Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
4/27/2004 - Regular
Working Document -Subject to Revision Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Action Agenda April 27, 2004 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for April 27, 2004. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Wednesday, April 28 at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday, May 1 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. Please note that the afternoon session will begin at 2:00 p.m. and the evening session will begin at 6:00 p.m. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call All present at 2:03 p.m. 2. Invocation: Reverend Diane Scribner-Clevenger Unity of Roanoke Valley 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS MAW requested that a closed session be added pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the appointment of specific public officers. ECH requested that the order of the following agenda items be changed: (1) Move the presentation of the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget from Item R-1 to Item D-1. (2) Item R-1, public hearing on the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget, will need to be held at 7:00 p.m. or later due to the fact that the advertisement stated that the public hearing would be held at 7:00 p.m. 1 PMM requested that a closed session be added pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) to discuss pending litigation, Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Board of Supervisors. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of May 3 through 9, 2004 as National Historic Preservation Week in the County of Roanoke Chairman Flora presented the proclamation to John Kern, Director of the Roanoke Regional Preservation Association, and Alison Blanton, President of the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation. 2. Proclamation declaring the week of May 8 through 16, 2004 as National Tourism Week in the County of Roanoke Chairman Flora presented the proclamation to David Kjolhede, Executive Director of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau. Also present were Susan Jennings, Executive Director of the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge; Beth Poff, Executive Director of Mill Mountain Zoo; Blaine Shively, Vice President of Operations -Hampton Inn Salem; and Cecelia Bradley, General Manager - Hampton Inn Airport. D. BRIEFINGS 1. Presentation of the fiscal year 2004-2005. budget for Roanoke County. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Brent Robertson, Budget Director) Mr. Hodge advised that at this time, a state budget has not been adopted so final budget figures are not available for all areas. The state contributes 6% of the County's total budget, and 48% of the school's budget. He stated that the budget is balanced within the existing tax rates and fees and does not include any new personnel. The budget places strong emphasis on public education, public safety, and economic development. It includes funding for several large County capital projects. The General Government Fund budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 is projected to be $135,889,036. This represents a $7.9 million increase of which $800,000 is federal pass-through funding for social service program reimbursements and $400,000 is generated from rescue transport fees that must be set aside for fire and rescue services. Mr. Hodge reported that the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) contract negotiations are expected to be completed by July 1, 2004 and both the City and County will transfer assets and personnel. The County will transfer approximately $28 million and 63 employees to the WVWA. The transfer will e 2 result in the elimination of inter-fund transfers which will cost General Fund operations approximately $315,000 that will need to be offset against new revenues. However, the long-term benefits of the Authority will outweigh this cost. Human services has experienced increases in both case loads and costs for providing services that will necessitate a transfer of approximately $1 million to the Community Policy Management Team (CPMT). This program is supported with local funds from the County and schools, as well as state allocations. In addition, the demand for social service programs such as foster care and detention continues to increase, resulting in the need for an additional allocation of $800,000. These programs are, however, 100% reimbursable and the cost is offset by federal pass-through funds. In summary, the total general government revenues are projected to be $135,889,036 and the total projected revenues for all funds are $314,969,985. Mr. Hodge highlighted the following proposed expenditures: Public Safety - $17,293,121; Community Services - $10,552,518; Human Services - $14,011,769; Transfer to School Operating Fund - $56,065,852; Comprehensive Services (an increase of $2 million over prior year) - $5,037,171. The proposed revenues from real estate taxes are $64,475,000. Personal property tax revenues reflected a decline in the assessments for used vehicles; however, this was offset by increases in new car sales. The proposed personal property tax revenues total $25,464,846. With respect to employee benefits, Mr. Hodge advised that a 3% salary increase has been included in the budget. The County also absorbed the increase in VRS retirement costs and a portion of the proposed health insurance increase. An increase in the deferred compensation match was also included. He noted that approximately $800,000 was set aside for contributions to human service, social service, cultural, tourism, and other agencies. Approximately $4,444,826 in additional funding requests was not funded in the proposed budget. Mr. Hodge also highlighted the projects included in the capital improvements program (CIP). E. NEW BUSINESS None F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these ifems does not indicate supporf for, or judge the merifs of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. None 3 G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES None H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to amend Ordinance 012704-5 which amended Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response" of the Roanoke County Code. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 0-042704-1 JBC motion to approve ordinance URC APPOINTMENTS 1. Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission 2. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Community Advisory Committee (CAC) RCF nominated Richard Kelly to serve an additional three-year term that will expire on April 8, 2007. 3. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 4. Social Services Advisory Board (Appointed by District) RCF nominated Dot Hayes to fill the unexpired four-year term of Patricia W. Thompson, Hollins Magisterial District, who has resigned. This term will expire on August 1, 2005. 5. Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) Board of Directors J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-042704-2 MWA motion to adopt consent resolution with Item J-3 removed URC 4 MWA requested that a work session be scheduled for May 11, 2004 to discuss Item J-3. 1. Approval of minutes -April 13, 2004 2. Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System R-042704-2.a 3. Request to approve name for the former Salem Office Supply Building. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for a work session on June 8, 2004, to conduct a training session with the Board regarding planning and zoning laws in the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) It was the consensus of the Board to schedule the work session on June 8, 2004. MAW requested that staff ensure that citizens are notified of the upcoming meetings that would allow them to provide input regarding the Comprehensive Plan revisions. L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS None M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None N. REPORTS MAW 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 e 5 5. Accounts Paid -March 2004 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended March 31, 2004 7. Statement of Treasurer's accountability per investment and portfolio policy as of March 31, 2004 8. Proclamations signed by the Chairman 9. Report of claims activity for the self-insurance program for the period ending March 31, 2004 O. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the appointment of specific public officers; and Section 2.2-3711 A (7) discussion of pending litigation, Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Board of Supervisors. RCF motion to go into closed session at 3:08 p.m. U RC Closed session held from 3:13 p.m. until 3:38 p.m. P. WORK SESSIONS (4th Floor Conference Room) 1. Work Session to discuss refuse collection on private roads. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) Time: 3:40 p.m. - 4:45 p.m. The Board participated in a tour of private roads in Roanoke County where trash collection concerns had been expressed. EVENING SESSION (6:00 p.m.) Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-042704-3 MWA motion to adopt resolution URC R. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing to receive written or oral comments concerning the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 and the fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program. (Brent Robertson, Budget Director) 6 There were no citizens present to speak on this matter S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jeff Bennett. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-042704-4 MWA motion to adopt ordinance URC 2. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of D. Gregory Roberts. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-042704-5 JBC motion to adopt ordinance URC 3. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Marc I. Wilson. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-042704-6 JBC motion to adopt ordinance URC 4. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 15.7 acre tract of real estate located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road (Tax Map No's. 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) from the zoning classification of C-1 and R-1 to the zoning classification of C-2, with conditions, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Kahn Development Company. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the petitioner A-042704-7 JPM motion to return the matter to the Planning Commission for re-consideration URC One citizen spoke regarding this matter 7 5. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the Planning Commission A-042704-8 MAW motion to refer the matter to staff for a period of 30 days for further review URC 7 citizens spoke regarding this matter T. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None U. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor McNamara: He commended the Parks, Recreation & Tourism staff for the good job they have done in preparing the athletic fields. Supervisor Church: (1) He requested that Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development, contact VDOT in response to concerns expressed by Teresa Walters regarding road conditions at West Main Street and Fort Lewis Church Road in Salem. (2) He advised that the County's engineering staff will be contacting Jimmy Williamson regarding his recent inquiry. (3) He notified staff and the citizens that he will be unable to attend the May 11 meeting. Supervisor Wray: (1) He advised that the National Little League Baseball opening day will be held this Saturday, May 1. He commended Parks, Recreation and Tourism for their efforts in preparing the fields. (2) He inquired about the process for citizens taking materials to the transfer station. Mr. Hodge advised that Roanoke County offers free acceptance of materials delivered to the transfer station from Roanoke County residents. The number of trips, however, is limited in order to prevent commercial use. If citizens wish to make multiple trips, they can call the County and the fee will be waived. If the trips occur on the weekend, citizens can advise the attendant at the transfer station that they are County residents and they will not be charged. Supervisor Wray requested that bill inserts be utilized to clarify this policy for citizens. 8 Supervisor Flora: (1) He advised that he attended the Lee Eddy memorial ceremony at Garst Mill Greenway on Saturday, April 24. He also commended Parks, Recreation and Tourism staff for the appearance of the park area. (2) He advised that the schools recently received the results of an efficiency study conducted by the Virginia Department of Education. He requested that the Clerk contact the School Board Clerk and schedule a date that this information can be presented to the Board of Supervisors. V. ADJOURNMENT RCF adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m. 9 Working Document -Subject to Revision Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Action Agenda April 27, 2004 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for April 27, 2004. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Wednesday, April 28 at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday, May 1 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. Please note that the afternoon session will begin at 2:00 p.m. and the evening session will begin at 6:00 p.m. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call All present at 2:03 p.m. 2. Invocation: Reverend Diane Scribner-Clevenger Unity of Roanoke Valley 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS MAW requested that a closed session be added pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the appointment of specific public officers. ECH requested that the order of the following agenda items be changed: (1) Move the presentation of the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget from Item R-1 to Item D-1. (2) Item R-1, public hearing on the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget, will need to be held at 7:00 p.m. or later due to the fact that the advertisement stated that the public hearing would be held at 7:00 p.m. 1 PMM requested that a closed session be added pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) to discuss pending litigation, Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Board of Supervisors. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS Proclamation declaring the week of May 3 through 9, 2004 as National Historic Preservation Week in the County of Roanoke Chairman Flora presented the proclamation to John Kern, Director of the Roanoke Regional Preservation Association, and Alison Blanton, President of the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation. 2. Proclamation declaring the week of May 8 through 16, 2004 as National Tourism Week in the County of Roanoke Chairman Flora presented the proclamation to David Kjolhede, Executive Director of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau. Also present were Susan Jennings, Executive Director of the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge; Beth Poff, Executive Director of Mill Mountain Zoo; Blaine Shively, Vice President of Operations -Hampton Inn Salem; and Cecelia Bradley, General Manager - Hampton Inn Airport. D. BRIEFINGS 1. Presentation of the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget for Roanoke County. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Brent Robertson, Budget Director) Mr. Hodge advised that at this time, a state budget has not been adopted so final budget figures are not available for all areas. The state contributes 6% of the County's total budget, and 48% of the school's budget. He stated that the budget is balanced within the existing tax rates and fees and does not include any new personnel. The budget places strong emphasis on public education, public safety, and economic development. It includes funding for several large County capital projects. The General Government Fund budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 is projected to be $135,889,036. This represents a $7.9 million increase of which $800,000 is federal pass-through funding for social service program reimbursements and $400,000 is generated from rescue transport fees that must be set aside for fire and rescue services. Mr. Hodge reported that the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) contract negotiations are expected to be completed by July 1, 2004 and both the City and County will transfer assets and personnel. The County will transfer approximately $28 million and 63 employees to the WVWA. The transfer will 2 result in the elimination of inter-fu.nd transfers which will cost General Fund operations approximately $315,000 that will need to be offset against new revenues. However, the long-term benefits of the Authority will outweigh this cost. Human services has experienced increases in both case loads and costs for providing services that will necessitate a transfer of approximately $1 million to the Community Policy Management Team (CPMT). This program is supported with local funds from the County and schools, as well as state allocations. In addition, the demand for social service programs such as foster care and detention continues to increase, resulting in the need for an additional allocation of $800,000. These programs are, however, 100% reimbursable and the cost is offset by federal pass-through funds. In summary, the total general government revenues are projected to be $135,889,036 and the total projected revenues for all funds are $314,969,985. Mr. Hodge highlighted the following proposed expenditures: Public Safety - $17,293,121; Community Services - $10,552,518; Human Services - $14,011,769; Transfer to School Operating Fund - $56,065,852; Comprehensive Services (an increase of $2 million over prior year) - $5,037,171. The proposed revenues from real estate taxes are $64,475,000. Personal property tax revenues reflected a decline in the assessments for used vehicles; however, this was offset by increases in new car sales. The proposed personal property tax revenues total $25,464,846. With respect to employee benefits, Mr. Hodge advised that a 3% salary increase has been included in the budget. The County also absorbed the increase in VRS retirement costs and a portion of the proposed health insurance increase. An increase in the deferred compensation match was also included. He noted that approximately $800,000 was set aside for contributions to human service, social service, cultural, tourism, and other agencies. Approximately $4,444,826 in additional funding requests was not funded in the proposed budget. Mr. Hodge also highlighted the projects included in the capital improvements program (CIP). E. NEW BUSINESS None F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. None 3 G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES None H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to amend Ordinance 012704-5 which amended Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response" of the Roanoke County Code. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 0-042704-1 JBC motion to approve ordinance URC APPOINTMENTS 1. Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission 2. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Community Advisory Committee (CAC) 3. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission RCF nominated Richard Kelly to serve an additional three-year term that will expire on April 8, 2007. 4. Social Services Advisory Board (Appointed by District) RCF nominated Dot Hayes to fill the unexpired four-year term of Patricia W. Thompson, Hollins Magisterial District, who has resigned. This term will expire on August 1, 2005. 5. Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) Board of Directors J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-042704-2 MWA motion to adopt consent resolution with Item J-3 removed URC 4 MWA requested that a work session be scheduled for May 11, 2004 to discuss Item J-3. 1. Approval of minutes -April 13, 2004 2. Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System R-042704-2.a 3. Request to approve name for the former Salem Office Supply Building. K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for a work session on June 8, 2004, to conduct a training session with the Board regarding planning and zoning laws in the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) It was the consensus of the Board to schedule the work session on June 8, 2004. MAW requested that staff ensure that citizens are notified of the upcoming meetings that would allow them to provide input regarding the Comprehensive Plan revisions. L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS None M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None N. REPORTS MAW 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 5. Accounts Paid -March 2004 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended March 31, 2004 7. Statement of Treasurer's accountability per investment and portfolio policy as of March 31, 2004 8. Proclamations signed by the Chairman 9. Report of claims activity for the self-insurance program for the period ending March 31, 2004 O. CLOSED MEETING pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the appointment of specific public officers; and Section 2.2-3711 A (7) discussion of pending litigation, Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Board of Supervisors. RCF motion to go into closed session at 3:08 p.m. URC Closed session held from 3:13 p.m. until 3:38 p.m. P. WORK SESSIONS (4th Floor Conference Room) 1. Work Session to discuss refuse collection on private roads. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) Time: 3:40 p.m. - 4:45 p.m. The Board participated in a tour of private roads in Roanoke County where trash collection concerns had been expressed. EVENING SESSION (6:00 p.m.) Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-042704-3 MWA motion to adopt resolution URC R. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing to receive written or oral comments concerning the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 and the fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program. (Brent Robertson, Budget Director) 6 There were no citizens present to speak on this matter S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jeff Bennett. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-042704-4 MWA motion to adopt ordinance URC 2. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of D. Gregory Roberts. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-042704-5 JBC motion to adopt ordinance URC 3. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Marc I. Wilson. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 0-042704-6 JBC motion to adopt ordinance URC 4. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 15.7 acre tract of real estate located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road (Tax Map No's. 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) from the zoning classification of C-1 and R-1 to the zoning classification of C-2, with conditions, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Kahn Development Company. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the petitioner A-042704-7 JPM motion to return the matter to the Planning Commission for re-consideration URC One citizen spoke regarding this matter 7 5. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the Planning_ Commission A-042704-8 MAW motion to refer the matter to staff for a period of 30 days for further review U RC 7 citizens spoke regarding this matter T. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS None U. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor McNamara: He commended the Parks, Recreation & Tourism staff for the good job they have done in preparing the athletic fields. Supervisor Church: (1) He requested that Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development, contact VDOT in response to concerns expressed by Teresa Walters regarding road conditions at West Main Street and Fort Lewis Church Road in Salem. (2) He advised that the County's engineering staff will be contacting Jimmy Williamson regarding his recent inquiry. (3) He notified staff and the citizens that he will be unable to attend the May 11 meeting. Supervisor Wray: (1) He advised that the National Little League Baseball opening day will be held this Saturday, May 1. He commended Parks, Recreation and Tourism for their efforts in preparing the fields. (2) He inquired about the process for citizens taking materials to the transfer station. Mr. Hodge advised that Roanoke County offers free acceptance of materials delivered to the transfer station from Roanoke County residents. The number of trips, however, is limited in order to prevent commercial use. If citizens wish to make multiple trips, they can call the County and the fee will be waived. If the trips occur on the weekend, citizens can advise the attendant at the transfer station that they are County residents and they will not be charged. Supervisor Wray requested that bill inserts be utilized to clarify this policy for citizens. 8 Supervisor Flora: (1) He advised that he attended the Lee Eddy memorial ceremony at Garst Mill Greenway on Saturday, April 24. He also commended Parks, Recreation and Tourism staff for the appearance of the park area. (2) He advised that the schools recently received the results of an efficiency study conducted by the Virginia Department of Education. He requested that the Clerk contact the School Board Clerk and schedule a date that this information can be presented to the Board of Supervisors. V. ADJOURNMENT RCF adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m. 9 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda April 27, 2004 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for April 27, 2004. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Wednesday, April 28 at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday, May 1 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. Please note that the afternoon session will begin at 2:00 p.m. and the evening session will begin at 6:00 p.m. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: Reverend Diane Scribner-Clevenger Unity of Roanoke Valley 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring the week of May 3 through 9, 2004, as National Historic Preservation Week in the County of Roanoke 2. Proclamation declaring the week of May 8 through 16, 2004, as National Tourism Week in the County of Roanoke D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1 F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to amend Ordinance 012704-5 which amended Section 2-7. "Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response" of the Roanoke County Code. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) APPOINTMENTS 1. Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission 2. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Community Advisory Committee (CAC) 3. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 4. Social Services Advisory Board (Appointed by District) 5. Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) Board of Directors J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of minutes -April 13, 2004 2. Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System 3. Request to approve name for the former Salem Office Supply Building 2 K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for a work session on June 8, 2004, to conduct a training session with the Board regarding planning and zoning laws in the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Accounts Paid -March 2004 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended March 31, 2004 7. Statement of Treasurer's accountability per investment and portfolio policy as of March 31, 2004 8. Proclamations signed by the Chairman 9. Report of claims activity for the self-insurance program for the period ending March 31, 2004 O. CLOSED MEETING P. WORK SESSIONS (4th Floor Conference Room) 1. Work session to discuss refuse collection on private roads (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) EVENING SESSION (6:00 p.m.~ Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION 3 R. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Presentation of and public hearing for the proposed budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 and the fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvements Program (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Brent Robertson, Budget Director) S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jeff Bennett. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 2. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of D. Gregory Roberts. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 3. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Marc I. Wilson. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) 4. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 15.7 acre tract of real estate located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road (Tax Map No's. 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) from the zoning classification of C-1 and R-1 to the zoning classification of C-2, with conditions, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Kahn Development Company. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the petitioner 5. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the Planning Commission T. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS U. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS V. ADJOURNMENT 4 f f 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: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring May 3 through 9, 2004 as National Historic Preservation Week APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ ~~" C _ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Regional Preservation Office, the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, and local preservation organizations are requesting that the Board adopt the attached proclamation declaring National Historic Preservation Week. Present to accept the proclamation will be John Kern, Director of the Roanoke Regional Preservation Association, and Alison Blanton, President of the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation. r .r ~~ C~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 PROCLAMATION DECLARING MAY 3 THROUGH 9, 2004, AS NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, historic preservation is an effective tool for managing growth, revitalizing neighborhoods, fostering local pride and maintaining community character while enhancing livability; and WHEREAS, historic preservation is relevantforcommunitiesacross the nation, both urban and rural, and for Americans of all ages, all walks of life and all ethnic backgrounds; and WHEREAS, it is important to celebrate the role of history in our lives and the contributions made by dedicated individuals in helping to preserve the tangible aspects of the heritage that has shaped us as a people; and WHEREAS, "New Frontiers in Preservation" is the theme for National Historic Preservation Week 2004, co-sponsored by the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation. NOW THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim and recognize the week of May 3 through 9, 2004, as NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK in the County of Roanoke; and FURTHER, call upon the people of Roanoke County to join their fellow citizens across the United States in recognizing and participating in this special observance. 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: AGENDA ITEM: APPROVED BY: April 27, 2004 Proclamation declaring May 8 through 16, 2004, as National Tourism Week in Roanoke County Elmer C. Hodge ~~'""r / '~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau has requested that the Board proclaim the week of May 8 through 16, 2004, as National Tourism Week in Roanoke County. David Kjolhede, Executive Director, will attend the meeting to accept the proclamation. ~ r s ~ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 PROCLAMATION DECLARING MAY 8 THROUGH 16, 2004, AS NATIONAL TOURISM WEEK IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the travel and tourism industry supports the vital interests of the County of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley by contributing to employment, economic prosperity, international trade, peace, understanding and goodwill; and WHEREAS, travel and tourism ranks as an important industry in the County of Roanoke in terms of revenue generated, by contributing $82,411,000 in travelers spending, $19,020,000 in payroll and $2,498,000 in local taxes; and WHEREAS, travel and tourism has become a $1 million dollar per day industry in the Roanoke Valley, with a total yearly amount of $401,433,000; and WHEREAS, as people throughout the world become more aware of the outstanding cultural, recreational and natural resources available in the County of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley, travel and tourism will become an increasingly important aspect in the lives of our citizens; and WHEREAS, given these laudable contributions to the economic, social and cultural well being of the citizens of the County of Roanoke, it is fitting that we recognize the importance of travel and tourism. NOW THEREFORE, WE, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors do hereby proclaim and recognize the week of May 8 through 16, 2004 as NATIONAL TOURISM WEEK and call upon the citizens of the County of Roanoke to observe this week with appropriate ceremonies and activities. f ~` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 012704-5 WHICH AMENDED SECTION 2-7. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Ordinance No. 031202-6 amending the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of a new Section 2.7 "Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired" providing the County with an opportunity to recover its reasonable expenses in providing an appropriate emergency response to such accidents or incidents. This ordinance was authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the 2003 session of the Virginia General expanded Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia to also include reckless driving, driving without a license, and leaving the scene of an accident; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, by Ordinance No. 012704-5, amended Section 2-7 to include several of these violations of State Code ; and WHEREAS, an amendment to clarify the reference to provisions of the State Code is in the public interests; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 13, 2004; and the second reading was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1 ~~ 1. That Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired be amended to read and provide as follows: Chapter 2. Administration Article I. In General **** Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired, Driving Without a License,. and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. (a) Any person who is convicted of violation of Section 12-8 of this Code, or of Sections 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, or Section 29.1-738 of the Code of Virginia, when his operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or water craft is the proximate cause of any accident or incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response; or the provisions of Article 1 (Section 46.2-300 et seq.) of Chapter 3 of Title 46.2 " relating to driving with out a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license; or of Section 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident, shall be liable in a separate civil action to the county, for the reasonable expense thereof, in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident. In determining the "reasonable expense," the County may bill a flat fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or to the maximum flat fee authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, or aminute-by-minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. (b) As used in this section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all costs of providing law-enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical services. 2 1. (c) The provisions of this section shall not preempt or limit any remedy available to the commonwealth, the County, or any fire/rescue squad to recover the reasonable expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident not involving a violation of any of the above mentioned State Code sections as set forth herein. 2. Any expenses recovered shall be deposited into the General Fund and appropriated annually to the Police Department and the Fire & Rescue Department operating budgets based upon an estimate of the proportional expenses incurred in responding to such accidents or incidents. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, AI#izer, Flora NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors 3 cc: File Circuit Court Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge William Broadhurst, Judge Robert P. Doherty, Jr., Judge Jonathan M. Apgar, Judge James R. Swanson, Judge Charles N. Dorsey, Judge Steven A. McGraw, Clerk Juvenile Domestic Relations District Court Joseph M. Clarke, II, Judge Philip Trompeter, Judge John B. Ferguson, Judge Joseph P. Bounds, Judge Ruth P. Bates, Clerk Intake Counsellor General District Court George W. Hams, Judge Vincent Lilley, Judge Julian H. Raney, Judge Jacqueline F. Ward Talevi, Judge Francis W. Burkart, Ill, Judge Theresa A. Childress, Clerk Gerald Holt, Sheriff Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Randy Leach, Commonwealth Attorney Magistrates Sherri KrantzlBetty Perry Main Library Ray Lavinder, Police Chief Richard Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue Roanoke Law Library, 315 Church Avenue, S.W., Rke 24016 Roanoke County Law Library, Singleton Osterhoudt Roanoke County Code Book John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer O. Amold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance David Davis, Court Services Elaine Carver, Director, Information Technology Anne Marie Green, Director, General Services Thomas S. Haislip, Director, Parks, Recreation & Tourism William E. Driver Director, Real Estate Valuation F. Kevin Hutchins, Treasurer Nancy Hom, Commissioner of Revenue 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~-~ - I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: April 27, 2004 Ordinance amending Ordinance 012704-5 which amended Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response of the Roanoke County Code Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: &~•~/ l SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On January 27, 2004, the Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance amending Sec. 2- 7 of the Roanoke County Code. Section 2-7 imposes a fee on individuals convicted on certain traffic offenses, in order to recover the County's emergency responses expenses incurred in responding to certain accidents. This amendment does not change the substance of this ordinance. Rather it clarifies a reference to a provision of State Code by more specifically incorporating across- reference to Article 1 of Chapter 3 of Title 46.2 instead of limiting the reference to a single code section. This cross-reference to the State Code deals with driving with a suspended or revoked license. This technical amendment is consistent with the State enabling legislation. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment will have no fiscal impact. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of this ordinance. ~~"~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 012704-5 WHICH AMENDED SECTION 2-7. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Ordinance No. 031202-6 amending the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of a new Section 2.7 "Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired" providing the County with an opportunity to recover its reasonable expenses in providing an appropriate emergency response to such accidents or incidents. This ordinance was authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the 2003 session ofthe Virginia General expanded Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia to also include reckless driving, driving without a license, and leaving the scene of an accident; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, by Ordinance No. 012704-5, amended Section 2-7 to include several of these violations of State Code ; and WHEREAS, an amendment to clarify the reference to provisions of the State Code is in the public interests; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 13, 2003; and the second reading was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1 ~.~ r,_ ~ 1. That Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired be amended to read and provide as follows: Chapter 2. Administration Article I. In General **** Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired, Driving Without a License, and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. (a) Any person who is convicted of violation of Section 12-8 of this Code, or of Sections 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, or Section 29.1-738 of the Code of Virginia, when his operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or water craft is the proximate cause of any accident or incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response; or the provisions of Article 1 (Section 46.2-300 et seq.} of Chapter 3 of Title 46.2 " relating to driving with out a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license; or of Section 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident, shall be liable in a separate civil action to the county, for the reasonable expense thereof, in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident. In determining the "reasonable expense," the County may bill a flat fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or to the maximum flat fee authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, or aminute-by-minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. (b) As used in this section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all costs of providing law-enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical services. 2 (c) The provisions of this section shall not preempt or limit any remedy available to the commonwealth, the County, or any fire/rescue squad to recover the reasonable expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident not involving a violation of any of the above mentioned State Code sections as set forth herein. 2. Any expenses recovered shall be deposited into the General Fund and appropriated annually to the Police Department and the Fire & Rescue Department operating budgets based upon an estimate of the proportional expenses incurred in responding to such accidents or incidents. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF .SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: April 27, 2004 Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board Elmer C. Hodge ~/y County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION The three-year term of the late Mr. Lee B. Eddy will expire on June 30, 2004. Mr. Eddy served as a citizen representative on the commission. 2. ROANOKE VALLEY AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC) The late Mr. Eddy served on this committee without a term limit. The County has three representatives on this Committee and the Board is asked to appoint a citizen and/or representative of the community, business, education, health care or civic interests rather than staff members. 3. ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMMISSION The three-year term of Richard Kelly expired on April 8, 2004. 4. SOCIAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD (Appointed by District) Patricia W. Thompson, Hollins Magisterial District, has resigned from the Social Services Advisory Board. Her four-year term will expire on August 1, 2005. .~ ~n~' 5. TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY (TAP) BOARD OF DIRECTORS The two-year term of Ms. Elizabeth W. Stokes, who serves as the designee of Supervisor Richard Flora, will expire on May 5, 2004. 2 ~k 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 RESOLUTION 042 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for Apri127, 2004, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 3, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -April 13, 2004 2. Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System 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 Altizer to adopt the resolution with Item J-3 removed, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None 1 A COPY TESTS//:ll[[ ~~'~/~ 111 ,Q ~ ~ • 111L1~~Y11~~_ Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J -CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for April 27, 2004, designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 3, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -April 13, 2004 5--3 2. Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System 3. Request to approve name for the former Salem Office Supply Building 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. 