visibly illustrate defined districts that are reviewed regularly. Recently, the department added an eighth district as part of a goal to reduce response time in an area that has less population, but a large area to cover. The Roanoke Count Police Department automatically has jurisdiction throughout the county, with the exception of areas within cities, which may be obtained through informal agreement. The City of Roanoke has agreed that Roanoke County should have the authority to work within its city limits; there is no such agreement with Salem, which maintains its own sovereignty. The Town of Vinton is Included within the area policed by the Roanoke County Police Department. Throughout the on-site, the assessment team was impressed with the relationships between the agency and others in the area. A partnership with several other agencies has helped to provide an outstanding shared firing range that includes a unique "shoot house" for training. At the public hearing, many agencies expressed their appreciation for the ability to work together with Roanoke County. Chapter 3 Contractual Agreements The Roanoke County Police Department does not provide contractual law enforcement services for other agencies. This was verified through interviews with area agencies as ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 23 well as personnel within the department, and documentation review throughout the agency. Chapter 11 Organization and Administration The agency very clearly defines lines of organizational structure and presents it to employees through a visual organization chart that is updated each year. All personnel are aware of the appropriate lines of communication. We were able to observe the positive effects of communication within the department as we attended roll calls and talked with detectives; it was evident that everyone works together to create an atmosphere ofi trust. The policy manual is well organized, and infiormation can be found quickly. Realistic long and short-term goals are identified in each annual report issued by the agency, with updates on the success of previous goals. Each unit has separate goals appropriate to their function. Should any goal- be incomplete, it is reviewed for revision or change as needed. The five-year plan is updated regularly, and presents a good overview for agency personnel to maintain focus on tasks that are important for continuous improvement. The wide distribution of the annual report to locations such as the public library, allow for accountability to the public, a very sound management practice. The maintenance system for the accountability for accreditation activities is the responsibility of the accreditation manager, and reports are completed on time. Reminders are sent out as needed to ensure that time deadlines are kept, and that no reports are missed. Chapter 12 Direction Officers are very aware of the protocol for working with supervisors in the department. Throughout the on-site, the assessment team observed that alf personnel demonstrated respect for supervisors, peers or subordinates. This atmosphere is one of the reasons that the agency is such a quality place to work. The defined departmental values are commitment, diversity, upholding the judicial system, and community involvement. These values are demonstrated in the way that the agency conducts its daily operations, the way they partner with the community. Cooperation is a strong suit for the Roanoke County Police Department, which works well in teams both in small groups and overall. Camaraderie at roll call and observations of patrol officers working together during ride along opportunities clearly indicated that the agency efforts to approach their work as a team is successful. The overall agency effort toward accreditation, shared by all ranks, emphasized the team concept as well. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 24 Chapter 15 Crime Analysis The agency has afull-time crime analyst, Ramona Kern. Ms. Kern completes a monthly report regarding crime analysis trends that are backed up by statistical data. The report is distributed to Chief Lavinder, Assistant Chiefs, the Criminal Investigation Division Lieutenant, and to all three patrol platoons. Her positive demeanor and helpful approach to her work add to the cooperation between the various units. Specific crime analysis issues are addressed separately, as was demonstrated by a study on burglary concerns seen in the proof files. All details were included, and the data presented in a full Power Point presentation. Ideas for the study of specific crime trends or concerns can come from any part of the agency. Chapter 16 Allocation and Distribution of Personnel Workload assessments are done on a regular basis, and they are done very thoroughly. It was evident that the allocation of work for all units is efficient and provides very good coverage for all units, including civilians. An example of the value of their workload assessments was described in the Communications Center, where the workload was reallocated when the ability to respond to cell phone calls was added to the 911 responsibilities of the dispatchers. Workflow and efficiency measures were taken so that the additional emergency responses could be addressed with existing personnel. Positions in crime analysis, fiscal accountability, traffic unit, vice detective unit, crime prevention/violence against women, and additional positions are based on an effiicient method of allocating tasks that allows for important activities to be completed in a timely manner. There are four specialized assignments recognized as such by the agency. An annual report from the two assistant chiefs evaluates their use and value to the department. One report regarding the specialized review of the 2002 CID assignment was added to the file during the on-site. The agency does not have Reserves, and standards were changed to reflect this. The use of civilians in many positions demonstrates the agency's desire to free officers from tasks that do not require sworn status. The Crime Analysis position is a clear example of the use of civilians when it is practical. Chapter 17 Fiscal Management and Agency-Owned Propertl The Roanoke County Police Department's fiscal function is well organized. Full time civilian Mia Nguyen is assigned as the accounts coordinator. She ensures that all funds are within budget, and has the responsibility for verifying cash before it is sent to Finance. This agency is one in which authority is pushed down to the most appropriate level. Consequently, it is the natural pattern for each unit to make their own budget ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 25 recommendations. Primarily the Assistant Chiefs and Captain conduct this function, with input from each subordinate unit directed to them so that they can deliver accurate recommendations, and so that expenditures can be monitored. Written documentation of all transactions is consistent and comprehensive. Employees _ of the department are knowledgeable in the fiscal policy and consistently follow the guidelines. Finance provides comprehensive procedures that assist in the processing of purchasing. The detailed monthly report is provided by Finance for the agency and