Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/2/2003 - RegularWorking Document -Subject to Revision Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Action Agenda December 2, 2003 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for December 2, 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. These meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and this meeting will be rebroadcast on Wednesdays at 7:00 p.m. and on Sundays 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: Rev. Branan Thompson Windsor Hills United Methodist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Hodge requested that the closed session be expanded to include discussion of appointments to the Western Virginia Water Authority. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of appreciation to Alfred C. Anderson for twenty-eight years of service as Treasurer for the County of Roanoke R-120203-1 MWA motion to adopt resolution URC 1 2. Presentation from the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve Unit and the Marine Corps League and appropriation of $7,500 proceeds from the 8th Annual Marine Mud Run 1St Sgt. Reeves and Mike Shepherd made the presentation to Chairman McNamara. Also present were Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, and Eddie Ford, Recreation Supervisor. 3. Recognition of the Fire and Rescue Department for receiving the 2003 Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Achievement Award for the joint efforts at the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Station The VACo Achievement Award plaque was presented to Chief Rick Burch and the following members of the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Station: Chief Jim Grigsby, Roanoke City; Battalion Chief Gary Houff; Lieutenant Sam Stump; Deputy Chief David Hoback, Roanoke City; Lieutenant Eddie Chitwood; Ernest Amos, Volunteer Fire Chief; Watson Simmons, Volunteer Firefighter; Susan Lowe, Volunteer Firefighter; and David Altizer, Firefighter/Paramedic. D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on the County Public Health Report Card. (Dr. Molly O'Dell, Director, Alleghany and Roanoke City Health Districts) Briefing by Dr. O'Dell E. NEW BUSINESS Request for an extension of time to analyze a Section 15.2-2232 request of the Vaughan and Jackson development, Back Creek community well facility, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) R-120203-2 JPM motion to adopt resolution URC 2. Request to authorize the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc. (Doug Chittum, Director of Economic Development) A-120203-3 RCF motion to approve staff recommendation (authorize the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the performance agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc.) 2 AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer NAYS: Supervisor McNamara F. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES None G. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES None H. APPOINTMENTS 1. Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare Supervisor McNamara requested that John M. Hudgins, Jr., member at large, be placed on the December 16, 2003, agenda for ratification. He will serve athree- yearterm which will expire on December 31, 2006. Supervisor McNamara nominated Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator, to serve an additional three-year term which will expire on December 31, 2006. 2. Grievance Panel 3. Library Board (Appointed by District) Supervisor Church nominated Josie Eyer, Catawba District, to serve an additional four-year term which will expire on December 31, 2007. Supervisor McNamara nominated Sheryl L. Ricci, Windsor Hills District, to serve an additional four-year term which will expire on December 31, 2007. 4. Roanoke County Planning Commission (Appointed by District) Supervisor Minnix advised that he will yield this appointment to Supervisor-Elect Michael A. Wray. 5. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Supervisor McNamara nominated Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services, to serve an additional four-year term which will expire on December 31, 2007. 3 I. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-120203-4 HOM motion to adopt consent resolution URC 1. Approval of minutes -October 28, November 9, and November 18, 2003 2. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows, Section 1 A-120203-4.a 3. Request from the Library to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation to be used to purchase materials for children's programming A-120203-4.b 4. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving Brookfield, Section 4 A-120203-4.c 5. Request to accept Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System R-120203-4.d 6. Request from schools to accept and appropriate $3,106 increase in Carl Perkins Entitlement funds for use in the career and technical education programs A-120203-4.e 7. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teaching program A-120203-4.f 4 8. Request to accept Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System R-120203-4.g 9. Request to accept donation of drainage easements on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2.3) and Greystoke Partnership (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2), Vinton Magisterial District A-120203-4.h J. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS None K. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS None L. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None M. REPORTS MWA 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 -October 2003 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended October 31, 2003 7. Report from VDOT of changes to the secondary road system in October 2003 5 N. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Altizer: (1) He extended condolences to Eric Thomas, member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, and his family on the recent death of his daughter in a car accident. He advised that Miss Thomas was also the granddaughter of Delegate Vic Thomas. (2) He thanked the School Board for their actions on behalf of the residents of Hill Drive. Supervisor Church: He thanked the School Board for their actions with regard to the school attendance issue on Hill Drive, and stated that the situation had to be corrected. He requested that staff work to prevent similar occurrences in the future. Supervisor McNamara: He advised that the Roanoke County Tree Lighting Ceremony will be held at the Brambleton Center on December 4 at 7:00 p.m. O. WORK SESSIONS (4th Floor Conference Room) Work session with citizens to discuss Back Creek development. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) This work session was held following Item O-2 Time: 5:20 p.m. until 6:15 p.m. There was a consensus of the Board that many of the concerns expressed by the citizens (i.e., overcrowding in schools, traffic congestion, impact on emergency services, protection of Blue Ridge Parkway viewsheds) were shared by members of the Board. These issues will be addressed in an upcoming review of the County's Comprehensive Plan, and through increasing administrative reviews in the Community Development Department. 2. Work session to discuss remote control locomotive operations. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) Time: 4:44 p.m. until 5:08 p.m. Mr. Mahoney briefed the Board on Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recommended minimum guidelines regarding the use of remote control locomotive operations, and advised that these are not federally mandated regulations; therefore, there is no penalty for noncompliance. Supervisor Altizer requested that the Board consider a resolution to the FRA at the December 16 meeting requesting that the recommended guidelines be changed to mandatory regulations. He also suggested that Norfolk Southern be contacted and requested to meet with the Board regarding some of these issues. 6 It was the consensus of the Board to place the resolution on the December 16 agenda for consideration. P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion of the appointment of specific public officers, namely Grievance Panel At 4:18 p.m., JPM moved to go into closed meeting URC Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION The closed meeting was held from 4:25 p.m. until 4:42 p.m. Supervisor Minnix left the meeting at 4:42 p.m. R-120203-5 At 4:43 p.m., JPM moved to adopt the certification resolution AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix R. ADJOURNMENT JPM adjourned the meeting at 6:16 p.m. 7 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda December 2, 2003 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for December 2, 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. These meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and this meeting will be rebroadcast on Wednesdays at 7:00 p.m. and on Sundays 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: Rev. Branan Thompson Windsor Hills United Methodist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of appreciation to Alfred C. Anderson for twenty-eight years of service as Treasurer for the County of Roanoke 2. Presentation from the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve Unit and the Marine Corps League and appropriation of $7,500 proceeds from the 8th Annual Marine Mud Run 3. Recognition of the Fire and Rescue Department for receiving the 2003 Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Achievement Award for the joint efforts at the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Station 1 D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on the County Public Health Report Card. (Dr. Molly O'Dell, Director, Alleghany and Roanoke City Health Districts) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for an extension of time to analyze a Section 15.2-2232 request of the Vaughan and Jackson development, Back Creek community well facility, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 2. Request to authorize the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc. (Doug Chittum, Director of Economic Development) F. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES G. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES H. APPOINTMENTS 1. Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare 2. Grievance Panel 3. Library Board (Appointed by District) 4. Roanoke County Planning Commission (Appointed by District) 5. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority 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 28, November 9, and November 18, 2003 2. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows, Section 1 2 3. Request from the Library to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation to be used to purchase materials for children's programming 4. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving Brookfield, Section 4 5. Request to accept Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System 6. Request from schools to accept and appropriate $3,106 increase in Carl Perkins Entitlement funds for use in the career and technical education programs 7. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teaching program 8. Request to accept Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System 9. Request to accept donation of drainage easements on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2.3) and Greystoke Partnership (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2), Vinton Magisterial District J. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS K. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS L. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS M. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Accounts Paid -October 2003 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended October 31, 2003 7. Report from VDOT of changes to the secondary road system in October 2003 3 N. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS O. WORK SESSIONS (4th Floor Conference Room) 1. Work session with citizens to discuss Back Creek development. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) 2. Work session to discuss remote control locomotive operations. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) P. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion of the appointment of specific public officers, namely Grievance Panel Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. ADJOURNMENT 4 •, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 RESOLUTION 120203-1 OF APPRECIATION TO ALFRED C. ANDERSON FOR HIS TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE AS TREASURER OF ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, Alfred C. Anderson is retiring after twenty-eight years as Roanoke County Treasurer, a career that spans over three decades beginning with his first term in 1972 and continuing through six consecutive terms from 1980 through 2003; and WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson, as Treasurer, consistently worked for the benefit of Roanoke County by improving tax payer services including new methods of paying taxes by telephone or on tine using credit cards, automatic deduction from checking accounts, and at local banks and drop boxes; upgrading technology to automate procedures; and improving efficiency thereby achieving one of the highest collection rates in the state; and WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson, who graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree from East Tennessee State University, continued his education throughout his career, becoming a Certified Governmental Treasurer through the University of Virginia, and a Certified Finance Master through the University of Tennessee; and WHEREAS, during his tenure as Treasurer, Mr. Anderson also served as President of the Treasurers' Association of Virginia; President of the National Association of County Treasurers; as Roanoke County Voting Delegate to the National Association of Counties (NACo) for many years; and as a NACo Steering Committee Member; named Treasurer of the Year by the Treasurers' Association of Virginia in 1 ~. 1986; and received the Victor E. Martinelli Outstanding Treasurers Award in July 1996; and WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson has been a good friend to the citizens of Roanoke County by serving as President of the Vinton Host Lions Club; President of the Dogwood Festival of Virginia; Treasurer of Vinton Masonic Lodge #204; Treasurer of the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (Explore Park); and as a member of the Roanoke Valley -Allegany Regional Commission and its Legislative Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on its own behalf and on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke County, does hereby extend its sincere appreciation to ALFRED C. ANDERSON for twenty-eight years of service to the residents of Roanoke County; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its sincere best wishes to Mr. Anderson in his future endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Appreciation File Joe Sgroi, Director, Human Resources 2 ACTION N0. 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: November 18, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of appreciation to Alfred C. Anderson for twenty- eight years of service as Treasurer for the County of Roanoke APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ \~~~~ ~~~~ ~~Jtn 1 r ~ ~ ~C~~ ~~ ~~ ))~~~ ~,~^b' SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Mr. Alfred C. Anderson has served as Roanoke County's Treasurer for twenty-eight years. He was elected to serve his first term in 1972, and starting in 1980, was re-elected to serve six consecutive four-year terms. During his tenure as Treasurer, Mr. Anderson has consistently worked for the benefit of Roanoke County by improving tax payer services including new methods of paying taxes by telephone or on line using credit cards, automatic deduction from checking accounts, and at local banks and drop boxes; upgrading technology to automate procedures; and improving efficiency thereby achieving one of the highest collection rates in the state. The County would like to express its appreciation to Mr. Anderson for his leadership as Roanoke County Treasurer, and wish him well in his future endeavors. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO ALFRED C. ANDERSON FOR HIS TWENTY-EIGHT YEARS OF SERVICE AS TREASURER OF ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, Alfred C. Anderson is retiring after twenty-eight years as Roanoke County Treasurer, a career that spans over three decades beginning with his first term in 1972 and continuing through six consecutive terms from 1980 through 2003, and WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson, as Treasurer, consistently worked for the benefit of Roanoke County by improving tax payer services including new methods of paying taxes by telephone or on line using credit cards, automatic deduction from checking accounts, and at local banks and drop boxes; upgrading technology to automate procedures; and improving efficiency thereby achieving one of the highest collection rates in the state, and WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson, who graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree from East Tennessee State University, continued his education throughout this career, becoming a Certified Governmental Treasurer through the University of Virginia, and a Certified Finance Master through the University of Tennessee, and WHEREAS, during his tenure as Treasurer, Mr. Anderson also served as President of the Treasurers' Association of Virginia; President of the National Association of County Treasurers; as Roanoke County Voting Delegate to the National Association of Counties (NACo) for many years; and as a NACo Steering Committee Member; named Treasurer of the Year by the Treasurers' Association of Virginia in 1 /"''~ ~' `' 1986; and received the Victor E. Martinelli Outstanding Treasurers Award in July 1996, and WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson has been a good friend and neighbor to the citizens of Roanoke County by serving as President of the Vinton Host Lions Club; President of the Dogwood Festival of Virginia; Treasurer of Vinton Masonic Lodge #204; Treasurer of the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (Explore Park); and as a member of the Roanoke Valley -Allegany Regional Commission and it's Legislative Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on its own behalf and on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke County, does hereby extend its sincere appreciation to ALFRED C. ANDERSON for twenty-eight years of service to the residents of Roanoke County; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its sincere best wishes to Mr. Anderson in his future. 2 ,., , ~f. t Z ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C -c~( 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: December 2, 2003 Presentation from the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve Unit and the Marine Corps League and appropriation of $7,500 proceeds from the 8th Annual Marine Mud Run Pete Haislip Director -Parks, Recreation & Tourism Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~ ~ r SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: For the past eight years the Marine Corps Reserve Unit, Company B, 4th Combat Engineer Battalion and the Marine Corps League, in cooperation with the Roanoke County Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism and many other corporate sponsors, have sponsored the Mud Run in Green Hill Park. The event is designed to raise funds for the Toys for Tots program and Camp Roanoke. This year's event continues the tradition of being one of the largest and most successful running events in the Valley and has received wonderful media support from around the state. It is a family event that includes runners from three years old to 70. This year the contribution to Camp Roanoke from the Marines is $7,500, which brings the total amount contributed over the last 8 years to $41,700. This year in an effort to further recognize the Marine Corps Reserve Unit, Company B and the Marine Corps League, Roanoke County Parks, Recreation and Tourism is earmarking $3,000 of the $7,500 donation for scholarships for dependents of members of the armed forces to attend Camp Roanoke. The Marine Corps League and the Marine Reserve Unit, Company B is currently developing criteria for the awards. Roanoke County is proud to be able to offer this opportunity to members of the armed forces, which is a small token of our appreciation of the significant sacrifices they make on all our behalf's. "~:' • ~ ... Attending the meeting to make the presentation of the check will be Marine Corp League member and race director, Claude Slomczewski, Mike Shepard, and Fred Doyle. The County is deeply grateful to the Marine Corps League and the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve Unit for their financial support of Camp Roanoke over the years. FISCAL IMPACT: The funds will be added to the Camp Roanoke renovation and scholarship funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board accept the $7,500 check and appropriate the funds to the Camp Roanoke renovation and scholarship funds. J 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: November 18, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Recognition of the Fire and Rescue Department for receiving the 2003 Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) Achievement Award for the joint efforts at the Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Station APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The Virginia Association of Counties presented Roanoke County with one of their 13 Achievement Awards at their annual conference held November 9 through 11, 2003, in Bath County. The Achievement Awards recognize the top county government programs statewide that exemplify innovative and cost-efficient services and provide a model for other counties. Roanoke County received an Achievement Award for their Clearbrook Cooperative Fire and Rescue Station. On January 1, 2002, Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke initiated a first in emergency services cooperation for the Roanoke Valley. Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke were each seeking to increase their fire and rescue services in the Clearbrook community. A transition team was developed to assess administrative, operational and logistical challenges and to devise a plan for emergency services cooperation. Roanoke County received six Roanoke Fire-EMS paid personnel to serve with 12 Roanoke County Fire and Rescue paid personnel. This allowed for three six- person shifts to provide 24 hour, seven day a week fire and rescue coverage to the Clearbrook community. The Clearbrook county station, with city and county personnel, is now responsible for responding to the city portion of the 220-corridor. Cooperation is taken one step further since in the jurisdictions are not only sharing territory but personnel. The City of Roanoke is able to serve the 220 corridor south end with a 3 to 5 minute response instead of a 6 to 8 minute response. Roanoke County is now able to provide a daily 24-hour paid service in a station that previously offered a daily 12-hour paid service. ~ 3 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board wishes to congratulate the Fire and Rescue Department and the Clearbrook Station upon this award. Present at the meeting will be Rick Burch, Chief, Roanoke Count Fire and Rescue Department, and personnel from the Clearbrook Station who will be on duty the date of the Board meeting. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. D - ~ 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: December 2, 2003 Briefing on the Public Health Report Card Dr, Molly O'Dell Director of Alleghany and Roanoke City Health Districts Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for Dr. Molly O'Dell to brief the Board of Supervisors on the Public Health Report Card for the Alleghany Health District, particularly Roanoke County. This review will look at data since 1990 and will compare our results and trends in recent years. It will also compare some of the demographic statistics of the various localities that comprise the Alleghany Health District and will allow Dr. O'Dell to indicate the issues and challenges that face the Public Health Department in the foreseeable future. ~~I V ~ ~ ~ N ~a J ~G1 U J a~ c~ d 0 0 r p7 M '. O N N N O N 0 0 r r r r r r r r r ,~~ooooo mgooo qo 00 ~ooo 000000 0 .. mooooo .. 000 0 *- .~ mooo 000000 0 ', W m N N N N N !p j N N N V N O O O lC m N N N N N N N N N N ~, ~ i i~-0 O~~O ~ O O OHO O O~: O m ~ O OTC O] ~if1 O O~OI O O~ u'1. ~ o E o .-~ !o> rn; o ~~ r of ~ a v d '.i I N CV m r O ~ ~, I I I ~~ c} I~ rIM r~CO I~ O OD ~I O; ~~N OlO~lr I~ I~ r ~Nfi~ r ~ ~I C^~ Nr M I HIV Oi N I~ M a0 N' n''O ~ ~~i^ ~ ;M N r Nc^O N:' ^. ~ ~ ~ it i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~' '~ ~ it ~ to ~ f0 h r f~ r GO ~ N N N ~ W' N N O W N CO N N GO r' r ~ I W M~~ -' N ~ N J' ~ N J !J O ~A ~ ~ ~ CO O O N r CO '' O N CO st ~ ~!Y W C'7 N N M ~~~~ V N~~ Ch r r r CMO V 'I ~ ~ N N E t~ ~ r NCO ~r N ','_ Z N N O O I n N O M O Cn e} ~~ i~ ~~ r r ~ GA n CO M I 'i ~ N D7 M N N ?•" ~ ~ N N N ~~}} O M 0 a M~f) N n ~O M NON ~`~ m M ~ f0 ~' 0 j r O ~ ~ ,' ~ r T~ ~ i III ~ ~rnvl Sri ,~ N ° r`u~i ~ ~' ,~ ± r.:~ - M ' M cD ~ 'O O G7 CO -~~~ O Go N 3,, f v ~~ N T ~ 7 VI ~ Q QI ,V Q ¢ ~,V ~ e. y GOON ~ ^~ ~ O f~O N ~ V O F• a ~~ O ~~: 0 r ~ ~~ V r ~V n co co rn 1 0 ~~~ GOON ~O~ '- J .^ ~~ IO J r J' N ' vi N J J Q' ~ ~! Q Q ~^ I~. GOD N GO N ~- ~' ' ~ Y' r l1D ~ M ' : m ~ '~~ ~ ~ ~+ ' r ~ N } N O v: I I ~ m I I ~ ~ 1 WI I I I i i '. ~ (> L , ~. N - - p, ~ i ~I m m '. C ~~ I •O ~ I .Q I i L `m I ~ ~I ~ I m' c I po' I •° o' ICI r rl °I ~ ! o o m I CII V O O I•d 71N ~' Ot tO ' ~ p,i m o io !0 ~ O i W O ~~ 1 7~ ~' Y a. I l0 O' ~' pf m c ~ m E~ml Im ono Li ,= o ~l ~ ~ ,olm W c m a ~ m ~,.I gl W rn coil N ~~ a''~ •3' L, c o a d r 01 m L o o I ~~ F~ m ~ ~ o.' o m ~ or oil ~ •' m v ~ .m C C! C L I O C C G C •3. N O '-' m W ~0 I C '~ C M dl j ~ a W::.. ~° a~0i C1'-wm w wl, c ~'-, j~ «'•a: :: c'm W.o m m ,~' oll I16'nL Q m col o', o'. 