1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 27th DAY OF APRIL, 2004, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 042704-2.a REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF LAUREL RIDGE DRIVE AND A PORTION OF CORTLAND ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the streets 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, and 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, and 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 Altizer Seconded by None Required Yeas: Supervisors, McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora Nays: None A Copy Teste: Diane S. Childers, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: Arnold Covey, Director, Department of Community Development Virginia Department of Transportation File I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 042704-2.a adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on Tuesday, April 27, 2004. Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors I ' o U C m E L U `o o' E ~ m N' ~ ~; ~ I a ~~+ E O p U 8~ O _O C7 C O Q w a. 1 LCy c~ C z Q C C a v E 2 c ~. 'm m ^C O b er b O 4 m ~C CO OU O E 3 C O CO O m E m z .~ ~ ~ ~ O H O K v; Y C ~i ~ ~ ( Z U O n ~ ~ m = ~ ~ ~ c Q ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~C U m O r ~' a z ~ H f~' m d ~ V ~ y } "~ O ~ ~ 0. ~ o C ~ a a ~ 0 a a 0 6~. m a °~ N N N ~ ~ N C a ~ ,yqQ m ~ ~ ~ypQ m ,yqq m ~ ~ 7 _c b ~ m O ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rr~.' V ~ O e y 15 J! ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ 6 b y ~ ^ m C O ~ ~ m O 0 m O 0 ~ m 4 ~ ~+ m Q a m O v Q m ~ a ~ m (' U m ~ C ~-- 0 u d ~'C ~ d ~ o 'a ~ LL.. a r a ci F b ~ o r a a b ~ c r Q a a F S u`. c r ~ o a FF b ii c r (~ e n. n c Q ~ ~ (il m b ~ Q ~i r Z N O ~ ~~// W V ~~// W V ~ ~ l: m ~ 2 Z ~ n n Y ~ ~ ti e 1 6 J-- ~,. m d a `a S , 6 2 17.I F ~ ~ ~ L r- `o ~ r p e G a o < ~. U = /` L% '~ ~a- y.. U / LLf ~ //V~ U V n L 0 r a ~ .. aBgJLeAp RGD...~ I gL .s6 4 .SITE ~ .' 6 RwD ~\ ~~' . - L ~ C ~ ~ o~ ~ c I ¢~ u ° ' °ra V r, c r m r T~ T /-~ 7' ~ T A ,~ ,( • ~ ~ 1 - JU. f.S' u, tanDY LoT6 B ~ NVY('NE- art' Paes: I :c•;' r a"pr Boor' . BseJ' 1 1p' SSf 1D K (J.AN.2D I ~ I r '^T'1p ^ :4~ lElSn SF._ f 6 /; FG " BJ-~- ~ _- ~1J1~1~ff'' Iy'Y8L I ~ I2l:U Sf j •~ -/Bn,FIR CCIR'TY/~ ~ (^-,B.SY ~I I E I '~~ 'S s'a 113R/S/. &~ LIBJ]SF. R 12SPn Si.' ~ .~ ~/ NG4T }rf~ <AI/R!L YOUN IA/I 6 7 , rG1J: u >q Y . M ~ I JJ,zei / rJJr• fi - P.B. az ac /Br-mJ - ~ - ~ 1 n,+,.. .,n.y. ~ I 1 ~ .. ~ - l-"(_i P.ur.'.~ ,s.tJ ~~ .. lBalcraiR! ca/NTrI~ I JB•NB.6- J ',: sr ^7 ~1/ ~_ ___~'_--.. aaBB'... u9.r sex'nnrtr rl ;'-"r- ~ ~ (~I~/ r ~ e W J,,T ~i ~/ Jvffr t p~ P 4 ` xr~i;)' ' LAUREL.RID~E .DRIVE/ yvs t -~\~_/ / / ~. . n'+'.c ~1 Q. 'l / _ .. ~: RcBr cn ~ ~ ~JJ'aldL Z 4~ I Q~ ~ tin. , am _ _ _ -~ _ d~~" `_ •rce rur. ~' 3 0 6 ~;~'- -* LN;vua ~ - --• ,---~ .._- 11 S ~ e ';. Pn. ,L:_,eJ rtan sF r i & ~Q yy~_,_..r- Jt'°' I \ r;Bn u. reBprcmc«r co,.Nn/ ,' I 3~';. IJ"L' iN !J' P.Ut. I ~ I ~ ~ I ~ 2 IR~ $ x c R r • 14 ~. ~ 13 / ffi ~ IEtn v 1.. , ~ I ~ $I ~ Y. 15 B4 M /L.JSJ SF. ~ )1182 S! "'1 ~~' J / ' 1{SIB Sl. P ""~ I ~ I i -The Orchards Section 1 Cortland Meadows r~ = ` r" ~_,B eJBB' i I 1 ~ ~~.i BC~IO.URT EAST--_ V fP.B2' ~ J e l Y A~TI+f.~ I SEC r I p N ; ' ~ I U' ~ ~ IBLnCK 3 I . _ _ N+-+tLtaJLr _ -nex:uw T ~ 1 p ~ 1'Z + !-srLPi7nr Pa ,a rc earl 1- - - - 1 11 .B.f:i'a°L`L a 4 (BOrziavAT ca.Bivrrl Bn: 1; 09J 5l. .'~ Ex. ,p ~," TN f• OACNARnS 1 (Fp~rPLPr c[W J ~ ~pfn r ) Ba rf roux r. spa rry` ' Ip,: i `' ~ ~+r;y.~~ l ~ I ~ rs. ,s: aNE lFprfrauer maven ~'. _ .arl'g'~<`) Bas =u_.~. , ys~~l t _ 1 ,i / [pr„ i' ~F~ti ,Orchard Park, Section 3 ORC NARB Pw RK ' S E L T/ p N J (RENYO) u~,. l~ ~ §~ +' ~,.,. P.B. 2P, P6 BJ ~Wi "~ $ ¢°/n y ~ ' /ROANPYF COUNP7 Fx. m• ra+J-'i *'1 ~ \ . /1 r l ~ USEaIENr 4 ; % ~/ ~ ~ ._ P.B PL PL BJ ~~~ ~, ~~c, .~1 ~ `--- 1 -~~ VIE i( ~E R`~A D ~ .._ ~ ,~ NIL/ i `Il ~` ~~ ' ~ c ~ ~ .~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY , to th , RdANQ~' CL?~LN~ ~ ~ The Orchards, Section 1, Cortland Meadows 1~~'~.AR3''1Y?' ~~ & Orchard Park, Section 3 Acceptance of Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into CO:D~,3~f'Ullrl?~Y. ~~~-~~~'~~~~ The Virginiabepartment of Transportation Secondary,System - DESCRIPTIOtJ LENGTH RIGHT OF WAY ROADWAY WIDTH SERVICES Miles Feet Feet Houses Cortland Road from th8 intersection with Huntridge Road 0.09 Variable 36 4 :and Nillview Drive fo the intersection with Laurel Ridge Drive (44 to 60) • Laurel Ridge Drive from the intersection with Cortland Road 0.11 50. 34 10 e connection with Laurel Lane in Botetourt Coun ' 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: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System SUBMITTED BY: Arnold Covey Director, Community Development APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: F8~W Community Development Corporation, the developer of The Orchards, Section 1, Cortland Meadows, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requesting that they accept 0.09 mile of Cortland Road, from the intersection with Huntridge Road and Hillview Drive to its intersection with Laurel Ridge Drive, and 0.11 mile of Laurel Ridge Drive from its intersection with Cortland Road to its connection with Laurel Lane located within Botetourt County. The staff has inspected these roads, along with representatives of VDOT, and finds the roads are acceptable. FISCAL IMPACT: No County funding is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to VDOT requesting that they accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into the Secondary Road System. ... ~. ~ -- ~`~.. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 27th DAY OF APRIL, 2004, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF LAUREL RIDGE DRIVE AND A PORTION OF CORTLAND ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the streets 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 c 'o U C O L O U C1 C 3 m c `o o' m N' ~ ~; to 3 L G a A Q U d CJ7 ~ 2 O O ~ U as '~ C m ~ ~ ~ ~ O H a ~ ~ a W, d ~ V]i N O ~ O a a Q 4 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ o s ~ L ~ O ~ O ~ = m ~ 9 R Q < Z cMi _> N ~ O K C Y, }' C Ly t ~ <. _ U W IO n I~+ ~ ~ m ~ c ~ ~ N. ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ O < U r° a m 6 ~ U a S ~O 8 ~iJ 5 9 p i m ID i m a a m a a mp a a m a d O a ~ m c C a °~ N NN N N t c .. m m ~ ~ ~ o o a o f ~5 0 ~ ~5 ~ o i ~ ~ ~ ~ b y m m m m v a o ~ m O ~ m ~ 4 b 0 N C ~ ~ C ~ ~ a b a ~ $ d ~ ~ 2S a ~ c 25 a b c ~ ~ a d c ~ o b c m e c iL c r n. d r a u;. o r a u. r a ~ r a ~L r a S r a ~ Q Z W i ~ b N ~ a ~ ~E E ~ l ~ O V O V m 4 Q Z .. N l7 Y 1!1 O ~ 2 U r O z 0 c U }.. i U I i i ~. J .w b . 5 ~ `~ ~ ~Y o~ ._ ~ ~ s og o my mu T~TnT~T Y14../1~Y11 ~ ~~~. ~~ ,,~--f 1Y~~~~ • - I su.ar r + ItanJ Nrryrplr- rtn. east:. aaDf• 8 ' o I cDrL ;G^ s~ I~ . / ~ ea ,, , ~~• r `I+• ~I I P.GC ( n :_ 0. lY.3J0 SF. M' SSC ID ~ LRAx!EO f / 'E~ nw -- _ - r r A zv.~A/r w~smuve . B I D i ~. p'YBL I I ~> ~ +E I,TJ Sf '~'.'6 • • ~ ` S FG L/- ~ "/BDIFIdMr CLI.A~ l ~ ~- l ,( eJJ' ~~ /r' ~ 6 ~. 7 y 8 ~.~ / - 'i g ' C I ; 5 ~^ g /i aD SE. $ fE310 SF. ~ ,~~ ~/ AOJ! riul S~ & g fiJY laB a sr &Y M ~ i H1. `,IUR tL UO UN rA/I r - . '~~"~~ I I . ~.rs;r.B. / ~7 ~ , ~ ~ ~ J'"- /r'P ut~ 's~ -rJJ h P6 14 Pc /a R' .. (BOrrrwRT CCUrrr) I rn ~ . ~ . may. ( I _ ~i JO a:- ..` f r _ ____- ~ ~ ' - _ Le 1 C _ ~ _ ~~ U. / s Pur _ ~ ~~ t'.: Sf ~;4// I 4 ~rl ( ~ ' :~ __ - _ ~-~ /QM AJ '.. - U ~ RIDGE DRIVE( t, LAUREL IIEnnT/: ( t 5 r / i > ~ -- (. . $ 3 O ~ -- -r--'~ .._ 11 P y''- T L Gf ? T e s .m_Iu ra Bn u. ' ~ 'Q _- IS y. r -- JL''' ( ~ Iierp Sf. y;>;/.--- GeDSrowr ccw' l 1 G:. S {1 ~SilMbgy /A@JD' I i 12 ~H~yt-CIS PIRG. i ~ ( /R-TI SF 1 . ~ ~ g t .I ~ I ~ R' 2 ~ ~' ~11 x Y 15 R" f ~. + rl IaI SE C ^I M 1 V - ~ 11 9/6 S! ~ ~1 Y ~ IL,JtJ S ~ - ~ ~ ~ r ~Tfx. J!' G ;P : , ,p'461-J I :~~ _E~,~,.D I ; -The Orchards Section 1 Cortland Meadows - . ~ ¢ I r: ' " ~ ~ t 4 ~ ~ _ ~ L NIJYti15r- ~. aa tI I t+I 6y ~ II ~ T'S ~~, . I I V I TT y: / IYS~ / e I>L Cmf~ T~ / BO S OUR T fA S I EC.'/OM J IB L O C K t I A 1 ~ ~ __ /ll-f Jasaf' -_nL]s:VYV ~ - - - - s O.[--L/ 12 I (-s/ex7Tr Ps rs x aL-cn ~ y 11 P.':S'PO. La-L.>, lO'LC P- APr CD/a EK POTrD l ~ P.B. 8 P6 110 cC~ ' (BOreTOIiRT Couvrt9 r ;ODS SF. 1 . i Y ~ ORCNAROB ( TNE fAff [66 SCC T/ON J s ~ a RD :CrT ~ C .~~1 ~1 Pal t 1. IDr: . -LT - eorErouRr_ sou BLOCK I ` ' ~ -. Via" ~ \ ~ \S( I ~' F ~ <J ~ 'ATV S. p4 ~ . P.S. l; PG 66 ROI t 3 F . /t: P.NF 11 /BOIF1fN.WT COUNTYf 1 GOr ~ <OT J ~ - I Pa )J. PG 6G-G) 1 o u• Puf~ y~ r" I ~ Section 3 Orchard Park I $~ ~ lD, „ I ~ORC NAP,O PARK sEC r/DN yP+flzffol '~~~~ BJ ti•' PG e 2Y ' P . , 1, - II 'sue o~> - % ' ~ ~ a~ ~ i , . . . , I ~ ~ (ROANCGYF LWN^'I EK SD' S([P'r 1 j ' \ ~ f SF r 1 A a 1 ~/ ~ 4 A NfN IY ~ PB PG S I tt , ~ - ' , \` ~`` . . ~ ' ~ / 1011 E Y ~ i / , Rip ~ DF R ` ~ J' i ~l ~ Hi~~~ -- - , +~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION LENGTH RIGHT OF WAY ROADWAY WIDTH SERVICES Miles Feet Feet Houses Cort{and Road from the intersection with Huntridge Road 0.09 Variable 36 4 and Hillview Drive fo the intersection with Laurel Ridge Drive (44 to 60 Laurel Ridge Drive. from the intersection with Cortland Road to the r_onnection with Laurel Lane in Botetourt County 0.11 50 34 10 RD~~O~ ~~~~~ The Orchards, Section 1, Cortland Meadows .~}~'F.~LR~'.1VT ~~, & Orchard Park, Section 3 Acceptance of Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road into C0:11~.3~FIItrI?'Y. ~~`~~~~~~~~~ The Virginia~Department of Transportation Secondary System _~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ,~- 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve naming of the former Salem Office Supply Building SUBMITTED BY: Anne Marie Green Director of General Services APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge ~'y County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The former Salem Office Supply Building is currently being renovated by the County for use as office space for the Sheriff's Office and the Court Services Unit, a division of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. During this process, the building has been referred to as the Roanoke County Courthouse Annex. The building is scheduled to be finished by October 1 and as the time for occupancy nears, signs and a plaque will be ordered. Traditionally, plaques on public buildings include the official name of the building, as designated by the Board of Supervisors, and facilities are generally named after an appropriate individual or based on geographic location. In the past, the County has not named facilities after individuals who are still living. This policy was followed in naming Darrell Shell Park and the Clifford E. Craig Dam at Spring Hollow Reservoir. Most County facilities are named after their physical location or purpose, such as Green Hill Park and the Roanoke County Administration Center. The Board will need to choose a name for this facility so that staff can proceed with ordering the appropriate signage for the building in time for the scheduled opening. •„ J"_~ ALTERNATIVES: 1. Designate the former Salem Office Supply Building as the Roanoke County Courthouse Annex. 2. Select another title for the facility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1. The title "Roanoke County Courthouse Annex" indicates both the location and the use of the building, in keeping with other County 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: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Request for a Planning and Zoning Law Work Session SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attomey COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS• SUMMARY__ OF INFQRM~ITION Staff is requesting that the Board of Supervisors agree to schedule a planning and zoning law work session on June 8, 2004, beginning at 5:00 p.m. It is anticipated that this work session will require at least 4 hours of time to cover the material. The Planning Commission wilt be invited to attend. The adoption of the revisions to the comprehensive plan, accompanying zoning ordinance amendments to implement changes to the plan, turnover in the membership of the Board, and the increasing litigious nature of society, all combine to suggest that a brief review of the legal foundations of planning and zoning law in the Commonwealth of Virginia would be valuable. Staff has contacted R. Michael Chandler, a professor in land use and community planning, and he has indicated his willingness to assist us in this work session. The County Attomey and the Director of Planning and Zoning will also present portions of this session. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding in the amount of $600.00 is required and is available in the Board's contingency account. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board schedule this work session for June 8, 2004, and approve the appropriation of $600.00 from the Board's contingency account. GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Prior Report Balance $8,977,656 6.60% Addition from 2002-03 Operations 1,483,629 Audited Balance at June 30, 2003 10,461,285 July 1, 2003 Explore Park Loan Repayment 25,000 February 10, 2004 Presidential primary for 2004 (24,180) Balance at April 27, 2004 10,462,105 7.69% Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $10,462,105 $10,462,105 7.69%~ 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 Approved By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Elmer C. Hodge C'~~~ County Administrator N-1 N -~~ CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Audited Balance at June 30, 2003 $360,172.56 Transfer from Department Savings 2002-03 274,972.00 Remaining funds from completed projects at June 30, 200: 419.66 10/28/2003 Equipment and software for electronic records managemei (73,057.00)I system for Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office 10/28/2003 Reimbursement from Water Fund for debt service paymen 11,000,000.00 made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir 2/10/2004 Addition to the Bent Mountain Library (28,057.00) 3/9/2004 Acquisition of Woltz Property (145,000.00) Balance at April 27, 2004 $11,389,450.22 ~ Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge ~/~ County Administrator N-3 RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2003-2004 Original Budget $107,940.00 July 8, 2003 Appropriation towards Roanoke Regional Airport Alliance (8,193.00) July 22, 2003 Appropriation towards Project 50 Capital Campaign July 22, 2003 Reserve towards Project 50 Capital Campaign August 12, 2003 Appropriation for debris removal and stablilization December 16, 2003 Appropriation for Office Support Specialist in the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office Balance at April 27, 2004 (10,000.00) (5,000.00) (15,000.00) (15,000.00) ~ 747.00 I Submitted By Approved By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Elmer C. Hodge ~'~ County Administrator N~y FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service Savings from 1998-1999 debt fund FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service FY 2001-2002 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service Savings from 2001-02 debt fund FY 2002-2003 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service FY 2003-2004 Original budget appropriation Less increase in debt service Balance at April 27, 2004 Reserved for Future School Operations FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation July 11, 2000 SW Co Regional Stormwater FY2001-2002 Original budget appropriation July 1, 2001 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle July 1, 2002 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle July 1, 2002 Transfer to Operating in original 2002-03 Budget July 1, 2003 Transfer to Operating in original 2003-04 Budget Balance at April 27, 2004 2,000,000 (1,219,855) 2,000,000 (1,801,579) 2,000,000 (465,400) 116,594 2,000,000 (2,592,125) 2,000,000 $670,000.00 1,113,043.00 2,000,000.00 321,772.00 2,000,000.00 780,145.00 495,363.00 198,421.00 1,651,194.00 (592,125.00) (2,202,725) (202,725.00) $8,435,088.00 $1,500,000.00 (290,000.00) 1,500,000.00 (1,858,135.00) (35,047.00) (566,818.00) (250,000.00) Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Elmer C. Hodge f~ County Administrator ACTION NO. April 27, 2004 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: Accounts Paid -March 2004 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance ITEM NO. Iy Elmer C. Hodge ~'~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors Payroll 3/12/2004 Payroll 3/26/2004 Manual Checks Voids Grand Total Direct Deposit Checks Total $ - 792,555.97 828,487.22 142,832.10 133,643.90 1,481.50 $ 5,039,429.78 935,388.07 962,131.12 1,481.50 $ 6,938,430.47 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. l~ _ a 0 0 N a a O .~ .~ L O C 0 a O ~>'+ C 7 O U 0 7 C R 0 U Q .D C c0 b c~ e w W O C 6l 67 R r.+ V l~ M ~ M W V1 ~--•. v1 ~ M N o0 O O~ M ~O N l~ 00 00 l~ N l~ [~ W 7 M 01 N l~ ~ V1 O ~ y .-~ l~ ~ M O N M~ °~ O N h l~ V O V ~--~ -r ~-+ ~~ •--~ O~~ vl h W d: ~ O M W N O oo O O ie d o O ~+ O ~-• M o0 V ~D N o0 00 V ~° ~ ~ 01 V oo l~ M ~ O~ l~ °~ ~ vl M 00 ~ O O~ 01 ~ M N Ca o ~ 'n .--~ ~ V1 ~ [~ O vl ~ W vi ~O ~D ~D O~ l~ ~ ~ ~ M N oo ~ N ~--' ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ [~ ~ i cC 7 .--. .-. ~ ~ ~ ~ u l~ [~ M 01 O N ' [~ ~ ~-^ W W N O N ~ O h M M M ~O M ~ N~ O\ O ~~~ M ~O N ~ r '!1 ~ W '""' 01 Vl D, -~ Vl N ~--~ N 01 ~--~ O O~ l~ N ~--~ ~ M N [~ M ~ ~ W O N Q1 W ~ v Vl V ~ N --~ ~O ~ ~ ~--' O~ ^ °~ vl ,-• M ~O o0 00 ~ 00 h N ~° ~ °~ M ~O 00 Vl ~ O ~--~ ~ V V O~ M .~ Y V1 M V O ~ M O~ 01 W V1 V1 00 l~ 00 ~ M O W ~ ~ ~ V'1 M Vl ~ V V T ~D N 01 ~y `~ Vl 00 M N o0 N 01 N ~-• T ~O h 01 ~--~ M ,--~ 'n •-~ •• V N '"" .-• 00 ~'' l~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ r N ~ y ~ 01 V1 N N O ~O N~ '!1 M N W N~ M M ~ M~ 7 M M l~ ~ ~--~ t. 01 M N .-~ .-. N .-~ ,-. ~ ~ N N "" M M ~ [~ ~--~ 'rl ~--~ M V 01 N N 40 N 'n M O 'il 'n ~ r O ~ v~ Q1 ~ 00 V O V O ~--' ~O '/1 ~ O' y M [~ M N V M v1 O~ O H O o0 V l~ 00 'h O 01 ~ M N l~ [~ M 7 0o N V~ N N N 01 O~ M GO ~ ~ °~ vl 00 I~ '!1 M °~ ~ W O oo O d oo ~O w1 00 ^-~ M O N ~--~ ~° M N ^ M 'n N ~O o0 00 00 V N ~ O A ~ M '!1 O Q\ w'1 N 'il O ^ d' [~ ~O N 01 l~ N h M M M oo ~ ~° O 01 7 M O M 0~ 0 ~n y o+ a1 M 'n ~ V ~ a, O~ •~ D\ 00 v'i t~ ~--~ '!1 01 M M N ~ N ~ N ~ 00 .-. 00 00 d' M O ~--' .-. 7 O V '~1 M M Q1 ~~ n 7 M oo N~ V N [~ •--~ N oo N M o0 ~--~ t~ v y O N 7 V V ~--~ N M~ N N ~ ~ M ~ a O O M oo N ~O ~O N~ W 7 V'1 M V' ~ O ~D O ~D N O l~ ~~ 00 ~ N .-. N 7 O O' ~--i .-. 00 O ~--~ ~ ~ ~ N V ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ N O ~ M V vl [~ N '~'1 ~O l~ M M [~ ~--~ M 01 ~ M ~ d O~ °~ D1 M O 'r1 M 7 M O l~ I ~O l~ N l M~ ~O N ~O .-. ~O vl 'n N 7 'n 'n ~--~ O O ~ l~ O ~ ~ M v'1 m ,--~ M V 'n N N M ~O ~ N O ~ vi 'l1 M 00 ~° °~ 01 v1 m ~O ~ G > N •-• V1 •-+ ~ ~p N vl [~ N N N ~ N M V N N M Opt ~ ,--~ ~ a _ '" 'O 7 C W '~ 0 .` v a = 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l~ O O O~ O O W O al O O '/1 ~ D\ M O V'1 ~ l~ M C O O O O O O M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l~ O O --~ N O O o0 M~ ~--~ O V --~ 'rl O~ O 01 N M l~ W O ~ '~1 O O O I~ O ~--~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~--~ ~ O o0 a n O V N~ --~ '/~ O '/1 00 ~° 00 O M O~ l~ V'~ N 9 [~ O O O O ~n °~ O 'n O O O M Vi O W M ~O '/1 --~ o0 01 O ~O O Q\ ~ ~ vi '!i V ~ ~D M_ ~O o0 00 7 V O O 00 t~ l~ 0 0~~ ~O 01 00 l~ .-. N [~ V V 'n V M O V 7 M V V'1 01 00 V l~ _M ~ Fp O O M h ~--~ M ~D d' M l~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ n O Vl M ~ -~ ~ 'il N ~ O O V N ~D ~D V ^~ ~ N M N V~ N~ [~ ~D N L ~. O W ti >. b~-0 N -- >~ ~ N C aNi cNC ~ X w °~ ro ~ ~ ~ ~" U rn r~ ~ h ~, O w F H ~ •° x a °o ai '~°- h ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ eq aoi :b ~ ~; '.; ~ Q o 0 O ~ ro~° w o on v° ~ ~_ ~ o> ~ ro o LO ~ d ~ ~' ~ j i ~ •~>-' °~' ~l ~° E~- a~ '.° k" ~ w °~'° ~ p ~ ~> ~. °' Y ~ ~a cn °„° ~a ~ v e x ° x ~ ° o ,~ p a 0' ~ o ~ ° Gq u ~ ° ° ,~ ~ G o o ~ o b ~ 4. ~ ~ b N ~ " .v ~ S C7 H o .~ a F~° o p a N ~ a U o o ~, °~' ° U ' C v~ U~ o .b v °~ a ~ `~ ~ ,a ~ .~ ['.' :~ ~ ~ ° ~ o o W o T w w w o o ~ y -o o°n 0. ~ _y ~ c ~ :d ~ ai ca o h voi ~ C ..-7 ~ CL cxa U ^C w L1. 'o ~ ~ `'-~ `~-' ~ ro ~ °~ W °~ ~ ro °~ ~ 1 C o N ~ y ° ~ E ~' O 3i E- ° ~ o ° ~ o a ~ a"i ~ ctl .°~. ~ ~ U w w o W ~ , ~? •ia ~ ~ ti . C G o a`i'i ~' y av'i a`i ~ 'C v, '~ ° y aGi aoi .~.° 00 ~ coi >o U ~ w ~ ~ w a`i ~ y ~ v 7 aoi cd O O ~ ~ ° ~ "' O ~ 'y' ' c' coa ~ aoi ?? .~°' ~ a>i a>i .~ s' ' a~ aoi O s ~ -d a> .~' ro L c rxa.aaa W UGOw~F-~xF-OQaawUa~..a:n:UUr~~c4zc~3w030v~0 0 w O_ -~ N_ M_ d' O N M~~ ~O l~ W °~ O ~--~ N 7 n W Q\ O N W O -~ ~ O --+ d' r M O~ O N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M V V V V ~n ~n 'n ~O ~D ~D ~O t~ 00 0o T 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~/-~ N 7 8 N ~ N v .~, H ~,,, ~ cd a~ O ~ o _ V u .. y A a Q L > ~ y ai ~ A r'~ 'fl m d~ ~ .'~ d R V M ~ L ~ C iv M '-' ~ W h C d i ~ ~i ~C ~ b11 ~~,, u 7 ~ ~ "O ~ C O ~ C 'O e0 ~ ~r ~~.,' ~.. O +=' ~ W C '~+ p O O O U ~, E 6r CC Q o ~_ j ~ r N d ~ ~ O A ~ yam, 7 Q~1 L C ~ ~ a M M O 9 W 'C 0 .~ G r 0 a O L L O W ~ °~ 7 s ~ C > ~" ~i oe 'O Ci r rn o, o~ N N '~ C 7 W L G v 4. O ~N O y C s.. C F- W M O fv-r M 7 O O N 0o O d ~ 6y! O ~ Q ~ ~ ~ °: ~ 6. 0 t' Y ~ Qa ~ ~i ~ Y M ~ O ~~ V ~ M L ~ ~ C to ~ ~ ~ ~ H 6l C L~ ~C ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ai ~ ~ C. O ~ C b ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o +j ~ W C '~+ ~ O O C U ~, 8 d 7 O :-i M M O t G W 'fl 0 .` a r 0 O s L 0 W 7 u ~D R ~ A O C ~ O 7 V' C A j ~D v e t ~ C > O d ~' M .- n 9 07 00 M M V1 H F '~ r. R L V 9 C 7 W L C V O O 7 C M h G. o z ~ -- f ~ r V O M ~ ~ O~ M O O N d ~ v y `v v `u ~ C C C 0.. W W W ~ S =' C ~ o q o o ~i ~ ~ W v. ~ ~' i~ .-~ ~..~ `~ ~ ;: a E ' fa G ~ < d b~ _ ° .. °' e o ~ W a o m 0o u ~ m a >+ d ~ a p E ~ u C ~ G ~ ~ m .7 m C bA L .:j O C e~ W O _~ C 7 O Q b ~ ~ r ~ a w 9 ~ A ~ u y C y a G*7 i k] ~ ?~ O M M O 'b b C W '~ 0 ~L 0. s C T O L L ~. W v u G e ~ e E W p V G O w v T +~+ s 9 C a Gr] v 9 W G O '~ w L a G O 'O C W r M Q~ M d' O O ~O N M O~ ~ ~O N O~ ~--~ O N ~p r M r Q~ 00 01 M ^ ~1 M M ~ N O~ O Vl M 01 O O~ O~ ~ ~ r o0 pp ~O O O V op ^-~ ^ M o0 M N nj r ~o r ~ ~n vi w ~ r r ~ ~ r r r ~o 00 ~o c~ r N V M V'1 ~ 'r V1 ~D r V N N O~ v1 N o0 O~ A d' V1 ~O ~p V ~O .y o0 N O~ ~/1 ~p N 01 O O~ O N I A 00 lp h O ~ i!1 .~-i 00 00 N 00 00 N M 00 ~-• •-• ~ N ~D V1 ~ r O oo p~ V 00 r r o0 N~ ~D r r M a0 O~ O~ O O O~ O~ 01 01 y r .--i ~ O V O V ~--~ O 00 O M M ^' 'n ~ ~ N r 01 V) d' 00 r Q~ M O~ N r '-+ r ~D ~O V1 M ~ Q~ M M O N r v1 N O O r oo V M 00 N oo ~n .-~ a0 ~--~ ~O o0 r -~ ~--~ ~O N N ~ N -~ 00 ^ M r o ~o o~ oo v-, ,n M O ~D V O~ V pp r V1 O r V N N .-i 0o r r oo rn o 00 00 M V1 00 ~D M V1 M r o0 O ~O ~ r y' [~ ~ Vl V 00 ~ M M 00 00 M O ~ ~ [~ V V h O vl ~ ~ ~ V N 00 ~O ~--~ O M ~ ,--~ ~ .-i O O~ M N o0 00 `O ~O M 00 M O ~--~ ~ ~ r 00 d' [~ r V1 O ~ r ~O V1 R V1 O1 00 M ~~ M M N N 01 00 ~O N N V~ ~O O ~O N ~--~ O~ M A N N ~--~ O~ O N ~D o0 V1 00 00 N v1 R ~--~ 00 0 0 V 00 R N N ~O V M N ~O 40 V N ~ N ~ ~ "" ~ ~ ~D ~'-~ M M M O 00 r V1 M ~ O ~O .