available to agency personnel who have budget responsibilities. Chapter 21 Classification Duties and Responsibilities The Roanoke County Human Resource Department establishes and maintains the written classification plan for the police department. Pay ranges or grades are assigned for every classified position and every grade consists of minimum and maximum pay rates. Overtime and compensatory time is well defined and its use is specified for exempt and non-exempt employees. Roanoke County Police Professional Standards provides County Human Resource with job task analyses and task inventories. Each year Professional Standards conducts a job task analysis on several positions, ensuring continuous updates. When a job task analysis is completed, a report describing the results is submitted to Chief Lavinder. Tasks are broken down by percentages and time spent so that job descriptions reflect the duties and responsibilities of each position. Job descriptions are developed based on the job task analyses and submitted to Human Resources after being reviewed and approved by the Police Chief. The job descriptions appear to be complete and thorough documentation of the job requirements, knowledge, skills and abilities, and essential job functions of all positions within the department. The Chief of Police may request a position reclassifiication at any time by submitting the request to the Human Resource Director who in-turn, submits it to the Job Evaluation Team. The Job Evaluation Team will make recommendations based on significant increases or decreases in job functions and responsibilities. The County Administrator must approve all re-classifications. Chapter 22 Compensation Benefits and Conditions of Work The agency has an extensive array of quality benefits, which are clearly defined and described for employees. Roanoke County Employee Assistance Program (EAP) provides immediate professional counseling, referral services and 24-hour crisis counseling to employees and their families. EAP is available to employees through self-referral, informal referral, formal referral and mandatory referral. Informs! referral is a counseling session by supervisors with the employee based on observed changes in work. Formal referral is documented decline in work and the possible presence of personal problems. The employee makes the choice of attending or not attending EAP ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 26 in informal and formal referrals. Mandatory referrals are made when an employee violates alcohol/drug policies, poses a serious risk for violence or is referred to fitness for duty. EAP and the employee develop an action plan and may refer the employee to outside resources. All supervisors are trained in the EAP program and are issued a supervisory handbook that specifies the role and responsibility of the supervisor, identification of behaviors indicating the need for EAP and instructions on completing the mandatory employee assistance program form. Other support services to employees include counseling, social and spiritual guidance from the department Chaplain. Line of duty death notification and assistance to immediate survivors of officers killed in the line of duty is provided. The department Chaplain is a member of the Western Virginia Critical Incident Stress Management team, a voluntary unit that assists police, fire and rescue personnel in times of crisis. Employee benefits include administrative, military, paternity and maternity, education, civil, FMLA (Family Medical Leave) and blood donor leave and eleven holidays. Sick leave hours can accumulate and accrue from one fiscal year to next with no maximum amount of accrual, and includes a "sick leave loan" to members who have exhausted their sick and annual balances. Annual leave is based on years of continuous service beginning with 12 days (0-5 years) up to 21 days (15+ years). The agency operates under the Virginia Retirement System and the County health and dental insurance plan. Uniforms and equipment are furnished to officers as required for performing law enforcement functions. Roanoke County police uniform manual specifies all issued equipment including body armor and take home vehicles. Secondary police work and off-duty non-police employment must be approved by the Administrative Assistant Chief and must not be a conflict of interest, reduce on duty effiiciency or impair call out availability. Policy specifies conflict of interest and other employment prohibited. Roanoke County helps employees pursue professional growth and development by providing reimbursement for non-mandatory job related coursework. The tuition reimbursement program includes financial assistance for one college course per semester, along with leave time for classes when practical and the use of vehicles to drive to school. Chapter 24 Collective Bargaining Code of Virginia, Section 40, 1-57.2, prohibits collective bargaining. The Roanoke County Police Department does not participate collective bargaining activities and this chapter is not applicable by function. Chapter 25 Grievance Procedures Following Virginia Code, the County of Roanoke distinguished the following circumstances as ones that can be grieved: discipline, dismissal, discrimination ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 27 complaints, applications of personnel policies and regulations and American With Disabilities (ADA) complaints. Steps of the grievance procedure are well defined as well as the appeal procedure. Steps include: (1) informal discussion with supervisor to possibly resolve the grievance; (2) forma! written grievance within 30 days to the County Administrator; (3) County Administrator response to the employee within five days; (4) employee requests to go before the panel hearing within five days of the City Administrator response. Members of the panel are appointed by the County Board of Supervisors and consist of three members serving three-year terms. The panel reviews the grievance and determines the outcome and recommended actions. The agency had five grievances filed in 2000, two in 2001 and none in 2002. Grievances filed in 2001 were for disciplinary action and implementation of County policy on "no smoking" in vehicles. The disciplinary action was upheld with a slight salary modification, and the new County policy grievance was upheld. The No Smoking in Vehicle County Policy continued to be in effect. The low number of grievances filed is indicative of the dedication of employees to the department and to the community. Chapter 26 Disciolinary Procedures The department has excellent written directives and is in compliance with the respective standards on the disciplinary process, the handling of sexual harassment and other forms of harassment and employee awards. The discipline policy stresses that discipline is progressive and corrective and punitive in nature. The department strives to eliminate inappropriate behavior at the earliest step of the discipline process, beginning with counseling. The progression steps are: counseling, oral reprimand, written reprimand, suspension, punitive transfer, demotion and dismissal. Disciplinary action steps are well defined for all levels of supervision. Counseling and remedial training are