'v~ o,m'a w ml~+v cl~ %% m alc,,, ~ aaaa, m L ..L ~ ~ e: m v. ma! ~ W' o o,Ul• ~ o of o o' ~ > v' >., v W m ~ ~'•~ m •~ ~ `m ~?' e~ «la ~~ aaaa w'o H N'M 'Q«« w'm o °-m ~ ~ WI m'm~o<n'~U!C ~I F- o o d O., ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o OIH F-I~~'~ U 0 ~ ~ J = W ''~ = O W ~ Y Q ~ Z C Q •~ Z ~ W J J Q ~. U O W J W V J a 0 N L .Q d a4i N N c6 d y L W O ,y O j ~ N V ~ ~ r r r'r rr -0 0 0 O.O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N NN:N NN l, ~~O O '~ C Ill i (A I I 1 I r r r r 0 O O O O O O O' O O' N N N N.N OI M '~ ~ j I ~i N N NN N N.N W t00 OOO O'A r lp OO O.O O O..O Q ~N N N'N N N.N ~ O ~ OI O O O ~. r. 01 ~ r O O V I r ~ ~ ~ (A ~ (A I~ ~'. (b r ~ 1~ N COO _ ; ~ N C'7 ` ~ ~ Ch r o ~'' n to QD ; M ~ C9 ~ ~ N ~ ~ W N r i O C l r ~ ~ (A '' ii i li ~ N ~ r y I y ~ ° '~ ~ aOa~omoo W °' .' r ~ N W m u~ r :.: O V~ ~v,, ~r i :a O ,rNr~ V r N ~ru JI N lD •~ M O N O ~ COO (10 O O N o O~ o ~ ~: ' tD to r C ~ I "' o N O ~ IO o m ~ j m l ~ O O O t `'3 N CQ ~ n `~ N O O W 0 0 0 N . O ' ~ V 1 3,_' ~ I ~ ~ ~. . ~ M V I ~ ~ t ~ ~~. __ i ~ .... .: y.. ;yrty .~I rNrC'9 tnOtnO N iA n V' _ NChO ~t':` (1G CL) _ OONOOOh W ~~~ I~ N R7 .. ; ~i N V , ; V ' CV C7 e} ~, to ~'.; O' V ,' t} £ O 0000 .. rn r .~ ~ E ~ V ~'V ~: c4 lh In ~ O I~ 4. '. L ~ co ~n v J J N J 'J o 0 0 0 0 Q',I `~ Q o ~'i cD of N O N ~ ` N to O N ~ O ~ .. i I ~ ~~ ~ L y F JJ~ fig'. ~ t J ~ ~ ', it ~.. t,. n ¢ ¢ ~ I II - I N. ~, I W,~ g . d !0 ~I E ~ g:; ... E w ~ W w, O d ~ • o O ~I '~ 'i , l6 c E I O r r, i ~ ..' ~ C °' y ~ ~ O ` ~ d' °' G D .a. ~ W a i ~ ~ ~~ ~, ~ i r a E- c ~~; ~I Li SI 2' r m, y ~. I C 0 ; a a y I C OI~ c' ~ N O C Of ~i , ~ Q W ~ C ~ ~ L O! ~ N W ~ ~ ~'O J Q O r `, Y iV~~ Wm ~~ C~'r V J'., C ! CC i ° a • 2 , E rn~ a ~ ' ~ J m'3 H '~ ~ ~ Q Q,QI ~ Fd m ~ O W d Q ~ «~ W W O'J ~ W 2 ' o m W ; ! I E v V;a t ~ ~ I~~N 4 ' a ~ i ~ Q c 3 L z -L ~~'m'~ = rn c O U Q' w ~ ~ ~ °: i O y C Ei O L N O I~ ~ {.Q ~ a., J ice., O O Z O llv ~i Q ~ lA;- Cp' c C. d~ 4!m_o>tO~,~d I mI H m'o o o C F-I I o ' ~ ~Q S V C7~fn F-!W i V J W Z O Z Q ~. Z W J J Q O 0 aCi .~ c 01 _. r ~~ N V Oo aN ~ ~ Q "" 4 _~ U m .7 a a ~, C M N O o ~~ O~^ O~~~~ N ~Ci l11 rn r~ r N r~ J ~ ~ ~ d C O to ~ M~ O O M ll•) O N °_ tt QO T N N M O fA r to O O Q O) tb N fT O _ M~ O~ O ~ '~ r O r tb O fn V M N ^ ~ fT In ~ ~ r M ~ O N p i Z O et ~ ~ 1~ M O ' CD ~ _ ~ M ~ ~ (7D ~ ~ t1 ) ~ °_ ~ ~ rT N ~ CO V r M M N O N V N U') CD to r N N (b N~ r N ~ ~ M C7 In r m Z'~i f~ocDo ~ofac0 x~~~T ~ N M O~~ N~~ W M r COO U r r o T 0 0~ ~t O M A N CO T N N N (b M ° r N CO ~ (70 N O C N O ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ V ~ ,C ~o ~ j v~ o~ r O co a0 M V c0 v o w O rn •~ 1 v, N p r ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ 1 ,O ~ M o ~ > 0 V 3 0 U ~ O o ~ N ~ «7 ~ M O ~ ~ ~ fA to O ~ (b (7D ~ . N r f70 ° O) M N~ M M~ ~t M A N Q~ ~~ r O M M~ M~ N O~ M~ N 0- ~ J C N N M r N n O) N T rt r t Q O ~ r i a~~i ~ ~ Cfj _ N f 'O ~ fp ~ ~ T CD ~ M ~ n N N CO N ~ ~ f N ~t ° ~ tb ~ f\ O fJ1 fD N CO CO Q f70 LA O T fT W O O M In r OD ~ d _~ fA r ~~ r r N O ' w, r r ~ 3 ~ d { ~ ~ O U Z Q ~ W ~•` ~ ~ c ~ c ~ rn ° ~n ° ~ •~ c c Fem. o y ~ a~ `' ~ ~ a o U ~ °c ~ °a-cpO mf°n °o~OO~OO~ ~ X~ ~- O -~~~ N G. <A N J U Z d p~ d~ W Z y~~ '~O t0 ~~~ C? 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~- O= ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ° p con rn a`°i ° ~ a~i a°i m ai a~i a~i ~ s ~ ~+ A T >. >+ A O _ f~ N y fA (~/ y V d50o cs c~ c~F°-HF°-F°-HF°-Q ° °oo~m ~ o" LL d W LL LL m ~ fb N W W o0 0 ~ Q ~ o H ~ ~ W W m ~ N N m u: '~ '~ U fi o o ~ N ~ fA ~ ~ ~ LL ~ ^ t O ~ 0~f) fA O N p O p ~~ O m N r ~~ p t` m M ~ r p~ ~ O a p r ~ _O m N ° ~ ~ °~ p Q ~ ~ U LL l1 LL LL m ~ ~ °~~. C r m p p ~ C7 f9 m y ~ ~ ~ ~ aci m _~ '~ _~ o qD a~~i N ~ ~~ ~_ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ m _ ~ ~ i N ~ ~ L M O to fh y d Y ~O N r N M y y E ~ T N N d~~~ cr ^~~ p 0 O U L ~i Y Y O L c~ U Y Y j Y~~ V N N E > p M~ ~~ N~ N § O f)) y y ~~ ~ C ~ ~ ° U n w N ~ Y O E C O m O c 0 _U to ~ `-° °a ~ cTO ~ °o ° m ~ o c c ~ ~ U C7 ~ ~ J J J ~ O ~ ~ F- ~ C ~ v Q ~ W = ~ _ Z 4 Q ~ ~ _ 2 .~ Q Z W J J Q ~oooaoc*~o T c0 ~ O N M N O r N O O O ~ ~ ~ M N oooao~o O V 0000000 O c aN ~ L ~ O O O N 07 O ~ ~ ~ Q 4 _ ~ J vooo0oc+~ rn a oo~r- Q ~ N ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ w O y ~ O a a` a W N y ~ m ~ a i a i Z ¢ ~ ~ m m ~ ~ U ~ Q C C J J C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N 2 2 U ~ 2 Q a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~, JJ~ ~,~ ~ 6 v ~_ O t Q ~ W = 2 ~ o V c a~ 2 4 Q p ~ ,R O Z Q j z W J J Q ~~. ~;`_~_ ~ 3 0 z a U m m m Q (n ~ U U U ~ U W w o, ¢ o cn cn cn U o w m O m O m ~ ~ cn cn cn cn to cn cn to cn co cn co to cn to c~ cn cn to cn to to to > > > Y ~ > U D U D U D > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0 0 ~n cD ~n rn m ~n ~n o ~n r M o r ~ co a; v v ~ rn r v N r ~ a r N O O O N O O M N O M 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 O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O N O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ 'c ~ ~ n ~-~ m., N . N M tp O~ M ~ a0 O N N ~ O) ~ =~a ~r" r ~ f~ M I~ M ~~I aN et n r N ~ ^ ~ O M "~i~,. ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,~:, M r i ~ `~~ ~ O c 0 n ' ~ ~'. ~ O) f~ O e v, Y ~ O ~ ~ ~'' O ~ N ~ N r 57 ~ ~ ,$~ ~` ~ ~ n O 1 44: K i ~'~ ~ f ~ t::, . O N k ~ ~? r ~ cf O ~i~ N CO tt ~I, c V ~A ~ M ~ N t~ ~ N d M ~ r ~ ~ O ~i; ; O ~ I~ sF f~ T ~A O ,., ~ 1 "~~ r`sk ~~ ' . T Q O M ~`~ O N t17 M N M CO 00 ~.. OD: . :. r n ,- s ~N, r O~ h t~ 00 ~ O ~ O) M C7 N V CO h _ N .. 0 p ^ N r ' O ~ O tt ~ r ~ O N M O 00 f~ ~ C'M (O ~ ~ O ~ CO O ~A fM O O N N N E T r r ~ : M r ~ M N r 00 CO N ~ r r 0 N (O N r O ° ~ , °~ `~ o N ~ N r O ~ M• n~ ,_~ N M ~A C7 N V ~A M ~ CO N r r O~ m O) O M (O M ~ 00 C'7 (D O OD ~ ~ f N r n O ~f r p ~ Oi ~ CO N O Oi m M In f~ m ~ O M I~ O m OD Oi r M 00 M CD ~ r f~ ~,.~ O f~ N _ N r T ~ N T r O) r iA N r = O ~ M ~ ~ O O V V O C9 C7 I~ t!7 Q~ O ~ O O O) w r ~ r I~ m CO N I~ ° CO ~ n ° O r ro Y ~ n N r N O r ~ ~ OD I~ O ~ M M M S O N CO O f~ ~t ~ N r nj OD CO m r N N N r N I~ N r 0 r r p ~ °~ N rn 69 ~ Z (C °' ~' !~ I~ ~~ O r to O) ~ ~ CD r p~ n O O r M m O O O n M N N M O r ~ M N r M N to r ~ O ~ (O ~ ~ h m ~ r ~ C~ O CO r 00 CO r 'R r N h OD 0 D n O c N N M r OD O N W r N W ~ ~ _ to r ~ ~ ~ ~ o U o Q ~ ~ M CO O h r O7 N ^ n O) I~ O) N O n M ~ O N CO O) h 00 f0 ~ O ~ ~ p~ p~ N v~ N N ,-- O n ~ ^ N N ~ O M ~ h ~ ~ r (D OD M O) l C r p ~~ ~ ~ N N r r r r r r M ii G •C «s ~ O ~ T ~ ~ ~ O ~ _ ~ O ~ to N n a O) N M N O) c0 M N N ~ OD O I~ O) r c0 ~ M ~ cY ~ ~ Q~ m ~? ~ 0~ ~ N ~ ~ M O ~ O N ~ O M V ~ h ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ O h T r D N ~ O r ~ r N r r r O CO f~ 69 O C V ~ O N C N N r r ~ 7 U 3 ~ m r co ~ c~a a ~ N ~ N E W °' o _ - ,, ~ ~j c~i O 0 ~ T O ~ O O ° O ° O ° O ° ~ ~ 41 ~ c ' m U a~ o o ~ m O o o_ t ~ o o E N r N N U ~' fC >. 'C 'O O N N ~' E N j ~ f0 O N d N N d C ~ O ~ ° C ~ O O .D O o } ~ C ~~ fn T N N Y O o ~ ~ N r c ro o . ° o m ' ~ ~ a m v E c ~ ~ m % ~ r ~ o ~ ~ E ~ w ~ o o o N' o . 0 c ~ o~° o m L ~ m ro i a E o O ~ ~ m ~~ m t E o ~n ~' a ° F" a~ > m •E L r ro o o . ~ ~ ~ m ° N o > > ~ ~ ° ` ° a m a a i a o. ° r t o ~ oC rn n a . rn °' cC m m r is ~ ~ - o - ~ m c c o ~ ~ ~ o m a~ ~ ~ o > o Q v> w ~ a m m o c ~ % m m ~ ~ ~~ ~ - c ° -° r v o o a~ m E a •- m 'a~ ~ w cn o . m m a~ g ~, o N c~ m ~ U 3 Y ca . w ~ 07 U ¢ ¢ N ~ .D ~ ~ N 0 ~ a ' (0 O) `° m cc C N ~ O V1 L N L « O i L r ..+ 3 ~ o c m 01 m C ~ >, ° o °' o_ o 3 ¢ ~ ~ m ~ ~ c ° ' ~ ~ °' ics cC m ~ C N a c E m ¢ ¢ ¢ E c 0 c c 0 0 «° ro a ~ro ~ m 0 w ~ o L t t c o U . - • m .o 'o a~ v o a o % ~ ~ m a~ m c o ~ a ~ ~ ~ , c ~ ~ ~ _ cn ~ B ~ U ~ D ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ° v i °' ~ `m $ E ~ ~ Y ~ aroi aoi c a r r y r a ~ a c ~ ~i > a ~ o L ~ ~ Q Q Q ~ U U ~ m ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ . 0 d 0 o m d d d > ~ o 0 0 0 ~ (n o ~ ~ ~ Q m ~ C .-. d 7 C i:+ C O V r O N 0 r C 3 O V Y O C a t4 ~ V ~ ~ 0 Q. Q d ~ ~a r~+ O ~ O ~ O _ _O V L ~ ~ 3 a c~ c~ a~ m N (0 N _~ Q _N .fl RS O a a~ m U p Q Q Q Q Q m Q CD c~~~~~~F->U OT O ,--o T r O N d 2 N N N N N N N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cd00000000 Q N N N N N N N N C9 N ~ ~~N T ~ ~ N ~- NcONT-N000 " N T N ~ N *- ~~ r 0 0 0 0 P. O f~ I~ M O ~;' N ~ ~ N Cfl ~: O (O OD CO I~ O N M i1L'1 s O Ch O O r T M N N r M~ T ttGS' M T ~ O r N O T O CO O O M ,_ (D oD O ~ ~ M ~ ~ N O~ OMO O O r ~ r O ~ f~ N f~ 'ch CO f~ ~ r O O O CO 'ct M ~ N ~o')N~~r c~ CO ~Y ~t O N t7 mot' r ~ ~ O N N 0~ CO N N ^ • T T~ M T T ~ C7 r ~ ~ u) C~ O N M to r ~ O ~' N O M N ~~ ~. ~ N T (O ~ r N ~ N ~ C N ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ °' c*i ~ co rj ~ t~ M DO Cfl r Cp O N O ~ N to ~ t!') ~ ~ C7 r f~ N ~ ~ J r ' s c~yl o -- ~ rn °'~ °~ m 0 ~ y ~~ U ~ ': ?'~ ~ ~. ~ 1 C i+ fn ~ m ~` ~- Q ~ ~ ~ rn N '+. _ ~ ~ p fA .. U ~ L 7 ~ ~ `: ~ ~ ~ 'N ` ~ 7 C ~ L N~ ~ D ~_ ~ 0 ~~ ~ =;i. Q2UC7cAF-w~ 0 0 N N N U 7 O v ro U r a a~ a~i U_ 7 co i~ 'o 7 c U O O N O rn rn y C N U m 0 7 N [Y] U [0 cC C .~ c c O U a Y U Y C O .~ N ~E E 0 U C N E 0 n E w «S C .~ >_ W c 0 U 7 W 0 c m r a d O D _« N 2 C t U O C 0 0 U C .~ m m U .Z m N U C N _~ U1 U N c a~ r a m D O O O N a~ n ~, a~i a: 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION 120203-2 REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANALYZE A SECTION 15.2-2232 REQUEST -COMMUNITY WELL FACILITY -BACK CREEK AREA WHEREAS, on October 31, 2003 Roanoke County received a request to allow the development of a privately owned community well facility on property behind Back Creek Elementary along Route 221 south; and WHEREAS, this privately owned public utility facility is not shown on the adopted Comprehensive Plan of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the Code of Virginia Section 15.2-2232 provides the authority to the Roanoke County Planning Commission to determine if this facility is substantially in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined the need to study the issue, analyze the land use impacts of such a facility and receive public input; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is granted by the Code of Virginia Section 15.2-2232 sixty (60) days to complete such a study unless an extension of time is requested of the governing body; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that additional time to thoroughly study this Issue is necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Roanoke County Planning Commission is requesting an additional 90 days (for a total study time of 150 days) to 1 study the Section 15.2-2232 request for the development of a privately owned community well system in southwest Roanoke County. 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: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development 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: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution from the Planning Commission requesting an extension of time to analyze a Section 15.2-2232 request - Vaughn/Jackson development -Back Creek community well facility SUBMITTED BY: Janet Scheid Chief Planner APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~. ~ 1 j ~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County has received a proposal to build a privately owned public utility facility on approximately 200 acres behind Back Creek Elementary School. Section 15.2-2232 of the Code of Virginia provides authority to the Roanoke County Planning Commission to determine if this facility is substantially in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan of the County. This Code section also allows the Planning Commission sixty (60) days to complete their study unless an extension of time is requested and approved by the governing body. The Planning Commission has determined that in order to thoroughly study this proposal and analyze the various land use impacts of such a facility and to obtain critical public input that additional time is necessary. The Planning Commission on November 18, 2003 passed a resolution requesting a 90-day extension of time to study this proposal. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ~. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the request for an extension of time to study this proposal. 2. Do not approve the request for an extension of time to study this proposal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. ._ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2003 RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANALYZE A SECTION 15.2-2232 REQUEST- COMMUNITY WELL FACILITY- BACK CREEK AREA WHEREAS, on October 31, 2003 Roanoke County received a request to allow the development of a privately owned community well facility on property behind Back Creek Elementary along Route 221 south; and WHEREAS, this privately owned public utility facility is not shown on the adopted Comprehensive Plan of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the Code of Virginia Section 15.2-2232 provides the authority to the Roanoke County Planning Commission to determine if this facility is substantially in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined the need to study the issue, analyze the land use impacts of such a facility and receive public input; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is granted by the Code of Virginia Section 15.2-2232 sixty (60) days to complete such a study unless an extension of time is requested of the governing body; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that additional time to thoroughly study this Issue is necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Roanoke County Planning Commission is requesting an additional 90 days (for a total study time of 150 days) to study ~~.. ~' d the Section 15.2-2232 request for the development of a privately owned community well system in southwest Roanoke County. Donald R. Witt, Chairman Roanoke County Planning Commission ACTION N0. A-120203-3 ITEM NO. E-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to authorize the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc. SUBMITTED BY: Elmer Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Lowe's has purchased a 14.843 acre parcel located at 4520 Challenger Avenue in East County to construct a 100,000 square foot home improvement center. Lowe's and the County estimate that the project will generate approximately $500,000 per year in local tax revenue. Per the County's Public Private Partnership Policy, an economic development grant equivalent to one year's new tax revenue may be offered to new retail operations in return for certain considerations desired by the County. Lowe's has agreed to the following building enhancements: 1. Install an additional buffer of evergreens between their new development and the adjoining residential neighborhood. 2. Install a retaining wall to match the earth tone color of their building. 3. Install a six foot shadow box fence along the entire length of the retaining walls. 4. Construct a rear parapet along the top of the rear building wall for the screening of HVAC units. 5. Construct a screen wall for their trash compactor. 6. Limit lighting pole heights to 35 feet with site lighting shields to reduce spillover of light. 7. Construct a minimum of two sides of the building with split-face block in an earth tone color, and additional columns/pylasters provided along the front of the building to closely match the adjoining Wal Mart Super Center. 1 These added improvements will produce a more aesthetically pleasing facility upon completion. FISCAL IMPACT: This economic development grant will be in the form of a reimbursement of up to $500,000 of one year's new tax revenue. The appropriation of this new tax revenue and the reimbursement will be included in the fiscal year 2004-05 budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends authorizing the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc. VOTE: Supervisor Flora motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ^ ® ^ cc: File Doug Chittum, Director, Economic Development Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ~..~~ ~. ,y .,~ „ THIS AGREEMENT made as of this _ day of , Zoos, by and between the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, (hereinafter referred to as "the County"), the INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA (hereinafter referred to as "the Authority"); and LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC., a North Carolina corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Lowe's"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Lowe's is the owner of an approximate 14.848 acre parcel of commercial real estate located at 4520 Challenger Avenue in the eastern portion of the County (the "Property"), and WHEREAS, Lowe's desires to develop the Property as a Lowe's Home Improvement Center (the "Project"), and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, desire to promote and encourage the economic development and vitality of Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valley through the recruitment of new business for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley, in order to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the County and the Authority desire, by the purchase and development of the Property that Lowe's will create additional employment opportunities for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley by developing the Project which will promote economic development and generate new tax revenues for Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, this increased employment and investment constitutes a valid public purpose 6 ~,. ~~, ,~ ~.,~., for the expenditure of public funds. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree to accomplish the following: 1. Site Development. Lowe's has filed a concept plan for its proposed development of the Lowe's Project with Roanoke County that proposes a Lowe's Home Improvement Center with access to Route 460. Lowe's proposes to construct the Project with projected annual sales revenues of Thirty Million Dollars ($80,000,000.00). Lowe's and the County estimate that the Project will generate approximately Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) in new annual local tax revenues for the County from real estate, personal property, business, professional and occupational license fees and the local portion of the sales tax. 2. Site preparation and certain site and infrastructure improvements by Lowe's. Lowe's will cause the following improvements to be made, subject to approvals by the County: (i) Construct an approximate 100,000 square foot Home Improvement Center in general conformance to the site plan dated April 15, 2008, prepared by Tysinger, Hampton & Partners (the "Site Development Plans") no later than twelve (12) months from the date of this Agreement so that an occupancy permit may be obtained therefor. (ii) Develop the Project in general conformity with the approved site plan; develop the Project with screening and buffering for the adjoining residential neighborhoods known as the "Orchards" and "Huntridge" as follows: (i) install and maintain a buffer of evergreens along the western property line as shown on the Site Development Plans; install Segmental Retaining Wall Block to match the earthtone color of the building; install a 6' Shadow Box Fence 2 cam` -. along the entire length of the proposed retaining walls; provide for rear parapet along top of rear building wall for screening of HVAC units; and construct a screen wall for the proposed trash compactor all as shown in the Site Development Plans; (ii) site lighting pole fixture heights to be 35' feet and site lighting house shields to be provided along the northern and western property lines to reduce spill over of light as shown in the Site Development Plans and the photometric plans dated November 8, 2002, entitled "Overall Site Lighting Plan and Photometrics" prepared by Page Interworks, P.A.; (iii) construct and maintain a building with split-faced block on the east and south walls of the building and a 4" split-faced block (veneer) facing on the west wall and asmooth- faced CMU on the rear wall of the building in an earthtone color and with additional columns/pylasters provided along the front of the building to closely match the adjacent Wal-Mart Super Center as shown on the architectural drawings attached as Exhibit A, and made a part hereof; all of which shall be subject to approval by the County, and such approval shall be deemed given upon receipt of this Agreement. Lowe's proposed garden center to be limited to 89' wide along the western property line. ~. Procedures for the grant of Authority funds to the Com~an~. The County shall appropriate up to Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) to the Authority to fulfill the purposes of this Agreement. The Authority, upon receipt of the appropriation of funds from the County, will award an economic development grant to Lowe's for costs benefiting the Property in the following manner: The Authority agrees to appropriate, allocate and grant Lowe's the equivalent to one year of new local tax revenues ("new local tax revenues" mean local real estate tax, personal property, professional and occupational license tax and the local portion of the sales tax) generated by this Project, less any amounts expended by the County and the Authority for public infrastructure s 6 ~, improvements required by or benefiting this Project and any funds previously awarded to Lowe's under the County's Public-Private Partnership Policy. It is estimated that this grant shall not exceed Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00). Lowe's shall provide such financial and tax revenue data (the "Financial Data") as may be reasonably required by the Authority so that the Authority may calculate the amount of the grant within sixty (60) days of the end of the 2004 calendar year. The Authority shall pay such amount within thirty (30) days after receipt by the Authority of the Financial Data. If Lowe's fails to construct the Project or the improvements for the Project described in paragraph 2 by December S 1, 2004, then the Authority shall be relieved of any obligation to award the grant to the Company. If the Project fails to generate for the County new annual local tax revenues in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) prior to December 31, 2004, then the Authority shall proportionately reduce its reimbursement based upon the difference between the actual local tax payments attributable to the Project and the Five Hundred Thousand Dollars, ($500,000.00) Lowe's shall have the right to assign this Agreement to a separate entity provided that any such assignment shall not relieve the Company of its obligations herein. This Agreement shall be governed by and all disputes related hereto shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. This Agreement and any reimbursement of costs and improvements from public funds is subject to future appropriations by the Board of Supervisors to the Authority. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY 4 °, ~~'~ • Approved as to form: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator sy INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA By. Chairman • LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC. By Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney • 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: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: December 2, 2003 Request to authorize the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc. Elmer Hodge County Administrator COUNTY AD111~IINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~' ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Lowe's has purchased a 14.843 acre parcel located at 4520 Challenger Avenue in East County to construct a 100,000 square foot home improvement center. Lowe's and the County estimate that the project will generate approximately $500,000 per year in local tax revenue. Per the County's Public Private Partnership Policy, an economic development grant equivalent to one year's new tax revenue may be offered to new retail operations in return for certain considerations desired by the County. Lowe's has agreed to the following building enhancements: 1. Install an additional buffer of evergreens between their new development and the adjoining residential neighborhood. 2. Install a retaining wall to match the earth tone color of their building. 3. Install a six foot shadow box fence along the entire length of the retaining walls. 4. Construct a rear parapet along the top of the rear building wall for the screening of HVAC units. 5. Construct a screen wall for their trash compactor. 6. Limit lighting pole heights to 35 feet with site lighting shields to reduce spillover of light. 7. Construct a minimum of two sides of the building with split-face block in an earth tone color, and additional columns/pylasters provided along the front of the building to closely match the adjoining Wal Mart Super Center. ~. These added improvements will produce a more aesthetically pleasing facility upon completion. FISCAL IMPACT: This economic development grant will be in the form of a reimbursement of up to $500,000 of one year's new tax revenue. The appropriation of this new tax revenue and the reimbursement will be included in the fiscal year 2004-05 budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends authorizing the County Administrator to ratify and confirm the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County and Lowe's Home Improvement, Inc. ~~~~ THIS AGREEMENT made as of this day of , 2006, by and between the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, (hereinafter referred to as "the County"), the INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA (hereinafter referred to as "the Authority"); and LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC., a North Carolina corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Lowe's") WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Lowe's is the owner of an approximate 14.843 acre parcel of commercial real estate located at 4520 Challenger Avenue in the eastern portion of the County (the "Property"), and WHEREAS, Lowe's desires to develop the Property as a Lowe's Home Improvement Center (the "Project"), and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, desire to promote and encourage the economic development and vitality of Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valley through the recruitment of new business for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley, in order to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the County and the Authority desire, by the purchase and development of the Property that Lowe's will create additional employment opportunities for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley by developing the Project which will promote economic development and generate new tax revenues for Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, this increased employment and investment constitutes a valid public purpose ~.,. , ..