--. 00 N M M 40 O~ ~--~ O N N l~ r O~, _ _ -r N M 01 00 M Vl 01 r v ~' M ~ 00 Oi G~ ~D O~ O O O 7~ N M O E M ~--~ V1 ~ O W~ ~O N N N 00 ~ O N E N ~ ~--~ ~ O N o0 v1 b O O W V1 ~--~ ^~ ~ N ~' ~O ~O v1 M M N M N ~ ~O ~!1 ~"~ M o0 r N ~"~ N M ~D ~O N N M V1 M O ~--~ V; ~p ~C .-i o0~ ~p~ rl .fir ~ CJ ,-. O~ N N N ~ v'1 N ~O M O O O ~O o0 M O r 00 ~ O O O O O M M ~-- O 00 ~D .-~ ~--~ p~ O v1 Vl ~ W O o0 N ~ 00 O N r l~ 01 0o V N V1 ~O 01 O ~D O~ O~ N ~D oo O~ r l~ r ~O ri r N ~--~ ~D ao ~ V O N O~ ~ O ~ O ~D O O~ O O O~ N 00 O V V1 N M ~ O r M ~ O N ~ M iA ~--~ N r O~ d; --~ O M M M ~O v r r O O~ e} N O~ ~0 0 V Q~ 00 0o r V'1 r N ~p M r M O M V r 0 ^' V1 M r N r M Q~ r ~O o0 V O vl 00 0 ~ ~ N I~ V) ~O r N vl ~ V N~ r ~O ~ r O 01 V1 O~ V1 M r \O r M O --+ 00 V ~D ~ M O p~ ~ N M ^~ V1 .-. N O M N r V1 ~D N ~1 V~ Q1 W~ ~ 00 ~ Vl M M V r N M N O O ~ ~ . -i 7 ~ N r N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ 0 0 O~ N V ~ O O N ~/1 V O O N V ~ ~ O O O .~ ~o ~n ~ o ao h N N N O r --~ r ~ M~ ~ --~ 01 V1 r N M O ~--~ 01 ~D M N O O o0 O O O O pp O~ ~!1 V ~ O v'i ~ N d: N V e} 00 N M M O~ O~ ~p O O O~ O O O O Q~ ~~ O N ^' ~ ~ r ~O V1 V M M N o0 N V1 M ~p vl M ~--~ V1 O M w1 N r O ~D ~ _ N M M O o0 ~ [~ N 00 r O O r ~p r O Q~ 00 Oi N h N M M N p~ Q~ ~--~ O N N ~--~ v1 .-i O ~--~ ~ V 7 N p~ ~ V r 0 'd„ 'n r VI ~D O M O~ O ~D l~ ~!1 [~ ~ N O~ vi r 0 O O~ O N N O~ N M r ~--~ r ~ 00 V 01 .y ~ ~O O V r o0 01 p~ _ ~D Q~ ~O M N O~ M V1 M O ~O M ~O O~ M 00 N V~ ~ O ~!1 ~O M M p1 M r N d' r M o0 ~ ~O r- ~ H 00 01 ~ N N~ V1 r vl M N N M N N ~ -~ N .--i R L h .C .~ .~ ~ ~ ~~ .~, E .~ p C d w ~ itf O O v o~j L7 G ~ L ftl y W O .N ~ Q V °A a~i ,~ °o .a C7 W o ~--~ N M O_ O_ O_ O O O A, 7 ~ •.Vi U 'd b ~ ti ~ ti ~. U O c N O ~-" N O O O O U v w [-~ O ~ a Q O ~ V y .Vi o ~ G b W ~ ~ `° m ~ o .C °o .a w U d c --~ N M V O O O O M M M M O O O O b 7 O °~ N ~ '~ ~ '~ ~ 'b ~ A M E ~ _ . ~ `n C] ~ '~ o U ,G a , G y h C C y 9 ~ C ~ ° ~ p ~ c a i y `a C7 CG ~ W .~ C7 o c ~ N M d' ~ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 V ~ V V V V O O O O O O N ~y Q O i Y 4 ~ ~ ~ ' ~ U .N. ~ .~ 'K ~ bA .b b ~ s. ~ .r N 7 Q U O O '~ U y yV>. ~ ~ i,. N •N ro L d w. O f1. C/] C..) C4 rGr Vl ~ -~ M d' ~/1 ~D r o0 O O O O O O O V1 V1 V1 u'1 V1 ul V1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~-:~ ;: a m 9 E 4 Q d V ne N d n' O c 7 8 ~ C 7 N ~ ( ~ ~ ~ 7 ~" 7 o"o v °' ~ ~ E u ~ G W G ~ i`l. v7 C O R ~L d L C CL a ,..i Q M ~ TJ O 'C C b0 h d ~ u c ~ ti i °' y' .C C W cCC 7 'fl C ~ o a ~~ w w a O ,ii^ L a~'+ L O L. ,, O 7 O U y o a x y W W ~' O ,rye 7 '~ L' u ~ ~ r ^ M M ~y M l~ Vl Vl M O N O O~ O O M M N 00 N v1 M O e} N M o0 0o C\ v'1 ^ N O ^ v1 O ~p ~O ~O r ~ V O~ ^ ~p N ~ l~ o0 ~c ~c t~ ~ ~ N r o, ~ ~ M M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V1 O O In O N O ~ ~^ O O O V O N ~D ~D O N ~D t l~ O n N~ 00 0 0 00 O N o0 O O O O ~ ^^ N O l~ M O .-~ V1 01 N O O ~D ~n p~ Vi O N r l~ a0 N 00 W W ^~ ~D ~ a0 O 01 O O~ O M ~ O [~ O N ~D ~--~ O ~O ^ 00 O n ~ O M O O ^ ..r ^ ~n ~p I~ ~^ O .-i N M m ~--~ O ~ N l~ O~ Cn n ~ ~~ N b M ~D ~O ~O N ~O N .-r ~ N M O ^ V1 M N ~D O t~ [~ M ~O O M ^ U7 M ~O ~--~ 7 ~O N N of ~ ^ N N O M l~ r .-y ^ 'r N N ~O l~ V O .~+ ~O M o0 O n ~ 01 O O O~ O C\ 00 O 00 ~ O~ [~ O [~ ~D ~n V O ~D l~ M N O O ^ O 'R ^ ~!1 ~O M 00 N O ~ n oo ~ O M l~ O N O O O O O o0 .-~ O~ p _ ~D l~ N M ~D ~--~ ~ M 01 ~ ~ O O ~ O [~ M n ^ O~ 7 VI o0 N N O M a1 ~ N O M V~ ~D N CT p~ V ~ r [~ N ~ h .-. N v1 N ~ v'i r+ N t~ 01 .-i M O~ ~ l~ v~ N M O~ O ,-. .-. I~ v1 ~ O O O ~ ~ ~ .-. O M ~ ~ ~n ~ oo ~ ~ 00 N ^ ~ M V R i O Y C y ~ v ~ L ~ 9 ~ A G O d W v U7 ~ ~" O N O N O O l~ O n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 7 V1 01 O ~ O O O~ O p~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O M O~ Vl O 1!j 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N O M ~ ~!1 DD M C\ ~--~ vl ~O l~ N O [~ ~O ~D N 7 ~ V7 .r ~ w u C ~ L e E a~+ ~ G ~ W O 00 DD O ~ U1 O N O [~ 7 l~ O O O O M O 00 ~ V O ~p O~ ^ O~ O p~ ^ N ~ O O O O p~ l~ ~ T 1n ~O M O C\ ^ N N O ~p [~ DD O O O O ~ OC U O Op ti ~ O~ M _ O l~ O 00 V V O M ~D ~ v1 O \O M h O O DD O ~ ~ 00 d' ~ ~O 00 ~~ O N M M ~ ~ ti N ~ O O ~ r 7 N ~ ~ o o ., l~ [~ N i, .~. ~ G a W N V O ~p ~D O O O ~p 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q~ O O O ~ ~O M O p~ N O N O ~ Q~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q~ O v1 1n M 00 V --~ Kj 00 ~D --~ O V1 N O ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ N ~ ~' ~1 M M vl M t~ n DD O~ O O V O a ~ .~ [~ 7~ h `p h~ O O O ^ O ~D O O l~ --+ ~ 00 f~ b ~ M l~ r 00 ~n O~ O~ N ~O O v7 ~ O ~--~ O~ [~ t~ oo M N QD l~ h O M r W vl Q~ .~ r M --~ O~~ M 00 ~D ^ 00 M l~ ^ N .-i ~O v1 7 ~ V ~O ~--~ ~ N O o0 00 M M N ~O ~-+ N O 7 1n r. .. r r in v 9 'O i e W L 6! C °o t W L O1 U ~ v E sy A. o, . ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ U ~ ^ ~ O^ 0~- Cn ~ U ~ ~ °~' ~ ~ ~ A J ~ ' ~ `" E O O ~ p N y ~ C O ~ ~ ~ ~ «`~+ ~ ~` ~ ~ CO ~ ~ 0 ~ x ~~ x ~x ~ ' ~ ~a ~> ~b , o ~ ~~~b a,y A ~~ ro ~ 0, ~ ~ ~ P U o C~ ~ ° U C O z ~ ~ F ~, v, ro y '~ 0.~ .C ' , v U~ N n. ~ w ~ '~ ~ O ~ O ~ O O E ~ ~ ~ N O C O ~ `' O a ..a U c w U W U c W Q~ F d. U~ o '~ '~ o ^ N M ^~ N M I ~--~ N M V ~D 1~ 00 ^ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~D ~O ~O O O O l~ [~ ~ ~ O O O O 00 W W 00 00 00 00 O O O O O O O 01 01 O O R 0 H 9 L V S ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER N "~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER. MEETING DATE: April 27, 2004. AGENDA ITEMS: Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy, as of March 31, 2004. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: BANKERS ACCEPTANCE: SUNTRUST CAP 957,153.36 957,153.36 CASH INVESTMENT:: ALEXANDER KEY - LIR 5,295.77 5,295.77 CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSITS: SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA SAVINGS & LOAN 100,000.00 100,000.00 COMMERICAL PAPER: ALEXANDER KEY FED 4,857.23 BRANCH BANKING & TRUST 2,066.67 EVERGREEN 3,901.65 MORGAN KEEGAN 4,800.83 SUNTRUST 6,218.06 SUNTRUST CAP 1,482,842.41 1,504,686.85 CORPORATE BONDS ALEXANDER KEY FED 8,229.25 EVERGREEN 3,779,594.75 3,787,824.00 GOVERNMENT: ALEXANDER KEY FED 12,603,681.37 ALEXANDER KEY -Sub Acct 4,350,309.45 EVERGREEN 8,300,358.24 SUNTRUST -CAP 9,414,494.65 34,668,843.71 LOCAL GOVT INVESTMENT POOL: GENERAL OPERATION (G.O.) 7,070,766.26 7,070,766.26 01 /12/04 l `vf ~ l ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER. MEETING DATE: April 27, 2004. AGENDA ITEMS: Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy, as of March 31, 2004. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: BANKERS ACCEPTANCE: MONEY MARKET: ALEXANDER KEY FED 14,003,877.40 EVERGREEN 0.93 ALEXANDER KEY -Sub Acct 21,313.67 SUNTRUST -CAP 3,304,910.96 SUNTRUST -SWEEP 1,811,308.07 WACHOVIA 2,307,793.70 21,449,204.73 REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: EVERGREEN TOTAL 26,961.00 26,961.00 69,570,735.68 01 /12/04 VV "~ Cnu~tntg of ~II~nuke ~~ ~~ICC~t,,~ ~C tlt ~ FtOANp~ F ` ~ ~~ F- y z ~ ~ a? 1838 DECLARING APRIL 17, 2004, AS NATIONAL YOUTH SERVICE DAY IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the youth of Roanoke County make important contributions to the community's welfare every day of the year; and WHEREAS, most young people who begin volunteering in their youth will continue serving throughout their lifetime; and WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke depends on its youth as vital community assets; and WHEREAS, the 16'" annual National Youth Service Day, a program of Youth Service America, in partnership with the National Youth Leadership Council and Parade Magazine, takes place on April 17, 2004; and WHEREAS, National Youth Service Day is the largest service event in the world, engaging millions of young Americans and focusing national attention on the amazing leadership of young people. NOW THEREFORE, I, Richard C. Flora, Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim and recognize April 17, 2004, as NATIONAL YOUTH SERVICE DAY; and FURTHER, call upon the citizens of the County of Roanoke to observe this week with appropriate ceremonies and activities. ~ ~. . J.....~ G '1-~ o..~ Richard C. Flora, Chairman Elmer C. Hodge, Count Administrator (~S~~z~#~ of ~uttn~~e N'8 ~ ~~~~ ~ r.~ p~ FtOANp~~ { ~, , L ~ ~ 2 ~ ? 2 °v a` 1838 PROCLAMATION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THE ROTARY CLUB OF ROANOKE UPON THEIR 90r" ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Roanoke, which was begun on February 1, 1914, by twelve local businessmen, is celebrating its 90~' anniversary; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Roanoke was sponsored by the Richmond, Virginia club as the 123`d Rotary Club with twenty-five charter members and currently has 96 members; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club is a worldwide organization of business and professional leaders that provides humanitarian service, encourages high ethical standards in all vocations, and helps build goodwill and peace in the world; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Roanoke has worked on a variety of projects over the years including various fund raising projects for charities at local, national, and international levels, worked for governmental and judicial reforms, endowed educational scholarships, and equipped hospitals and clinics; and WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of Roanoke has participated in Rotary's PolioPlus program to protect children worldwide from the cruel and fatal consequences of polio and, by working with partner agencies including the World Health Organization, the United Nations Children's Fund, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and governments around the world, has helped achieve a 99 percent reduction in the number of polio cases worldwide. NOW THEREFORE, I, Richard C. Flora, Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, Roanoke, Virginia, do hereby congratulate the ROTARY CLUB OF ROANOKE upon its 90'" anniversary and recognize -the members of the club for their humanitarian and civic work. . J.. ~ G ' l~-~C o...~ Richard C. Flora, Chairman ~~ Elmer C. Hodge, Count Administrator ~, ~. i A C~.~~xx~~~ .~~ ~..u~x~.~a.~.e ~ ~~~~ ~ t. j~ OF ROAN~~1"F' ~. ti 'A z ~ J a2 838 DECLARING MAY 2 THROUGH 8, 2004, AS MUNICIPAUCOUNTY CLERKS WEEK IN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE WHEREAS, the office of the Municipal/County Clerk, a time honored and vital part of local government exists throughout the world; and WHEREAS, the Office of the Municipal/County Clerk is the oldest among. public servants; and WHEREAS, the Office of the Municipal/County Clerk provides the professional link between the citizens, the local governing bodies and agencies of government at other levels; and WHEREAS, Municipal/County Clerks have pledged to be ever mindful of their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service to all; and WHEREAS, the Municipal/County Clerk serves as the information center on functions of local government and community; and WHEREAS, ,Municipal/County Clerks continually strive to improve the administration of their office through participation in educational programs, seminars, workshops and the annual meetings of their state, province, county and international professional organizations. NOW THEREFORE, I, Richard C. Flora, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim and recognize May 2 through 8, 2004, as MUNICIPAUCOUNTY CLERKS WEEK; and FURTHER, extend appreciation to Diane Childers, Clerk to the Board; Brenda Holton, Deputy Clerk to the Board; Mary Brandt, Office Support Specialist, and to all Municipal/County Clerks for the vital services they perform and their exemplary dedication to the communities they represent. ~.cl..--~ L ~ o.r .~ Richard C. Flora, Chairman Elmer C. Hodge, Count Administrator ~ ~. ~lv~z~#~ of ~rr~r~~~e ~!/- ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ r.~ O~ FLOANp~ F >, ~ A z ~ ~ 2 O ~~ 1838 DECLARING APRIL 30, 2004 AS NATIONAL ARBOR DAY IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees; and WHEREAS, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska; and WHEREAS, 2004 is the 132"d anniversary of Arbor Day which is now observed throughout the nation and the world, and will be celebrated in Roanoke County on Friday, April 30, 2004; and WHEREAS, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce oxygen and provide habitat for wildlife; and WHEREAS, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires and countless other wood products; and WHEREAS,. trees in our county increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community; and WHEREAS, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Richard C. Flora, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim April 30, 2004, as NATIONAL ARBOR DAY in Roanoke County; and urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands; and FURTHER, urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations. J.. --~ G ~ v, ~ Richard C. Flora, Chairman Elmer C. Hodge, Count Administrator ,~ ~. ~, Diane S. Childers, Clerk .- ACTION NO. ITEM NO. I'y - q 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: April 27, 2004 Report of claims activity for the self-insurance program Robert C. Jernigan Risk Manager Elmer C. Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In accordance with the self-insurance program, Ordinance #61494-4, Section 2-86.C, attached is the fiscal year to date claims activity report including the third quarter that ended March 31, 2004. Attachment A -Auto; Attachment B -General Liability FISCAL IMPACT: None P~-9 ~ ~ ~ O ~ I M ! O ~ O O (O 00 i f~ lf) ~ (D M O (O O Z 00 1~ N O ~ W ~ O ~ O O O ~I W ~ M O ~ O ~ ~- ~ M M ~fJ N ~ ~ W M O ~ M ~ W (O M ~ f~ ~ O f~ M _ M ~ (O ~ 00 M~ OO N W~ O I (D O O O O O ~ ~ ~ N M ~ N CD '. I ~ ~ ~. (D ~ O ~ OO N O I~ ~ Q M O ~~ ~I ~ ~ O~ i M ~ - - - -_ ~ I~ w I ~ ~ ! ~, I I I I ~ I I w , I ~ ~ I I i I ; ~ _ __; ' + - - • - - ~ - - ~ ~ v -o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ o ~ a~ a~ v ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ a~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ a~ a~ ~- tq a~ N ~ fn ~ N a~ N a~ fn a~ N ~ N ~ t/1 a N N N fn N N (n fq N N N Q O O O O O O O O O O O O _O O O O _O O O O ~ - U - U U' - U U U U U U U U U U, U U U U U U ~ I _ _ _ : - 1 - - I I ~ -- ` 0 ` Q ~ ! ~ O ~ Z O O O O O ~ O O! O O O 1 C I~ , O ', 7 C O '~ O O O O j O Q O Q N g ~ Q Q Q Q! Q Q Q~ Q Q Q, g Q' ~ QI Q Q Q Q' ! > > > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' Y ~ Y ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r !~ U Q ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ _ ~ .. - - ~. ~' ~ om ~ ~ , n . ~ I I ~ ~ ~ f ~i ~ ~ I O L ~ ~ N. L N ' ' I N (n M ~ ~ .5 1 > I m W G > ~ r ~i ~ E a~ l a W N L o - i ~ ~ ~ N ~ v ° 3 o a p ~ L i , ~ U m '-' ' ~ U t ~ l y I D ',. ~ J O > N °' ~ I° ~' o ~ . E I ~ V ~ O L O I Q) , ~ I U ° (0 ~ N ' i L ~ ' Y I l ~~ € L ' l Z -- > ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ o f r ' ~' > 3 ~ A i y I > d ~ :c m E ' c ~ a~ a~ ~ ~ 3 ;1 in o ~ f w. t ~ ~I W ~ L h l > O. 7 I N , U U Y . O ' N i a L ,' V , O > O m L F U ~ I ~ C I _ L U t ~ L i L > U ~ C (9 ', U 1 t ~ U Y L ~' > ~~ 7 p U L O- gy ~ ~ y Q U L O 'I m > > ~ ' x > C U ~ - > (pp ( Y O Z O O U w O O n ' O l . ~ O y '. 0 N ~ ~ N ~ w p U ~ O Z ~ L ~ . d • L N ~ ~ O ' ~ .L] ~ L •^ _ N ~ ~ N C N t~ L J~ N L ° ' i (6 E 7 o ; ' O ~ f6 E o ~ f 9 c . o ~ w o,j W ~ •_ - o a a I C ~ m C a s y N ' .- ~ C ~ Q C U N Y Y L U O U Y Y Y U ,y (~ j[ W V ~ f0 ~ U 2 U 2 . -. 2 U 2 U 2 •~ U 2 U ~ 2 I Y U 2 O ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ E ~ m a i ~ ~ - ~ • i a i Q m o in in ~ in in cn I v in ~ in m in o ~ in j ~ m - _ Q _ c I I Q o ~ E I I O LL W U d > ~ ~ I ~ ! d d m ~ I W N ~ m N ~ I m m I I m N m C 1= ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c O ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ a~ E' a~ o ~ a~ a~ dI a~ o I o a a ~ , j ~ I I >, I LU ~ o n. ~ _ a U a - n. ~ ° , o ~ I 0 a 0 cn 0 0 a a I 0 cn 0 a 0 cn o cn > > c° m -, z ~ _ I ~ Q I- M M M M ~I O O M O M O I M i O M ~ O M O M O M O! O O O ~ O O O O O O ~ Z O J O O O O O ' O , O ' O ~ O O O O' O O O O O O Q~ O O W u N N . I N N N N ;' N N N N I N N N N N N N ~ N N W ~ ~ Q (~ V ~ M CO (D C~ ' ~ ' I ~ ~ O I ~ (D f~ (D I ~ O M N O ~ (~ N ~ W U ~ O O ~ O ~ ~ N ~. N i ~ N ~ O: ~ O O M _ ~ ~ ~ U f~ W tt I ~ m ~ ~ i W ' N O O ~ r r N N ~ r N O M Q O O i O O O O ' O ~I O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , O O ~ r O ~yJ ~ _ . I ~ _ . _ __... - r_ __ _ _ i ~ ~ . II N O N ~ O O O i N (O N M N d0 N O N Q~ W ~ O l0 N ~, N lA (D 00 ~ N i~ ~ O pp ~ ~ ~ _ a Q O 1 Z V O V O' O V ~' ~ O d' O d' O V O I M O O O~ O d' '~ O V O ' BI O ~ ~ Q N O V O O O ~' -- U M M M~ M M M M N V M V M V . Mi M II M a M I M ~ M II ~ ~ II M ~ M I, W. i ~ N QI (6 a ~,J --~ ~ E- O Z O O o r~ , o oo~ O 0 O 0 O 0 o, 0 0 O of O O O' o r- w W O O O' O Ui O O' O' O ;~ O O ~ ui i i ~- ~ N M ~ , ~I ~ ~ I, ~ I '' I, .. i '~ 'i i ~ W (.7. ~ ', i i ~ I I W ~ --- i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. I - - - - I - , - 0 N N N N N d, I d N N N ~ ,I ~ N ~ O N O N N N O O O N O N O N N~ O O O ~ O _ _._ -_ _ ~ _. _ _ _- - _ _ _ -. i._.. _ _ .... __j_.. __ i __~ - __ . _. _. _ i ~ Z O ~ ~ O O O O ~ ~, O O N O) O C O ii O ~~ ~ ~! 0 Q U Q > Q > Q Q Q > > > j Q ' > Q > Q ~ Q > Q I N ~ ~~ I Y N I I .. ~ ~ ~ i ~ i M ~ -- ~- - i r ._ __, r t - ~ ~ I ~ ~ a ~ ~ i I ~ I I I I ~ ~ ' ~ ', j ! i i I i w o ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ ~ ~ 1 , ~ N _ J ~ I ' I N r m I ~ ~ F- J J J ~ m ! o i ~ ~_ J W ~ U ~ ~ N ~ I ~ ~ ~ o a~ ~ °~ Z W ~ I ~ m Y ~ ~i ~ U ~ W W ~ C d ~ N ~ ~ ~I O N ~ ~ ~ Z 0 LL O ~~ ~ ~p i ~ C ~ ~ N W In W N ~ ~ ~, ~ W I ~ ~ U Lf1 ~ ~ 00 ~ N ~ (0 U - (` M ~ f0 U C I 'f N Q u1 ~ Q ~ ~'i ~ v Ch N v °- N ~ a II W N C C I ~ ~ w N~ ~ p ~! ~., i, J W ~ ~ `~~i ~ ~ rn rn 'n ~ m ~° I ~ Q~ _cn v a~ _ o _ o mi ~ _~ ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ ~O ~ ~` ~ U °~' N •z ~' ~~ i ~'~ ~'; ` I~~ i I ~ E- ~ 2' (n (~ N ~ N ~~ N N( 7 >I i Z. ~ I Q = ~ t ~ w ~ ~ o = = _ ~ ~ ~ ~ = i o! o o = a J o __.M M. _ . ~ __ _ __ _._ _.. I _ __.. _.__ __ -__ __. W Z W M M M O N O 1 I M M O O ~ ~ M O I~ M I ' O O ~ ~ ~ W F- N U O ~ N O N O O ~ M N N ~ O ~I ' W . U h Q 00 O ~ ~ ~ W ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ I ~ W {_ _ _ _ . . _ i~ I i ~ i II ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O O M __~ ~ ~ _ _._ __ ~ ~ O J Z V~ U O ~ M N O O ~ ~ O 7 O 7 O \t~ O, '\~ O ~ ~ i ~I ~. Mi M M,' M ' i M M M~ Mi M M ~ ~ W , I i ~ r m m a 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: April 27, 2004 Work session to discuss refuse collection on private roads SUBMITTED BY: Elmer C. Hodge E~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside to discuss refuse collection on private roads. .~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 RESOLUTION 042704-3 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 Aftizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Closed Meeting File 4 ~, " "~ lA) AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 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. ACTION N0. ITEM NO. ~'~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM; Presentation of and public hearing for the proposed budget far fiscal year 2004-2005 and the fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvements Program SUBMITTED BY: Elmer Hodge ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a public hearing to receive written and oral comment from the public concerning the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 and the fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvements Program. This public hearing will include an overview presentation of the proposed budget by the County Administrator. A summary of the proposed budget was advertised in the Roanoke Times and World News on April 20, 2004, and information previously discussed with the Board regarding the proposed budget has been distributed to all Roanoke County libraries. Beginning late last summer, the Board and staff worked closely together to review local revenue estimates, state funding issues, capital improvement projects, health insurance costs, and other costs of operations. In addition, the Board has hosted presentations from the School Board; Volunteer Fire and Rescue chiefs; and Human Service, Cultural, and Tourism agencies to hear and then consider each group's budget requests for fiscal year 2004-2005. Based on these work sessions, staff reviewed a draft of the proposed budget with the Board at a March 30, 2004, budget work session. While there is still uncertainty due to the inability of the state to adopt a budget, we have used conservative assumptions for state revenue in balancing the proposed budget. Hopefully, the state will reach a budget agreement over the next several days and any adjustments that need to be made to the county budget will be made and included in the Appropriation Ordinance. 1f~1 T~, _.. This overview outlines the major issues and funding needs that have been addressed in prior work sessions. The first reading of the Appropriation Ordinance and adoption of the budget is scheduled for May 11, 2004, with the second reading of the fiscal year 2004- 2005 budget scheduled for May 25, 2004. Roanoke Times -April 24, 2044 i ,~ .~_ County of Roanoke ~ ~'`' Notice of Public Hearing of the Proposed 2004-2005 Fiscal Year Budget The County of Roanoke will hold a public hearing at 7:D0 pm or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard on Tuesday, Apri127, 2004 in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. The purpose of the hearing is to receive written and oral comment from the public concerning the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2004-05 summarized below, and the FY 2005-09 Capital Improvement Program. All interested citizens, groups, senior citizens, and organizations are encouraged to attend and to submit comments. Copies of the proposed budget will ba available for public inspection at the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors and atl County libraries. Summary of Proposed 2004-2005 Budget Revenue Estimates Amoun# General Fund General Government General Property Taxes $ 93,189,846 Local Sales Tax 7,400,000 Business License Tax 5,050,000 Utility Consumer Tax 4,775,000 Motor Vehicle License Tax 1,760,000 Recordation/Conveyance Tax 1,195,000 Meals Tax 2,860,000 Cellular Phone Tax 1,000,000 Other Local Taxes 2,445,000 Pennits, Fees & Licenses 633,577 Fines and Forfeitures 599,200 Interest Income 403,800 Charges for Services 2,397,200 Commonwealth 8,671,198 Federal 2,650,000 Other 859,115 Total General Government 135,889,036 E-911 Mairrtenance 970,000 Comprehensive Services 5,037,171 Law Library 41,735 VJCCCA/Life Skills 271,669 S B & T Building 404,273 Recreation Fee Class 981,694 Internal Services -Information Technology 2,974,293 Courrty Garage 346,392 Total General Fund 146,916,283 Debt Service Fund - Caunty 3,035,130 Capital Projects Fund 3,732,573 lntemal Service Fund 956,898 Water Fund 18,140,858 Sewer Fund 9,881,911 School Operating Fund 110,986,972 School Cafeteria Fund 3,959,000 School Debt Service Fund 10,352,924 School Grants Fund 4,507,045 Schoo( Capital Fund 1,168,335 School Textbook Fund 928,016 Regional Alternative School 404,060 Total Revenues AU Funds 314,969,985 Less: Transfers (81,370,548) Total Net of Transfers 233,599,437 .