used as an effective element of the disciplinary system. The department does not condone or tolerate any type of workplace harassment. Annual training on harassment in the workplace is provided to all supervisor and management positions. Supervisors then provide training to their subordinates. Documentation in the file confirmed compliance to the disciplinary process at all levels. The agency has had no dismissals during this re-accreditation period. Disciplinary actions and documentation in personnel files and internal investigation files are controlled by the Commonwealth of Virginia retention schedule. The department is very strong in recognizing employees for exemplary performance. Members of the department select employees for the following awards: • Officer of the Year Uniform Division Platoon Ofhcer of the Year Traffic Officer of the Year ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 28 • Uniform Division Rookie of the Year • Uniform Division Platoon Rookie of the Year • Criminal Investigations Detective of the Year • Communication Officer of the Year • Platoon Communication Officer of the Year • School Resource Officer of the Year • Community Service Officer of the Year • Civilian Employee of the Year The Chief of Police also recognizes employees with distinguished service plaques for exceeding performance during specific tasks and issues service stripes for wear on uniforms. The County has employee service recognition and recognizes police officers and communication officers of the year named by the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce. The walls in the police facility display recognition plaques and service awards as well as separate boards displaying commendations from the Chief and letters of commendations from citizens. Other awards include wounded in combat, gallantry star, meritorious service, life-saving and distinguished shooting. The department also awards a citizen for valuable or courageous assistance to a Roanoke County police officer. An award was presented to a citizen for assisting a police officer conducting a traffic stop in which the suspect fled. A citizen assisted the officer in apprehending the suspect. Chapter 31 Recruitment The agency actively recruits within its service area and completes a thorough analysis of its recruitment efforts. The recruitment plan for the agency is very comprehensive, and demonstrates the agency's understanding of the need to provide valuable information targeted at desirable candidates. The plan has definitive action steps that meet clear statements of objectives. The process is evaluated periodically to ensure its effectiveness and to suggest further action that may be helpful. The use of awell-written brochure specifically designed for the recruitment of women appeals to potential recruits in a way not otherwise done. This brochure is distributed in area colleges and used whenever a female candidate makes an inquiry. All information is posted on a web site that is very professional in its appearance, and clearly indicates the job requirements as well as items that would disqualify potential applicants. Training of those involved in recruitment activities is effective, and this was confirmed during the on-site by our discussions with members of the department. Good contact is made with candidates, and a "check-off sheet" is used to record individual contacts. The agency utilizes the comprehensive Roanoke County EEO plan, and clearly marks all recruitment publications. Recruitment activities include advertisements in all local newspapers and available outlets. Information is provided to churches, civic groups, ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 29 media outlets, Internet sites, government sites, and posted in sites such as their storefront office at the Tanglewood Mali, county libraries and additional public venues. Chapter 32 Selection The agency conducts its own testing and selection processes. Records of the process are maintained and destroyed according to the laws of the State of Virginia. The agency is able to predict fitness success through use of the "Lawfit" program, which gives a candidate an indication of their likelihood of success in completing the physical portion of the academy, without being a screening tool for decisions about hiring. Polygraph examinations are used in the selection process, but are not used as a sole determinant factor to determine whether or not employment is offered. Polygraphs are given by certified personnel within the agency who are licensed by the State of Virginia. Probationary employment is clearly defined in a three-year employment agreement that the new employees are required to sign. Candidates receive information on the elements of all aspects of the process at the time of application or reapplication in writing. Background investigators are well trained and are knowledgeable in how to conduct appropriate investigations. Detective Mark Tuck, who has 40 hours of background investigation training, described the detailed, thorough approach to conducting the investigation that is taken by the Roanoke County Police Department. Special emphasis on working with other agencies and in ensuring that all avenues are checked gives the agency knowledge on which they can make sound hiring decisions. Chapter 33 Training and Career Development The Roanoke County Police Department has a ten member training committee that meets on an annual basis. While its recommendations are non-binding, the agency uses the information to update and improve its training efforts. The Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services regulates training. Field Training for new officers includes atwelve-week process working with an FTO (field training officer). To be selected as an FTO, the officer must be a police officer II, have no written reprimands or suspensions and be approved by supervisory personnel. During a ride along, Officer Adam Amburgey described the FTO program as informative and indicated that it is taken seriously by all persons involved in its implementation, and this was confirmed by Sergeant Byrd during a panel presentation. Agency personnel are assigned to a variety of outside and inside training opportunities. Each employee is notified via e-mail, and documented records are retained on a computerized system. A good approval process for the clearly defned lesson plans ensures consistency and completeness in topic development. Written tests are used to verify learning. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 30 Training for specialized positions is identified and conducted regularly for field training officers, bike patrol, hostage negotiators and SWAT. The SWAT team engages in monthly readiness training. New civilian personnel have a checklist to ensure that all topics have been covered. Training by the county as to the expectations of employees is completed. Career development training is conducted for all employees. When promotions are made, the agency provides immediate training to effect a quality transition. Chapter 34 Promotion The agency conducts its own promotional examination processes for all levels of the department except for Chiefi of Police. The Chief of Police is administratively responsible for the promotional process; proofs on file indicated that the initial parts of the process are delegated to subordinates. The Chief of Police receives a list of eligible candidates; he or she then selects the person to be promoted from the top four candidates. Two more names are added to the list each time an eligible candidate has been chosen, and another position becomes vacant. Sergeant Scott Smith adeptly presented clear information on this topic during a panel presentation. The International Police Management Association test (IPMA) is used that has established adverse impact studies completed, and has a lengthy track record as a defensible written test. Announcements of upcoming promotional processes are detailed and widely distributed. Chapter 35 Performance Evaluation Performance evaluations are conducted on an annual basis for all employees on their anniversary date. The form used is both convenient and effective. Notices to conduct the evaluations are sent via e-mail to the employee's supervisor, and the Human Resources Department also sends a reminder. A daily report for officers in field training is used to develop the required quarterly evaluation for probationary employees. When performance is deficient, the agency documents it at the time and provides appropriate notice of concerns more than ninety days in advance of the evaluation. There have been no appeals of an evaluation for the past three years. The early warning system is effective, and proofs demonstrated that it has been used to take action through the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and through remedial training. There is both a quarterly review and an annual review of the early warning documentation. Ten different behavioral and work performance criteria are used to identify troubled employees. Supervisors are diligent in documenting information that is used in the quarterly reports. 6 ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 31 Chapter 41 Patrol The largest component within the department is the Patrol Division. Patrol handles all primary functions including response to 911 calls and non-emergency calls for service. Patrol administrative directives and practices were solid and well documented. Patrol is divided into three platoons with each platoon assigned a daylight, evening or midnight shift. Shifts are permanent and do not rotate. Assignment to shifts are based on the needs of the department, officers experience and officer requests to ensure adequate police coverage 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Assessors had the opportunity to observe roll call sessions on e~lery shift during the on- site. Thorough roll call briefings are held during the first fifteen minutes of each shift. Information is given to officers pertinent to shift operation, daily patrol information, change in schedules and assignments, new directives or changes in current directives, and other information relevant to responsibilities for the shift. Newly recruited officers are required to discuss a law of their choice during roll call briefing. This is a benefit not only to the officers in field training, but it acts as a refresher for veteran officers. Officers are assigned to patrol responsibilities according to geographic areas. The jurisdiction is divided into eight patrol areas. Previously, the department had seven areas, however, through assessment of manpower, predictions of call increase due to new businesses in the area, and minimum staffing requirements, the department requested and received six additional officers and redesigned the patrol area to eight areas. Officers are well equipped and are assigned a take home vehicle. [Vehicles are well equipped and patrol units are highly visible and apparently effective with officers taking particular pride in their efforts]. The department has just begun using mobile data computers (MDC's) that are issued to officers at the beginning of the shift. The agency provides protective vests for all officers. Uniformed officers are required to wear their vests at all times and plain clothes officers are required to have their vests available and mandated to wear them in all high risk situations such as raids and other planned operations. The decision to initiate and/or terminate pursuits is based on professional judgment of the officers based on time, weather, offense, speed, traffic conditions and the chance of apprehension at a later time. [Department policy specifies the use of roadblocks and forcible stopping as deadly force. All officers are issued and trained in the use of Stop Sticks and use them as an alternate to use of deadly force ]. All pursuits are reviewed by the Use of Force and Pursuit Driving Review Committee. The committee is comprised of the Chief, Assistant Chiefs, a uniformed officer, a ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 32 detective and Roanoke County Human Resource personnel. The Committee reviews the pursuits for policy compliance, safety issues and training needs. Annual Pursuit Analyses are conducted which provide review officer(s) involved, secondary officer, shift, type of vehicle, reason for pursuing, length and speed, temporal and geographic factors and provides recommendations regarding policy and training issues. The analyses compare statistics to the previous year and provide graphs to visually explain the results of the review. In 2002, the officers were involved in six pursuits, which is a decrease from 19 pursuits in 2001. Five pursuits were initiated in 2000. The agency has several specialized vehicles. Directives governing the use of these vehicles are well written and integrate the use and function into the agency objectives. Specialized vehicles include canine patrol vehicle, prisoner transport vehicle that is used for mass arrests, crime scene van, special operations vehicle and community service vehicle that is the animal control truck. Currently the agency has two K-9's and two handlers. The department's canines are department owned and are trained in obedience, article searches, pursuit and apprehension of suspects, field/area searches, building searches, tracking and narcotic detection. The canine is an essential tool in the department's efforts to suppress narcotics in Roanoke County and one of the primary functions is to detect and eradicate drugs in the schools. Bicycle patrol is used to establish interaction with citizens as officer's ride through the neighborhoods and business areas. In addition, bicycle officers patrol high volume traffic and pedestrian areas such as the malls and other business areas. The high visibility of the bike officers provides citizen safety by providing assistance and information to the public. The department has a substation located at Tanglewood Mall. The substation is not manned but is actually an office space in which officers can do reports as well as meet with complainants and/or conduct interviews. Chapter 42 Criminal Investigation The Criminal Investigations unit houses general investigators and specialized units. Investigations include seven investigators, a polygrapher, fraud unit, vice unit and an investigator assigned to the Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Task Force. The department has participated in the DEA