~ ~r 1...... ~~°,.. for the expenditure of public funds. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree to accomplish the following: 1. Site Development. Lowe's has filed a concept plan for its proposed development of the Lowe's Project with Roanoke County that proposes a Lowe's Home Improvement Center with access to Route 460. Lowe's proposes to construct the Project with projected annual sales revenues of Thirty Million Dollars ($30,000,000.00). Lowe's and the County estimate that the Project will generate approximately Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) in new annual local tax revenues for the County from real estate, personal property, business, professional and occupational license fees and the local portion of the sales tax. 2. Site preparation and certain site and infrastructure improvements by Lowe's. Lowe's will cause the following improvements to be made, subject to approvals by the County: (i) Construct an approximate 100,000 square foot Home Improvement Center in general conformance to the site plan dated April 15, 2005, prepared by Tysinger, Hampton & Partners (the "Site Development Plans") no later than twelve (12) months from the date of this Agreement so that an occupancy permit may be obtained therefor. (ii) Develop the Project in general conformity with the approved site plan; develop the Project with screening and buffering for the adjoining residential neighborhoods known as the "Orchards" and "Huntridge" as follows: (i) install and maintain a buffer ofevergreens along the western property line as shown on the Site Development Plans; install Segmental Retaining Wall Block to match the earthtone color of the building; install a 6' Shadow Box Fence 2 ~-a along the entire length of the proposed retaining walls; provide for rear parapet along top of rear building wall for screening of HVAC units; and construct a screen wall for the proposed trash compactor all as shown in the Site Development Plans; (ii) site lighting pole fixture heights to be 35' feet and site lighting house shields to be provided along the northern and western property lines to reduce spill over of light as shown in the Site Development Plans and the photometric plans dated November 8, 2002, entitled "Overall Site Lighting Plan and Photometrics" prepared by Page Interworks, P.A.; (iii) construct and maintain a building with split-faced block on the east and south walls of the building and a 4" split-faced block (veneer) facing on the west wall and asmooth- faced CMU on the rear wall of the building in an earthtone color and with additional columns/pylasters provided along the front of the building to closely match the adjacent Wal-Mart Super Center as shown on the architectural drawings attached as Exhibit A, and made a part hereof; all ofwhich shall be subject to approval by the County, and such approval shall be deemed given upon receipt of this Agreement. Lowe's proposed garden center to be limited to 89' wide along the western property line. s. Procedures for the grant of Authority funds to the Company. The County shall appropriate up to Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) to the Authority to fulfill the purposes of this Agreement. The Authority, upon receipt of the appropriation of funds from the County, will award an economic development grant to Lowe's for costs benefiting the Property in the following manner: The Authority agrees to appropriate, allocate and grant Lowe's the equivalent to one year of new local tax revenues ("new local tax revenues" mean local real estate tax, personal property, professional and occupational license tax and the local portion of the sales tax) generated by this Project, less any amounts expended by the County and the Authority for public infrastructure s ~~ ~'~,, improvements required by or benefiting this Project and any funds previously awarded to Lowe's under the County's Public-Private Partnership Policy. It is estimated that this grant shall not exceed Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00). Lowe's shall provide such financial and tax revenue data (the "Financial Data") as may be reasonably required by the Authority so that the Authority may calculate the amount of the grant within sixty (60) days of the end of the 2004 calendar year. The Authority shall pay such amount within thirty (30) days after receipt by the Authority of the Financial Data. If Lowe's fails to construct the Project or the improvements for the Project described in paragraph 2 by December 81, 2004, then the Authority shall be relieved of any obligation to award the grant to the Company. If the Project fails to generate for the County new annual local tax revenues in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) prior to December S 1, 2004, then the Authority shall proportionately reduce its reimbursement based upon the difference between the actual local tax payments attributable to the Project and the Five Hundred Thousand Dollars, ($500,000.00) Lowe's shall have the right to assign this Agreement to a separate entity provided that any such assignment shall not relieve the Company of its obligations herein. This Agreement shall be governed by and all disputes related hereto shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. This Agreement and any reimbursement of costs and improvements from public funds is subject to future appropriations by the Board of Supervisors to the Authority. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY ~.,.~:,~ By Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA sy Chairman Approved as to form: LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC. By. Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 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: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: December 2, 2003 Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE The three-year terms of Dan O'Donnell to complete the unexpired portion of Gary Kelly's term, and John M. Hudgins, Jr., member at large, will expire on December 31, 2003. The member at large must be confirmed by the Cities of Roanoke and Salem. Mr. S. James Sikkema, Executive Director, Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, has recommended that Mr. O'Donnell be reappointed and that Mr. Hudgins' appointment be ratified. Mr. O'Donnell has been contacted and indicated that he would be willing to serve an additional three-year term. 2. GRIEVANCE PANEL The three-year terms of King Harvey and Karen Ewell, alternate members, expired on October 28, 2003. 3. LIBRARY BOARD (Appointed by District) The four-year term of Josie Eyer, Catawba District, will expire on December 31, 2003. The four-year term of Sheryl L. Ricci, Windsor Hills District, who was completing the unexpired portion of David R. Smith's term, will expire on December 31, 2003. 1 1-~ ! -~ Ms. Ricci has been contacted and indicated that she would be willing to serve an additional four-year term. 4. ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (Appointed by District) The four-year term of Donald R. Witt, Cave Spring District, will expire on December 31, 2003. 5. ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY The four-year term of Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services, will expire on December 31, 2003. Ms. Green has been contacted and indicated that she would be willing to serve an additional four-year term. 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 RESOLUTION 120203-4 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM 1 -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 December 2, 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 9, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -October 28, November 9, and November 18, 2003 2. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows, Section 1 3. Request from the Library to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation to be used to purchase materials for children's programming 4. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving Brookfield, Section 4 5. Request to accept Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System 6. Request from schools to accept and appropriate $3,106 increase in Carl Perkins Entitlement funds for use in the career and technical education programs 7. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teaching program 8. Request to accept Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System 9. Request to accept donation of drainage easements on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2.3) and Greystoke Partnership (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2), Vinton Magisterial District 1 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 Minnix to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES : Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Vickie Huffman, Assistant County Attorney Diana Rosapepe, Director, Library Services Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance Roger Johnson, Career and Technical Education Administrator Dr. Linda Weber, Schools Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Dr. Carol Whitaker, Assoc. Director, Personnel & Staff Development 2 _• AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for December 2, 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 9, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -October 28, November 9, and November 18, 2003 2. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows, Section 1 3. Request from the Library to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation to be used to purchase materials for children's programming 4. Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving Brookfield, Section 4 5. Request to accept Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System 6. Request from schools to accept and appropriate $3,106 increase in Carl Perkins Entitlement funds for use in the career and technical education programs 7. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teaching program 8. Request to accept Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System 9. Request to accept donation of drainage easements on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2.3) and Greystoke Partnership (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2), Vinton Magisterial District 1 T i-~ That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required bylaw to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. 2 '` ACTION NO. A-120203-4.a ITEM NO. I-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Water and Sanitary Sewer Serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1 SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robertson Utility Director APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1, F & W Community Development Corporation, have requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1 subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sanitary sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Lumsden Associates entitled The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1, which are on file in the Community Development Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $19,375.00 and $42,075.00 respectively. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1 subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the 1 ~r transfer of these facilities. 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 Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 I ~ ., • a t ~~ r` air ~'~ ~i' ~~ ~ 1 ..,,, >., 6„ Water ~: ~ " ~~ ` , > . .. .v (i-ir1.l;~i:: [~-• ~:. ~ •.. L:.S!tv.: Z?T ' Y_ ~ _ ~r~~i'W~lrf.~.'~~.---F•{.r~-- '".Y A'^. ,'7!<CW~tv~_ is ' -.{,~Iv„a'::.t!: : , \,-' y/~/~ ,c \r- I ~ J ~ C/~ p! -:_ I N7.. n _M. ~ v; ~.~~ .. r. 1. I c:• g~, Sanitary ~ ~ S env er ~ ~ y I~~~` `~ ~>_--- , ~ ` ~ -•2 LKL ~ t I ~ ~ ~ ` /••~~ / .. . K M w la y ~,. _ "44 -.: Jd~~ la 4i i•i lu `O t.1w ` U ` ~.~ '~i. .. Ct ~,' ~?1'.o m cr r~,h ` ~ , ^ ~ .. ~ „ - ~ _ , T~` 2 s ±; e' I i ..._ ~. , .... ~ , ., ~ ~ ` r,. Rf f. ..._ ~ ~ t s 1 1 .~ 1 J 1 1 C,T '7 I "F R.2S ~ ~ .. ~ _ ~ X88 t _..W~f - J ` ~ ~ ~ +r ... q - V 1 _ f [ ~ ~ ~. _ „_ F4 _ g„ Sanitary Sewer y 4 .. ) ' w ~ . tt7 I .~ T 3. ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~~ _ .6„ ~ Water ~° n :: . MATCH LINE ~ ~° ~:.~ _ <_._ '=»'„ . ~. ~,~5 _~ _. ~ _ . , - ~~AT'rT~ ~~~~' "'&'1re ~re~aa-c~s" .Section 4, "C®rtta~d l~ead€~v~~s" • ITT~L ~~~-' ~~~ ~~~~~' Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities • '~. 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: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Water and Sanitary Sewer Serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1 SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robertson Utility Director APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~,, ~c ~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1, F & W Community Development Corporation, have requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1 subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sanitary sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Lumsden Associates entitled The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1, which are on file in the Community Development Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $19,375.00 and $42,075.00 respectively. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving The Orchards -Cortland Meadows -Section 1 subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. ~~- , . ,.~'~ ,,~ ~ . ,- ~ ~ ~o ,: ~~_~~~' C4~~.11@~'I'~' G6'~'he ~rc~aa-c~s" section 1, `.`Cort~aa~d 1~%Ieadov~~s" ' ~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~ Acceptaa7ce of water and sanitary sewer facilities '~ ACTION NO. A-120203-4.b ITEM NO. I-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Library to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation to be used to purchase materials for children's programming SUBMITTED BY: Diana L. Rosapepe Director of Library Services APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Library staff members have developed a series of storytime kits that are rotated among the six branches in the system. This has reduced redundant planning time, improved the overall quality of the programs, and made it possible to maintain an extensive storytime schedule without adding staff. There are currently two years of kits in use but a third set is needed to expand the number of topics and avoid recycling themes. To fund this project, the Library applied for and received a grant in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation, Ashland, OR. Acceptance of the SFCF grant would enable the Library to purchase approximately 480 books, as well as the puppets, props, and other supporting materials necessary to create 36 additional kits. FISCAL IMPACT: No additional funding is required. ALTERNATIVES: None. 1 Z STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of the $6,545 grant to the Library's budget. 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 Diana Rosapepe, Director, Library Services Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 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: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Library to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation to be used to purchase materials for children's programming SUBMITTED BY: Diana L. Rosapepe Director of Library Services APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: R ...,~ K--. ~ ~I ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Library staff members have developed a series of storytime kits that are rotated among the six branches in the system. This has reduced redundant planning time, improved the overall quality of the programs, and made it possible to maintain an extensive storytime schedule without adding staff. There are currently two years of kits in use but a third set is needed to expand the number of topics and avoid recycling themes. To fund this project, the Library applied for and received a grant in the amount of $6,545 from the Sharkey Family Charitable Foundation, Ashland, OR. Acceptance of the SFCF grant would enable the Library to purchase approximately 480 books, as well as the puppets, props, and other supporting materials necessary to create 36 additional kits. FISCAL IMPACT: No additional funding is required. ALTERNATIVES: None. KAA.~, _... .,,~° -.....e,.....~ .,..,4,.~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of the $6,545 grant to the Library's budget. t ACTION NO. A-120203-4.c ITEM NO. I-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving Brookfield, Section 4 SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robertson Utility Director APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of Brookfield, Section 4, Fralin & Waldron, Inc., have requested that Roanoke County accept the deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Brookfield, Section 4 subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sanitary sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Lang Engineering entitled Brookfield, Section 4, which are on file in the Community Development Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $25,450.00 and $31,272.00 respectively. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Brookfield, Section 4 subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a deed for the transfer of these 1 facilities. VOTE: Supervisor Minnix motion to approve staff recommendation Motion Approved Yes No Abs Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Minnix ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 -~ ~~ l~M ~~~ ~ ' ~~~ m A/A)F)E) p OR. . ~ ~ ~ n hY7,~p ~ ~y • .~0~ ~ ,p$ clo n o y ~.~C.~N.I~~' .tY1A.1 r _ ~OANO COUNTS UTI]LIT~' D~P~..RTIVIENT ,- BROOKFIELD, SECTION 4 Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities ~ - M ~ b Qn ~I~C~~V.~~'~ ~YlA.~~ M % /: :~ ~./I . ... ,~ \~ /,/ ~ ': .~ ~ ' ~t 1,~ ~ ~. ~ .V 817 ~i " iF' ~~; `` ~ - 8" WATER _'' b ~'~ '" ~' ~.. ~; ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~' ~_ ,. ,V , A. ~~.~ Sheet 2 of 2 RO~~N(~~ COUl®TTY W UTILITY DE~ARTNN~NT ,_ ; ~, , BROOKFIELD, SECTION 4 Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities 6 i . ACTION NO. ITEM NO. .r-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept water and sanitary sewer serving Brookfield, Section 4 SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robertson Utility Director APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: V~~.lAhv'.).~ fi VL ~J'1 vv~ ~ r~ 1 ~ ~_ ~, ~~ . ~ ~, SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of Brookfield, Section 4, Fralin & Waldron, Inc., have requested that Roanoke County accept the deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Brookfield, Section 4 subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sanitary sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Lang Engineering entitled Brookfield, Section 4, which are on file in the Community Development Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $25,450.00 and $31,272.00 respectively. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Brookfield, Section 4 subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a deed for the transfer of these facilities. } c ~• i S'1 '~11 Y ~~~ .CY1.~11 . - - ~OANOK ~+ COUNTY ~ BROOKFIELD, SECTION 4 UTILITY DEPARTMENT Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities ~. - .. - - 1 a ~' , VIC.I.~V~I~'~ ~lY1A~~ ul •a / ~T; `, ~. -, / / ~~ 1,. ;5 `,' ` , r :~ .- - :.. ... r .~ y •i ~,~ . ~. ~ • .. ,~ ~ ~.' ~ ~, - 8" WATER .. ~_ .. ~ r °i'. `.` ... sue , •~ '} •C ~C ~ % ` ~~ ' •. 3 1 \. i •{/9 ~ ifs ..` A, ~. ~~ ~ ~~ ~.,> ` l } .~ \. - ..y ~~ ~ ~ Sheet 2 of 2 \\ C,, 1 ` I ~~ ` '` c~ i . ~~ ~ ~ ~ • r ,. -" ' ,., t arm. r '~. u \ ~ A ~ U ~~ i. "1 ~ ' 06 n ,, ~ .L .~ RO.~N4I£E COUNTY ~ BROOKFIELD, SECTION 4 • UTILITY ~3EPARTMENT Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities _ _ - THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2003, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 120203-4.d REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF GLEN MEADOW INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved by: Supervisor Minnix Seconded by: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara Nays: None A Copy TestQne: ~~l~~ / Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 120203-4.d adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unani ous recor ed too Tuesday, December 2, 2003. a.- _ Brenda J. H Iton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors • • ~I L 'S U Q, C m N (v L X U~ CO Q tff 1\L L m Q Cn O ~ m "\ NI N a ~ -a c ;, O O U d m .C E 2 O ~ T = m O ~ 3 ~ a d ~ ~ ~ O pp V a 1 ~ Q 'o ~ ~ ~\~ Q ~ o Y ~ L ~ p _° i~ }- ~ O ~ t m Q < Z ~ ~ N ~ N 0 C ~ s V' T C t v~ °z U o n ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ _ < U O }- Q Z n ~" CL ~ m m 6 m m a a a d ° a ° °' a°. a° i ~ 0 c z . M/ 41y~ T. ~ U ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ° m p ~ O G r ~~' Q O O ~ r ~ ~ 5 FF Y °v v ti < ,N 3 b V ~ N ~ ~ ° ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m C ~ ~ ~ ~ 2S ~ is b i ~ ~ 2 F ~ FF a ~ `a ~ 0 FF 0 m c ~ u. O r E a. ~ u, ~ f- O a a ~i 0 r o d 6 u`. p r a ~ O r d ti C r ~ u`. ~ r- a i , ~ Z //'~~ C+' 1 i J ~ 1 ~p ~ V to ~ ~ ,' , a ~ z ~ s ' O (t Z . N' n ~ f ~ ~ ~ 6 I i a:,~M ~ ~ S~w m c U .9 C E z ~ w ~ v 2 < _ r ~ r 1 ~ a O ~ O a U }. V 2 n V E 9 6 ~I ~ L g t c METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A :OMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT N ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. .,,~°~° ~;:,:~ ~ 2 5729 ~ ~ µW ,~' 5726 N ~~ 5732 P ~~ Ni ' ~ S~t io~ ~ 3 1 ~ ~ 5706 5702 2 `fir 4 3 ~~ Jc~ 5710 5741 4 5718 5714 5 , 5 6 ~'~ > 2 1A 7 5722 ~ 5730 8 5726 (eaa'G '~1. 5711 3 5803 9 5734 e ~ 16 ~Z ' 5719 5723 2,4 5811 5738 , 5727 5817 7 5731 15 ,~{ 5735 14 5827 ~~~ ~?' '5739 ~G~ 5816 >3 5786 11 12 8 10 5824 \ 4A-1 Length: 0.13fi5 Miles No. of Homes Served: 16 » , ________ SCALE:____= 100__ CAX MAP N0.__86_16 PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Glen Meadow DR. into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System e 'REPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY )EPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE:_11_ 24-03 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. Z - 5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey Director of Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: r 1 , ~~.~~ c ~~ (~ ~~~~ ~ ~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Radford and Company, developer of Glen Meadow Subdivision, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requesting that they accept 0.1365 mi. of Glen Meadow Drive from its intersection with Merriman Road (Route 613) southwest to its cul-de-sac. Roanoke County staff has inspected this road, along with representatives from VDOT, and finds the road acceptable. FISCAL IMPACT: No County funding is required. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the resolution requesting that VDOT accept Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System. 2. Do not approve the resolution and leave Glen Meadow Drive a private road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the resolution accepting Glen Meadow Drive into the State Secondary System. ti THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2003, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION MEADOW INTO THE SECONDARY SYSTEM REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF GLEN VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved by: Seconded by: _ Yeas: Nays: A Copy Teste: Diane Childers, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors pc: Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation File ~I y ~ U ..~ C Q m c' E L U~ b1 Q 3 s m a N O ~ E ~ m y 1, v' N L ` O 0 ~ U d m ~ L E .... ~ O ~ ~l o C O ~ Q ~ a d N O A e O L d a ~ ~ ~ y `o a -$~ ~ ~ m ~ N Q ~ O {,~ Y o! N L ~ _ ~ ~_ ~ }- ~ O O r m E ~ Z4 ca Q < Z c~ N G H 0 < ~ ~ L y-~ T 1C ~! < ~ z E v O rWi ~ c ~ ~.,, ~ ~ v U < a 8 O r 8 z n "~ d ~ s ~ L ~ o m m m u ~ ~ . ~ a ~ d m ° a a ti° ~ a° a a° ~ a°. c c S i L C + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e - ~ 4 Q o 0 0 0 o C r r ° ~ ~ f` ~ $ r ~ i b y ~ ~ m m m m o ~ m ~ b t ~ ~ d m i ~ ~ ~ i `~ m ~ O ~ E ~ E E O ~ ¢ a O p s E S ~ x a O ~ ~ C - u. O r a. ~ ~ r d ~ p r n. u. r a ~ r d ci r a w r a ~ ~. i i ^^ 4' ~ i 8 ",~ to u o = G+ I m Z Q ~ N' A f H f0 h' i i a i 7 u .~_ . ~.. ~,~...~ ..., ~ j m °a `a c E 2 ~ w ~ ~ 2 < L r ~ H LL a O o Z n O u < $ U u Ct n W U E r U 9 L6 F H g METES AND SOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS • SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A . COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CAI,.CULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. :~ ~°- ~ 1~Q, 2 5729 5726 4 ~ 5732 A j~ 3 1 ~ 5706 5702 2 '~~ 4 3 •~ JUG 5710 574 > 4 5718 5714 5 5 6 ~~ 1 2 lA 7 5722 ~ 8 5730 5726 eaa~ ~ 5711 3 5803 9 5734 e '~ 16 ~l ' 5719 5723 5738 2A 5811 5727 5817 7 5731 15 ~~ 5735 14 5827 ~~~ ~?' 5739 ~G~' 5816 13 5786 11 12 8 >O 5824 \ 4A-1 Length: 0.1365 Miles No. of Homes Served: 16 „_ , TAX MAP N0.__ 86_16 ___ ----- SCALE:----- ~ -~-- PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Glen Meadow DR. into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE:_11_ 24-03 ACTION NO. A-120203-4.e ITEM NO. I-6 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from schools to accept and appropriate $3,106 increase in Carl Perkins Entitlement funds for use in the career and technical education programs SUBMITTED BY: Roger Johnson Career and Technical Education Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The State Department of Education provides Roanoke County Schools with an annual Carl Perkins Entitlement for career and technical education. The Department of Education has notified us that Roanoke County will receive a supplement to our entitlement from funds unexpended by other school divisions during the 2002-03 school year. The entitlement has been increased by $3,106. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of the $3,106 increase in the Carl Perkins Entitlement to be used in the career and technical education programs. 