~ Proposed Expenditures Amount General Fund General Government General Administration $ 2,712,828 Constitutional Officers 8,840,587 Judicial Administration 1,110,435 Management Services 2,851,441 Public Safety 17,293,121 Community Services 10,552,518 Human Services 14,011,769 Non-Departmerrtal 5,389,314 Transfers to School Operating Fund 56,065,852 Transfers to School Insurance 347,299 Transfers to Capital Fund 2,779,718 Transfers to Debt Service Fund 10,589,136 Transfer to Comprehensive Services 2,153,000 Transfer to County Garage 134,318 Other 1,057,700 Total General Government 135,889,036 E-911 Maintenance 970,000 Comprehensive Services 5,037,171 Law Library 41,735 VJCCCA/Life Skills 271,669 S B 8~ T Building 404,273 Recreation Fee Class 981,694 Internal Services - Infom~ation Technology 2,974,293 County Garage 346,392 Total General Fund 146,916,263 Debt Service Fund -County 3,035,130 Capital Projects Fund 3,732,573 Internal Service Fund 956,888 Water Fund 18,140,858 Sewer Fund 9,881,911 School Operating Fund 110,986,972 School Cafeteria Fund 3,959,000 School Grants Fund 4,507,045 School Debt Fund 10,352,824 School Capital Fund 1,168,335 School Textbook Fund 928,016 Regional Alternative School 404,060 Total Expenditures All Funds 314,969,985 Less: Transfers (81,370,548) Total Net of Transfers 233,599,437 t AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE 042 704-4 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO JEFF BENNETT TO OPERATE A CUSTOM MANUFACTURING BUSINESS ON 3.56 ACRES LOCATED AT 4040 JAE VALLEY ROAD (TAX MAP N0.90.00-3-28) VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Jeff Bennett has flied a petition for a special use permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Va11ey Road (Tax Map No. 90.00-3-28) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a 1`frst reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Jeff Bennett to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road in the Vinton Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following condition: (1) The business shall have a maximum of three employees, in addition to the owner. 1 .- r 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~~ ~. ~~~ Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants name: Jeff Bennett DEPARTMENT OF Proposed Zoning; SUP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Existing Zoning: AG-1 Tax Map No 90.00-3-28 PETITIONER: Jeff Bennett CASE NUMBER: 8-4/2004 • Plannin Commission Hearing Date: April 6, 2004 g Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: April 27, 2004 A. REQUEST The petition of Jeff Bennett to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres, located at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Larry Wheeler, 3898 Saul Lane spoke in support of the petition. 5-1 C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Holladay presented the staff report. The commission inquired about possible number of employees. Mr. Holladay responded that the petitioner intended to operate the business alone. The commission asked the petitioner about a condition of the special use permit to limit the number of additional employees to three, and Mr. Bennett offered no objection. D. CONDITIONS • 1) The business shall have a maximum of three employees, in addition to the owner. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Ms. Hooker made a motion to approve the request with the condition. Motion carried 4-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 3 STAFF REPORT ~~..._ Petitioner: Jeff Bennett ..,,_,, • Request: Special Use Permit for Custom Manufacturing Location: 4040 Jae Valley Road Magisterial District: Vinton Proffered/Suggested None Conditions: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The petitioner, Mr. Jeff Bennett, wishes to operate a custom manufacturing business on a 3.56 acre tract zoned AG 1. The business would be located in an existing 2,000 square-foot garage. A 2,000 square-foot expansion of the garage is planned. The existing space would be used for the assembly/fabrication of custom motorcycles and automobiles. The expansion area would be used for the existing parts and accessories business, and for storage of finished vehicles awaiting delivery. All work would be fabrication and installation. No collision repair, paint booths, or general maintenance of vehicles would be allowed. Mr. Bennett plans to be the only employee. The proposed business does not require new urban services. It requires minimal land disturbance for a proposed addition, and would not change the existing rural residential development patterns. The proposed business would be conducted within an enclosed structure, and should have no impact on the • adjoining properties. The proposed use conforms to the policies and guidelines of the Community Plan. The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance requires a special use permit for custom manufacturing, and also requires that certain use and design standards be met. The proposed business complies with, or can meet the zoning ordinance standards for Custom Manufacturing. No negative impacts are anticipated. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Custom Manufacturing is allowed by Special Use Permit in the AG1 zoning district. Zoning Ordinance use and design standards for custom manufacturing are as follows: (A) General standards: 1. A custom manufacturing establishment shall meet all the requirements for a principal structure. 2. All activities associated with a custom manufacturing establishment, other than loading and unloading, shall be conducted within an enclosed building. (B) Additional standards in the AG-3, AG-1, AR and AV districts: 1. Maximum square footage for a custom manufacturing establishment: six thousand (6,000) square feet. 2. When adjoining a residential use type on an adjoining lot, a Type C buffer yard in accordance with Section 30-92 shall be provided along the property line which • adjoins the residential use type. 3. The site shall front directly on and have direct access to a publicly owned and maintained street. J ' \ C Additional standards in the AG-3, AG-1 and AR districts: ~~ () 1. The custom manufacturing establishment shall be accessory to a single family • dwelling. 2. No custom manufacturing establishment shall be located on lot containing less than three (3) acres. 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background - Mr. Bennett built his home and garage in 1995. He currently has a home occupation business license selling motorcycle parts and accessories through catalogs, the Internet and telephone. Mr. Bennett wishes to expand the business to include installation of custom parts, and assembly/fabrication of custom motorcycles and cars. Topography/Ve etg_ation -The petitioner's property lies at the intersection of Rt. 116, Jae Valley Road and Rt. 939, Aerospace Road. The property slopes up and to the south from both streets. Areas around the home and garage are grassed and landscaped. Most of the remainder of the property is wooded. Surrounding Neighborhood - Mr. Bennett's property is 3.56 acres, and zoned AG1, Agricultural Low Density District. Adjoining properties to the north, east and south are also zoned AG1. Properties to the west are zoned AG3. All surrounding properties contain a mix of single family homes and undeveloped wooded lots. Several businesses exist in the vicinity on property zoned I1 or I2 industrial. Aerospace Testing Corporation is located on Aerospace Road. Several building contractors are located on Aerospace Road and Carr Rouse Road. • 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture -The custom manufacturing business would be located in an existing 2,000 square-foot garage. A 2,000 square-foot expansion of the garage is planned. The existing space would be used for the assembly/fabrication of custom motorcycles and automobiles. The expansion area would be used for the existing parts and accessories business, and for storage of finished vehicles awaiting delivery. All work would be fabrication and installation. No collision repair, paint booths or general maintenance o~ vehicles would be allowed. Mr. Bennett plans to be the only employee. The proposed business complies with, or can meet the zoning ordinance standards for custom manufacturing. The property is greater than ~ acres. All work would be done within an enclosed structure. The garage and proposed expansion do not exceed 6,000 square feet, meet all setback requirements, is accessory to asingle-family dwelling, and has frontage and direct access to a public street. Access/Traffic Circulation -The petitioner's driveway enters from Jae Valley Road. VDOT staff has commented that if improvements are made to the entrance, then a commercial entrance permit would be required. Traffic impacts from the proposed use would be very minimal, with one or two trips occurring per week. Given the infrequent traffic associated with the business, the existing driveway should adequately serve the petitioner's needs. Fire & Rescue/LJtilities -Fire and Rescue service is provided from Mount Pleasant. No impacts • are anticipated. The property is served by private well and septic system. No additional public services are necessary. 2 J 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The petitioner's property is designated Rural Preserve in the future land use guide of the 1998 • Roanoke County Community Plan. This designation is given to areas that are generally stable and require a high degree of protection to preserve agricultural, forestal, recreational and remote rural residential areas. The proposed business does not require new urban services. It requires minimal land disturbance for a proposed addition, and would not change the existing rural residential development patterns. The proposed business would be conducted within an enclosed structure, and should have no impact on the adjoining properties. The proposed use conforms with the policies and guidelines of the Community Plan. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance requires a special use permit for custom manufacturing, and also requires that certain use and design standards are met. The proposed business complies with, or can meet the zoning ordinance standards for custom manufacturing. The proposed use also conforms to the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. No negative impacts are anticipated. • CASE NUMBER: OS-04/2004 PREPARED BY: David Holladay HEARING PC: 4/6/2004 SOS: 4/27/2004 DATES: C, J , County of Roanoke For Staff Use Only • COInII1lllllty DeVelOPIllent - Date received: ' Received by: Planning & Zoning ~ " ~ Application fee: PC/B~ date: 5204 Bernard Drive O G ~ P 0 Box 29800 Placards issued: BOS date: • a`1 C'' Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (640) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 Case Number --- ~ ;. _ ;fLL;APPLICAIV•TS - Check type of applica n filed (check all that apply) ~ ~ Waiver O Administrative Appeal pecial Use O Variance O Rezoning Applicants nameladdress w/zip Phone: S ~Ju- `-~ ~.7- ~~Yt~ 5 -7 ~-`~ ~~~ 1'j e ~n %~ Work: S4v • LI ~~- vc:-i - ~i ~ 4 v~ e ; .Z,, ~ 1 ~^ P ~/~. \1~.~ ~.~• y u'-1'Q~ ~ Cell #: ~ ~`i v ~ ~ ~. ,, + ( C~Or.,~01~Q ,~ a~'~7~ 'f Fax No .: Owner's name/address wlzip ,i c ~~ 13r r~ ~ ~'~" L~c~• ~I •v~4ib ~~~ J~11e•~ `, (i0 wea14G ~~ 7`~p~ T Property Location • ~ Tax Map No.: ~,(~u--3-~-a Size of parcel(s): Acres: ~ ~ S 6 REZ0IVING SPECIAL USE PEh Proposed Zoning: ,y} ~ l Proposed Land Use: C„~s .~.o r1ITA1VI3 W_9IVER' APPLICANT ~'',ltv~~ vY} .~ 111: M.. ~ •-~ ~t ~~ f-~ r-~ H-~ - y_ ,~ S ~~ ryes the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQI7IltED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE I5 REQUIItED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No ... .. ..:. _.. j~~I~lANCE, WAIVER AND AD11f7~'VISTRATIVE APPEAL APPLICANTS (V/W/AA) .. _ , _ . ... ..:..... .:. Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to. Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): '., of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to ~~~',~~~- Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WIIJL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE • ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/5/W V/AA ~s v/~, x~s~vv viAA Consultation ~ 8 1l2" x 11" concept plan Application fee Application ~1{ Metes and boards description ! ~ Proffers, if applicable justification ~ Water and sewer application ~ Adjoining property owners • I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the ope r the o is agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the ]mowledge and consent of the owner. Owner's Signature 2 Phone # : } Uo - y a l - 3 Sr ~V Work: S4v - ~! 17. 3 ~ Sro Fax No. #: Magisterial District: (~~ ~ y~ Community Planning area: ~'~~ -f ~ 1 ~ ~ ~S Existing Zoning: ~ Cr ~ Existing Land Use: ~c v. ~ ~ ~ `~..w.; ~ JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SRECIAI USE °PERNIIT OR WAIVER REQUEST ~...~- • Applicant [7 Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. •=~ .1, e C~ ~ C The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. • 3 r .J ' _ ... CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST ..._ . '"-°' A concept plan of the proposed protect must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS a. Applicant name and name of development _ b. Date, scale and north arrow _ c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions _ d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties . e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties g. All property lines and easements _ h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights -"'"" ~ ~'~ _ i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional information required for REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS ~ ~. V ,; _ k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site ~J _ 1. Any driveways, entranceslexits, curb openings and crossovers ,%~ ~. m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals ~ ' ~'1 _ n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections `: ~'" _ o. Locations of all adjacent fue hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule • I certify that all items required in the checklist above aze complete. a~i~j~~ ~~ - Si re of applicant Date 6 `'~. . Business Plan For Windy Gap Cycles 4040 Jae Valley Rd. Roanoke, Va 24014 (540) 427-0015 Jeff Bennett Current Description: Motorcycle parts and accessory dealer. Sales thru catalog, Internet and phone. Proposed Description: Increase of business to installation of parts and accessories for motorcycles and /or cars. All work will be fabrication and no collision repair of vehicles will occur. There will be one employee- business owner and no others. Proposed description will not require a dealer license. Also, no traffic or loud noise will occur. Customers will park motorcycles and /or cars in the building for installation. Current building is now approximately 2000 sq. ft, which will be used for fabrication of motorcycles and for cars. Proposed addition will be approximately 2000 sq. ft to be used for parts/accessories store, storage for in progress or finished vehicles. .7 _; - .: ~~ JUSTIFICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT , CUSTOM MANUFACTURING • JEFF BENNETT 4040 JAE VALLEY RD ROANOKE, VA 24014 PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THE REQUEST FURTHERS THE PURPOSES OF THE ROANOKE COUNTI' ORDINANCE AS WELL AS THE PURPOSE FOUND AT THE BEGINNING OF THE APPLICATION ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE: Request is for a business related to a custom manufacturing establishment. This request meets Roanoke County Code requirements under Section 30-33-1 as the requested business plan will be centered on land that has scattered residential development located within a rural service area. Request for proposed business plan will ensure that the natural and scenic resources are maintained and will remain in it's rural state. Also, the plan will ensure that the land and surroundings will remain consistent with the recommendations of the community plan for rural preserve azeas. It is understood that this district is intended to minimize the demand for public improvements and services such as public water and sewer. Business plan will meet all "use and design standazds" under Section 30-86-3. The building will not exceed 6,000 squaze feet. All activities associated with the custom • manufacturing establishment, other than loading and unloading will be conducted with in the enclosed building. The requested addition to the current building has a wide span of yard which adjoins the residence. The site is located directly on and has access to Rt. 116 which is a state owned and maintained street. The custom manufacturing building is located on a lot that is 3.56 acres and is an accessory to a single family dwelling. PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THE PROJECT CONFORMS TO THE GENERAL GUIDELINES AND POLICIES CONTAINED IN THE ROANOKE COUNTY CO1~~IlVIiJNITY PLAN Adherance to the Community Plan is described above. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE IMPACT OF THE REQUEST ON THE PROPERTY, THE ADJOIl~TING PROPERTIES AND THE SURROUNDING AREA AS WELL AS THE IMPACT ON PURLBIC SERVICES FACILITIES Proposed business plan will have a minimal impact on this property and adjoining properties and the surrounding area. There will be no impact on public services and facilities. There will no need for public water and sewer. Property already has well and septic accessibility. There is an existing building in which additional square footage will • be added not exceeding 6000 square feet. No trees will be cut, therefore no interruption of natural surrounding will occur. No additional fire services from Mount Pleasant Volunteer Fire Company will be needed and no additional gazbage services will be needed. ~. S-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO JEFF BENNETT TO OPERATE A CUSTOM MANUFACTURING BUSINESS ON 3.56 ACRES LOCATED AT 4040 JAE VALLEY ROAD (TAX MAP NO.90.00-3-28) VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Jeff Bennett has filed a petition for a special use permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road (Tax Map No. 90.00-3-28) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Jeff Bennett to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road in the Vinton Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following condition: (1) The business shall have a maximum of three employees, in addition to the owner. 1 ~-:v` ._ 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 2 - ' e'S ~ ~~~~ ~° ~~$ ~~ 0 ~~o~¢ ~ q ~~r~y/ ~ e ~~~~~~~n I ~ D~`~ti y a~ F Pfl~ V ¢ K~~~ ~~ cwR µ~¢ ~ €~~`~o~h < ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~a~ f` A 1.h N S~ ®W~~~3t3~~k i n ~° pP9 Q ~~v 4 ~ ~ C • W ~~5. W W ~ ~ ~ Y ' ' ~ ~ 2N M ~ ~ QC' M 1 ,~~ ~ f' { ~ ~ ,6 ~ 7 o ~Mh // ~r ~ /0 9 ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~!~~ ~ k r o P / -;`~ L„ o ~5 O ~~ _II ,,~ ~V.~"_ 2~.°s~ ;~ T ~; *: - V .~ ..... ~` m %. n 't.~ a ~ ~• ~ • ~ ~r t~.~~ tip` ~(E i d~~ O4 >- ~~ I ~ ~ b w ~ -~-~5 .. h IR~ 2~2 Uhh '~ ~~e I ~~~ Ci r ~ ~eH a°~ Q Np ~S ¢^~ ti N h C 45 M "'-'~..~1'L _ 3 1 ~ ~7'-d~ h N ~ _ «~• •h ~ \~e ~''o ~ ~ /ti Y c b „ a ~ e 6Y o~ O n \~a ~ I o~~ ~ n ~ ~ \¢ ~ i / s ^ \ b / ® Q \ / ~ Nb ~ b N $ L6 '6d 9l6 S O 7 ~. e 2 N3Z33KN O 3N37HV0 Y Y 1N3JI 6Z-t'-OO D6 73Jd'Yd XYL n o ~ h e 0 ~ u 0 o ~ c ~ ° $ e w ° u a~4 5 o s ~ FO~i e ma ~e ~~ • W H n.~ ~~ o H n ~ u 2 h ~ 0 U A ~ L ¢ Q j m ~~ ~~ a F ~~ e O y yp ~ 3 M a ~ ~~``'~ ~ ~~ g~ < ~ ~ ~ ki ~ ~~~ ~ y ~ S b , _ Q ~6~C J ~ ~ 06 o~ ~U ..~ L _ o ~' O. N t ~O~ l .D 6 y Ci . ~ a n u ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~~jhro h~ ~ 2 a 2 se ~ o m m y ~S h \r\ ~_l J41ti `1 1 h~~" ~ ~ q \ ~ ~ N ~ ~ m W ~ ti ~ ti ~ ~ ~ > \ H ~~ y 0 1 ~ ~W ~a zo Ns ~ WOUQ; ~ W ~ ~ q Qa o W = l ~ ~ 0 0 2" ~•°_ y j ~ U ~oW~ ~,o S ~ O ~g ~'+ Q ~. (V io 2'~~ ~n s ti Ci Ci ¢eQ nh~ ~i h em ~ ~ ~ ~~~ 4 L6 6d 9/6 ~ p b'~7~~ O 3N37bY0 ~ Y 1 N3.y i'F'-r-optic ~rvdxyl W Rq Q iY ~N 44 \ ~ ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants name: Jeff Bennett Proposed Zoning; SUP Existing Zoning: AG-1 Tax Map No 90.00-3-28 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE 042704-5 GRANTING A SPEGIAL USE PERMIT TO D. GREGORY ROBERTS TO CONDUCT A HOME OCCUPATION IN AN ACCESSORY BUILDING ON 2.14 ACRES LOGATED AT 5228 PONDEROSA DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 36.12-3-3Z) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, D. Gregory Roberts has filed a petition for a special use permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive (Tax Map No. 36.12-3-32) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to D. Gregory Roberts to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) No more than one (1) dog on the premises for grooming at any given time. (2) No more than ten (10) appointments per week. 1 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants rr,ame: D. Gregory Roberts Proposed Zoning: Special Use Existing Zoning: R 1 Tax Map No 36. >2-3-32 PETITIONER: D. Gregory Roberts CASE NUMBER: 9-4/2004 • Planning Commission Hearing Date: April 6, 2004 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: April 27, 2004 s-a A. REQUEST The petition of D. Gregory Roberts to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres, located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. John Anderson, 5208 Ponderosa Drive, said he would support the petition if the Type I Home Occupation Provisions and the Conditions imposed by Planning Staff were followed. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Chris Lowe presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts then gave Mr. Lowe a copy of a notarized letter from his adjoining neighbor, Dr. Dennis Garvin who wrote a letter of support to the Board of Supervisors. D. CONDITIONS 1. No more than one (1) dog on the premises for grooming at any given time. • 2. No more than ten (10) appointments per week. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Ms. Hooker made a motion to approve the request with the conditions. Motion carried 4-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission ~J .