task force since 2003. Annual reports are submitted to the Chief summarizing the activities and successes of the task force. For the three-year accreditation period, the department's equitable share of forfeitures was approximately $30,000. Roanoke County Police detectives are not on the same pay grade as uniform patrol offiicers. Offiicers must go through a promotional process for the position of detective ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 33 and are classified two pay grades higher than uniformed patrol officers. If a detective is transferred back to patrol, it is considered a demotion and pay is decreased to the patrol pay grade. Investigators have checklists for childhood deaths, homicides, death scene investigations, body diagrams, physical evidence recoveries and firearms documentation information. Through interviews and the quality of investigative supplements, it was clear that investigators utilize the checklists. Polygraph examinations are used as an investigative aid and procedures are set and tests are administered in accordance with standards promoted by the Virginia Department of Professional and Occupational Regulations and Virginia Code. Department polygraphers are licensed by the Virginia Department of Professional and Occupational Regulations Polygraph Examiners Advisory Board. The Investigative Sergeant developed a computerized case screening system designs specific to Roanoke County Police Investigators cases. The Criminal Investigative Records Tracking System (CIRTS) is inclusive of important information to track offenses. The. investigative records tracking system assists in identifying habitual offenders. When a habitual offender is identified, the investigator notifies the Commonwealth's Attorneys office. Cases are assigned based on solvability factors with aggregate point totals of 10; however, even though a case may not have the specific total for solvability, it may still be assigned for investigation. Procedures for information development for cases are not only well defned, but also continuously followed as investigative case reports and supplements are well written and comprehensive of the incident. Chapter 43 Vice Drugs and Organized Crime The Vice Unit is part of the Criminal Investigations Unit and is responsible for receiving and acting upon complaints related to organized crime, vice and drugs. The unit consists of a Sergeant and three vice detectives. The unit is responsible for long-term drug investigations, as well as prostitution, gambling, organized crime investigation, online crimes concerning solicitation of sex, crimes concerning child pornography and subversive, terrorist or extremist groups. The unit is also responsible for conducting surveillance activity. Specialized equipment necessary for criminal intelligence and surveillance is maintained by vice unit. A check out list is used to track surveillance equipment. All officers can use the basic surveillance equipment; however, only a detective trained in its use and operation can operate the highly technical equipment. The agency maintains excellent operational plans for undercover initiatives, raids and surveillance operations, addresses suspect information, target analysis, previous contacts, legal issues, expense source, communications and equipment. The Vice unit ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 34 supervisor maintains complaint information records and case reports. The CID Lieutenant informs the Chief of all activities the unit is involved in through memoranda and e-mails. Informant files and confidential funds are maintained and secured in the Lieutenant's office. Each Vice Officer is issued expense monies for purchases of evidence, payment for information and specified operational expenses. Informant payments over $200 must be approved by the Vice Unit Supervisor; over $350 approved by the CID Lieutenant and over $2,000 approved by the Chief of Police. All confidential fund expenditures are accounted for through a monthly balanced accounting form compared to officer's monthly reports. Chapter 44 Juvenile Operations The Roanoke County Police Department has a comprehensive program to address juvenile needs that includes nine SRO's (School Resource Officer) at the high school and middle school levels. Sergeant Linda Payne is the School Resource Offiicer supervisor, and indicated in the panel presentation that the SRO's are paid by the agency, with the schools providing desks and workspace. The "Right-Track Program" is a local diversion program. For a youth to be accepted into the diversion program the offense involved must be a chargeable crime, first time offense, and the schools indicate no history of problems. A contract is signed with the youth, and it must be satisfied before the case can be closed. Juveniles also have the opportunity to participate in two Challenge Camps during the summer. Participation of high school students is encouraged in a leadership program offered by the Virginia Chiefs of Police organization. Officer Jason Taylor made a panel presentation regarding the department's "Coaches Program", showing great enthusiasm and concern for youth. What began as a grant effort that had officers coaching school sports turned into a volunteer program that continued beyond the grant. Eight officers from the department participate, much of which is on their own time as they partner with the youth of the community. The agency utilizes other elements of the juvenile justice system for input whenever changes are made in juvenile policy. A comprehensive annual report is completed containing charts and graphs to illustrate the results of their programs and evaluate the success of their efforts. Chapter 45 Crime Prevention and Community Involvement The Roanoke County Police Department has a full time crime prevention officer. The agency targets programs by type and geographic area, and addresses any misperceptions that the community may have about criminal activity. One way this is done is through the "Community Observer", a newsletter that is distributed throughout the county. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 35 Efforts in crime prevention are evaluated annual basis. There are over 100 Neighborhood Watch programs and 80 Business Watch programs in place. The quarterly report is designed to provide the input discovered in contacts with the community so that decisions may be made accordingly. The citizen survey was conducted by the County for all services, including the Police Department. The survey indicated a 98 percent approval rating for police services. The public hearing also provided anecdotal information that the community has a positive view of the Roanoke County Police Department. Chapter 46 Unusual Occurrences and Special Operations Operations Assistant Chief Donna Furrow is responsible for the planning function for unusual occurrences. Plans are comprehensive, and reviewed annually. While the agency has not had a mass arrest situation in this re-accreditation period, the policy is detailed and well thought out. Policies surrounding barricaded subjects have been utilized twice in this time frame, and they worked well. Emergency operation plans are issued to all supervisors, and are available in common