1 1 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 Roger Johnson, Career & Technical Education Administrator Dr. Linda Weber, Schools Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. T- l~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from schools to accept and appropriate $3,106 increase in Carl Perkins Entitlement funds for use in the career and technical education programs SUBMITTED BY: Roger Johnson Career and Technical Education Administrator APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: C~,~ „-u~,y V ~1~ 1 n W~'~'__l. ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The State Department of Education provides Roanoke County Schools with an annual Carl Perkins Entitlement for career and technical education. The Department of Education has notified us that Roanoke County will receive a supplement to our entitlement from funds unexpended by other school divisions during the 2002-03 school year. The entitlement has been increased by $3,106. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of the $3,106 increase in the Carl Perkins Entitlement to be used in the career and technical education programs. ;, ACTION NO. A-120203-4.f ITEM NO. I-7 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teaching program SUBMITTED BY: Dr. Carol Whitaker Associate Director of Personnel and Staff Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The mentoring teacher program is a program used to support new teachers. The support is identified as training and resources for new teachers. Mentors are assigned to all new teachers in Roanoke County Public Schools. Two days of pre-inservice training in August and afollow-up day of training during the school year are provided. Roanoke County schools have been awarded $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education forthe 2003-2004 school year. FISCAL IMPACT: A local 50% match in the amount of $6,454.14 for Roanoke County Public Schools is required. The account code is 731230-1128 and 731220-1128. The required matching amount is included in the current budget. ALTERNATIVES: None 1 ., STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of mentor teacher funds in the amount of $12,908.27 for training and resources in the mentoring teacher program during fiscal year 2003-2004. 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 Dr. Carol Whitaker, Assoc. Director, Personnel and Staff Development Dr. Linda Weber, Schools Superintendent Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. Z-`I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education for the mentor teaching program SUBMITTED BY: Dr. Carol Whitaker Associate Director of Personnel and Staff Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: U' (~~ (~,v~ ~ , P~ ~ ~.~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The mentoring teacher program is a program used to support new teachers. The support is identified as training and resources for new teachers. Mentors are assigned to all new teachers in Roanoke County Public Schools. Two days of pre-inservice training in August and afollow-up day of training during the school year are provided. Roanoke County schools have been awarded $12,908.27 from the Virginia Department of Education forthe 2003-2004 school year. FISCAL IMPACT: A local 50% match in the amount of $6,454.14 for Roanoke County Public Schools is required. The account code is 731230-1128 and 731220-1128. The required matching amount is included in the current budget. ALTERNATIVES: None s~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance and appropriation of mentor teacher funds in the amount of $12,908.27 for training and resources in the mentoring teacher program during fiscal year 2003-2004. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2003, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 120203-4.g REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF STRATFORD WAY, JULIET COURT, AND HAMLET TRAIL INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor Minnix Seconded By: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Flora, Church, Minnix, Altizer, McNamara Nays: None A Copy Teste: , Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 120203-4.g adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on December 2, 2003. /~ _ /1 ~ / . i Brenda J. Holtonf, CMC Deputy Clerk c ~ U c m E s U R ~ Q 3 L 2 m Q • O m f17 a ~ 'C C e O o V d to L z ,~ o -- ~ m O w " D ~ ~ ~, Q ~ 3 d y O o '~' o ~ L d a i ~ ~ `o n ~r G ~ o ~ ~ ..~. ~ ~. Q ° O ~ ~ m s ~ L ~ O ~ }- ~ C n z a ~ u a Q < ~ t~1 ~ > '" N c m I ~ O ~ ~ r C t ~ ;::;. z E >' . •< v O t=. n 6 P 3 i 7 a 'o 2 0 B u ~_ H j 2 W U U z ~ n O a Z n O o C U a LL y... v 5 n ~ 'E 9 n METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A CO1vIPOSI'TE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. . . 1149 1.62 Ac. 9 ~~ AX MAP No. 86.01 Length: 0.5723 Miles No. of Homes Served: 41 y 1I:1 P ~ N ,a, ~x 0 x SCALE:_ 1 = 300 J PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System 2EPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY APARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 6-16-03 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A )MPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CAI.~CULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT J CURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~~~uY ~,.,,, ~~„~ I 7~9 t .62 Ac. sJSe wise ~r AX MAP N0.__ 86.01 i Length: 0.3369 Miles No. of Homes Served: 24 F. V b ~ O ~ O '-~ ~~ a' O x » > SCALE:__ 1_= 300 _ 3 PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System REPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY T'1Tl AT'1TllT'l1TT /lT /`1/11f1lTTl.TTT~T T11TrrnT nnlfr. Arm ~ TIATF.• 6-~ 6-03 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS'SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~~~ A 1249 740 • 9 \6358 iT4@ / SAX MAP No. 86.01 Length: 0.1642 Miles No. of Homes Served: 14 U io ~ C~ ~ N .y,~ ~ rx 0 SCALE: ~ = 300 S PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System 'REPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 6-16-03 1.62 Ac, ME'"'ES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A ;OMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CAI,.CULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT iN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. I A I 7149 ~ s4o i• \63(5y/8 STfB I Tax ,rap N~_ 86.01 i Length: 0.0712 Miles No. of Homes Served: 9 iJ t('3 .~i ~ 4.a ~,~ Qw' O x SCALE:__ 1__ 300 '1.62 Ac. 3 Y PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE:_6 _16_ 03 ~ . 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: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey Director of Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N~`~ ~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Jackson and Associates, developers of Wexford at Steeplechase, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requesting that they accept 0.34 miles of Stratford Way from its intersection with Route 1537 (Steeplechase Drive) west to its cul-de-sac, 0.16 miles of Juliet Court from its intersection with Stratford Way north to its cul-de-sac, and 0.07 miles of Hamlet Trail from its intersection with Juliet Court west to its cul-de-sac. Staff has inspected this road, along with representatives from VDOT, and finds the roads acceptable. FISCAL IMPACT: No County funding is required. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the resolution requesting that VDOT accept Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System 2) Do not approve the resolution and leave Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail as private roads. ,,~,~, „~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the resolution accepting Stratford Way, Juliet Court, and Hamlet Trail into the State Secondary System. `'~ A ~ ~° THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2003, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF STRATFORD WAY, JULIET COURT, AND HAMLET TRAIL INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A), fully incorporated herein by reference are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved by: Seconded by: _ Yeas: Nays: A Copy Teste: Diane Childers, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors pc: Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation File w C m L U ~ ~ L m Q O m .. N N L Q E O p m s O C O ..a E c >. m 5 S s 0 a a C~ 0 n D Q b a `o ^' ~. 0 0 O E c O ~_ O m Z i~ c~1 >_ N ~ N O L C O v-; C ~ ~ ~ 2 O n N ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ < U Q a ~ } - Q Z s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ 4'1 m t/1 o ~ o `~ ~ o '~ ~ ~ ~ ° _! n a° ~ d J c d o a ~ , a a a a a ~ c d 'J ~ , i V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ c t• J ~ _ J ~~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ J a'~ ~ d' ~ O ~ o 2 t` ~ ~~ ' 4 ~ b N ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 o ~ ,! ~ ~ ~ ~ O m ~- ~ ~ F-1 J ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~; ~ ( Q O m -` W qj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m "` m ~ ° ' i i Af1j cj ~ p ~ p ~ O " ° O !,L` ~ ~ o a o ! ~ ~ ~ ~ Y a ~ ~ ~ a ~ a U ~ ~ ~ b ~ c r a 2 0 ~t o ~- a a 6 u`. c r a a b ii o r a a b ~i o ~- a d a S c r a n. 6 ti c r 0 a _ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~1L (~ ` J '~ ~ - e~ ~`y ~ ~_ ~ V ' '~ ~-~ J m Z Q ~ N 'I A ~ f N f° h i A i u J ._. O 0 v r E Z W ~~ S < _ r $ ~ a O a o e H U `- LL y... v s W ' U L u 9 0 n L r METES • AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS' SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COIGIPOSIfiE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~~ TAX MAP N0. 8 6.01 Length: 0.5723 Miles No. of Homes Served: 41 PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~. U .. 3 I~ a~ ~a 0 x SCALE:_ 1 =300 DATE: 6-16-03 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. .-~ ~ ` TAX MAP N0.__ 86.01______ Length: 0.3369 Miles No. of Homes Served: 24 ,> > SCALE:__ 1_= 300 3 PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE:_6 _1_6-03 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CAI~.CULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~.~~. i i ,~.o TAX MAP No.__ 86.01 I Length: 0.1642 Miles No. of Homes Served: 14 ~, U O ~ ~ ~ ~a 0 x scALE:__ ~_= 300 _ PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System 3 PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 6-16-03 ~ sz n~. METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON '1'ril~ rLA'r n~rtc~~~ly 1 x COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. #" ;y ,. ~4 1119 7 3 TAX MAP N0.__ 86_01 Length: 0.0712 Miles No. of Homes Served: 9 » > SCALE:__ 1_= 300 PLAT SHOWING Aceceptance of Stratford Way, Juliet Court, Hamlet Trail into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE:_6 _16= 03 ACTION NO. A-120203-4.h ITEM NO. I-9 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept donation of drainage easements on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Tax Map No. 61.01-1- 2.3) and Greystoke Partnership (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2), Vinton Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Vickie L. Huffman Senior Assistant County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves acceptance of the following easements conveyed to the Board of Supervisors for drainage purposes, on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc., and Greystoke Partnership, in connection with the development of Edgefield Subdivision in the Vinton Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke: a) Donation of a drainage easement, fifteen feet (15') in width and twenty feet (20') in width, from Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Deed Book 1632, page 985; Tax Map No. 61.01-1- 2.3), as shown on a plat prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, dated April 14, 2000, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. b) Donation of a drainage easement, fifteen feet (15') in width, from Greystoke Partnership (Deed Book 1280, page 573; Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2) and Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Deed Book 1632, page 985; Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2.3), as shown on a plat prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, dated April 14, 2000, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The location and dimensions of these easements have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering staff. FISCAL IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of these easements. 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 Vickie Huffman, Assistant County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development 2 ~~, ~ ~~ ~~ • r~ • E J' ~ O ~s°~ LOT 2 / ~~o / /O~ ° `S;TO" s~ \ ~ ~~~k~/ ~~//ti o ti ti ~ c' °S- ` J 'r / PROPOSED 2r~~ °'~ r "'Q / ~ ~p~ LOT 1 '~~ // ,. 7`--~p S, SECTION 1 EDGEF7ELD '°F ~ c z E O ~ os ~ ~ ~s.9tiFFO /'~ t O 'y v i-- ~D o m o ~ F T ^ ~~ _'1 W ~ a ~ ~ ~ F w o , ~ 1 ~ 2 ~ ~ 1~' 1g1 ~ F,p~~ ti12 ~" o`" ~r~? 5~' / ~}~ /+ N /~ /~ O n? No / G~2 ~ H w O ~ S 16 v OHN 7. PARKER 9 •p ~ No. 1076 ~ ` W ~/f/ /? LOS 2 ~ W°o_ O_ `ia --~ \~ .. O J Q O 1~ DC" ~/ ~ \~ v \ ex~sr °FNc Z `N o o c" W W \9~ `N~ rRACr a-zn ~~ Z.`~ REMAINING PROPERTY ~ \ QFIARLES It mil, !NQ .~ ~I ^~,~4 E U T41AL , 3" g5 51 ~8~~ 21'93 S (151 ~ ~ Q6~5 Ap~E NEW STCXtAIWA1D4 INANAG~71/ENT EASt7~lENT N ~~ j\ ~~s6O' S9~ ~ ~O ~' ~ qN F ~~~ o \~~~ t _ ~/N~\ ON ~ T 0 fo ~-Y~-9GJG N~ o~ ~ 'A~ NN ~ ~ ~9 N •o / ~~ LEGEND D.E. =DRAINAGE EASEMENT ' R/W =RIGHT OF WAY -O ~3~~ N~~ -o Z G~ p T N 'PROPERTY DWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL ASSUME THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY LOCATED THEREIN, AND CONTAINED WITHIN AN EASEMENT PROPERLY DEDICATED, THE HILLS OF SPRING GROVE BLOCK 1 LOT 17-A ~` m w _s ` ~ w N ~~ PLAT FOR '~.~ SHOWING NEW STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EASEMENT 20' ACCESS EASEMENT AND VARIABLE WIDTH DRAINAGE EASEMENT .SITUATE OFF FOUNTAtN LANE V1N'TON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT I I LOT 16-A I I LOT 15 col I I +/ ~o. F l ~e ~J.~ 7630 FO 6j4 ~ ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA TAx # s1.o1-a1-o2 , CALC: LRD DRAWN: Z/LRD/3 TPP&5 T. P. PARKER & SON N.B. GREYSTOKE 818"Boulevard SCALE: 1" -- 60' ENGINEERS SURVEYORS, Post, Office _Hag 39 DATE: APRIL 14. 2000 . PLANNERS Sfllem, VII'81I1i8 24153 W.D. 99-D236 )~IBIT A • • ~~ 19 5~9 i ' MERjDIA QG~ S2 ~~~ Zg ~ ~ P ~, 2~, ~ S ~~ 090 LGND D.E. =DRAINAGE EASEMENT R/W = RfGHT OF WAY EXIST =EXISTING ~. ~ "sue ~ ~ ®' i i ~ ,~~ .~ HOC T ~ F.w. F~~ GAG ~~ O \ ~,~ \ \ \ '~o- / / ~ ~~ G~ ~/ / v~ Q5~'~~ ~ 05~ ~~~~ o / / Q~~e ~G~~ / o ~ boy ~~' / ~~ +\ \ 0~ V N .PARKER 9 ~//~'~ 2 +~ N o. 1076 / \ ~Jrfll,/~ / /'~ + ~/ + ~ a ~ ~F+ ^~ / / ~ PROPERTY OWNER OF THIS 'F/s~' / / ~~ DEVELOPMENT SMALL ASSUME .THE / / ~ MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY OF \oF / THE STDRM DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND +\ \ / / OF THE STORMI,~ATER MANAGEMENT / FACILITY LOCATED THEREIN, AND + • ® / / CONTAINED WITHIN AN EASEMENT \ PROPERLY DEDICATED. ~ ! ! ® +\ ,~ ! ! ;, + `n ~ 1 m TRACT ';4-2" ~ . ~s ! ! o REMAIN_lNG PROPERTY T9 ~ ©1 ! ~ !aFli~RL£5 R. S7A/PS1UN, jNG. ~d'N °' TAX #61.01-D9-02.3 ~ . ~ ! ~~ 1 j ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ! i ~j to _ . I~1 1 ~j Iti - bRP;1NA~E EASEMENT FOR ~ 1 ' 3 , r r ~ CHARLES R. SIMP.S4N. INC. ~ ~ `; ~ AND ~ ~n , GREYSTOKE PA PTI~I ERSl~ G ti ! ~ ~ <~~ACT ' e" ~ = P ~ j j = ~ `` FROPER.TY:.OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO BE VAc`(~, . 1 j ~ l~7EY57gKE.PARINE7,t5~ljP lJPON RECORDATION OF FIiTURE SE~sI'101~S o j j ~ TAX #61 01-01-Q2 .. . OF ED6EF4ELD ~--~ ~ 1 j ~ . SITUATE OFF FOUNTAIN .LANE N J. ~ VIN TON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT 15,00' `NgT~'RA~ w r- ~ ROANOKE COUNTY, ViRGlhtlA A ~ E'h' N 24, . OS ~ ~URS \ „ 01-0 - = 60 TAX ~ 61. 1 02 SCALE: 1 2000 CALL LRD ` D ATE 4PRIL 14 2 E... . . : : . : , - DRAWN: Z/LRD/3 W.O. 99=0236 N B GREYSTOKE • - TPP&5 T; P. ~a~ &k sore Bib Houle EN GINEER9 SURVEYORS Poab Offloa ~ti]d~cv PLANNERS Salem, YlrgiSy~4I53 ~ ~" H , HI~H3BiT B 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: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept donation of drainage easements on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Tax Map No. 61.01-1- 2.3) and Greystoke Partnership (Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2), Vinton Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Vickie L. Huffman Senior Assistant County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: '~~ r '1 I SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves acceptance of the following easements conveyed to the Board of Supervisors for drainage purposes, on property of Charles R. Simpson, Inc., and Greystoke Partnership, in connection with the development of Edgefield Subdivision in the Vinton Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke: a) Donation of a drainage easement, fifteen feet (15') in width and twenty feet (20') in width, from Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Deed Book 1632, page 985; Tax Map No. 61.01-1- 2.3), as shown on a plat prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, dated April 14, 2000, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. b) Donation of a drainage easement, fifteen feet (15') in width, from Greystoke Partnership (Deed Book 1280, page 573; Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2) and Charles R. Simpson, Inc. (Deed Book 1632, page 985; Tax Map No. 61.01-1-2.3), as shown on a plat prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, dated April 14, 2000, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. _.., The location and dimensions of these easements have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering staff. FISCAL IMPACT: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of these easements. .~,.`.w;,. ~~ OT 2 ~ ~ F. ~s ~ / S- ~ ~ / /O~ o_ fo, .P ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ `~k~/ ~ ~ So ~ ~ S // 2 ,~ ti ~ ti f b PROPOSED r f"'~ To_~ h / ~ ~~` LOT 1 '~~ 7~,o S, SECTION 1 A ~A ° EDGEFIELU ,~; z E O ~ m s~~-v,~pEp < O ti V ~'. ~D N ~ ~I ~ ~ T 41 ~ _ F `~ ~ ` ~~`~~ y i ~ ~ ~ ~ F'P/ 1~2. ~g c m ~ ' a : ~~ ~5 ~ `. -ta 0 "~ rn -~'©~~ oPG ~yTHOFD~ ~v o ~ ~25~ o ,.. R O o 16 V OHN T. PARKER Y W 5 N o. 1076 N ` Z W ~/fI ~ ~ ~~c~. ~ 5~~ •~ .o \~~ ~` J O ~ \~ ~ v ~ ~ -~ r \ ~ ~ FMS n N~ ~^ N Z- `N O o ~ W TRACT 'A-2" ~~ z . `~ REMAINING PROPERTY ~ QNA>RiLES R. S~A/PS101N, /INS ~ ~I _~,~4 E ~ , joTA~ 3" S S 55 OS) 210 93 <1 i 0 T y~ GJ, f~N~ s°,~ ~G~F NN_ / ~/~ O LEGEND D.E. =DRAINAGE EASEMENT R/W =RIGHT OF WAY -o ~3~~ N 'o Z N PRUPERTY OWNER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL ASSUME THE MAINTENANCE RESPUNSIB~LITY OF THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND ~F THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY LOCATED THEREIN, AND CONTAINED WITHIN AN EASEMENT PROPERLY DEDICATED. THE HILLS OF SPRING GROVE BLOCK 1 LOT 17-A QB~,S ApdE NEW STC7IRA/WA 1ER A/ANAGEA/ENT EASEMENT ~ ~~1~.~~s6oJ S9' ~ 'S'O w ~ q~ 0 o~~ O \~o~ F I '~ l~/N~NTy . oN \ PLAT FOR '\ SHOWING NEW STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EASEMENT 20' ACCESS EASEMENT AND VARIABLE WIDTH DRAINAGE EASEMENT SITUATE OFF FOUNTAIN LANE VIN'TON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT 1 I I LOT 16-A / LOT 15 ~ of I~ ~~ II I +~ 2p• ~ J . Oe \ II I 7B3 v D AC ej4 ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA TAx # 61.01-ot-02 %, ~"~ , /i% CALC: LRD l DRAWN: Z/LRD/3 TPP&S T. P. PARKER & SON N.B. GREYSTOKE 818~~HOUlevard SCALE: 1" = 60~ ENGINEERS SURVEYORS, P~~,Offipe~,Boz 39 DATE: APRIL 14.2000' PLANNERS Salem. Virginia 24153 W.O. 99-0236 m ~` ~ W _~ ` ~ N ~~ ffiIBIT A p1AN ~ g2 ~o~ 19 ~~;1° / . cF~ GAG ... •p.B• ~ ,y o s\ `~ ~~e/ / % \ s ~~ % ~ \ ~ o ~ ~ ~ Ao G N D +\ ®/ ~ ~ 0~ ~ D.E. =DRAINAGE EASEMENT ~N "'- ~- ~ R/W =RIGHT OF WAY +\ ~ ; O `ro_ ~p~ (G.~~OA ~~ CVICT - CVICTI AI (~ - / ~ Qo~ Gv~ 1, ~~yTH OF Pl ~, oc y / \ \ °~ / ~` ~ 6 v N .PARKER 9 ~/ ~/ Z + No. 1076 / \ ~an~ s~xv~°~' rZ // /f//,off ~ . + / / °~a PROPERTY OWNER tIF THIS \~+sr / / ~~ DEVELOPMENT SHALL .ASSUME THE / / ~ MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY OF ~°F / THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND +\ ~ / / OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT / FACILITY LOCATED THEREIN, AND + ® / / CONTAINED WITHIN AN EASEMENT \ PROPERLY DEDICATED. f ® +\ ~; 1 1 ~1 + `~'~ ~ 1 1 rn TRACT 'A-2" 9s \ ©~ ~ ~ REMAINING PROPERTY G7~lARLt3 R. S/I~/PS~AfV, /NG '~N_°' 1 TAX #61.01--09-02.3 © ~ \+\ ~' 1 , 1 1 0 `~ 1 1 ° - / 1 ti - ~° ± ~ 3 DRAINAGE :EASEMENT fOR .. 1 1. ~ CHARLES R. SIMP.SON. t.I~C. ~ ~ ~ ''1~~ AND 1 i ~ :BRACT " e" GREYS70KE Q~-~TI~IiERS~J~L~P 1 1 = PROPERTY OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO BE Vfa; ~t 1 1 ~ G71EY57gKE.PARINERSf!lP UPON RECORDATION OF FUTURE SE~fIC3T5}S 0 1 ~ ~ TAX #61.01-01-Q2 . . OF EDGEFIELD " ~----~ ~ 1 1 ~ SITUATE OFF FOUNTAIN .LANE N .~. ~ VlNTON MAGISTERIAL DlSTR1CT IS,00' ''vArOR ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ~~a~ N 24~~ 22' ~URS~ TFR CACG~ LRD.~Ot-01.-02 DATE: APRIL 14. 2000 E - DRAWN: Z/LRD/3 W.O. 99=0236 N.B. GREYSTOKE - 1 PPBcS T, P. 'PAR 'K11R &5 SON E.N GINEERS 818 BOU1tYfl~'tt'~ ' ~ - SVRVEYORS P08t Offfc8 ,~3o]h}'~'J _ - 'PLAN N.ERS SsIeID, Ylrg~ri+~~4:I53 ffiIBiT B (~ - 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 December 2, 2003 $9,002,656 6.62%~ Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $9,002,656 $9,002,656 6.62%I 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 ~ p~.(~ '~1r County Administrator ~`~`~ °~ /~ ', ~j M -'~~, CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 10/28/2003 Amount Unaudited Balance at June 30, 2003 $360,172.56 Equipment and software for electronic records managemer (73,057.00)I system for Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office Balance at December 2, 2003 $287,115.56 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~~ y ~.~ ~,~ i~ ~-+"~ 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)I 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)I Balance at December 2, 2003 $69,747.00 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator `' ~ ~~~ ~v ~~~ "~~~ FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget $670,000.00 Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund 1,113,043.00 FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00 Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund 321,772.00 FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00 FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriatio 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (1,219,855) 780,145.00 Savings from 1998-1999 debt fund 495,363.00 FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriatio 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (1,801,579) 198,421.00 FY 2001-2002 Original budget appropriatio 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (465,400) Savings from 2001-02 debt fund 116,594 1,651,194.00 FY 2002-2003 Original budget appropriatio 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (2,592,125) (592,125.00) FY 2003-2004 Original budget appropriatio 2,000,000 Less increase in debt service (2,202,725) (202,725.00) Balance at December 2, 2003 $8,435,088.00 Reserved for Future School Operations FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation $1,500,000.00 July 11, 2000 SW Co Regional Stormwater (290,000.00) FY2001-2002 Original budget appropriation 1,500,000.00 July 1, 2001 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle (1,858,135.00) July 1, 2002 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle (35,047.00) July 1, 2002 Transfer to Operating in original 2002-03 Budget (566,818.00) July 1, 2003 Transfer to Operating in original 2003-04 Budget (250,000.00) Balance at December 2, 2003 - Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~, , . ACTION NO. ITEM NO. N1- 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: December 2, 2003 Accounts Paid -October 2003 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors Payroll 10/10/2003 Payroll 10/24/2003 Manual Checks Voids Grand Total Direct Deposit $ - $ 801,377.74 779,492.94 Checks Total - $ 4,403,891.57 158, 597.41 959, 975.15 157,525.57 937,018.51 1,598.92 1,598.92 $ 6,302,484.15 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. ` - ~ Ca ~o i B u o e v ~ o o $ ~ a W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b v m n, °._{ q d E u ~ C e1 v P1 ~ w7 C bA L ti O ' C ca O ~i ~ O K O U N y z w ~ v C v ~ .°1+ Y L ~ q ~ A C a W i Fj °~ ~ O ti M O b C W t .~ C4 i G O ~r 0 d r W d C e ~ a 7 u .ti. C O W u ~. T ~ e G y o a ~ " W eo 0 0.1 v C Lr L d C~ °o 'fl G e W ~~ ... ~P l~ l~ O 1n 00 7 ~ ~O N V v1 .~ N O O [~ ~ M M 7 O N V' 00 O ~ ~O V'l M Vj 00 O p~ O O M N 1(j 00 ~O \O 00 ~ ~ 00 O ~O ~O ~--~ N V1 ~ M M N M N M N V' M M N M M Vl M~ 7 M er ~!l Vl M N V1 O M M l~ l~ ~O O ~n ~O ~ O ~ oo ~p in M oo V O N N O O oo vi ~O O M l~ M O W ~ V1 ti ~ .-. N M 7 V V'1 O N ~--~ O~ M ^~ v1 [~ l~ O~ ~ Vl p~ l~ ~ M V1 l~ ~O ~ V ~O ~ N h M M M O~ V V 00 [~ ~--~ V'1 M Vl l~ ti _ _ O ~ ~ _ [~ N M O~ ~D O~ V IA O~ O l~ ~-+ r ~ ~ O~ O V V 00 ~O l~ ~ ~ fy, ~O v1 O .-. M l~ V [~ to Q~ V M o0 ~ O v'1 N l~ \O M Vl O~ l~ O\ N [~ l~ l~ M N ~h .--, ~ 7 M O~ Ul 00 O~ 00 IA 0o N oo O~ l~ v'i N O~ O M O ~ ~ O ~ ~ M o0 O~ ~--~ N U oo ~D O O M --~ b ~ h M '. O~ ~n M O^ N O~ O --~ V ^~ 00 N O O~ oo -. M Vl IA rl \O V1 M In .--~ N ~--~ 1(1 N ~--~ V1 i O b 00 v'i O ~ N m [~ M V1 ~ 00 [~ O O O V1 V ~O O V) N v i o0 V~ l~ l~ ~ V V DO O O M A N ~--~ 00 O M Q~ V1 N N O ~O vl O l~ V'l 00 ~ M N ~ v1 V ~O O ~D .-. ~ N ~D o0 V ~ [~ --~ O ^-~ V N l~ ~ M M M O Vl O ~ [~ O~ lp ~ l~ V O O~ ~ ~, _ ~ 00 M ~ ~ [~ 00 ~D ~O O o0 7 OQ [~ O O l~ I~ ~O l~ O~ [~ O~ ^-~ O V oo ~ rr vi v1 ~O P N N ~ V' Oi ~--~ ~D N vi o0 M O o0 l~ R oo O~ O~ 7 O N oo ~ ~ ~ _ N ~ h ~ vl O 01 ~ N .-+ N O~ •--~ •--~ M ~ ~ O~ O M ~ ~ V1 O ~ N --~ l~ T . i N M ~ N .-. 00 ~.j .-. .--~ V1 .-. M O N 0 0 O O~ O O O p~ O v'i O 00 O N ~A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O --~ O .r O O O ~. .--~ .--~ O t7 O V O ~O O l~ Op 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O c~ o o ~ 0 0 0 d o 0~ o, r o 0o vi o~ o v r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~o ~n .~ _ ~ ! ~ ~ O ~ N O~ N ~ vl O O O~ O ~O ~ N O~ N l~ O N ri ~--~ ~O h [~ N O ~--~ ~ M M N 00 N ^-~ ~ N ~-. ,~ O O O~ 01 V v1 O~ ~O 00 O~ --~ V o0 O~ 00 N l~ V 00 ~D O ~O I~ V O V'1 00 ~--~ ~ l~ H ~ ~ ~ \O [~ M M ~ ~ W ~ O ~--i M \O ~--~ V1 V'1 Vl 01 O l~ !r M --~ [~ N ~O ~O M ~O lG 00 O~ ri W vl M W N N W N M O W ~ O~ N vi l~ v1 00 et o0 ,-. O~ oo p~ N O~ l~ O~ ~ oo ~ ~D O ~O .