~ STAFF REPORT _. Petitioner: D. Gregory Roberts -~ • Request: Special Use Permit for Conducting a Home Occupation in an Accessory Building Location: 5228 Ponderosa Drive Roanoke, VA 24019 Magisterial District: Catawba Suggested 1. No more than one (1) dog on the premises for grooming at any Conditions: given time. 2. No more than ten (10) appointments per week. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for a Special Use Permit for Conducting a Home Occupation in an Accessory Building at 5228 Ponderosa Drive. The parcel is designated as Neighborhood Conservation in the Roanoke County Community Plan, and is currently zoned R-1. The request involves (1) one parcel, consisting of 2.14 acres. • E REGULATIONS 1. APPLICABL Type I Home Occupation Zoning Provisions Roanoke County Business License 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background -The property is currently, and will continue, to be used as a residence. The applicant has no plans to expand the business beyond dog grooming. She enjoys this part-time occupation as a hobby and approached the County to find out what permits, applications, and procedures she needed to follow so as not to be in violation of any of Roanoke County's Ordinance or Codes. Roanoke County's Zoning Ordinance defines a commercial kennel as; the boarding, breeding, raising, grooming, or training of two (2) or more dogs, cats, or other household pets of any age not owned by the owner or occupant of the premises, and/or for commercial gain. The applicants understand that if they would have more than one animal on the premises for grooming at any one time then they would be in violation of the zoning ordinance by operating an illegal commercial kennel. The applicants have agreed to the conditions that they will only allow one dog at a time on the premises and they would schedule the appointments so as not to have any overlap. Topography/Ve etg a`tion - The property is tucked behind a parcel to the front. It has a shared • driveway and can be considered a flag lot. The property slopes from West to East and sits below Unity Church. The House has a vegetative buffer on all sides that makes it undetectable from Ponderosa Drive. i~.,..aY M~ Surrounding_Nei~hborhood -To the south is one R-1 zoned property. Unity Church adjoins to the East, and Mr. Roberts has 6.8 acres of additional R-1 property surrounding the North and • West property lines. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Proposal - Mr. Robert's roommate, who is a permanent resident, will be operating apart-time grooming business for dogs. Her operating hours will be Monday through Friday 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. and Saturdays 8 a.m. to Noon. She plans on only one dog at a time, with no more than 2 dogs daily, and by appointment only. Site Layout/Architecture -The site is a 2.14 acre site. The property has a single family residential home and a detached garage. The grooming area will be in the finished area of the garage that has electrical, heating, water, and sewer services. Access/Traffic Circulation - V DOT anticipates that the existing entrances are acceptable and that this request will have no impact on Buffalo Creek Circle. Fire & Rescue/LJtilities -Fire and rescue services will continue, as they currently exist. The Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department primarily serve the site. Public water and sanitary sewer are not currently available to this property. This Special Use Permit does not affect the existing public water and sanitary sewer systems Department of Economic Development -The Department of Economic offer no objections. Roanoke County Traffic -Roanoke County Traffic Engineer notes that the proposed use of the site should not generate much traffic and consequently should not decrease the level of service on Ponderosa Drive or Cove Road. No traffic impacts are expected by this Special Use Permit request. 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The site is designated as Neighborhood Conservation in the 1998 Community Plan. This particular use is not identified in the Community Plan. Neighborhood Conservation is defined as a development area that encourages residential development. This petition does not change the character of this neighborhood or development pattern. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS This is a request for a Special Use Permit to conduct a Home Occupation in an Accessory Building. The request involves (1) one parcel, consisting of 2.14 acres on Ponderosa Drive. Though this use is not identified in the Roanoke County Community Plan the site has ample space to conform to all applicable development standards. As long as the suggested conditions • requested by staff are in place, and if the neighbors support the petition, then no negative impacts are anticipated. 2 • • CASE NUMBER: PREPARED BY: HEARING DATES: 10-4/2004 Chris Lowe PC: Apri16, 2004 BOS: Apri127, 2004 ~~ 3 •: ~. r,,, it.a?~- County of Roanoke For Staff Use Only COInInllillty Development - Date received: Received by: Plannlnb & ZOlllnb ~' ~ • U `( ) Appli lion fee: PCBZA date: 5204 Bernard Drive ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ P O Box 29800 Placazds issued: BOS date: Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 y Z 'pc (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 Case Number -.~ Applicants name/address w/zip ~ ~ ~ ~ STS p. ~ Sc.6G d ~~I yLZ~ Po-~b~2osA ~2 Ai,r aPPLrcAlvTS __ Check type of applicatj~n filed (check all that apply) 0 Waiver O Administrative Appeal ~I O Rezoning al Special Use O Variance 5~-0 - 76 I - ~t-~ ~ ~•- Phone: Work: S d' M Cell #: S ~"" ~ FaxNo.: S~Z- SZLo Phone #: S ~f- 0 7~ I ' ~f-1 ~ y- Work: SQ'r~ Lr Fax No. #: S~ Z - S 2 z , Owner's name/address wlzip S 722 ~ P~~~~~,~s.~ ~~ ~0.~~~wt: V/i L'fa~9 Property Location SZ2o ~o~r ~~ 2os~ ~P Tax MapNo.: f~~ ~. ~2 - f~3 32 Size of pazcel(s): Acres: z + i ..p;.. ~_•_~~:~ ~i rri iii liT ".1771': TI7i Magisterial District: ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ Community Planning area: C /~ i ~" 1~ 3 ~ Existing Zoning: L Existing Land Use: 7 r ~ G L~ r~ µ ` ~' 1.11111'U `ice v...•.:l Proposed Zoning: ~ ~ ~' 1 ~ G (~ C ~ S ~ Proposed Land Use: G ~ rJ ~ t! ~~ 1~1~ l U ~u~ ~ ~ '~''~ t N ~ ~'~ SS 0 ~`'~ ~ V t l ~ [ ~- the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? es / No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIl2ST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No ,:: _ . - - _ .,...• , , - ,.CANTS (V/W/AA) j ,.~RIANCE, WAIVER AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL APPLI . ..........:.:. ...._.,. Variance/Waiver of Section(s) N ~r[ of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WII.L NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE • ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. g~gry~ V/AA R/S/W VlAA R/S/W V1AA Consultation 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan Application fee Application ~ Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable Justification }( Mater and sewer application Adjoining property owners • I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the pr rty o the owner's agent or on Jct~purcha er and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. ~ ~ Owner's Signature 2 . .... __ .... _, ~, 3UST'IFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE `PERMIT OR WAIVER REQUEST -?~. licant ~ , ~ K-~ ~' Q ~ ~ o Rl ~ ~~5 A • PP • The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. p D~ ~(~-OOMt~ G 01~(--~ : NO i~N~-~I ~ ~~ o~ ~'v~ y. NO ou`- S~ ~~ ' ~~ ~ ~- .. I ~ G 5 i R GC~ ~ ~ 0 r--t ~ ,J ~ q- 2~ sh r./ ~ I ( 5 c (n! "tie. L N ~ j v S ~ 0 (~ ~ ~-/I G L i N ~F1.B -~ N ~ S ~'l2 c~ ~ ~-L g _ (!' LG G" i ~i.C ~i'j, ~ I~ A-'t ~ W~ S G P-o o M ~ rJ G f-(-o t,' R--S ~ ~`'~ - F ` 5 -~ - . M - F ~ Pa"i . ~ P M ~ (- Z ~ o~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ y~ ~ ~ S/4T ~~M- Nv~,J CL ~gs 5~~ ~-~ ~ ~Gi~~ P~~~T ~-~~ ~~~~ ~,~~ a~ ~-~<<sf~~y ~~~ I~~.~~ Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. ~~ ,i i~es~~ ,~~-~~ NLI~f--~~~2N~~~i~ CoNS~~v~- ~ (~~ ~~ 191t~ yj~ , ,~ M s w ~ i11 ~f ~-~ ~ t, (c ~ c: S C1 i L~ ~ ~ ~ r/C- s ~ 0 ~ / ' z ~~~~ ~ ~ y ~~ iC,ifii3o~11-00~ G~rJS~rV~llont ~~.5-~Ng'~~~rs. Please describe the impact{s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including waterlsewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. Y~ ~ ~ ~c ass ~ ~ ~ v i I ~ ~ ~ i s r ~ s ~ ~ f~ ~r-~ M ~L~ N c~~r~c~g D ~2 ~~ i ~~~6~~aR ~~Joi~S ~ Sou~I'6, ~ VN~t~ GHV~~~,-I ~-d i;~~~S ~ ~ i I ~.~t~ M '~'~r, ~{ J (~- Il-1 ,° !'J ic3 j ~ '~ v S ~ ~ ~ f ~ r 1 ~ ~ -H'l. i t ~ ~~ ~ l ~ ~ .~/ 4 Pvb I~~c ~-h I.~-,~.5 ors s~ ~~/~c.~c . 3 ,.. „.,~ JL-1STIFTC~ATION FOR VARIANCE REQTJEST ~ ,~' '~ • ,Applicant The of Zoning Appeals is required by Section 15.2-2309 of the Code of Virginia to consider the following factors before a variance can be granted. Please read the factors listed below carefully and in your own words, describe how the request meets each factor. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. 1. The variance shall not be contrary to the public interest and shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The strict application of the zoning ordinance woulj produce unPue hardship; a hardship that approaches confiscpatiPn~s distinguished from a special privilege or convenience and would rohibit or unreasonabl restrict the use of the ro e i• 3. The hardship is not shared by other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. Such hardships should be addressed by the Board of Supervisors as amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The variance will not be of a substantial detriment to the adjacent properties or the character of the district. 4 I." i• ,. JUSTIFICATION-FOR A.DIVIINISTRATIVE APPE:A)tJ REQUEST _" Applicant Please respond to the following as thoroughly as possible. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. 1. Reasons for appeal: i• [7 2. Evidence supporting claim: 5 ".`~ . _ • CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST _ , _ ~ _ the A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the applic etio ~'~ an halpl addres salny potential land use or land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Furth p design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limn the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unle 1 maybe altered to the extent permitted by the zoning strictnand other a special use permit or variance, the concept p y regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS _ a. Applicant name and name of development _ b. Date, scale and north arrow _ c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions _ d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties • e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. _ f, The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties _ g. All property lines and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights _ i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development j, Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional information required for REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS _ k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site _ 1, Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers _ m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals _ n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections _ o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule • I certify that all items required in the checklist above are complete. Signature of applicant Date 6 • • • • March 22, 2004 County of Roanoke Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 RE: Petition by D. Gregory Roberts, Planning Commission, April 6, Board of Supervisors, April 27. Dear Sir: I am writing in reference to a special use permit submitted by Mr. Roberts to allow a home occupation in an accessory building at 5228 Ponderosa Drive. I am the only immediate neighbor of Mr. Roberts. My address is 5230 Ponderosa Drive. My home is the structure most closely located to the accessory building. I am sorry to not be able to attend the meetings governing this permit application. I am providing this letter to advise the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor that I have absolutely no difficulty with this special permit and with the home occupation to'which it refers. I believe that the location and the proposed endeavor represent no difficulty or problem from my perspective. Should there be any further questions, please contact me at (540) 772-3630. S' cerel , ~~ Dennis D. Garvin, M.D. DDG/sat ~!`~A~N ~~D~B ~~~~' €~~~~~D ~'~°e~S ~ir~~ ~i°.sFi P6tits~vS'...d6'~9 ~'~ n'~~u e~~J DT: 03/23/04 NOTARY S I GNATURE : ~p . ~.~ i ~ C~ .~.,+ ..,. .. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO D. GREGORY ROBERTS TO CONDUCT A HOME OCCUPATION IN AN ACCESSORY BUILDING ON 2.14 ACRES LOCATED AT 5228 PONDEROSA DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 36.12-3-32) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, D. Gregory Roberts has filed a petition for a special use permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive (Tax Map No. 36.12-3-32) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to D. Gregory Roberts to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) No more than one (1) dog on the premises for grooming at any given time. (2) No more than ten (10) appointments per week. 1 .v .. ~.",,, -._ ~-. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 2 . ~, ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicants name: D. Gregory Roberts Proposed Zoning: Special Use Existing Zoning: R 1 Tax Map No 36.12-3-32 > •. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE 042704-6 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO MARC I. WILSON TO CONDUCT RECREATIONAL VEHICLE SALES ON 1.4088 ACRES LOCATED AT 3328 PETERS CREEK ROAD (TAX MAP N0.37.14-1-7~ CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Marc I. Wilson has filed a petition far a special use permit to conduct recreational vehicles sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road (Tax Map No. 37.14-1-7) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Marc I Wilson to conduct recreational vehicles sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) Recreational Vehicles sales and service shall be allowed only as an accessory use to Minor Automobile Repair and Automobile Dealership, Used. 1 4. (2) No more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for sale at any one time. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: n10 . ~~~~11D ~ Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Chief Planner William Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 2 `~ o 1. 0 ~~ • a ~ 4650 ~ 2 ~h7 G6k'0 3320 3. 13. - .per r~39 ~~s o c.~ Zoni g R 15' 4s3o r 4. as3z 9.1 - '' Zoning R 1 12. O 1 7 ~ '~ as25 ' ` ti ~ ~+ ~ 11. .r5'1s - 3326 ' " u~, Zoning C2 :,, . ` e' ••~~, ., r %. :`. ._ . 4311 3 m _ j ~ ., ` i . 1D. Zoriir`ig C2 - H 23 agpo ~-~ n Lake 9. ~n _ 3<^pz G 4G2a d ~,b 47. . • 48. - 3130 49. .~ ~ _'100-3;20 _,,;.?- ei G'~ ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants name: Mark I. Wilson DEPARTMENT OF Proposed Zoning: Special Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Existing Zoning: C2 Tax Map No 37.14- >-7 E 5-3 PETITIONER: Marc Wilson • CASE NUMBER: 11-4/2004 Planning Commission Hearing Date: April 6, 2004 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: April 27, 2004 A. REQUEST The petition of Marc I. Wilson to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres, located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Ms. Tammi Wood presented the staff report. Ms. Hooker questioned the difference between the existing Automobile Dealership, Used use and the requested Recreational vehicle Sales and Service Use. Mr. Wilson explained where the recreational vehicle would be located on the site. D. CONDITIONS 1. Recreational Vehicle sales and service shall be allowed only as an accessory use to Minor Automobile Repair and Automobile Dealership, Used. • 2. No more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for sale at any one time. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Ms. Hooker made a motion to approve the request with the conditions. Motion carried 4-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission • 5 STAFF' REPORT' - Petitioner: Marc I. Wilson ~~'° „ • Request: To obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service business on 1.4088 acres, located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District. Location: 3328 Peters Creek Road Magisterial District: Catawba Proffered/Suggested 1. Recreational Vehicle sales and service shall be allowed only as an accessory use Conditions: to Minor Automobile Repair and Automobile Dealership, Used. 2. No more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for sale at any one time. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request by Mr. Marc I. Wilson to apply for a Special Use Permit to operate a Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service business in addition to his Minor Automobile Repair and Used Automobile Dealership businesses at the Sportscar Clinic. This Special Use permit request consists of one parcel consisting of 1.4088 acres. The proposed special use permit conforms to the policies and guidelines of the Transition future land use designation, which encourages the orderly development of highway frontage parcels, and small-scale planned and • clustered retail uses. As long as the business continues operating as a minor automobile repair business with an automobile dealership and recreational sales and service as an accessory, no negative impacts are anticipated. If the Planning Commission wishes to place conditions on the special use permit, the above-mentioned conditions are suggested. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Recreational vehicle sales and service is defined as Recreational vehicle sales and service in the zoning ordinance. The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance defines a recreational vehicle which can be towed, hauled or driven, designed and used as temporary living accommodations for recreational, camping travel uses only. Recreational vehicles shall include travel trailers, pick-up campers, motor homes, tent trailers or similar devices used for temporary mobile housing and shall also include boats. A recreational vehicle sales and service business is permitted in a C2 General Commercial zoning district with a special use permit. Per Section 30-85-21. Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service, of the Zoning Ordinance: 1. A ten-foot plating strip shall be provided adjacent to any public street right-of-way. Within this planting strip one deciduous, large evergreen or small deciduous tree shall be plated every thirty (30) linear feet. Such plating materials shall otherwise comply with the landscaping requirements contained in Section 30-92. (Screening, Landscaping and Buffer Yards) 2. The storage and/or display of recreational vehicles in the planting strip required above shall be • prohibited. 3. Any recreational vehicle which is missing major mechanical or body parts or has been substantially damaged shall be placed in a storage yard. The storage yard shall be fully screened from public view and shall be set back at least one hundred (100) feet from any adjoining residential district. ~~._ ,. .,,,~ 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background -The Sportscar Clinic has been in business in the Roanoke Valley for over 27 years in both the Christiansburg and Roanoke locations. In September 1997, to operate a Minor Automobile Repair business, the Sportscar Clinic was rezoned from R1, Low Density Residential District to C2C, General Commercial District, with the following condition: "No junk vehicles will be stored outside." In March 2001, Mr. Wilson was granted a Special Use Permit to operate an Automobile Dealership, Used, with the following two conditions, "Used Automobile Dealership shall be allowed only as an accessory use to Minor Automobile Repair and no more than 5 vehicles shall be displayed for sale at any one time." The Sportscar Clinic has been a licensed used car dealer from the Roanoke location for over 3 years. The planned recreational sale and service use does not engage in volume sales, but would be provided as a complementary service to their current customer base. TopographyNegetation -The proposed use would not change the site. Surrounding Neighborhood -The proposed use would not impose an additional impact on the adjacent properties. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture -Prior to construction of the business in 1997, the property was rezoned from R1 Low Density Residential district to C2C General Commercial district with a condition of "No junk vehicles will be stored outside." At that time the site was developed according to Roanoke County standards. • Access/Traffic Circulation -The proposed use would not impact local traffic. 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The site is designated as Transition in the 1998 Community Plan. Transition encourages the orderly development of highway frontage parcels such as small-scale planned and clustered retail uses. The proposed special use permit conforms to the policies and guidelines of the Transition future land use designation. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS The proposed use would not change the site, or impact local traffic, or adjacent properties. The petitioner supports a condition that limits the Recreational Sales and Service as an accessory use to the current auto repair and used automobile dealership businesses as well as the display of only one recreational vehicle at any one time. Staff suggests that the Planning Commission consider the following conditions for the Special Use Permit: Recreational Vehicle sales and service shall be allowed only as an accessory use to Minor Automobile Repair and Automobile Dealership, Used. 2. No more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for sale at any one time. CASE NUMBER: PREPARED BY: HEARING DATES: 11-412004 Tammi L. Wood PC: 416/04 BOS: 4127/04 2 County of Roanoke • Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 -^ For Staff Use Unly Daot`eZreceive~ d^ ~ Re~ved,by: Application fee: ~ ~~i4 te:~ Placards issued: aaooy BOS date: Case Number r ALL APPLICA~'~'"lS Check type of application f -e-allxl~at apply) Rezoning Special Use ~ Variance Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: 540-563-1133 Marc I. Wilson 5001 Glenvar Hts. Blvd Salem, Va. 24153 Fax No: 540-265-1470 Owner=s name/address w/zip Phone 540-563-1133 Marc I. Wilson and Curtis S. Sheets 5001 Glenvar Hts. Blvd Salem, Va. 24153 Fax No. 544265-1470 Property Location Magisterial District: ~ G+"~Tk1 Vu 6I1 The Sportscar Clinic • 3328 Peters Creek Rd. Roanoke, Va. 24019 Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: 37.14-1-~ ~ Existing Zonmg: C-2 pe0. Iet-s h ~ ~ ~ iJ~~el Size of parcel(s): Acres: 1.4088 ac. Existing Land Use: Automobile ~..