areas within the department. The agency uses the Virginia State Police bomb squad to address explosive devices, and has used them several times within this re- accreditation period. Weekly inspections for all equipment and vehicles designated for unusual occurrences are designed to ensure that the agency is prepared. The VIP plan was successfully utilized when President Bush flew into Roanoke airport. Roanoke County Police SWAT has twelve members, and crisis negotiator assignments are made according to their written directive. Training is conducted regularly, and joint training sessions are held with neighboring jurisdictions. The agency conducts search and rescue operations in cooperation with the Fire Department. Chapter 51 Criminal Intelligence Detective Mike Williams presented the process for receiving, evaluating, maintaining and disposing of criminal intelligence during the panel review process. Detective Williams demonstrated that the intelligence process is organized and records are carefully kept. Intelligence files are the responsibility of the Vice Unit, and are securely maintained in the Vice Unit office. The Sergeant in charge of Vice determines the worthiness of intelligence information based on policy guidelines. Any information turned in that would not meet the guidelines is destroyed, and the files are purged according to law. The integrity of the files is maintained with appropriate security. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 36 Chapter 52 Internal Affairs The internal affairs process is overseen by Assistant Chief Terrell Holbrook. The agency takes complaints seriously, and is diligent to ensure that all are investigated appropriately. Agency policy allows 90 days for internal affairs completion, however, most are completed within 30 days of receipt. The agency has a lot of flexibility in conducting internal affairs investigations. The agency has the right to order polygraph testing, photographs, drug tests or line-ups when necessary as part of an internal affairs investigation. While a policy change was required regarding the content of allegations in notifications to personnel who are the subject of a complaint, the agency has confirmed that all personnel are given timely notice. The statistical summaries have all been completed for the three-year period, and the statistics from the internal affairs process each year are published in the annual report for public review. Sustained complaints demonstrates the fairness and thoroughness of the investigations conducted, and the agency's open approach to information is well received by the community. Chapter 53 Inspectional Services Staff inspections are conducted more frequently than is required by the standard. They are done with quality, and the recommendations are taken as guidelines for improvement. Assistant Chief Holbrook is responsible for seeing that staff inspections are conducted in a thorough, timely fashion, and to make sure that repairs or discrepancies are corrected. Reports of the staff inspection process are both detailed and timely. Agency personnel are well dressed and present a very good appearance, a tribute to their inspection process. Roll calls are organized in such a way that officers are reviewed with line inspections conducted daily by supervisors. Chapter 54 Public Information There is a professional relationship between department personnel and the media. Documents and interviews showed that members of the media are respectful and compliant when appropriate, and that the agency supplies them with information whenever practical. A recent initiative by a neighboring jurisdiction has resulted in a regional media cooperative group that exchanges information between law enforcement, television and print media. In a recent meeting, policy changes were presented to allow media input in agency policy. The media was supportive of the agency's policy, and no changes were required based on media input. 0 ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 37 Chapter 55 Victim/Witness Assistance The documentation regarding victim-witness efforts of the agency demonstrates a sincere commitment to deliver services to those most impacted by crime. Within the investigative function, there is a violence against women detective (Tim Wyatt) who addresses issues of domestic or other violence. The assessors viewed a Rape Aggression Defense class (R.A.D.), which is offered for women 13 years and older. An analysis of victim-witness is not conducted by the agency; they believe that they are already close enough to the community to be effective. Information is presented to crime victims in the form of detailed handout cards. It is mandatory that officers provide them after crimes have been occurred. Follow-up services are designed for the support and convenience of victims and witnesses. Officers of the agency are empowered to assist victims in appropriate ways, and the communication center personnel effectively consider the needs of victims, especially in situations that require an immediate response. Chapter 61 Traffic The Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department focuses on traffic through the use of a traffic unit that has four officers and a Sergeant dedicated to the traffic function. Deployment is accomplished based on obvious high traffic locations and high crash incident areas. The traffic unit operates with unmarked vehicles of different colors that are not assigned to specific districts. Each member of the unit has specialized training in accident investigation. Sergeant David McMillan described the basic functions of traffic enforcement for the agency in the panel review. Enforcement focuses on reducing accidents based on a yearly crash analysis that is distributed to each patrol platoon for enforcement in addition to the traffic unit. A good use of field training officer documents was used to show the extensive training and knowledge of officers in this function. Selective enforcement efforts include roving patrols, DUI checkpoints, driver license checkpoints, use of hand-held radar units and thirty-day special assignments for citizen complaint areas. DUI enforcement is a priority, with roughly 240 DUI arrests per year. During a panel presentation, Traffic Enforcement Officer Billy Smith presented a succinct, organized synopsis of how the department addresses traffic issues and demonstrated knowledge of "stop and approach" traffic methods. Safety was emphasized at all times, and this was also observed during ride along observations. Emphasis is placed on school zone safety. !n addition to the focus of the traffic unit, a thorough annual analysis of school crossing guard locations is completed just prior to the new school year, and considers the input of school officials. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 38 Chapter 71 Prisoner Transportation The agency's written directive clearly states where prisoners are to be seated in the vehicle while being transported, and offiicers are aware of the requirements. Reports indicate that officers search every prisoner before and after transport, There have been no escapes during the past three-year re-accreditation period. Officers use the appropriate level of security when needed. Ankle restraints are available, and officers are trained in their use. All vehicles that transport prisoners have barricades with door locks and handles disabled. At the public hearing, another agency spoke to the safety procedures taken by the Roanoke County Police Department during transportation of prisoners. Chapter 72 Holdin Facility Chapter 72 is not applicable by function. The agency does not operate a holding area or other secure facility for prisoners. Chapter 73 Court Security Chapter 73 is not applicable by function. Roanoke County Sheriff personnel perform the Court security function. Chapter 74 Legal Process The agency lists the types of civil process that they serve, and has an effective procedure for serving it. Officers are knowledgeable about the processes and diligent in completing service. There is a good method of working existing warrants, with a comprehensive tracking system to verify what was done. Warrants or other legal process are placed in pouches that are assigned to the district officer. The pouches are distributed at roll call, and the officers must attempt to serve them. Each pouch also contains an inventory sheet of attempts or actual service of the document. Chapter 81 Communications The Roanoke County Police Department 911 Communications Center is located within the Police Building and is the responsibility of the police department. The center is staffed 24 hours a day. There are three shifts staffed with a minimum of five civilian communication officers on daylight and evening shifts, and four communication officers on midnight shift. A communications supervisor or lead communicator is on-duty on all shifts. All emergency calls for police, fire and emergency medical services (EMS) are dispatched from the 911 center. The computer aided dispatching is a current product offering a high level of information in both dispatching and providing data to the police and fire departments. Roanoke County is using the 800mzh radio system and the Communication Officers have the ability to talk with surrounding law enforcement and fire agencies. The enter ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 39 also has the capability to dispatch calls via radio for Roanoke City Police and vise versa if either agency has radio or power failure. The center's enhanced 911 system provides the communication officer the information needed to dispatch the call. Each console is equipped with TDD capabilities allowing the communication officers to communicate with the hearing impaired through the use of a keyboard. All 911 calls are handled in this center, as are all non-emergency calls after business hours. The center has a 911 emergency number and separate telephone numbers for non-emergency calls. The center's equipment allows the retention and immediate playback of radio transmissions and telephone calls. Due to recent upgrades, the center now answers cellular 911 calls. Communication Officers are certified Emergency Medical Dispatchers and are able to give life saving instructions over the phone in the event of a true emergency where interventions are needed immediately. They are trained by the Association of Public- Safety Communications Officials -International (APCO) through the Roanoke Police Academy and are retrained annually. Each dispatch station is equipped with an APCO Emergency Medical Chart that has established protocol of pre-arrival and telephone instructions for basic medical emergency. The department had an incident in October 2002, where a dispatcher calmly walked an elderly subject through the process of giving CPR and when emergency medical services arrived they were able to get a pulse from the victim. Tactical dispatch plans were located in the dispatch areas as well as written directives, first aid dispatch instructions, officer rosters and phone numbers and other required documentation. Along with after-hour phone calls for Social Services, Probation and Parole, Garne Warden, Parks and Recreation and Utilities, the communication offiicers are trained in handling warrant entries. They are responsible for entries into the State and National wanted system, handle local warrants and provide them to the officers for service. The Integrated Flood Observing and Warning System ((FLOWS} is also part of the center. (FLOWS is a state of the art system that relays weather information in the event that the County is faced with severe weather and/or flooding. The department participates in the Virginia Missing Children Information Clearinghouse. A computer designated for this purpose is located in the communications center. This program will send out flyers and descriptions of missing children immediately to surrounding agencies The police building also houses the County Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The EOC is constructed and equipped with technical equipment needed for operation during any type of emergency. The emergency operation center has astand-alone generator and the communications center uses the generator that services the police building for alternate power. The EOC is used also as a training room or meeting e ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOI{E COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 40 room for the police department. County service agencies are also permitted to use this room for individual or community meetings. The computer designated for entering missing children into the Virginia Missing Children Information Clearinghouse is also housed in the communications center. The team observed that the communications staff was very knowledgeable in their areas of responsibility and performed their multiple duties with confidence and professionalism. Chapter 82 Records Written directives for records are detailed with personnel who are very knowledgeable and efficient in records requirements. Two of the records clerks are responsible for entering incident reports, one clerk is responsible for entering traffic crash information and insurance information and the fourth records clerk enters all arrest reports. Even though responsibilities are assigned to specific employees, records personnel work together as a team. The records unit also has one supervisor. Hard copy juvenile records are separated from adult files and only personnel assigned to the records unit have access to the juvenile files. Records files are also computerized and juvenile computer records are separated by an access code. The agency adheres to the Code of Virginia regarding records retention and purges and destroys records in accordance. Annual audits of the central records computer system for verification of all passwords, access codes and access violations are conducted. The Services Lieutenant reviews the event logs documenting any access code violations and meet with Information Technology to ensure that there were no access violations from the remote login sites. Unauthorized installation, copying, modification or removal of department computers, software, disks or data is strictly prohibited. The Records System (RMS) traffic accident module lists accidents by type, location and identifies roadway hazards and intersections near traffic crashes. Traffiic analysis reports review accidents by type, drinking increases and decreases from previous year, temporal factors by four-hour time increments and by day of week. The analysis also indicates the top ten crash causes, with locations broken down by top five closest intersecting streets to crash location and number of crashes at the intersection, charges and violations and special enforcement by events Traffic citation books are secured in records. Records personnel issue a number of citation books to each shift in which they are kept in a locked cabinet in the patrol sergeant's office. Supervisors must issue citation books to the officers and return completed books to records. The department uses the incident based reporting system. Information is sent to State Incident Based Reporting System by downloading the information on computer disc. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 41 Officers have 24 hour access to police records by requesting information from records personnel or using the computer to access reports in the records management system. Chapter 83 Collection and Preservation of Evidence The evidence technicians are responsible for protecting and preserving crime scenes and for collecting and packaging evidence at crime scenes. The evidence technicians are responsible for photography, taking video and still photographs of crime scenes, evidence, and any related areas. The primary function of the Evidence Technicians is to maintain the integrity of a crime scene and any and all evidence present until such time as all evidence has been collected. The department has five officers that are trained in collection and preservation of evidence. Officers received their training from the. Division of Forensics Science at Virginia Tech. The department also has traffic officers with advanced training in accident reconstruction and collection of evidence at major traffic incidents. The evidence technicians use checklists that provide guidance for collecting evidence at a scene and drawing a crime scene. The evidence technicians utilize crime scene software to produce high quality crime scene diagrams and compose sketches of suspects. The evidence technicians hand draw the diagram at the crime scene and produce diagrams using the software when they arrive at the department. The evidence technicians complete detailed reports and frequently testify in court about evidence and how it was collected. Evidence is submitted to the State Forensic Laboratory for analysis. The department also has two investigators trained in seizing computers as evidence. Offiicers obtain the search warrants and take the computers to the State Lab for forensic analysis. Evidence technicians are on call after hours for major crime scenes. Chapter 84 Property and Evidence Control The Property and Evidence Unit is responsible for controlling all evidence, as well as found and recovered property that is seized by the Roanoke County Police Department. Information is entered into a computerized record system as a bar code sticker is put on each piece of property. All items are securely stored until such time as they can be returned to their owners, auctioned, or destroyed, based on the guidelines in the Code of Virginia. The property room was very neat and well organized. Drugs were stored in one area, weapons in another area. Money and precious metals were stored in a safe, with bank documents and checks filed in a filing cabinet by case number. All other evidence is stored in bins. Each bin was assigned to an officer and all evidence belonging to that officer was stored in the bin. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINA POLICE DEPARTMENT PAGE: 42 The Services Division Sergeant and the Warrant Clerk serve as property custodians. The custodians and Service Division Lieutenant are the only employees permitted access to the secure evidence areas. The Services Division Lieutenant conducts quarterly inspections of property procedures. Inspections are conducted of the officer's assigned bins, vault, drugs, weapons and money. Annual audits are completed of all property and over the last two years four complete property audits have been conducted. The department experienced two property custodian changes in the past six months. Complete audits were conducted for both custodian changes. The agency is just beginning to implement a bar coding system. The bar code is placed on each piece of property as well as a property tag, providing double accounting for evidence and property. Officers complete property forms, package evidence and submit it to the evidence custodian before the end of their tour of duty. Evidence lockers are used for submitting evidence after working hours of the custodians. All evidence and property is destroyed as soon as a court order is received. Weapons are taken to Cycle Systems to be cut into small pieces of metal; drugs are taken to the Brickyard where they are burned in the incinerator and legal documents are taken to Shredding Company and shredded on-site. Bicycles are donated to Virginia Explore Park after being advertised in the Roanoke Times and World News. The property room was found to be secure and well organized. The property custodian was very conscientious and took pride in the exceptional operation of property and evidence. T. Summary and Recommendations: The Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department is a very unique agency. From the beginning of its inception as a police department, it focused on doing the right things in a positive way, using the CALEA accreditation process as a framework to ensure that quality is maintained. The result of these efforts is that they are in their third re- accreditation process, and that accreditation has become a benchmark by which they measure their success. The extremely low number of items to be addressed as either applied discretion or file maintenance is a testament to a lot of hard work -hard work by the accreditation team, the administration of both the police department and county officials, and the members of the agency that accept the responsibility of following and improving the guidelines that govern agency procedures. ASSESSMENT TEAM'S FINAL REPORT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT - PAGE 43 - ; iii) _ .. T ~~~ `J Throughout our review of standards, we found the general orders to be in good -- ~~~ " condition, and the proof files organized and appropriate. Agency__personnei were always helpful and open in every discussion. Accreditation Manager Nancy Short, along with Sergeant Smith, demonstrated knowledge in the accreditation process, and were helpful throughout our visit. Chief Lavinder was accessible, courteous and helpful throughout our on-site visit. The Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department was found to be in compliance with all applicable standards during this re-accreditation on-site assessment, and is ready to be reviewed for re-accreditation at a future Commission meeting. It is with conviction and an appreciation of effort that this assessment team recommends that the Roanoke County, Virginia Police Department be given every consideration. The final decision on re-accreditation remains the prerogative and responsibility of the Commission. Respectfully Submitted, Chief W e I. Mc~ Y Team Leader J_ ~~ C~