-~ ~D M eT O M l~ ti M O N ~ r+ V') 00 O 1p ~--~ O O~ V1 h M r V'~ [ O^ Vl M ~ O vl ~O ^-~ M M ri l O ~O O~ O ~O ~O U1 [~ vi N vl N N O~ vi o0 7 O~ N N N [~ Q~ [~ ~O O N M M C~ M O~ O ~O O~ N N N O~ l~ N N ~O ~ 00 rr M W V'l ~O M 'ct -+ ti N M N N ~ ^' N ri ti ~ M l~ P O~ M N N M r ~ O M O ~--~ O~ ~D O O~ O O o0 0 0 0 0 00 O~ O~ 'ct M M M l~ N v1 7 N ~ N M M O~ O ~p O O O~ O O O O O~ V O~ N h --~ O~ O o0 00 M V et vi O ~--~ M vl ~O N ~n M vi ~n O M ~n ~p N o0 00 O~ ~O ~--~ 00 00 N O~ V II1 U N M V O O O l~ O [~ oo Q~ N Vl O M N O~ M 1(~ 01 Q~ pQ M N Vl M 1(~, M ~ [~ 00 V ~O e~ '7 V V O 7 h ~ -. 00 M vi l~ M N O~ M V' O~ M N Vl ~ O~ N O~ N O~ vi m O~ --~ f~ Q~ 01 V 7 00 00 O~ 00 O~ ~O 00 O\ M V'1 N 01 V1 M 00 ~ M V1 T O [~ M ~O ~O N N N [ ~ O [~ 00 M V~ N M V1 M~ -. .-~ [~ N .~ V N n r --~ et ~ W ~--~ ~-~+ O oo h ~--~ 7 N M M N rl .r M N -~ 00 R 4 N '2 . ~ cd ~ o '-' U ~, ~ C v~ .~ ~ E U w 'b a _ U O ~ d }~i ~ U L ~ C O cy y N NN ^y ~ O O O f"' O C ~ ~ ~ Y '~ U cd ~ ~ 0. aY i w ~ O b N ~ 'fl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~;~ ~ 3 ¢ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ k-i aLi ~ ~~ a~i ti ~ ~ U No ~ a Y ~ ~ • ~ ~ U ~ N W 23 ~ U ? H N ~ O ' may N ¢ ~ G~, y p ~ L cC ~ '> C •~ ~ 'j tC > X ~ L i ~ ~ ti w 0. g U ~ , a ~' q '~ o U ~ ~ ?, x °' N .~ o N r~I'i V] Q V] x i ~ v i ° ti w G „ L'i U (C (, a ~ ~ ~ ~ U V N d ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ a ~D aCi d O o -C O a O 'Q o o ~ ~ •~ . ~ G a ~ ° aCi p 'v C ,p ~~ ~v 0 ..a C7 W c U OO c c d ~ a w U Q c v v Un5 ~' W .~ C7 o c ~ a~ U a~ rn 0 c N M O O O N O O N M I O O O O N M V vl ~O O O O O O O M~ vl ~O 1~ 00 O O O O O O O _ _ _ O O O N N O O M M M M O O O O ~~~ ~~ ~ O O O O O O h~ h~~ V'1 N O O O O O O O .d. ~ ~. N nt o o t~ ~ Q ; ~ v •° d a W E V ~ ~ ° p a m a+ ~ ~ ~ 9 d m °' o °1 a E ~ u u G ~ G W G m C~ ' .~ .~ L O C a 'w F O C 7 O U ~O r z w v u C u ~ a°3 .'. E ca 9 u .~. C ~' W v W ~ ~ M O M O .r '[7 'O G W 7 C a t C O 0 u s W u u C C V L ~ E a0 p .. ~ 7 O 0 W d T E i G c y o y W e°1o 0 00 C W, i u C °o t C 0 w ~O 00 ~ p ~ O V~ N V O\ ~ O O O M O M 00 00 O~ l~ D\ b o0 V h p~ oo ^-~ ~O O O M pp O O O N M M l~ ~ M N 00 ~O rl ^' ~ M M ~ a\ ~ N M ~ ~ O V O ~ l~ ~O V O r O N --~ O O V [~ O o0 00 M [~ oo O ~ --~ V O O ~ N O~ t~ O O oo ~p O l~ l~ M M M o0 1(j vl N t7 O rl M N ~O O O ~O p~ N O~ ti ~ a\ O~ O O~ O vl [~ O M v'l M A O O 7 00 O~ N N O~ N O t~ O N N N O t~ Q~ M vi 0 0~ ~ ~O v'i ~ p? 00 O V M -~ r [~ M 00 W D\ N O •--~ O~ .y h --~ l~ N ~O 00 M 00 00 00 00 In V1 N M O [~ O\ O~ V' l~ ti N ^-~ M V~ M N [~ V' V ~O ~--~ l ^ ~O 7 r-I '~Y N ^-~ M N M a\ O N ~ n ti .ti M ~O O O~ O~ ~ ~O O O~ O ao D\ O O O M O N N O ~C v1 O ~"~ O vi .-. O l; oo O N O O -~ e•j O N fy O~ M O O ~ `R [~ O O O O N M M p V1 N e! M O Vl _ O h O i ~ W M O O e7, V N ~O O M M N~ o o V v i ~ M ~O h N ~O ~Y ~ 00 h ~O .ter N M M ~ n 01 ~ W ~ N N ~ ~ O O N (~ O N M . . .-+ ~ ~--~ N M N --~ ~D O t~ O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O M v1 M O OQ O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N O M O ~ O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O ~p ~ °` ~ v ,~ o _ ~ N N ~ n O~ N O ~ O M ~O O p~ l~ O O O O ~ O O O O~ 00 N O ~ N ~O ~ O t7 ~-+ I~ X 0 0 0 ~ O O Q O~ 0o t~ O ~O ~D a\ O~ O V1 vi ~7 O O O M O M O~ _ O V ~O v~ ~ ^-~ N N oo _ N O N O N O~ V M l~ ~ ~O l~ ~ ~ M ~ 00 ~ D\ M ~ ~ [~ .-. Vl ~ l~ .-. N ~O O~ ~O N ~ V ~ O~ N ~ ~ M M V1 N ~ M O O M ~O O O O ~O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O M M ct O l~ N O N O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N v1 l~ 00 O N ~O --~ O O~ 00 O l~ O O l~ N ~ M 0p N --~ O ~--~ ~ _ vl M ~ M O~ O O O ~ ~p N [~ p~ pp ~O ~--~ t~ 7 ~ ~ O O ~--~ O 7 O O I~ ~ .--~ O .x ~ vi ~O l~ O~ ~O D\ M [~ n n vl O~ O ~--~ O~ N 00 'ct N ~O 00 ~"~ V1 ~A l~ 00 Vl 00 O 00 M V O [~ T ~ V N [~ O M ~--.~ ~O vl ~n M vl V ~D ~-+ O^ ~D vl N O~ M N V1 ~ N M a\ O ~ ~D l~ M w 4 i r+ o ~ U d 4 a a o'~ ~o •~ o ~ `U° ~o 'd G O N y U ~ c P, ~ > U ~ p `° a °' `c° •~ ~ A w x a U ' ° 8 °° O O ~ o ~ ~ ¢ ou ~ ~ ~ g ~ ti ~ C ~~ ~ x ~~x~o ~ ~a ~>~ ~ ~~ . U '° " N W y ~ ~ ~' ~ b Ga A ~ ~ N ~ " ~y U G x U O A [~] y C V A , C t, ~. ~ tx W ~ o. °~ •,~. U aq o y > ~ w.U, ~ ~ c H H 1. [~ ' ' ti ~ ~ st ~ 0 ~ c a ~ ~ o o ~ o ~ „ ~ w' ~ .~ ¢ •~ ~ ~ a " o ~ ~ ~ o c~ ~ P l U 0 O U O U U O r _ ~ ~ y O ~ O L O , o L4 W o W A H fx U c ~ .C c N M O O O N M I O O O O N M V ~O I~ O O O O O O •--~ N O O ~ ~o ~o 0 0 0 ~ t~ r ~ 0 0 0 0 o0 00 00 00 00 0o 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn a 0 0 F b c P ~~ ~' ~,1 ~~ , '.-, 0 0 N J a Q C~ .~ .~ i+ ai .'~. O C ca a w 0 C 7 O U 0 n o °z ~ ~ y d 7 C 6> ~~i// FV CQ "~ y u Q' b C ^O d e W W O C d ~ O ~--~ N O l~ 00 ~ h N n N M O ~--~ ~ O O W E V'1 O M 00 O~ V M O M M~ [~ l~ O 00 ~ N O O O ~D O~ O~ N -+ N 00 N vl ~O V --~ --~ CY O~ O ~--~ R ~O l~ 00 ~O M ~/1 V [~ O O~ ~ ~O O O~ ca ayi O Vl ~. 00 ~O l~ M N l~ ~--~ Q\ M ~O 01 V1 ~O l~ ~D o0 M o0 O~ M N l~ ~ D1 O~ 00 Vl N N N A 7 d ^-~ N N N M^ N N N ~--~ V M N N N^ O~ M N~ M N M ~--~ ^ ~ ~ M N ^~ M 4. Y ~ ~ ~i ~ u ~+ ~ h V O~ O ~D O~ ~D o0 M N V O~ V' [~ ~--~ D\ ao 00 ~ ~--~ V O O ,--~ M ~ l~ O~ ~--~ 00 ~ O ~O 00 O~ ~--~ O~ O O~ ~ 01 V1 00 M 00 \O O~ M ~--~ N Q\ ~--~ ~ ~ ~ M ^ N [~ M '""' M ~ M O ~ ~ '~ ~--~ [~ N ~ ~ 00 7 l~ O N 00 M O N 00 M --~ 'R 00 Vl lp [~ Vl 01 M N V O ^~ ~ M ~ [~ ~ 00 00 ~ Vl O~ 61 00 h Q~ Vl O V1 M l~ N ~O l~ N ~ ~O l~ M l~ V M D\ [~ .-. ^ 00 O M 00 00 00 .-. O~ 00 u ~ M Q\ r r r O N N ~--~ O~ O~ N ~D l~ N V~ M N V O~ l~ ~ M V O R N M~ V O C M 01 i ~ ~ r N ~ ^-~ ~ r N O ~ n M V'~ O~ -~ ^ V' Vl O~ M N ~ V1 N M ~ ^ ~D ~ 00 00 ~ ~O M N 'V V 'V' ~--~ ^~ ^-~ ^ N M M N ^ vi N ~ ~ O~ v1 7 N_ l~ 00 ~O ~O O Q\ N O ~ ~ ~ O V ~D l~ --~ N h V O N O~ 00 ~ --~ O oo O O oo O ~ ~O --~ M O ~O ~O l~ O ~ l~ M N ~O 01 O~ V ~O oo [~ [~ v~ oo ~ °O vi ^ ~ M ~ ~--~ h 01 00 ~--~ ~O O~ l~ ~--~ ~O 00 Vl M ^ M O O O [~ Vl ~O M 00 00 ~!1 V ~--~ V ~ ~ N Ca ~ V a\ ~ N N M N r o0 00 N V ~O -~ N N o0 0o N M O~ N N t~ oo ~O ~O T .-. ~ o0 ~ y M ~ O Q~ N [~ Q~ N ~O Q~ V1 O M N O~ --~ --~ ~ N O~ ~O Q~ ^ v'1 ~ V ~O ~O ~O ~n O N --~ ~O 00 N •-• M •-• l~ •-• .-• ~-• ~ V M Vl ~ V'1 y ~ M .-. .-. .--i .-r eC > a~ y ~ a M O o0 l~ ~O ~O O O~ -~ N o0 v1 l~ ~O V1 V'1 00 O~ 00 N M ~O o0 O~ ~O ~O V v'l O U l~ O N h nr W 'V' 00 M O N 40 M l~ ~O 'cF O 00 00 V' O~ V' l~ ~O ~G O O V1 ~ 00 M M 00 O ~--~ DO M i, d DD M ~+ 00 N O O~ M ~ ~ V'l ~O l~ M ~O 00 l0 N M ~O 00 O O M l~ M 00 O~ V U 00 V ~ O W V O~ ~D N W h ~--~ ~ N M -~ ~ V~ M V O oo N V O ~O l~ V~ ~--~ O d7 N ry = y N [~ M ~O O N N ~1 ~~ W M M N ~ M W N O ~--~ O Q~ O~ 00 00 V G > l~ V1 V1 -+ N N ~--~ --~ V M 7 ~"f a ~a d G W b 0 .~ a ._, 0 0 0 0 0 0 --~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [~ O O O oo O O O O ~t [~ 0 0 O~ O~ M O M O l~ O V q O O O O O O M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [~ O O^ 0 0 0 0 O O O Vl O~ O ^-~ O O ~+ O~ O ~ O O O O [~ O --~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~--~ l~ O 00 ~O O V O ~O --~ V O Vl O~ ~O 00 O M O O Vl ^ 'C O O O O O Vl O O Vl O O O M V'1 O 00 M ~D V1 00 Q~ O N N O~ ~O N v1 Vl ~ O 00 O --~ O~ l~ 7 O O O 00 l~ [~ M O ~ V ~O 01 00 l~ ~--~ N l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M O Ch O~ M M O 01 00 ~O ^ O W M vl ~ ~ W O M ~ -~ M V'i ~ M l~ ~ ~O ~O N N ~D l~ O~ M M ~D --' ~O ~ ~O o0 O~ O O~ V N ~O ~O 'Ct ~--~ --~ --~ N^ N N V --~ M N -- v1 N t ~. O W ti ~ 0a m '~_ v, N a ~ cd ~ y ~~ v o o ~~ U "° y '° ~ ~ a ~ w X23 ~ ~ ~ ~' °° N ~ Q °~' ~' ~ ~ K a~ H ~' ~ w •> ~ °' v ~ ~ O w H ~ ~ ~ ° k o °o i w ~, ' v ~ ° ~ ~a °C' ~ ~ U ~ Q o ~ ~ ~ ~ > o C7 H o .v `~ .a ~"" ~ v cka ~ a~i ~ ~' G ti ~ ~ ~ U p o o v~ a ~ ~ U 'C y rn U ~° o ~~ y N ~ .°~ ~C. `e °~ ti .~N, ~ ~ .1 ~ a' `° U b cU Q b ~ N ti m Cam/] ~ ~ ~ W ~ ° '~ ~ ~ ~`~'. °o W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~'"' is cCa Y o ° ~ ~ ~ y y a> ~ .b ti ~ ;; U w w ~ is Rf N . ~ p o y ~' Y v a`"i ~ b ~ v~ ~ ° y a~i a~i ~.° ~° ~ v o U ~ ~ y '+`•d a`i a`'i ~ 'o ~ a'"i ~ a~i ia' o o ~ ,~. ~ cka ' " o c~ '~ c~a chi a~i ~ ~ C a~i a~i ,~ ,~ ~ d ~ v o ,~ °~ ,~ °~ ~ ~ N ~ wa.aaa.aUxlw~[-~~xF-O¢~.aawUair.u;wUUrx~rxZrn~O~00E- w O_ --~ N_ M_ d' O N M V V1 ~O 1~ W ~ O ~--~ N V' t~ 00 O~ O N o0 O -+ ~O O M O ~D N M ^" N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M V 'ct 7 V V1 v1 V1 ~D ~D ~ [~ o0 00 01 01 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 r1 O O N ~ ~ ai N e ~ rl m ~ •' « e a ~ ~ d ~ CQ y Qi ca v7 d 7 C a~ i a L~ •C CO •~ U Q' ~ ~ ~ C o ca C ^O ~ ~ C +"' a w ~ O H i, W C ~ O ++ U d CE M 0 M O 'O 9 C W 0 .~ a G O t. L O W 'fl d N y •~ V ~ C L .~. G e0 .7 W f7 O O N ti M d ~ ~ O A ~ M G ~ ti ~ a ~ a 7 t ~ od 0 aM4 O N OD b 7 0.1 N b O O^ M H W O F 'O C ~. 1 Q 0 ~, o o ~ • z w ~ 'O G 7 W L G O O .w b G 7 W M O y ~ 7 y O O O N v v v ~ v v 0.. W W W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ v (Y. ~ ~ W c. '~ v ~y ii >' ii 1}1.$ 1 y0 GIpI 7 X69 ~~~Mhlt'M~~• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET ;' RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219-2000 PHILIP A. SHUCET COMMISSIONER November 18, 2003 Mr. Elmer C. Hodge Roanoke County PO Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Mr. Hodge: The enclosed report contains a list of all changes to the Secondary System of State Highways in your county approved by the State Secondary Roads Engineer in October 2003. All additions to and abandonments from the Secondary System are effective the day they are approved by the State Secondary Roads Engineer. This date appears in the far right column of the monthly report. If you have any questions or comments about this report, please call Martin Law at 804-786-7399. Michael Estes Director of Local Assistance Division ME/MII VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING M -'~ r .+ O N ~ i .~. ? u ~ ~ w ~ W V~ C 0 .~+ O R ~ Q ~ ~i w ~ CD p~" a .~ .~ L F L ~ y ~~ 7 a w w o ~ :~ ~~ _~ u ,~ •°-~ 0 L O p"' 4~ .Q b Oi ~ 0 O i' ..~ o0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ CC ~ ~ z s o w ~ a ~ O ~ ~ ~ OR'i O rY' U O O 0 0 O O N N ~ ~ n ~ O O O O U ~ ro ~I~ QQ U~~ ~'~ wl3 E-~ F~- M M ~ ~ N N_ O '', O cC '' rx ~_'~ 3 3 G C O O ~ ~ L L ~ ~ c c ~ E wlw` ~ ', ~ oio G 0 M 'O p 'C o Q a~ O N y ~ ~ ~ U U wD c .v ' b C L ~ ~ U O Q I Q y H C R ~ ~ M ~O O o i M O I N I O N O O a~ .U ~ s y Ili C: Y (~ .~ U o F~ ~ z ~~ R Q '' H U cp a ! ~~ .~ w a N O ~ 'O ,~ C Y ~ W O .. ~. w Z 'I M N I 0 N a~i b Q O O N ' O N ~D O 0 0 ro 0 O to 'o I~ I° I~ U s ~o '~ i 0 N v 0 li ~ '~~ '~ ~, ~y r 0 s m 0 s d r N I N I 5 I ~ 01 I U ~~ w ACTION NO. ITEM NO. (~- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work session with citizens to discuss Back Creek development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside to meet with citizens of the Back Creek community to discuss proposed development in the area. r 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: December 2, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session on Remote Control Locomotive Operations SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On November 18, 2003, Supervisor Altizer requested a work session on remote control locomotive (RCL) operations. On March 25, 2003, Mr. Michael Roop spoke on behalf of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE) and expressed his opposition to Norfolk Southern's practice of using remote control technology for switching trains within yard limits. He requested that the Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution banning RCL. Attached you will find a summary and a copy of the Notice of Safety Advisory which recommends minimal guidelines for RCL operations, published by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Remote control devices have been used to operate locomotives in Canada for more than a decade and at various locations in the United States, especially within certain industrial sites, for many years. The safety record concerning use of these devices has thus far been very positive. Many believe that, if properly used, these devices can actually reduce the number of injuries and fatalities that occur in yard operations where employees are sometimes struck by trains being operated by an engineer on board the locomotive. However, FRA is monitoring RCL operations very closely to ensure they are implemented safely. FRA has accident/incident reporting procedures in place to obtain data on these operations for review. If at any time unsafe conditions are detected, FRA will take immediate corrective action. 1 - ., ~~ After the FRA gave approval to the nation's major freight railroads for RCL operations, the United Transportation Union (UTU) entered into an agreement with these railroads to implement this technology. The BLE is opposed, alleging that the technology is unsafe and untested. Its attempt to launch a strike on this issue was blocked by a federal judge in January 2002. The BLE then filed a lawsuit that a certified locomotive engineer be in charge of all locomotive operations, not a trainman, whether the operation be manned or remote. It lost that case. In March of this year, BLE staged a protest rally criticizing the Bush administration and the Department of Labor over its approval of RCL operations. The BLE claims that it is not opposed to the technology; rather it protests the lack of necessary federal regulations to safely govern such operations. At this rally the AFL-CIO labor unions applauded the actions of local governments in banning remote control locomotives, but it said that this issue should instead be "governed by the highest national standard" issued by the FRA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It appears that this is a dispute between the nation's major railroads and one of its unions, the BLE. In addition, it appears to be a dispute between two unions, the BLE and UTU. It further appears that the federal agency with responsibility and expertise for this issue has approved RCL operations and has recommended guidelines for its use. I do not believe that Roanoke County has any lawful jurisdiction or power over this issue. From Mr. Roop's comments it does not appear that there are any rail yards in Roanoke County. Is the Board interested in further research on this topic? Would the Board like to request a representative of the FRA, UTU, or NS to provide it with further information? Attachments "Attachment A" -Federal Railroad Administration, Remote Control Locomotive Operations, August 2003, Summary. FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION Remote Control Locomotive Operations "Attachment B" -Notice of Safety Advisory 2001-01. Recommended minimal guidelines for the operation of remote control locomotives. http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/advisories/sa2001 01 pdf "Attachment C" -News Release, March 11, 2003, AFL-CIO Transportation Unions Say Bush Administration Inaction Threatens Safety of Rail Workers. pr031103 RCL 2 Attachment A $ u~a~~ August 2003 Summary Site Search; Remote control locomotives (RCL) have been in use in this country for a number c term refers to a locomotive that, through use of a radio transmitter and receiver sy operated by a person not physically located at the controls within the confines of tl cab. The systems are designed to be fail-safe; that is, if communication is lost, the brought to a stop automatically. In the U.S., this technology has been confined largely to in-plant rail operations. R however, each of the largest railroads in the country has begun implementing RCL a wider scale, as have several regional railroads. Therefore, the Federal Railroad . (FRA) is assessing the operations, with the first priority to ensure that they pose ni railroad workers or to the public. Because this technology is not widely used in U.S. railroad operations, FRA has Iii which to base an objective safety analysis and must, therefore, proceed prudently recognize that these operations have existed in Canada for several years and app credible safety record. However, it is clear that the potential for serious injury exist all aspects of railroad operations. As these operations expand, some of the traditic conducting rail movements will be significantly modified. Under such circumstance factors may change. It is FRA's task to ensure that this transition takes place safel Because information currently available to FRA does not lead to the conclusion the operations should be prohibited on safety grounds, FRA has elected to proceed c~ range of views and safety concerns expressed during various public meetings on 1 underscores the need to proceed with the implementation of this new technology i consistent manner. Therefore, FRA issued a Notice of Safety Advisory, which w the Federal Register on February 14, 2001. The advisory is a nonregulatory appro delivering guidance to the rail industry on how, in FRA's view, these operations sh conducted. In general, railroads appear to be proceeding consistent with the Safety Advisory. reminds the railroads that employees using RCL control units are subject to the re Qualification and Certification of Locomotive Engineers (49 CFR Part 240) . F implementing the technology are required to submit amendments to their training I that RCL operators are properly trained and qualified to handle the most demandii service that they will be assigned to perform in their job. Remote control devices a "appurtenances" of locomotives subject to daily and periodic test and inspection ui rule 49 CFR Part 229. FRA is monitoring compliance with this requirement. Looking ahead, FRA has taken the initiative to conduct a risk assessment of RCL a root-cause analysis of RCL incidents. This research will be extremely helpful in i focusing on any perceived safety concerns related to this technology. FRA has als to ensure that any accidents/incidents associated with RCL operations are identifiE to under the provisions of FRA's accident/incident reporting regulation (49 CFR P~ will use this data to monitor the future safety of these operations. The current Safety Advisory was developed for yard-switching operations only. Wi contract negotiations and rulings, however, RCL operations may expand from yarc main-track "train" operations. If this occurs, FRA will re-evaluate its policy on thesE http://www.fra.dot.gov/Content3.asp?P=94 11/20/2003 ~a~~-~sr Ra~1 ~rsss~oa~ Remote Control Locomotive Operations (~~` ' ~ I Attachment A with all aspects of railroad operations, FRA will monitor RCL operations closely an will take whatever actions are necessary to ensure safety. ~. About Us i Safety (Freight Railroading I Passenger Rail (Press Raom (Legi Regulations & Litigation (Site Tndex (Privacy Policy (FOTA (Jobs (Hor `c, Federal Railroad Administration 1120 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, D{ http://www.fra.dot.gov/Content3.asp?P=94 11/20/2003 Attachment B w NOTICE OF SAFETY ADVISORY 2001-O1-Recommended minimal guidelines for the operation of remote control locomotives. On February 14, 2001, FRA published Notice of Safety Advisory 2001-1 in the Federal Register (Volume 66, No. 31, page 10340), addressing the establishment of recommended minimall guidelines for the operation of remote control locomotives. Background: Remote control locomotives (RCL) have been in use for a number of years. The term "remotely controlled locomotives" or "remote control locomotives" refers to a locomotive which, through use of a radio transmitter and receiver system, can be operated by a person not physically located at the controls within the confines of the locomotive cab. (As used in this document, the term "remote control locomotive" does not refer to use of distributive power, in which a locomotive or group of locomotives entrained or at the rear of a train is remotely controlled from the lead locomotive of a train). FRA's first priority in assessing RCL operations is to ensure that these operations pose no threat to railroad workers or the general public. Because this technology is not widely used in railroad operations, FRA has limited data on which to base an objective safety analysis and must therefore proceed prudently. It is clear that the potential for serious injury exists, as it does in all aspects of railroad operations. RCL operations have been in existence in this country for many years; however, this technology has largely been confined to in-plant rail operations. As these operations expand, some of the traditional ways of conducting rail movements will be significantly modified. Under such circumstances, safety risk factors may change. It is FRA's task to ensure that this transition takes place safely. Throughout its history, FRA has tried to encourage and embrace technological advances in the rail industry. In 1994, FRA proposed to conduct a national test program of RCL operations. FRA held a hearing on February 23, 1995 (FRA Docket No. 94-6), to gather testimony on the proposed RCL operating conditions. See 59 FR 59826 (November 18, 1994). Several manufacturers, labor organizations, railroads, and their associations participated in the hearing. The testimony provided by these organizations revealed a broad spectrum of opinion concerning the merits of the proposed program, the substance of the program requirements, the resultant risks to railroad employees, and the safety of the technology. Interest in, and use of RCLs by the railroad industry has intensified since publication of the Notice of Test Program and the 1995 public hearing. FRA believed that RCL technology has progressed beyond the "test" period and proposed one final meeting to obtain the most recent information and comments on this technology. On July 19, 2000, FRA held a technical conference to allow all interested parties the opportunity to state their concerns and opinions on RCL operations. The conference examined all safety aspects of RCL operations, including (1) Design standards, (2) employee training, (3) operating practices and procedures, (4) test and inspection procedures, and (5) security and accident/incident reporting procedures. Attachment B ~~ '~~_~ s,. The following is a brief discussion of the material and comments presented at that conference. Several commentors expressed concerns in the following areas: RCL operations in bad weather conditions, ergonomic issues in the design of the remote control transmitter (RCT), electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions from RCTs, insufficient clearance when wearing the RCTs in tight spaces, roadway worker protection issues, mental and physical stress associated with RCL operation, and lack of accurate exposure metrics for calculating accident rates. Conversely, several commenters stated that RCL operations have enhanced safety performance. Some of the suggested enhancements included better visual contact with the leading end of rail movements, the elimination of communication error between the locomotive engineer and ground crew, and the reduction of yard accidents and injuries. Several commentors submitted data that indicate accidents and incidents dropped dramatically as RCL operations increased. Although FRA commends these commentors for their efforts in gathering such data, FRA notes that the data used were obtained without equal exposure metrics to allow valid comparisons between remote control and manual operations (i.e., comparisons were not equalized for the number of labor hours and number of employees). Normalizing safety data is necessary to clarify our understanding of the potential safety risks. Consequently, FRA is taking steps to incorporate RCL operations into the accident/incident reporting procedures required by 49 CFR part 225. See 65 FR 79915, December 20, 2000. FRA is proposing to modify the instructions for Forms F 6180.54, 6180.SSa, and 6180.57 in its Guide to Preparing Accident/Incident Reports. Two of the three form modifications will request that the "Special Study Block" (SSB) of each form be used to capture (with coded letters) information pertaining to accidents/incidents which involve RCL operations. The third form will capture the required data with an annotation in the narrative portion of the form. In addition, FRA recommends that railroads maintain appropriate exposure measures, including total number of labor hours and total number of employees by location for both RCL operations and manual locomotive operations. Together these measures will allow FRA to accurately measure accident and incident rates of both types of operations and make valid comparisons between RCL operations and manual operations. Thus, the railroads will be able to closely monitor the safety performance of RCL operations as they progress. FRA will then use these data when considering any future policies on these operations. FRA notes that many of the ergonomic design concerns experienced by remote control operators (RCOs) have been addressed in the current generation of RCTs. FRA commends the rail industry and RCL system manufacturers for their diligence in addressing the design concerns of RCOs. As this new technology expands, the continued input of the men and women who operate RCLs will be necessary to ensure that ergonomic issues and operating concerns are properly identified and fully addressed, consistent with the needs of both RCOs and the rail industry. Furthermore, we must be cognizant that gender specific issues may arise with respect to ergonomic challenges and solutions. FRA will, therefore, recommend that railroads give special consideration to the unique human/machine interface problems that may arise during the proliferation of this technology, 2 Attachment B ~r~ ~;, particularly regarding female operators. FRA has reviewed the furnished data concerning fatalities that have occurred during RCL operations on plant railroads. The data indicate that none of these fatalities occurred as a direct result of RCL system failure. All involved the same scenarios described in similar fatalities that have occurred during manual switching operations. There was no way to determine if these workers were distracted due to their added responsibility of conducting RCL operations. However, FRA will attempt to reduce possible risk by recommending that RCOs (1) Should not ride on rail cars, (2) should not mount or dismount from moving locomotives during RCL operations, and (3) should remain well clear of affected tracks when in front of a locomotive movement. FRA also believes that additional training should be provided to traditional locomotive engineers who will be required to operate RCLs and who have never worked on the ground during switching operations. These individuals lack the valuable experience gained from working around moving equipment and are less likely to recognize dangerous situations. FRA believes that bad weather conditions, roadway worker protection procedures, RCT clearance problems, and mental and physical stress issues are operational problems that can and do occur during any railroad operation and are best addressed through proper training and through a credible communication system. There should be a direct line of communication between labor and management to quickly address RCL operating problems and training needs. Therefore, FRA recommends that a formal communication procedure should be developed to ensure that RCL operational concerns are handled expeditiously. In response to concerns expressed by a number of parties, FRA had previously asked DOT's Volpe Center to test the electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emissions from an RCL system, simulating realistic rail yard operating conditions (since multiple reflections of radiofrequency radiation from metallic surfaces, like railcars, can enhance the primary beam and cause hotspots). An independent test contractor then tested EMIR levels according to FCC standards and found that under normal use and where the manufacturer's operating instructions were followed, EMR emissions and workers' exposure levels were in full compliance with applicable human exposure safety standards regarding radio frequency radiation. FRA found no data that would indicate that electromagnetic field (EMF) and EMR emissions from RCTs exceed the accepted human exposure safety standards in the United States. FRA and the DOT Volpe Center technical experts will, however, continue to monitor the latest studies on potential health effects from long term low level environmental and work EMF and EMR exposures, as well as up-to-date applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards posted on the web at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www. osha-slc.gov/SLTC/radiofrequencyradiation. Standards and practices addressing EMF and EMR emissions can also be found in: FCC, 1997 Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," FCC Office of Engineering Technology (OET), Ed. 97.01, FCC Bulletin 65, August 1997 and Supplement C, December 1997. Both items are posted Attachment B on the web at ~- ~, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.htm1&log=linklog&to=http://www./ fcc./gov/oet/rfsafety; IEEE, C95.1a-1988, "IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 KHz to 300 GHz," Edition 16 and Supplement a, April 1999, to be ordered from IEEE Customer Service at 1-800-678-IEEE; and the "American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIII)," TLVs and BEIs-Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents," pp. 150-155 (See http://fiwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.htm1&log=linklog&to=http://www. ecgih.org). FRA intends to ensure that the margin of safety is maintained in this area and will take appropriate action if it becomes apparent that accepted safety margins are not maintained or if credible data on potential worker safety or health hazards from such exposures become available. A review of the accident/incident reports submitted during the technical conference disclosed communication failures, speed surges, braking force problems, and emergency stops during RCL operations. However, most of the reports were dated between 1996 and 1997 and pertained primarily to one rail yard and to a specific group of RCLs in that yard. FRA believes that current generation of RCTs have addressed many of the reported problems with RCL systems. It has been FRA's experience that, as this type of technology is introduced into railroad operations, unforeseen problems in hardware and software design do develop. As a consequence, FRA suggests that railroads have procedures in place to immediately identify and address such problems to reduce the risk of accident and/or injury. In addition, the FRA suggests that railroads have scientifically valid data gathering procedures to accurately monitor accident rates in RCL operations compared with manual locomotive operations. FRA has also reviewed data from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) regarding any accidents investigated involving RCL operations. The records indicate that there has been considerable concern by OSHA regarding protection of rail movements. The records cite incidents of inplant rail movements that were not properly protected in the direction of travel, i.e., RCOs were not in position to observe the track ahead of the movement. MSHA also reported an accident that was caused in part by ~ the inability of the remote operator to see the locomotive." These concerns are not new to the rail industry, which has long adopted operating rules that require switching movements to be made at a speed that will enable the movement to stop within half the range of vision short of a train, an engine, a railroad car, people or equipment fouling the track, obstructions, a stop signal, or a derail or switch lined improperly (restricted speed). Simply put, no movement should begin unless the track ahead of that movement is known to be clear. This would require RCOs to view the track ahead of the movement each time a movement is made. Because FRA believes RCL operations will be primarily conducted within heavily congested areas, i.e., railroad yards, and because FRA wishes to ensure that these operations are conducted in the safest possible manner, FRA recommends that all RCL movements be conducted at restricted speed, unless specifically exempted by railroad special instructions. However, these special instructions should ensure that a comparable means of protection is afforded these movements. FRA notes that many railroads have limited exemptions from the provisions of restricted speed. FRA plans to 4 Attachment B ~`~ closely monitor how railroad operating rules are modified to accommodate RCL operations. Safety must not be compromised by these modifications. FRA also plans to monitor the accident/incident rates in areas where RCL operations exist to ensure that safety is maintained. FRA notes that traditional raikoad industry restricted speed rules or their equivalents were not developed to protect trespassers or railroad workers who are not authorized to be on the track. Therefore, in the interest of safety, FRA will recommend that the public and railroad workers in the area should be notified by clearly visible warning signs, or by other equally effective means, that RCL operations exist and train movements are being conducted without anyone in the locomotive. FRA is also concerned about RCO safety when operations are conducted in isolated areas. There is no assurance that emergency aid can be adequately provided in a timely manner in the event of an emergency situation. Therefore, FRA recommends that the railroad or RCT should provide some automatic means of communication that will notify the railroad in the event the RCO becomes incapacitated, i.e., "a worker alarm". This automatic communication feature should also be capable of determining the non-responsive RCO's location to ensure that emergency help can respond effectively. Part 240 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations requires that all individuals who operate a locomotive are to be qualified and certified in accord with the requirements of that regulations. Therefore, anyone who operates a locomotive, regardless of the means used, must be properly trained and certified. The introducfion of remote control operations is a significant departure from traditional on-board locomotive operations. If a railroad elects to conduct RCL operations, its locomotive engineer certification program would have to be modified to outline the training that will be required for this type of operation. This would constitute a material modification of the program requiring that the program be submitted to FRA for approval according to 49 CFR 240.103(e). Because information currently available to FRA does not lead to the conclusion that RCL operations should be prohibited on safety grounds, FRA has elected to proceed cautiously. The range of views and safety concerns expressed underscores the need to proceed with the implementation of this new technology in a safe and consistent manner. The Safety Advisory announced today is a refinement of proposed standards contained in the original Test Program. Recommendation: The following design criteria and operating procedures are recommendations only. Compliance is voluntary. However, railroads are strongly encouraged to regard these suggested criterion as a minimum from which to tailor their own RCL operations. It should be noted that all of the design features recommended are available with the current generation of remote control technology. In certain circumstances, due to the design of their equipment, or differences in operating practices, a railroad may not be able to obtain complete consistency with these recommendations. In those situations railroads are encouraged to develop alternative designs or practices which offer at least equivalent or greater levels of safety. FRA emphasizes that although 5 Attachment B ~~ ., compliance with this Safety Advisory is voluntary, nothing in this Safety Advisory is meant to relieve a railroad from compliance with all existing railroad safety regulations. Therefore, when procedures required by regulation are cited in this Safety Advisory, compliance is mandatory. A. Safety Design and Operational Requirements Each RCT should, at a minimum, have the following features: 1. directional control; 2. graduated throttle or speed control; 3. graduated locomotive independent brake application and release; 4. train brake application and release control; 5. audible warning device control (horn); 6. audible bell control, if equipped; 7. sand control (unless automatic); 8. headlight control; i. emergency air brake application switch; j. generator field switch or equivalent to eliminate tractive effort to the locomotive; and k. audio or visual indication of wheel slip/slide. Although an RCT can have the capability to control, at different times, different locomotives equipped with remote-control receivers, it should be designed to be capable of controlling only one RCR equipped locomotive at a time. (A locomotive may consist of one or more engines operated from a single control). An RCT having the capability to control more than one RCL should have a means to lock in one RCR ~ assignment address" to prevent simultaneous control over more than one locomotive. 4. Each locomotive equipped with an RCR should respond only to the RCTs assigned to that receiver. The RCT should be designed to require at least two separate actions by the RCO before RCL movement can begin (in order to prevent accidental movement). When an RCT's signal to the RCL is interrupted for a set period, not to exceed five seconds, the remote-control system should cause: a. full service application of the locomotive and train brakes; and b. elimination of locomotive tractive effort. If an RCT is equipped with an "on" and "off' switch, the switch, when moved from "on" to "off' position, should result in: a. application of the locomotive and train brakes; and b. elimination of locomotive tractive effort. Each RCL should have a distinct and unambiguous audible or visual warning device that indicates to nearby personnel that the locomotive is under active remote control and subject to movement. 9. Each RCT should be equipped with an operator alertness device requiring manual resetting or its equivalent. It should incorporate a timing sequence not to exceed 60 seconds. Failure to reset the switch within the timing sequence should result in: Attachment B a. application of the locomotive and tram brakes; and b. elimination of locomotive tractive effort. 10. Each RCT should have a tilt feature that, when tilted to a predetermined angle, should result in: a. an emergency application of the locomotive and train brakes; and b. elimination of locomotive tractive effort. Note: If RCL operations are being conducted in an isolated area, the railroad should establish timely emergency response procedures in the event the RCO is incapacitated. One method that would serve to meet this recommendation would be to equip the RCT with capability of transmitting an emergency signal. The signal should also be capable of identifying the RCO's location. 11. If the RCT is equipped with a "tilt bypass" system enabling the tilt protection feature to be temporarily disabled, the bypass feature should deactivate after 15 seconds, unless reactivated by the RCO. 12. The RCL should be equipped with a device that causes an application of the locomotive and train brakes and elimination of locomotive tractive effort whenever the RCL's main reservoir air pressure falls below 90 psi or when a locomotive protection alarm is activated while the locomotive is in remote operation. The device should need to be manually reset on board the RCL. 13. When the air valves and the electrical selector switch on the RCR are moved from manual to remote or from remote to manual modes, an emergency application of the locomotive and train brakes should be initiated to prevent unauthorized use of the system. 14. Railroads which acquire and utilize RCL equipment should comply with current human safety exposure standards for radio frequency radiation in their workplace. FRA further recommends that manufacturers should certify their equipment for compliance with current EMR exposure safety standards. 15. Consideration should be given to the design of the RCT to provide for ahuman-machine interface (HNII) that incorporates basic human factors principles for the design and operation of displays, controls, supporting software functions, and other components. FRA recommends that railroads work closely with RCOs when addressing RCT design and comfort issues. The overriding goal of the design should be to minimise the potential for design-induced error by ensuring that the RCT is suitable for operators, including female operators, and their tasks and environment. RCT systems that have been designed with human-centered design principles in mind--system products that keep human operators as the central, active component of the system--are more likely to result in improved safety. This includes the ergonomic design of the RCT. See FRA's 1998 report entitled ~~Human Factors Guidelines for Locomotive Cabs" (FRA/ORD-98/03 or DOT-VNTSC-FRA-98-8). Special consideration should be given to the effect of the RCT on the musculoskeletal system of the RCOs as well as on RCT harness comfort to avoid distraction from safety-related duties. Additional consideration should also be given to the "breakaway" safety feature of the RCT harness. The harness should be designed to easily break free of the RCO in the event the harness becomes entangled on equipment. Attachment B B. Training ~ -- Each person operating an RCL must be certified and qualified in accordance with 49 CFR Part 240 if conventional operation of a locomotive under the same circumstances would require certification under that regulation. Training must be provided to all RCOs subject to the requirements of 49 CFR Part 240. Additionally, training should be afforded those RCOs not subject to the requirements of Part 240 and those locomotive engineers who have little or no on-ground experience in switching operations if they are expected to conduct RCL operations. All affected railroad employees should be trained on RCL operating rules and procedures. Under Part 240, railroad engineer certification programs must include procedures to keep certified engineers current on methods of safe train handling, operating rules, condition of equipment, and personal safety and to provide initial training for new engineers on those subjects. Sec. 240.123. The programs must also include skill testing in the most demanding type of service the person will perform. Sec. 240.127. Appendix B of Part 240 requires that railroad engineer certification programs address how the railroad responds to changes such as the "introduction of new technology" and "significant changes in operations." In FRA's view, it is likely that the introduction of remote controlled locomotives on railroads would typically necessitate a material change to each railroad's engineer certification program. Material modifications must be submitted to FRA for its review under 49 CFR 240.103(e). C. Operating Practices 1. The railroad should establish written standard operating procedures tailored to its RCL operations. At a minimum these procedures should include: a. Upon going off duty, each RCO should place the RCL in manual operation and properly secure it, unless control of the RCL is directly given to a relieving RCO. b. When operating an RCL, the RCO should not: i. ride on a freight car under any circumstances; ii. mount or dismount moving equipment; iii operate any other type of machinery; or iv. stand or walk within the gage of the track or foul the track on which the movement is occurring while physically located in front of the movement. c. RCOs should ensure that the track is clear and properly aligned ahead of the remotely controlled movement while it is underway. Therefore, RCL operations should be operated at restricted speed not to exceed 20 mph, i.e., at a speed that will enable stopping the movement within half the range of vision assuring that all movements are protected. d. The RCO should operate only one RCL at a time. e. Prior to performing any function as prescribed in 49 CFR 218.22(c)(5), the RCO should apply three point protection, i.e., fully apply the locomotive and train brakes, center the reverser, and place the generator field switch to the off position (eliminate locomotive tractive effort capability). f. Passenger trains should not be operated by use of aremote-control device. Attachment B ~`-"~ ~ 2. The railroad must include RCL operating rules and procedures in its program required under 49 CFR part 217. 3. The railroad should establish formal communication procedures to enable the appropriate railroad officials to receive and respond to information pertaining to RCL system failures or safety problems. 4. The FRA recommends that the railroad keep a record of the total number of labor hours and the total number of employees by location for both RCL and manual switching operations to ensure that accidents and incidents are accurately measured, and that valid comparisons between the two types of operations can then be made. 5. The FRA recommends that the railroad develop and implement a program specifically designed for RCOs that addresses the risks associated with switching operations and train movements on adjacent tracks. This program should incorporate the findings and recommendations of the Switching Operations Fatality Analysis Working Group. D. Security 1. The railroad should have instructions for the proper storing and handling of RCTs when not in use or in the operator's possession. 2. The operation control handles located in the RCL cab should be removed or pinned in place to prevent accidental or intentional movement while the RCL is being operated in remote. 3. The railroad should have strict procedures in place to ensure that only the intended RCTs are assigned to the appropriate RCL. E. Inspections and Tests 1. The RCL system must be included as part of the calendar day inspection required by 49 CFR 229.21, since this equipment becomes an appurtenance to the locomotive. 2. Each time an RCT is used for the first time on each shift, a test of the air brakes and the RCT's safety features (tilt switch and alerter device) should be conducted. The test would not be required if the RCT were being directly transferred from one RCO to another with no change in remote status. 3. The RCL system (both the RCT and RCR), should be designed to perform aself-diagnostic test of the electronic components of the system. The system should be designed to immediately "fail safe" (fia11 service application of the locomotive and train brakes and the elimination of locomotive tractive effort) in the event a failure is detected. 4. The RCL system components that interface with the mechanical devices of the locomotive, e.g., air pressure monitoring devices, pressure switches, speed sensors, etc., should be inspected and calibrated as often as necessary, but not less than the locomotive's periodic (92-day) inspection. It is recommended that records of such inspections and calibrations be kept. F. Notification of RCL Use and Protection of Workers 1. Each RCL should have a tag placed on the control stand throttle indicating the locomotive is 9 Attachment B r being used in a remote control mode. The tag should be removed when the locomotive is placed back in manual mode. 2. In areas where RCL operations are being conducted, warning signs should be posted indicating that there is no operator in the control compartment of the locomotive. These warning signs should be highly visible and posted at conspicuous locations so as to maximise their exposure to those most likely to encounter RCL operations. 3. Whenever worker protection is required according to 49 CFR part 218, the locomotive should be placed into manual mode and be properly secured. The appropriate blue signal protection should then be provided. G. Accident-Incident Reporting Procedures 1. All accident and/or incidents described in 49 CFR part 225 must be reported to FRA using the appropriate ~~remote control" reporting codes. 2. Railroads are also reminded that they are required to comply with the provisions of 49 CFR part 229.17--Accident reports. Issued in Washington D.C. on February 1, 2001. Edward R. English, Director, Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance. 10 '. ~ Attachment C P„s,ter-Fri~~,sily FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 11, 2003 Michael B~ 202/628-9 202/262-3 MichaelB c AFL-CIO Transportation Unions Say Bush Administratio Inaction Threatens Safety of Rail Workers One Death, Over 40 Accidents Caused by Remote Control Locomotives Washington, D.C. -Acting on behalf of 35 unions representing transportatio the AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department's (TTD) today called upon ti Railroad Administration (FRA) to issue an emergency order immediately sty use of unsafe remote control locomotives until rigorous, enforceable federal be established to protect workers and those who live near railroads. In the last two years there have been over 40 accidents involving remote cor including the death of a rail worker near Syracuse last month. In a letter to the TTD supported the petition of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (BLE CIO affiliate, in calling for the FRA to take action. TTD noted that what the f "recommended minimum guidelines" do not actually require rail carriers to FRA's suggestions. "We have seen accident after accident while the FRA I allowed carriers to use this technology without any set of rules or sufficient the letter said, adding that while AFL-CIO labor unions applaud the actior governments in banning remote control locomotives, this issue should i "governed by the highest national standard" issued by the FRA. The letter also expressed frustration that the FRA, an agency of the U.S. Dep Transportation, has both refused to meet with BLE leaders on this matte provide the public with accident data on the use of remote control locomotive; Also today, hundreds of workers gathered outside of the FRA headquarters 1 government action to save rail workers' lives. AFL-CIO Secretary-Treat Trumka, International Brotherhood of Teamsters General President James BLE International President Don Hahs, and TTD Executive Director Ed Wy among those speaking at the midday rally. Additionally, U.S. Senator Edwarc (D-MA) today sent a letter to the FRA to ask for strong federal action to prot safety. http://www.ttd.org/pressrel/Mar2003/pr031103_RCL.htm 11/20/2003 ` Attachment C .. j ~ ~~ Addressing the FRA, 1lVytkind said, "your silence is deafening. Your sil railroad workers that their safety isn't a priority. Your silence must end," addir is yet another example of the challenges workers face when corporations profits ahead of people's lives ...This is unacceptable corporate behavior, abetted by what appears to us as a code of silence in the Bush Administratior Wytkind said that the entire labor movement will "keep fighting until goin doesn't kill you." TTD represents 35 member unions in the rail, aviation, rail, transit, trucking longshore, maritime and related industries. For more information, visit www.tt ##### http://www.ttd.org/pressrel/Mar2003/pr031103_RCL.htm 11/20/2003 r- 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 RESOLUTION 120203-5 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, Altizer, McNamara NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix A OPY TESTE: , Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Meeting File r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 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. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED MEETING BY MEMBER WHO LEFT PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 This is to certify that while I was not present to vote on the Certification Resolution following the Closed Meeting on December 2, 2003, to the best of my 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. +/ , ~ .~ ~/ H. Odell "Fuzzy" i ix Dated: ~ 2- ` ~;f~ a 3 OF ROANp~,F o ~ 9 2 ~ 1838 Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 Joseph McNamara, Chairman Windsor Hills Magisterial District Richard C. Flora, Vice-Chairman Hollins Magisterial District December 3, 2003 Reverend Branan Thompson Windsor Hills United Methodist Church 3591 Windsor Road, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Rev. Thompson: Michael W. Altizer Vinton Magisterial District Joseph B. "Butch" Church Catawba Magisterial District H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix Cave Spring Magisterial District On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank you for offering the invocation at our meeting on Tuesday, December 2, 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, a~C~,t~.y,.~. eph McNamara, Chairman oanoke County Board of Supervisors OFFICE: FAX: VOICE MAIL: (540) 772-2005 (540) 772-2193 (540) 772-2170 E-MAIL: bos ~ co. roanoke.va. us ~" °~` COPY Return to: Roanoke County Attorney's Office THIS DEED, made this 11th day of November, 2003 by and between F & W Community Development Corporation, a Virginia Corporation, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the Developer; and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, its successors or assigns, party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "County." WITNESSETH: THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Developer hereby GRANTS CONVEYS, A SSIGNS A ND T RANSFERS u nto t he C ounty, w ith G ENERAL W ARRANTY OF TITLE, all water and/or sewer lines, valves, fittings, laterals, connections, storage facilities, sources of water supply, pumps, manholes and any and all other equipment and appurtenances thereunto belonging, in and to the water and/or sewer systems in the streets, avenues, public utility easement areas, and water and sewer easement areas that have been or may hereafter be installed by the Developer, along with the right to perpetually use and occupy the easements in which the same may be located, all of which is more particularly shown, described and designated as follows, to wit: As shown on the plans entitled Cortland Meadows -Section 1, made by Lumsden Associates, PC, and on file in the Roanoke County Department of Community Development. 1 The Developer hereby covenants and warrants that it will be responsible for the proper installation, construction and maintenance of the said water and/or sewer systems, including repair of surface areas affected by settlement of utility trenches, for a period of one (1) year after date of acceptance by the County and will perform any necessary repairs at its cost. This instrument is executed by a duly authorized administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, to signify acceptance of this conveyance by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, pursuant to Resolution No. the day of WITNESS the following signatures and seals: 2003. Developer. ' ~:s~s~'~r~~~ .~~'.~:.~1~~~9'" t~ ~-r~. By: ~ -r,~'~ ~~ ~. (SEAL) State of Virginia County/ of ~c~(~.dl p (4e, , to-wit: adopted by said Board on The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~~day of ~VO YE~~11~ , Zoo3, by Avid ~e~ ~' f~ef~~-~162c~-e, ~r~i o1~-~_ , on behalf of ~/(X,(f ;~, ~G(~ d /YVY~J , ~ Q ~~l /C i t'v 1:t, f ~6r~ a--•.~ , Developer. My commission expires 1 3~ D Notary Public 2 Approved as to form: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~IA By: (SEAL) County Attorney State of Virginia, County/City of Roanoke, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2003, by on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My commission expires: 3 R ~-.-y Return to: Roanoke County ~- ,,,,, Attorney's Office THIS DEED, made this 11th day of November, 2003 by and between Fralin and Waldron, Inc., a Virginia Corporation, p arty of t he f first p art, h ereinafter r eferred t o a s t he Developer; and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, its successors or assigns, party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "County." WITNESSETH: THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Developer hereby GRANTS CONVEYS, ASSIGNS AND TRANSFERS unto the County, with GENERAL WARRANTY OF TITLE, all water and/or sewer lines, valves, fittings, laterals, connections, storage facilities, sources of water supply, pumps, manholes and any and all other equipment and appurtenances thereunto belonging, in and to the water and/or sewer systems in the streets, avenues, public utility easement areas, and water and sewer easement areas that have been or may hereafter be installed by the Developer, along with the right to perpetually use and occupy the easements in which the same may be located, all of which is more particularly shown, described and designated as follows, to wit: As shown on the plans entitled Brookfield -Section 4, made by Lumsden Associates, PC, and on file in the Roanoke County Department of Community Development. s The Developer hereby covenants and warrants that it will be responsible for the proper installation, construction and maintenance of the said water and/or sewer systems, including repair of surface areas affected by settlement of utility trenches, for a period of one (1) year after date of acceptance by the County and will perform any necessary repairs at its cost. This instrument is executed by a duly authorized administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, to signify acceptance of this conveyance by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, pursuant to Resolution No. the 2003. day of WITNESS the following signatures and seals: Developer: FRALIN AND WALDRON, INC. By: ~ ~ J , ~=---i-.-_ (SEAL) As: PRESIDENT State of Virginia County/ig'~jr of ROANOKE , to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2003, by on behalf of Developer. ANDREW C. KELDERHOUSE FRALIN AND WALDRON, INC. My commission expires: AUG. 31, 2007 adopted by said Board on 12TI~lay of NOVEMBER 2 Approved as to form: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA County Attorney By: (SEAL) State of Virginia, County/City of Roanoke, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2003, by on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My commission expires: 3 '~ Diane Childers - VACO award Clearbrook Page 1 ~_ __..._. __.__..__ _._.___~.~W~_._____ .._:.~_____._... ~. ._..W~_:.._.W_ _-- ----~.~_ ~_._-- .__...-_. .. __~_ -. _- From: Brenda Holton To: Diane Childers Date: 11/12/03 1:02PM Subject: VACO award Clearbrook Mr. Hodge stopped by and saw the VACo plaque. At first he said to put it on this meeting and when I mentioned that you said that he wanted to give Clearbrook a duplicate plaque and have people come in for presentation, he said yes, that's right and put it on for the first meeting in Dec. He probably has already talked to you about this but thought I would let you know that he said today. Also, do you want us to call Richmond and see if we can get a duplicate plaque from them. The address is one the back of the plaque. Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us l For Immediate Release Contact: Jennifer Conley-Sexton Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department Marketing and Volunteer Coordinator 540-561-8060 or 561-8100 j conley(a~co.roanoke.va.us VACo Achievement Awards recognize Roanoke County for the Clearbrook Cooperative Fire and Rescue Station The Virginia Association of Counties presented Roanoke County with one of their 13 Achievement Awards at their 69`h annual conference held earlier this week in Bath County. The Achievement Awards recognized the top county government programs statewide that exemplify innovative and cost-efficient services and provide a model for other counties. In addition, five counties and one city received Honorable Mentions. The awards were presented earlier this week at the Homestead. Roanoke County received an Achievement Award for their Clearbrook Cooperative Fire and Rescue Station. On Jan. 1, 2002, Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke initiated a first in emergency services cooperation for the Roanoke Valley. Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke were each seeking to increase their fire and rescue services in the Clearbrook community. A transition team was developed to assess administrative, operational and logistical challenges and to devise a plan for emergency services cooperation. Roanoke County received six Roanoke Fire-EMS paid personnel to serve with 12 Roanoke County Fire and Rescue paid personnel. This allowed for three six-person shifts to provide 24 hour, seven day a week fire and rescue coverage to the Clearbrook community. The Clearbrook county station, with city and county personnel, is now responsible for responding to the city portion of the 220-corridor. What was a response challenge previously from a city station would now be within miles of the county Clearbrook station. Cooperation is taken one step further in that the jurisdictions are not only sharing territory but personnel. The City of Roanoke is able to serve the 220 corridor south end with a 3 to 5 minute response instead of a 6 to 8 minute response. Roanoke County is now able to provide a daily 24-hour paid service in a station that previously offered a daily 12-hour paid service. VACo received 105 entries from 26 counties in the association's inaugural statewide competition honoring excellence. Thirteen county programs were selected to receive Achievement Awards. In addition, programs from five counties and one city are receiving Honorable Mentions. An independent panel of judges with expertise in county programs and challenges had the monumental task of reviewing the entries, all of which exemplify that Virginia counties are striving to provide citizens with innovative and cost-efficient services. The judges this year were former Prince William County Supervisor Kathleen Seefeldt, who was also a 1995 recipient of the Jefferson Cup; former Culpeper County Administrator Steve Miner; and Tedd Povar of the Virginia Institute of Government. VACo sincerely thanks our judges for their time, dedication and enthusiasm. The difficult selection of winning programs was based on innovation and collaboration, as well as the potential for the program to provide a model that other local governments may learn from or implement in their own localities. ### Virginia Association of Counties 2003 Achievement Awards Intergovernmental Approach to Fire and Rescue Services 1. State the problem, challenge or situation faced by the locality and how the program fulfilled the awards criteria (innovation, partnering or collaboration and a model for other localities). Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke were each seeking to increase their fire and rescue services in their respective jurisdictions before January 1, 2002. Roanoke County was moving towards increasing Emergency Medical Services in the Clearbrook station, which serves the south end of the county. The goal was to increase paid staff from half day to around-the-clock full paid coverage to enhance the volunteer service in the evenings. The challenge was the expense that additional staffing would require. At the same time, Roanoke City was looking at enhancing their services in the south end of the city. They desired a reduction in response time along the 220-corridor in the south end of Roanoke City. Their closest city station provided a geographical challenge to this commercial and residential area in terms of meeting their 4 minutes or less response goal. 3 On January 1, 2002, Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke initiated a Roanoke Valley first in emergency services cooperation. The Clearbrook Cooperative Fire Station would resolve each of the jurisdiction's challenges while saving significant funds for each. The merger would provide each jurisdiction with the pieces of the puzzle that both lacked and strengthen the service to the Clearbrook community regardless of what jurisdiction they were in. Roanoke County would receive 6 Roanoke City Fire-EMS paid personnel to serve with 12 Roanoke County Fire and Rescue paid personnel. This would allow for three-six person shifts to provide 24 hour, 7 day a week Fire and Rescue coverage to the Clearbrook south county community. The Clearbrook county station, with its county and city personnel, would now be responsible for responding to the city portion of the 220 corridor. What was before a response challenge from a city station, some distance away, would now be within miles of the county Clearbrook station. The closest station is now responding across jurisdiction lines to the benefit of the community. This is truly a model for other jurisdictions and localities. We know that other localities share jurisdictional lines through specialized mutual aid agreements. This cooperation goes one step further in that the jurisdictions are not only sharing territory, but also personnel. 4 2. Tell how the program was carried out, including financing and staffing, and the program's results. Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke Fire and Rescue personnel, from the Chiefs down to Firefighters and Paramedics, joined forces to devise a plan that would be sound. The plan had to be thorough in order to work efficiently and effectively, knowing it could well be the prototype for future endeavors. A transition team was immediately developed and put into place. The team would consist of 12 personnel from Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke. Since Roanoke County included Fire and Rescue Volunteer organizations within the merger station, their leaders were included in the transition team as well. The transition team was charged with assessing what administrative, operational and logistical challenges might lie ahead. First they agreed with the already scheduled building additions and renovations to include separate male/female bunkrooms as well as separate bathrooms. Renovations would include an updated kitchen, and increased office space. The cost of the addition and renovations had already been slated for this station before the merger. 5 Subsequently, the team would assess, evaluate and recommend protocol for approval to both Chiefs. They addressed everything from uniform policy, to who would complete and approve evaluations. The Intergovernmental Cooperation Approach to providing the best fire and rescue services possible to the community across jurisdictional lines has proven most successful. With the additional personnel from the city, Roanoke County is now able to provide a daily 24-hour paid service in a station that previously offered a dailyl2 hour paid service. This increase in service was provided with no additional cost to the county. The City of Roanoke is now able to serve the 220 corridor south end with a 3-5 minute response when previously they were showing a 6-8 minute response. In addition the city of Roanoke was able to enhance a shortfall without any additional resources. 6 Chief Richard E Burch, Jr. of Roanoke County Fire and Rescue and Chief James Grigsby of Roanoke City Fire-EMS congratulate each other after signing the Clearbrook Cooperative Agreement. 7 _ ____ .......----- ___-9 Y .. --- Dine Childers Re: Bnefin b Dr. O'Dell From: John Chambliss r' To: Diane Childers Date: 10/31/03 7:58AM Subject: Re: Briefing by Dr. O'Dell Diane, Thanks. Molly checked her palm pilot that day, but like mine, that tool is not always current when others can also schedule events. I will give you a cover report for the meeting. She is planning to revise the two handouts that I gave Brenda, so we don't want to simply copy those. John »> Diane Childers 10/30/03 10:11AM »> I spoke with Dr. O'Dell's office this morning, and they indicated that it would be best for her schedule to attend the pecember 2 meeting to brief the Board on the County's public health report card. I will place this in the agenda file for December 2. Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 Page 1 Dime Childers -Report Card Data for December 2nd Board~~eting Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Kathy budding <kdudding@vdh.state.va.us> <dchilders@co.roanoke.va.us> 10/30/03 3:48PM Report Card Data for December 2nd Board Meeting Diane: This will confirm that Dr. Molly O'Dell, Director for the Alleghany and Roanoke City Health Districts, will appear before the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at 3:00 p.m. on December 2nd. Dr. O'Dell will be presenting the September 2003 Public Health Report Card which provides community, risk factor, death, birth, reportable disease, and environmental data for the localities within the Fifth Planning District and the State of Virginia. She will also provide Public Health Report Card data specific to Roanoke County for the Years 1990 - 2001. Please note that I was able to mesh all of the pages together into one spreadsheet and have attached it with this message. The only thing missing is the list of references, but that will be included in the hard copies which Dr. O'Dell will bring to the meeting. I was unable to mesh all of the sections together into one continuous document, however, so please call to the Board's attention that the spreadsheet has 4 separate tabs at the bottom (or a total of 6 pages). Tab 1 is the Public Health Report Card 2003 (2 pages). Tab 2 is the Environmental Health Report Card 2003 (2 pages), Tab 3 is Roanoke County Data Page 1, and Tab 4 is Roanoke County Data Page 2. Please let me know if you have any difficulties with this document or if more information is needed. I can be reached by email at kdudding@vdh.state.va.us or by telephone at (540) 473-8226. Thanks, Kathy Diane Childers Nov 18 agenda Page 1 From: Brenda Holton / To: Diane Childers v Date: 10/28/03 10:46AM Subject: Nov 18 agenda John C. just told me to add an agenda item to the Nov 18 as follows: Briefing by Dr. Molly O'Dell on the Public Health Report Card for the County Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us __ _ __ ,Brenda Holton -Nov 18 agenda and Dec 2 Marine Corp presentation From: Brenda Holton To: Pete Haislip Date: 11/11/03 8:45AM Subject: Nov 18 agenda and Dec 2 Marine Corp presentation Pete, since you are out of the office today, I am emailing you rather than leaving a phone message. (1) We have the following recognition on the agenda for Nov 18th. Are we ready to go forward with it? We will need some information or a Board report from you and who will be attending for this item. As the agenda goes out Friday, we need to know as soon as possible if this is going forward. Recognition of the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department for receiving the American Camping Association accreditation at Camp Roanoke (2) Had a call from Claude Slomczewski about the annual donation from the Marine Corp League for Camp Roanoke from the Mud Run. He said that he talked to you about coming to a meeting but no date was decided. He said that Dec 2 at 3 p.m. would suit them better than Nov 18 (which is probably good since time is getting short). I am forwarding the Board report from last year. I asked him to get with you and give you the details for this year's presentation. Please let me know about Camp Roanoke accreditation recognition as soon as you can. Thanks, Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us Page 1 CC: Diane Childers Brenda Holton -Claud Silchesky (sp?) cell: 293-7082 ~ _ _ _ Page 1 ', From: Mary Brandt To: Brenda Holton Date: 11/10/0310:23AM Caller: Claud~~ilchesky (sp?) ~"~ ~ ` Company: Marine Corp League ~~.. ~ ~ ~' ~',. ;~ "f ; ~ ~`' Phone: cel1:293-7082 ["] Telephoned [*] Please call [ ]Will call again [ ]Returned your call [ ]Wants to see you [ ]Came to see you [ ]Urgent Wants to come before the Board to present their annual donation to Camp Roanoke. Mary cc: Diane Mary V. Brandt Office Support Specialist ~, Board of Supervisors 540-772-2005 mbrandt@co.roanoke.va.us "~~~' AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: 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: PHONE (OPTIONAL): C V GROUP/ORGANIZATION: ~l } i C+ C?!Q `y3~~- ~~; AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCECITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: g~~rE Z Z. D~ v Cio~Ft F~-~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS F'OR 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~ rq ~"~ ~- E ~•as~,~ ADDRESS: ~/~'~ / ~'~l,~r' ~a-v.~ Q. ~ ~-off,.-.c/~, (~i~'1-- 2yE-~8 PHONE {OPTIONAL): ~8~i 3~c~~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: C` / /"7 ~~-s Imo--- ~~~T ~~~~"7~~ 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. ""' PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~' I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, 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: ~,~ i~~~~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~~~~. ~5 ~'~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT :~~~~~:~~ ~;~~~.. ~~.':~<;~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, ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: WILL GIVE MY NAME AND AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE ^ 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 wil! exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD ~~:~ r-~ r~ NAME: ,~'~;~,~' ~ e`° ~:~ ~~ ~~"'~' ADDRESS: ~ *4 PHONE (OPTIONAL): GROUPIORGANIZATION: 6 Citizens for Smart Growth Roanoke County Board of Supervisors & Planning Commission Joint Work Session Dec 2, 2003 Citizen Concerns: - Runaway Development on Rt. 221 Corridor ^ Overcrowding in Roanoke County Schools ^ Traffic Congestion on 221 & Secondary Roads ^ Overtaxed Emergency Services ^ Depletion of Local Aquifer ^ Compromised Quality of Life ^ -€conomic Impact of Spoiled BRP viewshed 1 Route 221 Corridor Development Currently: 1000+ developable acres zoned AR, 600+ AG1 BACK CREEK AREA COULD RECEIVE 2200+ ADDITIONAL HOMES Downzoning to 1000+ AG1 and 600+ AG3 -would reduce potential development to 800-1000 homes *** Rural Preserve land use category in Community Plan*** Roanoke County Schools -All South county elementary schools combined have capacity for only 74 ma~~ students. c~~,i - Back Creek, Cave Spring, and 221 corridor schools are over capacity by 116 students it The new Hidden Valley High is overloaded and will be installing trailers next year - no~- *2003 Roanoke County School Board Data pcr RcF 2 Traffic and Emergency Service - Currently 2?~000 vehicle trips per day on Rt. 2212 - Roanoke County Police report 38% increase in traffic accidents on Rt. 221 since cotton hill developments ~-~ ~incc a~ - In 1995_ the Battalion Fire Marshall determined that Cotton Hill development would` adversely impact response times3 Local Water Supply Issues ~~~~ -Virginia DEQ has determined that the Back ~o~ ~~ `h Creek area aquifer is marginal and that well a~ locations must be carefully planned to avoid adverse impact on neighboring wells.4 - High density development will risk depleting the aquifer i~•3ll ~n aa~ ia~y 3 Quality of LifeS - Back Creek community values ^ rural character ^ open spaces ^ Views from 221 and BRP - Back Creek Land Use Plans • Design principles to enhance and protect rural community lifestyle ^ Maintain low density single family homes Economic Impact6 ~8c~ M k~ - Blue Ridge Parkway visitors spend $66million/yr in the Roanoke area and ti ~' '.n Rye would discontinue BRP use with loss of scenic value Roanoke County section of BRP listed in top 10 .Endangered American Landscapes ~ ~~ ~a Vatl~ 4 Board Action Requested 1. Enforce current density limiting regulations a. AGR lot sizes -quad ~Grian.ee ~ apliona~• b. Prohibit risky community well systems (eg Carriage Hills and Forest Edge) c. .Avoid setting high density precedent for future developments 2. Review zoning along 221 corridor & downzone to AG1 and AG3 as appropriate ~. Investigate Adequate Public Facilities regulations Footnotes 1. Roanoke County School Administration, school enrollment data z. Virginia Department of Transportation 2002 annual average daily traffic volume estimates 3. Roanoke County Planning Department Zoning Review 1995 4. Virginia DEQ Groundwater Analysis s. Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan - 1998, chapter 7 6. Scenic America's Annual list of Last Chance Landscapes 2002-2003 ~. 2003 Virginia General Assembly proposed legislation 5 MEMORANDUM TO: TASK FORGE MEMBERS FRO ~IDREA B. KROCHALIS MA, CAGS SUBJE :COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DATE: 12/02/03 As we discussed in our fast meeting, f am reviewing the Comprehensive P{an and the impact it has on our discussion. Overall, the Plan refererx~s goals bf: The 1995 Plan used strategic visioning, "based on community consensus and reflects the community values" • The following areas were reviewed by focus groups: Agriculture and Forestry, Economic Development, Public Education, Technology, Resource Preservation, Transportation, Growth Management and Planning, Government Relations, Recreation and Culture and Housing. • The group developed five community wide themes, see the foilow'rng excerpt. COMMUNITY WIDE THEMES 1. ~egiona{ism -The County must take the {ead in finding new and innovative ways to look beyond its political boundaries for solutions to the cha{lenges of the next century. asinie krochalis Page 1 I2/U~/U3 2. Sustainability -Recognizing that our natural systems are vital to providing both economic needs and quality ofi lifie for all citizens, sustainable development has been incorporated into County planning meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising-the ability ofi future generations to meet their own needs. 3. Community Identity -Roanoke County citizens identify very closely with their neighborhoods and school districts. Efforts must be made to preserve the elements of community identity that provide gathering places for the exchange of information and support. 4. Scenic Beauty -The mountains that surround the County provide a sense of place and are a source of beauty, recreational activity and inspiration. Steps must be taken to develop sound conservation policies for our dwindling farms and mountainsides and ridges, rivers and streams, soil and air. These resources are considered by many to be our region's greatest asset. 5. Quality of Life -The citizens of Roanoke County recognize that there exists a fragile balance between economic growth and prosperity and the preservation of away of life that is cherished by many~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 addition to these five broad community-wide themes, each focus group developed a vision statement for their community. • I have attached the Back Creek Community Plan. annie krochalis Wage 2 12/02; 03 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS • The process of amending the community plan is as follows: PLAN AMENDMENTS The Roanoke County Community Plan is a general planning document that is subject to interpretation. It is intended to guide future land use development in the County but is not fixed in place. Therefore, proposed amendments to the Community Plan will be received and reviewed twice annually in the months of January and July. Amendments to the Roanoke County Community Plan may be initiated by any citizen, the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, any county landowner or the Secretary to the Planning Commission. Amendment applications must meet one or more of the following criteria; • The subject property was misinterpreted or overlooked in the Community Plan. • Significant changes have occurred in the condition of surrounding lands. (~IoQc (crooianl • The requested amendment will significantly enhance other goals of the Community Plan. Amendment appfcafions will be considered, based on the preceding qualifications. The Planning Commission will review the application, hold a public hearing and recommend to the Board of Supervisors whether to consider the amendment. The Planning Commission may, at their discretion, hold a community meeting or convene a meeting of the appropriate neighborhood council. If recommended by the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing and vote to accept, deny, or modify the amendment and forward its order to the Secretary to the Commission. The Board of Supervisors retains the right to initiate an amendment to the Community Plan at any time. Any amendment should be determined to be consistent with the remaining goals of the Community Plan and the overall community vision. annie krochalis Page 3 12/02/03 Cf3MMENTS • One discussion of this task force has been how can we put more strength into this Plan?, • Can we enforce a GREEN LINE? • What accountability can be addressed ~•rith de~elopers? { ex. cash proffers} • Can there be a mandated ;e~,~e! of infrastructure, prior to overdeveloping an area? • There is a growing concert about the issues of enforcement of standards and compliance with existing Codes and Regulations. annie luochalis Page 4 12/02; 03 MEMBERSHIP TOTAL ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOLS October 31, 2003 GRADES K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 UL REG TOTAL HIGH SCHOOLS Cave Spring High 221 198 197 178 794 Glenvar High 143 148 134 107 532 Hidden Valley High 297 244 248 253 1042 Northside High 280 226 257 258 1021 WilAam Byrd High 336 275 252 221 1084 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Cave Spring Middle 201 218 199 618 Glenvar Middle 136 160 147 443 Hidden Valley Middle 291 274 283 848 Northside Middle 244 241 269 754 William Byrd Middle 321 302 301 924 ELEMENTARY Badc Creek 64 53 66 61 66 64 374 Bent Mountain 10 9 16 12 10 6 63 Bonsack 79 65 76 84 55 83 442 Burlington 65 62 72 89 71 75 434 Cave Spring 85 93 103 86 94 121 582 Clearbrook 37 26 21 16 23 24 147 Fort Lewis 25 36 33 33 25 33 185 Glen Cove 66 72 74 79 75 87 453 Glenvar 51 60 43 78 71 61 364 Green Valley 57 87 67 60 60 62 373 Herman L Hom 73 68 73 70 77 63 424 Mason's Cove 32 36 33 30 45 46 222 Mount Pleasant 44 41 44 53 46 64 292 Mountain View 65 67 81 66 88 66 433 Oak Grove 74 65 76 92 84 109 500 Penn Forest 101 77 83 82 86 99 528 W. E. Cundiff 88 68 75 74 90 76 471 TOTALS 1016 965 1036 1065 1068 1139 1193 1195 1199 1277 1091 1088 1017 0 0 14347 Elements 8675 Seconds 5672 UL 0 Sub-Total 14347 R Tonal 0 TOTAL 14347 ~ i .o ~yj, c~ooo c~ ~+''NMt~~ } t U Q J 0 .1 V'MNhMOCp ~ O 1~tDdO'~'tiON M to .- M to M Z ~ ~ (n W U p W Q Y CLL O C7 Q ~tp~`0'NQ~O O NNtflOd~ O ~ !~ T t0 O `7 M O ~ CO Cfl r- O N t0 W a0 ~ M r-N(CtI~ONN O H O r- LC O CO N tfl(OM~I~COM Cp e- O N CD 1~ 00 r ~ MOMtflI'~ O!~ to O N O t~ !` ~ t'-ODMtnhO Y "- Q 00 a N ~' = M to ~_ Q Y r~ O N N ~ ~.. ~ C ~ m ~ W Ulm O] ~~- -e c U W Q m~~ y o J i m ~ c o WmmUUC)Oa a~ '~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~~ s ~o ~~ a ~ m g s ~ '~ ~ ~ LL ~ ~ ~ ~ F- ~~ a o g ° o ~ ~ ~ m ~i ~n N a ~ ~, ~ ~ .~ ~ ~~a t~l ~ ~ 0 oc ~ m tF M r ~ ~~ ~~ .. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ N M r G ~ .- ~ ~ ~ ~ v m ~ a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 rn C i ~~ ~U !~a g 0 r <~ ~U ~ ~ ~ ~ g g a $ oAi ~' r ~ ~ ~ O C ~ O Q' _~ a M m a U o ~ U y ~ ~ U Q Q ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ °~ °o ~°o ti ~ g o `c~ O ~ C _~ a N ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a '~ ~ U ~ ~ U 7 ~'3~' _~ cg ~Q € ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °o _h O C 4~ U ~~ 0 °o N T C .YS~ ~~L ~~ ~'~ s KtLVNINC, gc ~/~IVV u~c rcrciv-~ i ~ RE~fiEW COMMENTS RPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM ~ pLArII1ING DEPAR~Tr P.O. BOAC 29800 PROJECT -1, AG-1, AR TO PRD ~r ~ 24018-0798 PLEASE REVIEW AND RETURN COMMENTS BY ;~TEn.I,iESDI~y - c1 _TOBER 11, 1995 THE ROANOKE COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THIS REZONING REQUEST FORA 315 + ACRE PARCEL OF LAND, BEING THE PROPERTIES OF, NICHOLAS AND SUSAN BEASLEY, BOONE, BOONE & LOEB, INC., PALM LAND COMPANY,L.C. AND COTTON HILL LAND COMPANY, L.C. AND LOCATED OFF COTTON HILL RD. AND MONET DR. S.W. ROANOKE COUNTY, VA. 24018. THE MAGNITUTE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE AS IT PRESENTLY EXIST. CONSIDERING THE DISTANCE FROM THE TWO FIRE STATIONS THAT SERVE THIS AREA, CO.3 CAVE SPRING AND CO.11 BACK CREEK, THE RESPONSE TIME THAT IS PRESENTLY BEING ACHIEVED COULD NOT BE MAINTAINED, DUE TO THE INCREASE POTIENTIAL AND TRAVEL TIM$. WE FIND NO OTHER REASON TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST. Donald W . Gillis ' r Battalion Chie ire a *** IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS REQUIRED, USE REVERSE SIDE *** Chapter 7: Planning Area Analysis BACKCREEK COMMiTNITY PLANNING AREA Community Values The rural, pastoral views of the Back Creek area, with the Poage Farm being the focus of these views. The rural character associated with this area is an important quality to protect and preserve. All new developments need to respect these values and enhance them through the use of landscaping, building design and signage. Key Resources • The views of Mount Chestnut, Masons Knob, Bent Mountain and the other ridgelines as seen from U.S. Route 221. • The red bud trees lining the roadways and creeks in the Back Creek community. • The historic buildings and sites in the Back Creek community, such as Harris House, Poage Farm, Jakes Garage, etc. • The views from the "Horseshoe Curve" along U.S. Route 221 and the Blue Ridge Parkway. • The land to the rear of the Back Creek Elementary School is an important resource and should be reserved for educational purposes. General Policies Natural Resources • Prevent development on sensitive environmental and natural hazard areas which would endanger the environment or the development. • Recognize, respect, and work with private property owners in order to preserve the rural lifestyle and protect the rights of property owners. • Continue and expand the land use assessment program to promote the preservation of agricultural and forestal uses of land. • Creation of greenways in the community will provide a method to preserve open space as 137 Chapter 7: Planning Area Analysis well as offering safe walking and biking facilities. Land Use • Require both residential and commercial developers to use design principles that mitigate the impacts of the new development on adjacent uses. These design principles should enhance and protect the rural lifestyle of the community. • Permit the development ofsmall-scale commercial uses constructed in a planned commercial center for the community. • Prevent the use of strip lineaz commercial development along the U.S. 221 comdor in the Back Creek community. This type of development has large un-screened pazking areas, many access points to the main road, numerous detached buildings of varying architecture, and high light poles adding light pollution to the evening sky. • Work cooperatively with VDOT to limit the requirements for small scale cottage businesses to operate in relation to transportation improvements required for access to the public road. • Encourage and continue to permit the use of accessory apartments in conjunction with agricultural operations as supplemental income sources for agricultural operations. ~~ u"~~1M aintain the low density of single-family homes in the Back Creek community. Public Facilities • Support and encourage the upgrading of U.S. Route 221 to create a safe roadway for the community. • Extensions of utility service should be conducted at the same time as the improvements to U.S. Route 221. However, such extensions should be made only after a careful evaluation of all the impacts which would be caused by the extensions. Additionally, community participation is a vital key to this evaluation process. • Provide for street lights at key intersections in the community, such as in front of the elementary school. • Promote increased support for the rescue squad and fire department in relation to providing full-time staff resources during the day. ,• Continue the use and support of citizen watch groups working in cooperation with the County's Police Department. BENT MOUNTAIN- FUTURE LAND USE MAP 138 Elizabeth Abe From: Davidson,Charies [cbdavidson@deq.state.va.usj Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 3:23 PM To: Elizabeth Abe Subject: Ground Water Conditions; Rt. 221, Roanoke Co. Dear Ms. Abe: As we recently discussed, the area of interest is underlain by the Blue Ridge Complex, mainly greenish-gray granite and granite gneiss. Ground water yields are generally low (0-10 gpm) with dry holes (unproductive wells) occasionally occurring. Yields tend to vary greatly and are, to a great extent, controlled by the topographic position of the well; lower is generally better. Systematic location of wells (not random) is necessary to develop reliable supplies, especially if trying to develop a public water system. Other ground water supplied water systems in this area have been somewhat unreliable due to low yielding wells. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me at 562-6797. Bruce Davidson Ground Water Programs Manager Department of Environmental Quality West Central Regional Office Roanoke, Virginia /~ Scenic America PRESS RELEASE Embargoed Contact: Meg Maguire Unti! Feb. 24, 12:00 a.m. 202-543-6200 Scenic America Announces 10 Endangered American Landscapes Uncontrolled Growth, Airport and Road Expansion, Billboards, Coastal Erosion and Logging Threaten the Beauty and Distinctive Character of American Communities Annual List of 10 Last Chance Landscapes Will Be Released Feb. 24 (Washington, D.C.) -Scenic America, the only national nonprofit organization dedicated solely to preserving the natural beauty and distinctive character of America's communities and countryside, today released its annual list often of the nation's most threatened scenic landscapes. Each Last Chance Landscape is a place of beauty or distinctive community character chosen because it faces imminent and potentially irrevocable harm. However, each of the winners also possesses a potential solution, a "last chance" for people at the local, state and national levels to step forward and preserve their scenic beauty before it's too late. "Each of our Last Chance Landscapes has a story to tell," said Scenic America's President, Meg Maguire. "We hope that we can help write a much happier ending for each of them." Some of the threats highlighted in this year's list include airport expansion affecting four historic New England towns; cell towers jutting their unsightly necks into the Potomac River viewshed; forest clear-cutting erasing the visual context of an historic 19`~ century southern plantation; and sprawling residential and commercial development stripping the Blue Ridge Parkway of its spectacular views. Maguire emphasized that Scenic America does not seek to put an end to growth or development. "Development can be done in a way that doesn't destroy the character of a place or the natural beauty that drew people there to begin with," she said. Nominators for each winning landscape have outlined ways to solve that community's problems. Scenic America is dedicated to the principle that "change is inevitable; ugliness is not." -- More -- 801 Pennsylvania Ave., SE Phone (202) 543-6200 Suite 300 Fax (202) 543-9130 ~~ Washington, OC 20003 E-mail scenic~scenic.org a member of Earth share nE~~cgEc Last Chance/Page 2 This year's Last Chance Landscapes are: • Historic Towns of Concord, Lexington, Lincoln and Bedford, Massachusetts • Creole Nature Trail National Scenic Byway, Louisiana • Glen Mary Plantation Historic Site, Georgia • Schuylkill Marsh, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania • Lower Marks Creek Rural Landscape, North Carolina • Jordan River Conservation Corridor, Utah • Middle Potomac Scenic Corridor, Maryland and Washington, D.C. • State Highway 99 Corridor, San Joaquin Valley, California • Blue Ridge Parkway Viewshed, Roanoke County, Virginia • Gaviota Coast, California Maguire emphasized that each of the ten landscapes chosen highlights a problem that may be occurring in dozens of communities across the country. "Unfortunately, much of the natural beauty and distinctive character of America's cities, towns and natural areas is disappearing in a sea of uncontrolled, cookie-cutter residential development and shopping malls," Maguire said. "Haphazard growth gobbles up open space at a frightening pace. Cell towers and enormous billboards -- the "litter-on-a-stick" of the American highway -puncture scenic vistas. The threats posed to this year's landscapes are an illustration of what's happening to communities all over America, every day of the year." Scenic America is a national, nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C. whose mission is to preserve and enhance the scenic character of America's communities and countryside. Since 1978, Scenic America has helped citizens and public officials in thousands of communities nationwide protect their scenic heritage. Scenic America advocates for federal, state and local laws and policies that support scenic conservation and community livability. For more information about Scenic America and a detailed description of the threats posed to each of this year's Last Chance Landscapes, please visit www.scenic.ore. ### C~ •,~ 4~ . ,.y w ~, ~: ~ o ~ ,~ ~ >- ~ o ,~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~~ ~ `~ ~ '~ ~ A ~ Sao o~ ~ ~ ~, o ; a ~~ ~ .~~~a O o ~ ~ ~ ~ u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oc ~ ~~, ~ ~ W ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ p ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m W ~ a ~ ~ ~ 0 0 o a c ° ~ c ~. ~ .c o N .~ o °~° v° o ~ ~ o b OZ"Oi~N ~ •~ p 6>AoN ~,; ~fS+~V ~ ~ b oA'~o°od' ~ ooh O ~~ O~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 ~ b ~ D O Q 0 ti 0 ~ O~ V ~~~~ ~~w~w tiav~aa ~~w~w 1 ~ ~ p ~ ~ +' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ o ~,~~oa~ ~~a~ ~ v ~ o~°~, ~ ~ LEA Z+ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ 0 0 ob t~ ~ ~ v . •.~ ~ ~-' , ~ may, ' ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ tai ~ U ~ ~ o o ~ , ~ o ~ ~ ~ o w C~ +~ C6 ~ ~ O ~ ~ v ~ ~~+ ^~, ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ai ~ o ~ ~ ~ sy o 0 0 ~ ~+ ~ ~' ~ ~ a~ o o b ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o o a~ ~ ~ a~ ~ o O a~ ~1~,-~ c~ ~ ~+~ ~r1~ ~ o UUc~ •~ A~ W cv. v V V ~! ~ L~ -f ~`1-•,yr:Yo~o t -y `•- ~-~ Z ~ r4 ' ' 1 d ~, ;~~ ''- . ~ ~ ~4~~~t~ r { .x~ `;~, ,aa ~ ~ t tD ~ ~ ~ N a. ~~ .t_ ~ ~ _~ •~ •~ •~ ~ '~ O vV cv. 1V V V bA z ~ a 5 0 x 0 A W I~ c~ 0 0 0 o~ ~U CL'i ~ U a W U O ~ 'T~ pp ~ ~ c~ b y ~~ ~ -~' o ~ a~ o .~ '°'~ ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~~.~ ~ ~, ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ c ~ ~ o ~ .-+ ° ~ ~ v1 Cd v i~-i b ''d ~~ ~ ~ ~ o a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °~.~ o.~ ~ ~ °"~~ ~~~~~~ a~ a~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ''~ ,~i ~i ~ a U ~ o ~ ~ ,~ .~ m ,.d o ~ _,., ~ b ~ O U O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _d O ~~~+++ +~ ~ ~ a ~ o ~ U ~ c ~ ~ a> ~ «t ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ a~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ +' ~ c c ~ A, -~ b . a~ ~ ~ a~ ~ a~ +~ ~ ~~~~ ai U ~ ~ ~ •~ b •~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~,~ ~ o ° ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~'~~~~ a;~~~~~~ 4-+ ~ ~ is ~ O . ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H~~~~a~ ~ ~ ~ O ~,~~~~ 0 a~~~~~~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~b ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a~ .~ ~ 0.' ~ .N o ~ ~' ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ c~ a~ ~ a~ ~~ o~ ~a ~, `~°o+~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ O ~~ ~¢~ °a~'~r~a a~ ~• ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ p y ~ ~ '''' ~ cd ~ a WU x O O a Pq 0 O O U a U ~ ~ ~U ~~ U w ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ o ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ rd ~ o ~ '~ cd O c~ b r~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'' ~ ~ O 0 ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ a? ~ a~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o 'Tj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *-~ tan ~ :~ ~' ~ ~ ' o o ~ ~ " ,~ rd ~ ~ ~ o a' a '~ ° ''~ ~ o a~ rd V ~ ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ .~ ~ ,~ rn O ~~~b~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~b R, 0~0 ~ a~ ~ rd ~ o ~ ~ hp U ~ o ~ .Q ~_ v~ co ~ a~ a ~ ~ ~ ~+., Ei ~n o ~ ~ ~ E~ a a~ A .~ O +~ ~ ~~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ v V y a ~ ~ ~ O x O O I 0 0 0 o~ N ~ ~ ~V ~~ ~~ w U u] ~ v ~ D, ~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ U ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ U ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ p., a ~ ;.~ ~ a ;~ o ~ C~ Of-, U U Ra ~ ~i . ~ O U ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ b,p ~ o ,~ a~ O • ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ Abp '~taA ~~b~ aa~~;~~ p~~~~~~,~a~° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ day ~ ~~'' ;.Q ~ c~ C1 v~ RS U1 U -~.~ O ~ ~ ~ U G~1 ~ -~ ~ ~U~yy ~ U .~ ~ C~ C ~' ~ ~ 0 5 ~.~ ~ ~• ~ ~ ~d rd ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ r,, cd ~+ c~ ~y I~ ~ F'i ~ U C~ [~/I ZT' C~ ~ ~ 'b ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ..~ ~ ~ o ~, ~ .r., ~ A, r o +~ ~ ~ +~ o 0 ''d ~ Q ~ ~ ~ o .. c ~ i' . b ~ ~ 0., ,..d om., ~.,, tip ~ i7' O ~ U ~ .~ . _ ~ . U ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ . ~ ~ p ~ U ~ O ~ ~i •~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ 4-i O ' U ~ ~ O ~ ~' ~ . ~' ~ ~ +' i' ~ a ~ ~~ ~ y ~ O ~ ,b 0 v E' o ~ 3 0 ~ +' ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ F' o ~ ~ c D ~ ° ..~ ~ a~ a a~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ . . . i..~ ~• W z 5 zO O A w a 0 0 0 V ~ ~ V V ~~ y U W V d+ a bA ~ ~ ~ v, ~0 ~ ~ vim., '~' rd~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ +~ ~ v ~.' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ •~ ~ ~ v, ~ ~ a+ y ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o U ~ ~ v R~ ~ U ~ ~ O a~ ~'~~ ~ ~ b~ ~~ ^, ~ a c~ ~ O ~ ~ y v ~ ~ ~ +~ ~Ot~,,, c~ ~ O ~ • rte'' ~ ~ b a' ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~, ~ RS Z3 4) ~ ~ C~ O R, . ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ c `~ O c~ c~ o -~ ~ ~ ~ R,~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ra a' v i ~ ~1 ~ U ~ '~"~ ~ ~ a ~ z a 5 O x zO O A W 0 0 0 o~ '~ N o~ U d ~ U ~ ~~ U ~ W U rr ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ o~~~ ~~~ ~~~o ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0 a~ o ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ ~~-~~ ''"~ ~ U O ~ R,, • ~ +~ v ~ ~ ~ ~n .~ ~ a~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~~~~ w ,~ A a c~i ~ ,..~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O tap ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~n ~~~~w ~ ~b ~~~~~~~~ ~~~000~0~ ~ a'~'~,-.,,~ rd o b b .-~ a, a~ o~ ~'ti•~ ~~ ~ a ~~ ~ o ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ °a~ a~ c~ o ~ a~ ~„~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ C6 ~ ~ cd ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~°~~~~~ b a~ as ~.~~'~b~ a~ b~ ° ~ ~b~ °'~'S ~ o ~ ~ ~ a~ a~ ~o ~o~o'~~.ma oUU~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ c ~~ .~ Cd ~ ~ ~ ''~ ,Q ~ ~ O U ~ ~~~~ ~ a~ ~ ~ o ~~ ~a,~~'~~~~ F,~:ti a°~n~~--a c~ 00 ~ ~do~"c~~~'~o~ • rl • rl 0 0 0 0 0 0 U ~ ~ U ~ ~~ U U cfl bin c~ a O ~ L1A ~ +' ~ ~ r~n ~ . ~ o ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ °. a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' 'a ~ ~ o ~ •~ ,~ ~ v ^d o ° c ~ ~ ~ o o ~ b~A U ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ t~ c ~ ~ Ra o ~ b ~" ~ ~ ~ ~ .,~ ~ O y ~ U ~ ~ ~ ''d tip ' ~ O ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • q,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ an o ~ o +~ a ~'' , ,~ ~ ~ ti -+~ N ~ ~ U b • c~ ~ ~ ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ '"~ 'Tf -~ C~ ~ N N ~ . ~ C~ . ~ R, , ~ a> O O ~ O ~O ~ b .~ ~ , F~ ~ ~ ~ ( /~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y ~ C ~ ~, ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ o ° ~''" ~ c ~ ~ ~~ o +''~ ~ •~ ~ ~ d v ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O +' ,~ o o a~ 'S ~ ~ o ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4-~ p ~ ~ ~ "~i O O ~ v ~~ td ~ U~rO bA~ i~~•~ U O ' ~ cG~~ O C~ ~ ,,,~ ~ ~ '~ p 4a ~ ~ ~ .O ~ ~ ~ p ~ O ~ , -f~,~ 0 O ~ ,~~ C~ ~ ~ O'J ~'' GV O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a N .~ ~ o ~ ~ 5 ~ a~ C~ ~ ~ R j ~ ~, ~ +~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti a O x G~ as C+'y O O O a v '~ d N ~ ~ U ~ ~' ,N N U U ~ ~ ~ 4p ~ c~ ~, ~ 'x ~ ~ ~ • ~ • ~ ~ ~ o a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~•~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~h ~' ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ a~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ O rd ~ U ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O ' p ~ ~+ •~ •~ ~ UI ~ ~ '~'~ ~i CL$ ~ ,~ +~ o o ~ .~ 0 a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c a~ o c~ •~ a~ ~ a ~ ~ a ~ ~ + o ~ •~ p ~ 0 ~ rC , • . ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ E-1 . ~ ~~ ~ C6 ~ r-a ~ din ~a 5 0 0 W A 0 0 O CV o~ U '~ N o~ ~ ~ ~U N U W U O ~ ~ `r'• c~ 3 ,~ ~ °` O ~~~o~ ¢~~ ~ ~a a3i ~ '~ ~° j~4 ~c.~~ ~; ,r N 00 ~ ~ O ¢~ ~ o ~~~ ~ ~ h ,~ + ~ O .-.. U ~ ¢+ .~ ~ c, ~ ~~ CrJ M O ~ ~ ~ O a ~ ~ °~' ~~~ rn ~~ O ° '~ ~ ~ °' ?? r" cd N cd ~ N .-~ N -d 'b ~ a~ o ~ ~ a yc~w° ~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ .-~ ~ '~ o •~ °o. a~ ~~ o~ U ,_~ ~; ~, ~~ e z M M O ~--i ~O e~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ,~~, y Q o °~,, a3i ~ .~ y~4~ «,. N N ~ O O ~ _ ~ cd~-~ ~ ar O ~ ~ N >a~ z ~ a O U a A W a CYJ D GV O O '~ ~~ U ~ P; vi Cl U W U Scenic America NEWS RELEASE For Release February 24, 2003 Contact: Gary W Johnson, Blue Ridge Pazkway, (828) 271-4779 ext. 210 Email: Gary W Johnson@nps.gov Janet Scheid, County of Roanoke, Va., (540) 772-2094 Email: jscheid@co.roanoke.va.us Meg Maguire, Scenic America, (202) 543-6200 Email: scenic @ scenic.or~ Parkway's "Last Chance Landscape" Designation Brings Pledges to Save Views (Roanoke, VA) A host of Roanoke County, federal, and private officials and organizations today pledged their mutual support and cooperation to conserve the endangered landscapes along the Roanoke section of the Blue Ridge Parkway, which was today named a "Last Chance Landscape." The 28-mile section of the Pazkway through Roanoke was one of 10 threatened landscapes that Scenic America, a national nonprofit organization, announced today in its annual listing. The organization's president, Meg Maguire, said that each Last Chance Landscape is a place of beauty or distinctive community character chosen because it "faces imminent and potentially irrevocable harm." Through designation, Scenic America hopes to encourage people at the local, state and national levels to step forward and preserve their scenic beauty before it's too late, she said. At this morning's press conference at the County Administration Center, local leaders pledged to do just that. Rep. Bob Goodlatte described the Pazkway as a national treasure that is known worldwide for it beauty. "Preserving the Pazkway viewshed in the Roanoke Valley is important not only as a scenic resource but also for the enormous economic impact that Parkway visitors have on the azea," he said. --more-- 2 Joe McNamara, chairman of the Roanoke County Boazd of Supervisors, and County Administrator Elmer Hodge said that the county would be working closely with Pazkway officials in the coming months to develop specific strategies for protecting and enhancing views. In addition, Roger Holnback, executive director of the Western Virginia Land Trust, offered the advice and support of his organization in helping to develop and implement along-term view protection strategy. Dan Brown, Parkway superintendent, said that when he served as a Pazkway management assistant at neazby Vinton in the eaz1y1980s, the landscape through Roanoke still had a "very rural, very agricultural chazacter that was entirely compatible with the overall design intent of the Pazkway." Brown said that when he returned as superintendent in 2000, it was obvious that the local Pazkway landscape was "being transformed" by adjacent commercial and residential development. He said he is committed to doing all that he can to preserve the scenic qualities along what is the Parkway's most urban adjoining community. Several speakers noted the importance of working cooperatively with adjacent landowners and the need to preserve views through design guidelines and incentives to encourage sensitive planning, and of selective acquisition of conservation easements and critical tracts. Williamsburg architect Cazlton Abbott served as moderator and introduced the press conference speakers. Abbott, a native of Salem, Va., authored the study, "Visual Character of the Blue Ridge Pazkway." The Blue Ridge Pazkway is one of 388 azeas administered by the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. It is also the most visited unit in the National Pazk system, recording more than 23 million visits in 2002. Parkway visitors have an economic impact of some $800 million a year in the 12 Virginia counties through which the scenic road passes. Scenic America is dedicated to preserving and enhancing the scenic character of America's communities and countryside. It also helps citizens and public officials nationwide protect their scenic heritage. Other Last Chance Landscapes for 2002-2003 are: •Historic towns of Concord, Lexington, Lincoln and Bedford, Massachusetts •Creole Nature Trail National Scenic Byway, Louisiana •Glen Mary Plantation Historic Site, Georgia •Schuylkill Marsh, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania •Lower Marks Creek Rural Landscape, North Carolina •Jordan River Conservation Corridor, Utah •Middle Potomac Scenic Corridor, Maryland and Washington, DC •State Highway 99 Corridor, San Joaquin Valley, California •Gaviota Coast, California 3 ## [Note to editors: Additional background information and a digital photo of representative Blue Ridge Parkway landscape in Roanoke, Va., are available electronically by contacting Eileen Kelly@nps.gov, telephone (828) 271-4779 ext. 206.]