~ a "°'" REZONI~'!'G A1'~'D SPECIAL USE PF.R:'IIIT APPLICANTS (RCS) Proposed Zoning: C-2 ~~~•sU~~,~ , ~ ~ Proposed Land Use: Automobile ~ °~a °°'~°, RV sales ~ Ste-=~~-~- Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. oes the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No N J ~ 1'AKIANCF. AI'I'LICA,'VTS {1') Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WII,L NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R,~s v R~ v s v / Consultation / 8 1/2" x 11" concept plan / Application fee • / Application ._ Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable / Justification ~ Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner=s agent or contra urchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. .~ Owner s Signature ~. JUSTIFICATION FOR RE7.OISZNG Ok SI'ECL1L LiSF. PERMIT REQUEST • Applicant Marc I. Wilson The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. • ., ,. The Sportscar Clinic has been serving the Roanoke valley for over 27 years from its two locations in Roanoke and Christiansburg. It has been a licensed used car dealer from its Roanoke location for over 3 years. The Sportscar Clinic does not engage in volume sales to the general public but instead focuses on sales to and from its customer base for service. RV sales is considered an accessory business and provided as a complementary service to current service customers. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Given the type and quality of the cars serviced by the Sportscar Clinic, RVs offered for sale will also be of late model and high quality since we market primarily to our current customer base. We would offer no more than 1 RV for sale at a time. In keeping with our image as a high quality service center, Al1RVs offered for sale would be tastefully presented Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. No impact on any public services would be expected. Given the type and number of automobiles offered for sale at any time only a minimal impact of a positive nature would be expected on the community at large. The property currently exceeds all DMV requirements for a sales license. Since ample parking and attractive landscaping is already in place, no impact on the current site is expected. I Z. ~~~ ,...~ ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO MARC I. WILSON TO CONDUCT RECREATIONAL VEHICLE SALES ON 1.4088 ACRES LOCATED AT 3328 PETERS CREEK ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 37.14-1-7) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Marc I. Wilson has filed a petition for a special use permit to conduct recreational vehicles sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road (Tax Map No. 37.14-1-7) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Marc I. Wilson to conduct recreational vehicles sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) Recreational Vehicles sales and service shall be allowed only as an accessory use to Minor Automobile Repair and Automobile Dealership, Used. 1 ,. ~~_ (2) No more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for sale at any one time. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 2 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ Applicants name: Mark I. Wilson DEPARTMENT OF Proposed Zoning: Special Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Existing Zoning: C2 Tax Map No 37.14-1-7 ACTION NO. A-042704-7 ITEM NO. S-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 15.7 acre tract of real estate located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road (Tax Map No's. 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) from the zoning classification of C-1 and R-1 to the zoning classification of C-2, with conditions, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Kahn Development S~IBMITTED fBY: APPROVED BY: Janet Scheid Chief Planner Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFQRMATIQN: This time has been set aside fior a public hearing on the second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 15.7 acre tract of real estate located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road. Kahn Development Company wishes to construct amixed-use office and retail development. The petitioner has also proffered possible residential uses mixed with the office uses. If included, the residential uses would be those allowed in the C2 zoning district. The C2 district allows multi-family residential included within an office or commercial building, not to exceed 50% of the total floor area sion for ~J~ PETITIONER: Kahn Development • CASE NUMBER: 6-3/2004 Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 2, 2004 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: April 27, 2004 (Continued from March 23, 2004) A. REQUEST The petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.9 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District with conditions and 5.8 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District with conditions in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS The petition generated significant attendance at the public hearing. The meeting room was full to capacity, and another conference room was provided with an audio/visual presentation. The majority of the citizens attending were opposed to the petition, as were the majority of those who spoke during the public hearing. Those citizens in opposition voiced the following concerns: increased traffic, commercial development on residential property, conformance with the Community Plan, impacts to property values, noise, lights, orientation of the project to Keagy Road, drainage and flooding, safety of children, school buses traveling Keagy Road, the project is not needed or wanted, loss of trees and wildlife habitat, opposition by the Greater Hidden • Valley Neighborhood Association and the Greater Deyerle Neighborhood Association. Speakers in support of the petition voiced the following: economic development benefits, scarcity of land, appropriate location, most of the land already zoned C1, tax revenue benefits. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Thomason asked the petitioner's traffic engineer if the improvements described in the traffic impact analysis would work. Ms. Booker of Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern responded affirmatively. Mr. Azar noted that the costs of the road improvements would be borne by the petitioner. The Commission asked for input from Mr. Billy Driver, Director of Real Estate Valuation and Mr.-Doug Chittum, Director of Economic Development. Mr. Driver spoke about property values near commercial developments, citing continued climb in resale values. Mr. Chittum answered questions about whether the proposed development would draw new businesses or relocate existing business. He responded that the development would draw new businesses and the design as an open air center is anew trend in retail development. Mr. Azar supported the mixed use design concept. Mr. McNeil and Ms. Hooker noted the opportunity for road improvements without drawing from VDOT funds. Ms. Hooker also noted the opportunity to guide the development of the properties with the proffered conditions. Ms. Hooker and Mr. Thomason noted that the Community Plan is a guide for rezoning and land use decisions. • i• [7 i• D. CONDITIONS ~ ~ L~ Please see the attached proffer of conditions, dated March 2, 2004. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason motioned to approve the request with proffered conditions. The motion carried 5-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission EXEiIBIT A • ~~~~,.. PROFFERED CONDITIONS KEAGY VILLAGE March 2, 2004 1. Concept Plan: a. The property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan dated January 22, 2004, revised February 26, 2004, made by DMR Architecture, P.L.L.C., subject to those changes that are required by the County during comprehensive site plan review and subject to petitioner's right to relocate or reconfigure the buildings, service areas and parking layouts shown on the concept plan. Building relocation, however, shall not change the overall concept of retail and commercial uses oriented toward Route 419 and Keagy Road, and office or residential uses buffering the retail and commercial uses from the adjacent residential properties along Keagy Road. The entire site will include sidewalks connecting all buildings to encourage pedestrian connectivity between all uses and parking areas. b. A nature/walking trail shall be incorporated into the design of the center. It is anticipated that the trail will be located along the edge of the property, where possible, and will provide walking opportunities for users of Keagy • Village as well as neighbors by connecting to on-site sidewalks and street crosswalks. c. Any building constructed along the western boundary of the property (adjoining tax map parcel number 67.18-2-5, the home of Mr. and Mrs. Atkins) shall be no more than one story high and shall contain only office uses. Screening (which shall consist of plantings and a stained wooden fence starting approximately 50' from Keagy Road) shall be installed within a 30' buffer on the developer's property along said line substantially as set out in a conceptual landscape plan dated February 23, 2004 made by the Land Plan Group. Said landscape buffer shall be in place no later than the time the parking lot and/or office building adjacent to the 30' buffer strip is completed. A decorative brick column shall be placed at the end of the fence closest to Keagy Road. 2. All buildings shall be designed to be compatible with one another. All facades of buildings shall be of similar design, compatible materials and similar detailing. 3. Plazas, hadscape, landscaped areas and site amenities shall also be compatible to the established building character and shall include outdoor seating areas, varied paving materials to add contrast and texture, and decorative containers • with seasonal landscape. Restaurant tenants will be encouraged to provide outdoor dining areas with tables, chairs and umbrellas. • 4. Roofline treatment shall be of compatible design on all buildings. 5. Single, large building masses without articulated facades shall not be permitted. Large building walls shall be required to incorporate multidimensional design features, such as, changes in plane, canopies, awnings, dimensional signage, windows, doors, facial, arcades, and changes in texture, material and color or vary in height to add interest. Retaining walls shall be subject to proffers 7 and 8 relating to construction materials or be composed of textured keystone blocks. 6. Required screening of service and trash areas shall be with finish materials compatible with the adjacent building. The loading area at the northwest side of the proposed grocery store shall be screened with a freestanding wall with similar finish as the adjacent building. 7. Acceptable building finishes include: a. brick b. wood, vinyl or composite wood substitute lap siding and trim c. glass, with clear glass required in retail storefronts d. stucco or exterior insulated finish system (EIFS) e. stone face colored concrete block • f. stone or cast stone g. standing seam metal, copper, composite slate tle or asphalt shingle roof 8. The following building finishes are prohibited: a. unpainted or bare metal panels b. 4 x 8 plywood or composite panels c. bare exposed concrete that is not exposed aggregate, hammered, sandblasted or covered with acement-based acrylic coating d. unfinished wood other than cedar, mahogany, teak or redwood. 9. Site Lighting: a. All lighting near the property lines shall be shielded "cut off ' types to internalize illumination and avoid spillover to adjacent sites and public roads. b. Sidewalks shall be illuminated with decorative pedestrian-scaled pole or building mounted luminaries. c. Plazas may be illuminated similar to sidewalks but may include additional feature lighting for attractions and outdoor dining. e. Landscape lighting may be employed to enhance site entrance and feature areas. f. No exposed neon or fluorescent lightng shall be permitted. • g. The maximum height of freestanding light fixtures shall be 30 feet. 2 • 10. Site Signage: a. Off,premises signs (billboards) shall not be allowed on the property. b. The main freestanding multi-sided project identification sign shall be at the oad and Route 419 and shall be monument style utilizing corner of Kea R gY materials approved as acceptable building materials and shall not exceed 25 feet in height. c. Minor freestanding entrance signs shall be multi-sided monument style and shall not exceed 10 feet in height. d. Tenant signage visible to off-site shall be encouraged to be creative in order to add interest and texture and, in addition to letters, may include logos and images. Projecting blade signs and projecting three-dimensional signs are also encouraged. Box signs, exposed raceways and exposed neon are prohibited. Signage maybe internally or externally illuminated. 11. Non-specialty drive-in or fast food restaurants and gasoline stations shall not be permitted. Establishments primarily serving specialty foods (such as coffee, baked goods, e.g.) with drive-through windows are not included within this prohibition but would require a special use permit in accordance with the requirements of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Drive-through windows are not permitted directly facing the street unless they are completely • screened. 12. The Concept plan indicates offices uses buffering the retail uses from the adjacent residential properties along Keagy Road. Residential use may be substituted for up to 50% of the office square footage as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Except as set out in 1(c) above, buildings labeled on the concept plan solely as "office" shall be used only for office or residential purposes. Building configurations, building heights, number of buildings and parking layouts may vary to accommodate the residential substitution. 13. The developer shall comply with all VDOT requirements for improvements to adjoining Route 419 and Keagy Road including any required easements for sight distance as well as the donation of any additional right-of--way along Keagy Road and Route 419. KAHN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY B ~ ~_ T dd J. Walter ice President /Development • 3 uL~tNIV + r tLllrlHfV t- dX ~ ~4U-LLU-25U~U Hp f LU LUU4 1 L ~ U5 h'. UL GLENN FELDI~~NN ,. _.....__.....___.._..._...._ ; ..,, ,;" MARYHLLEN F. GOODLATTE Y ' `r " Direct Disl (540) 27.4-3015 ~~ ` *1_.-•'~' Email mSoodlatte@gfdg.com r. _................. ....._~........ GUODLATTE Apxil 20, 2004 2;0 1st Street S.W. Suit= 200 P~Sr OiRce Aex 288i Roanoke, Virginia X001 SENT BY FACSIMILE - (540) i'72.2108 540.224.8000 Fsx 5402?h.80~0 Ms+ Janet Scheid gf~gp?fdg.corn Chief Planner Roanoke County Planninn and Zoning. P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, Vir?inia 24018-0798 Re: Kahn Development Rezoning Dear Janet: This is to confirm our telephone conversation this morning. As you know, we have been working for many weeks with representatives of the neighbors and the neighborhood a>sociation. Most recently, at the request of the newly formed neighborhood assoc;iation, tive have been exploxing the possibility of "swapping" the R-1 properties under contract t.o Kahn with the Via family, who own adjacent acreage along Route 419. The association itself asked both the Via family and. Kahn Development to consider such a swap. Both were willing to so consider and Kahn has presented a preliminary proposal to Via family attorneys. The Via family is still considering that' proposal. We aze hopeful of their willingness to proceed -but must await their decision. If they agree, our pending petition would need to l:~e referred back to the Planning Commission. Our petition would be amended to include a portion of the Via property along Route 419 and to remove the acreage t.o be conveyed to the Via family. During the course of our discussions with neighbors, we explored other options in addition to a stivap with the Via. family. If we are not able to proceed with the swap, Kahn is still willing to make some changes to its concept plan in order to accommodate neighbor concerns. Ln particular, Kahn is willing to proffer that no development on the situ will take place beyond Sugar Loaf Mountain Road. This would eliminate an office building currently shown on the concept plan. To make the changes associated `~vith that potential modification, and to give the ,~..,~ . County time to consider those changes, eve are now requesting a continuance of Tuesday's public hearing. "~Y'.,~'~.. ~.. ~.. '. Y' , '` 'i ` 1• 6 1954 `~ael.~~Gxati~a ~ ears ~ C~erz~zce 2004 ~~ ~ _ GLENN , FELDMRN Fax ~ 540-224-8050 Rp r 20 2004 12 05 P. 03 GLENN ._ ......_ ...._ Ms. 7a11et Scheid FELDMANN ---~---~ ~~- ~~ April 20, 2004 DARBY~~~;- Pane 2 _....... _..........__...... a GOODLATTE I plan to be present Tuesday night and provide the Board with a quick update on the developments in this matter. At the minimum, we will seek a continuance for 30 days, so that the matter would be considered by the Board of Supervisors at their May 25 public hearing elate. However, if we are able to reach an agreement with the Via family, I ~x~ill be asking the Board, next Tuesday, to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission. In an event, we will not rop ceed next 'Iliesda night, Thank you very much for your assistance and cooperation throughout this very lengthy process. Even though Kahn comes to the Board with the unanimous recommendation of the Planning; Commission, it remains very desirous of accommodating its neighbors as much as it possibly can. It is to that end that we have been continuing this matter thus far and again request that continuance. I will keep you posted and appreciate your assistance. V cry truly yours, Maryellen F. Goodlatte MFG:1nh:5267000 cc: Kahn Development Company (BY FAX - (803) ?88-5923) R. David Barbe, Esq. (BY FAX - 774-8808) R. Neal Ke.esee, Jr., Esq. (3Y FAX - 983-7711} Stephen W. Lemon, Esq. (BY FAX -- 982-2015) GLENN,FELDMRN Fax..540-224-8050 Mar 10 2004 11~4b r.u~ GLENN ~- FELD~M~NN IVIARYELLEt. F. GOODLATTI; A R RY , ~ DiPect Dial (`a0) 224-9013 , ~~ '~ `L y :. ~,~ L•-ma;l mgoodlsttc ~'d eom ~&- S• _. .. . ~ao~L~~E March 10, 2004 210 tst Street S W sL"te Z°° SENT B'St FACSIMILE - 77221.08 Fost Offtc.e Bex 2567 Rcano'r:, virginf~ 24001 Ms. Janet Scheid s4o z~i.sooo Chief Planner F~ r. 540724.8050 Roanoke County Planning and Zoning BOX 2.9800 0 P ?f~gwgfdg.ccm • • Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Re: Kahn Development Rezoning Dear Janet: As you know, tive represent Kahn Development Company which has filed a petition to rezone property at the intersection of Route 419 and Keagy Road. The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to consider the rezoning . at their March 23 meeting. • Dave Barbe re resents the newly farmed neighborhood association which has p been opposing this request. On behalf of his clients, Dave contacted me to aslc if Kahn Development would be wiJ.ling to continue the public hearing before the Board of Supervisors in order to explore whether changes could be made to the proj oct that would address his client's concerns. In order to allow time for the neighborhood association, Kahn Development and County staff to discuss and explore possible changes, we request that the public hearing scheduled for March 2:4 be continued until Apri127, which is the Board's regularly scheduled public hearing date for April. If there is anything further we need to do in connection with this request to continue the March 23 public hearing, please let me lrnow. Very truly yours, ivlaryellen F. Goodlatte MFG:1nh:~2G7000 • cc: Kahn Development Company R. David Bazbe, Esq. (SEI\TT BY FAX - (540) 774-8808) 1954 ~e1.~GzA.lin~ SO~.~~ aff ~ezvice 2004 STAFF REPORT ac.... `.~, ~- { Petitioner: Kahn Development Company • Request: Rezone 15.52 acres from C1 and Rl to C2C Location: Intersection of Rt. 419, Electric Road and Keagy Road Magisterial District: Windsor Hills Proffered/Suggested See Exhibit "A", Proffered Conditions, Keagy Village Conditions: See also additional suggested conditions at end of Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Kahn Development Company wishes to construct amixed-use office and retail development. The petitioner has also proffered possible residential uses mixed with the office uses. If included, the residential uses would be those allowed in the C2 zoning district. The C2 district allows multi-family residential included within an office or commercial building, not to exceed 50% of the total floor area. In the northern and eastern portion of the site, the petitioner wishes to build one large anchor retail grocery store, with a mix of specialty shops and restaurants in the other retail buildings. Non-specialty drive-in or fast food restaurants and gasoline stations are specifically prohibited in the proffers. Specialty food establishments such as coffee and baked goods shops would be allowed, but still would require a Special Use Permit from the Board of Supervisors if a drive- through service was proposed. The remainder of the site would be used for offices and possibly • multi-family residences. The issues of conformance with the Community Plan, and generation of new vehicle traffic are central to this proposed rezoning. The petitioner has worked to achieve conformance with the Community Plan through proffered architectural designs, and a tiered development plan that places less intensive office uses as a buffer between the retail uses and adjacent homes. The 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan designates the properties Neighborhood Conservation and Transition. The three properties that are currently zoned Rl fall under the Neighborhood Conservation designation. The development pattern is not a typical suburban residential design, so the debate is not so much conservation of an existing development pattern, but rather should those properties be ultimately redeveloped for single or multi-family residential, or for commercial use. Given the location across from a large office building development and proximity to a signalized intersection, it seems fairly debatable that with a high quality development plan, this property could be better used for commercial development. As mentioned above, staff understands that three of the properties on the petition are designated Neighborhood Conservation, and if the properties are rezoned, the new development must make every effort to mitigate impacts to the neighborhood. In addition, the Board of Supervisors should make a firm commitment not to extend commercial development beyond this point on Keagy Road. New traffic would be generated from this proposed development. A traffic impact analysis is underway, and will make recommendations to VDOT for improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road. VDOT will then determine the extent of required improvements to the streets. VDOT has • commented on the proposed rezoning, and those comments should be taken into consideration if the Board of Supervisors accept proffered conditions to rezone the property. Construction of required improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road should also be included in the proffered conditions. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning, staff recommends the • following proffers be added to those submitted: 1) The developer shall comply with all VDOT requirements for improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road 2) The developer shall provide easements for sight distance from the eastern Keagy Road entrance. 3) The developer shall donate additional right of way along Keagy Road and Rt. 419 as required by VDOT for street improvements. 4) Access to the site from Rt. 419 shall be ingress only. 5) Retaining wall finishes shall be the same as those listed as "Acceptable building finishes" in proffer #7, dated February 12, 2004. 6) The loading area at the northwest side of the proposed grocery store shall be screened with a structural wall with similar finish materials as the adjacent building. 1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) approval is required for new entrances and other improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road. Site development review is required for conformance with Roanoke County standards. • 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background -The petitioner, Kahn Development Company, is the contract purchaser of four parcels of land in the 5000 block of Keagy Road. The properties are located between the intersection of Sugarloaf Mountain Road and Rt. 419. Three properties, with a total area of 5.8 acres are zoned Rl, Low Density Residential. The remaining property is 9.$5 acres and zoned C 1, Office District. Most of the site frontage, approximately 1,090 feet, lies along Keagy Road. The site has approximately 235 feet of frontage on Rt. 419. Three single-family homes exist on the site, along with numerous accessory structures. The western-most home was first used as a school, before being converted into a residence. A review of the 1992 "Historical Architecture Reconnaissance Survey Report, Roanoke County, Virginia" revealed no references to the structure. An evaluation committee from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources has recommended that the old school building is not potentially eligible for listing on the National Historic Register, due to a loss of physical integrity, including the structure being converted into a duplex. To~o~-aphy/Ve~etation -The property slopes down and to the northwest from Keagy Road. A small water course runs through the middle of the properties, and drops into a deep ravine as it reaches the northwest property line. The channel conveys runoff from Keagy Road and the Allstate property. The topography of the site also slopes down to the north, near the intersection of Rt. 419 and Keagy Road. Vegetation consists of open residential yard areas, surrounded by mixed deciduous and evergreen trees. The wooded areas appear to be of various ages, with some • mature stands, and some younger trees. 2 Surrounding Neighborhood -Property to the south, across Keagy Road is zoned C 1 and contains the Allstate office building and parking lots. Properties to the southwest and west are zoned Rl, • and contain single family residences on .75 -1-acre lots. A 19+ acre tract adjoins to the west, and is zoned R1, with a single family residence. A vacant 15 acre tract adjoining to the northwest is zoned R2. A vacant 13.8 acre tract adjoining to the north is zoned C1 Conditional. The conditional Cl zoning is the result of a 1983 rezoning for an office building that has not been constructed to date. Properties across Rt. 419, in the City of Roanoke are zoned RS1 and C1, and contain vacant parcels, Showtimer's Theatre, and a medical office. The RS1 and Cl districts are similar to the County's Rl and C1 districts, respectively. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Community Meeting -The petitioners held a community meeting on January 15, 2004, at the Oak Grove Elementary School. Approximately 40 people attended the meeting. Attendance was a mix of nearby residents, interested business persons, the subject property owners, the petitioner and their legal counsel, and county staff. Most, if not all of the residents voiced concerns and opposition to the proposed rezoning. They cited traffic concerns, safety, impact to property values, and a desire for the single-family home sites to remain residential. Site LayoutJArchitecture -The petitioner's proffered site development plan shows ten buildings designed with a mix of retail and office uses. The petitioner has also proffered possible residential uses mixed with the office uses. If included, the residential uses would be those allowed in the C2 zoning district. The C2 district allows multi-family residential included within • an office or commercial building, not to exceed 50% of the total floor area. In the northern and eastern portion of the site, the petitioner wishes to build one large anchor retail grocery store, with a mix of specialty shops and restaurants in the other retail buildings. Non-specialty drive-in or fast food restaurants and gasoline stations are specifically prohibited in the proffers. Specialty food establishments such as coffee and baked goods shops would be allowed, but still would require a Special Use Permit from the Board of Supervisors if a drive- through service was proposed. The remainder of the site would be used for offices and possibly multi-family residences. The proposed retail buildings are oriented toward Rt. 419 and Keagy Road, and the office or residential buildings are oriented toward the adjacent residential properties. In their statement of proffered conditions, the petitioner proffers this overall concept in order to have the office or residential area buffer the adjacent residential properties from the retail uses to the northeast. The site development plan proffers a design concept to place the prominent anchor retail grocery store and large parking area to the north of the site, away from the adjoining residential neighborhood, but visible and easily accessible from the signalized intersection of Rt. 419 and Keagy Road. The proffered development plan also shows that the site will have varying topography and varying building floor elevations. While these floor elevations may not be exact final elevations, they communicate a design of varied building elevations stepping down to the northeast, along Keagy Road from Sugarloaf Mountain Road toward Rt. 419, and also stepping down to the north • and northwest from Keagy Road. The floor level of the grocery store is shown approximately 40 feet lower than the floor level of the building nearest the intersection of Sugarloaf Mountain Road. Along Keagy Road, the floor elevations drop approximately 15 feet from the first two buildings to the second two buildings to the northeast. The floor elevation drops approximately 3 C 20 feet from the second two building to the single building at the eastern corner of the site. The four buildings facing Keagy Road will have the upper level face Keagy Road, and the lower level face the interior parking lots. A building in the center of the site has a similar design, with the • upper level facing the southwest and the lower level accessed from the large parking lot. The concept plan shows retaining walls around significant portions of the northeast and northwest sides of the site. The petitioner has approached the property owner adjoining to the northeast about a possible slope easement in order to achieve their desired building location. If the slope easement is not utilized, then the large retail store and some of the parking lot may need to be relocated due to differences in proposed grades between the driveway around the store and the adjacent property. In the petitioner's proffer statement, proffer number 5 addresses architectural treatment of large walls. This proffer should be clarified to specifically address retaining wall materials. The loading docks for the proposed grocery store are shown on the concept plan at the northwest side of the building. Staff requests that the petitioner clarify whether the loading area would be screened from view of the residences to the northwest. If not, then a proffer regarding screening of the loading area, or relocation to the southwestern side of the store, is recommended. A storm water detention pond is shown in the northwest end of an existing water course. The proposed level of the detention pond is shown to be much lower than the developed site. Comments received from the City of Roanoke, Department of Planning, Building and Development stressed conformance with all applicable storm water management requirements under Commonwealth of Virginia law. • Other site amenities include several outdoor plazas for pedestrians and seating, landscaped areas, sidewalks connecting all buildings, and anature/walking trail around the property perimeter. Seven of the 12 proffered conditions address building and site architecture. The petitioner wishes to have some flexibility on final building design decisions, but has proffered by both inclusion and prohibition a concept of all building facades being of similar design, with compatible finish materials, similar detailing, and compatible roofline treatments. Typical building elevations and building cross sections were submitted by the petitioner as illustrations of design concepts, but the specific designs are not proffered. Site lighting and signage are also proffered. Fixtures on freestanding poles would be limited to a height of 30 feet. Other lighting proffers address shielding of lights near property lines, and varying scales and design of pedestrian, plaza and landscaping lighting. Monument style freestanding signs are proffered. Some particular sign designs are prohibited, while other sign design concepts are encouraged. Access/Traffic Circulation -Access to the development is proposed via three entrance driveways. One driveway would be a right turn from south bound Rt. 419. Two other driveways would provide access from Keagy Road. The main entrance to the site would be aligned with the eastern most entrance to the Allstate property. This entrance is shown on the proffered site plan as a divided driveway. Vehicles entering the site would proceed into the main parking lot, and would not be allowed to stop and attempt an immediate left turn into the front parking areas. • Smaller parking areas are shown between Keagy Road and the buildings facing the street. Most of the parking is located in the interior of the site, and away from Keagy Road. As is the case with the building floor elevations, the concept plan shows the parking lots at varying elevations. 4 ~. ~. Sidewalks are proposed throughout the interior of the site, to facilitate pedestrian access within • the development. A walking/nature trail is also proposed on the site. The petitioner has initiated discussions with the Virginia Department of Transportation regarding possible improvements to the vertical curve in Keagy Road, where the eastern entrance driveway is proposed. If the roadway could be lowered, site distance at the proposed new entrance would be improved. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) staff commented that the proposed development will significantly increase traffic generation from the property, and that a traffic impact analysis will be necessary to evaluate existing turn lanes and determine lane requirements at the proposed entrances. VDOT staff recommends access from Keagy Road only, citing turning movement problems with the proposed entrance from Rt. 419. VDOT has also commented that additional right of way may be needed for street improvements, and that attention should be given sight distance improvements on Keagy Road at the location of the eastern entrance. The petitioner has contracted with a local consulting firm to perform a traffic impact analysis. The traffic impact analysis will make recommendations to VDOT for improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road. VDOT will then determine the extent of required improvements to the streets. The report is anticipated to be completed prior to the March 2 Planning Commission public hearing. Traffic count and traffic generation information have been supplied by the consultant and are as follows: • AADT 2002 Average Annual Dail ) y Traffic ( Street From To CDT Rt. 419, Electric Rd US 221 Salem limits 36,000 Rt. 685, Keagy Rd Rt. 419 Sugarloaf Mt. Rd 4,100 Sugarloaf Mt. Rd Walton Ln. 1,900 Rt. 692, Sugarloaf Mt. Rd. Keagy Rd. Elbert Dr. 2,700 Projected Development Trips Per the consultant's information, "Based on the projected uses and facility sizes, approximately 1,180 trips are projected to occur during the PM peak hour of adjacent streets. This number represents the total volume of entering and exiting trips projected for all three proposed entrances to the development, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual." The consultants have added that internal trips, or those taken by tenants of buildings in the development to other businesses in the development, may reduce the peak trip projection. The issue of traffic generated from the proposed development, and how to properly serve the traffic is central to the proposed rezoning. The petitioner has initiated a traffic impact analysis, which will produce estimates of where vehicles entering and leaving the site would travel, as well as recommended improvements. Considering that improvements to both Rt. 419 and Keagy Road will be necessary, and considering the VDOT comments mentioned above, staff suggests the petitioner consider proffers regarding the following: • 1) compliance with all VDOT requirements for improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road 2) easements for sight distance from the eastern Keagy Road entrance 3) donation of additional right of way along Keagy Road and Rt. 419 4) restricting access to the site from Rt. 419 to ingress only '~ Fire & Rescue/LJtilities -Fire and Rescue Department staff have commented that access appears • to be good, and that development of the retail site should not produce an extremely high volume of calls. Response would come first from Cave Spring, which is within five miles, and other stations may have to assist. Public water service is available via either an 8-inch water line in Keagy Road, or a 10-inch water line in Rt. 419. Sanitary sewer service is proposed to be extended along Rt. 419, from a point near the intersection of Valley Drive and Keagy Road. Economic Development -Economic Development Department staff strongly support the petition, citing the location adjacent to one of the valley's largest employers, support their staff have heard from citizens and business representatives, and the opportunity for a quality development from national developer. The department hopes the project may be judged by its merits, and realizes that the question of appropriate land use remains central to the discussion. 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan designates the properties Neighborhood Conservation and Transition. With the prof ect being on the border between anticipated future residential land use and anticipated future commercial land use, the petitioner was cautioned by staff to produce a plan that mitigated impacts to the adjoining residential neighborhoods, and was acceptable to the Board of Supervisors as a preferred development option. The petitioner has worked to achieve this goal through proffered architectural designs, and a tiered development plan that places less intensive office uses as a buffer between the retail uses and adjacent homes. The Neighborhood Conservation land use designation is a future land use designation where established single family neighborhoods are delineated and the conservation of the existing development pattern is encouraged. The three properties that are currently zoned Rl fall under the Neighborhood Conservation designation. Two homes are located on three parcels that range in size from 1.1 to 2.6 acres. The development pattern is not a typical suburban residential design, so the debate is not so much conservation of an existing development pattern, but rather should those properties be ultimately redeveloped for single or multi-family residential, or for commercial use. Given the location across from a large office building development and proximity to a signalized intersection, it seems fairly debatable that with a high quality development plan, this property could be better used for commercial development. As mentioned above, staff understands that three of the properties on the petition are designated Neighborhood Conservation, and if the properties are rezoned, the new development must make every effort to mitigate impacts to the neighborhood, and the Board of Supervisors should make a firm commitment not to extend commercial development beyond this point on Keagy Road. The Transition land use designation is a future land use designation that encourages the orderly development of highway frontage parcels. Transition areas generally serve as developed buffers between highways and nearby or adjacent lower intensity development. Intense retail and highway oriented commercial uses are discouraged in transition areas, which are more suitable • for office, institutional and small-scale, coordinated retail uses. Planned office parks, small scale planned and clustered retail uses are encouraged land use types. The proposal conforms with the policies and guidelines of the Transition designation. 6 .~ ~~ The 419 Frontage Development Plan, dated February, 1987, is adopted by reference into the Community Plan. The 419 Plan has goals, design guidelines and implementation strategies to • encourage quality economic development along Rt. 419, and avoid haphazard strip development of the comdor. When approached by the petitioner about possibly rezoning the subject properties, county staff presented the designers with a copy of the 419 Plan to use as a basis for their design standards. The petitioner responded with a plan that proffers clusters of buildings and land uses, extensive architectural design standards, and controlled access leading to and from the signalized intersection of Keagy Road and Rt. 419, as well as providing access from the surrounding neighborhood. The proposal conforms with the overall goals and guidelines of the 419 Plan. The 419 Plan also contains Future Land Use designations that are tied to the Community Plan. In the 419 Plan, the three properties that are currently zoned Rl fall under the Development designation. The Development designation is areas where most new neighborhood development will occur, including large-scale planned developments which mix residential with retail and office uses. Innovative housing design and environmental sensitivity in site development is a key objective. Clustered developments are encouraged as is the use of greenways and bike and pedestrian trails. While the proposed development conforms generally with some of the design concepts of the Development designation, residential development is the prominent feature of the designation. Thus, the same debate over future use of the R1-zoned properties exists whether the property is designated Neighborhood Conservation in the Community Plan, or designated Development in the 419 Plan. • g. STAFF CONCLUSIONS The issues of conformance with the Community Plan, and generation of new vehicle traffic are central to this proposed rezoning. The petitioner has worked to achieve conformance with the Community Plan through proffered architectural designs, and a tiered development plan that places less intensive office uses as a buffer between the retail uses and adj acent homes. The 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan designates the properties Neighborhood Conservation and Transition. The three properties that are currently zoned R1 fall under the Neighborhood Conservation designation. The development pattern is not a typical suburban residential design, so the debate is not so much conservation of an existing development pattern, but rather should those properties be ultimately redeveloped for single or multi-family residential, or for commercial use. Given the location across from a large office building development and proximity to a signalized intersection, it seems fairly debatable that with a high quality development plan, this property could be better used for commercial development. As mentioned above, staff understands that three of the properties on the petition are designated Neighborhood Conservation, and if the properties are rezoned, the new development must make every effort to mitigate impacts to the neighborhood, and the Board of Supervisors should make a firm commitment not to extend commercial development beyond this point on Keagy Road. New traffic would be generated from this proposed development. A traffic impact analysis is underway, and will make recommendations to VDOT for improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road. VDOT will then determine the extent of required improvements to the streets. VDOT has commented on the proposed rezoning, and those comments should be taken into consideration if • the Board of Supervisors accept proffered conditions to rezone the property. Construction of required improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road should also be included in the proffered conditions. 7 w,. • • • If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning, staff recommends the following proffers be added to those submitted and dated February 12, 2004: 1) The developer shall comply with all VDOT requirements for improvements to Rt. 419 and Keagy Road 2) The developer shall provide easements for sight distance from the eastern Keagy Road entrance. 3) The developer shall donate additional right of way along Keagy Road and Rt. 419 as required by VDOT for street improvements. 4) Access to the site from Rt. 419 shall be ingress only. 5) Retaining wall finishes shall be the same as those listed as "Acceptable building finishes" in proffer #7, dated February 12, 2004. 6) The loading area at the northwest side of the proposed grocery store shall be screened with a structural wall with similar finish materials as the adjacent building. CASE NUMBER: 06-03/2004 PREPARED BY: David Holladay HEARING PC: 3/2/04 DATES: BOS: 3/23/04 8 i• ~ LLLL Ke ~~ w ~ pp NjSo __ ~ m ~w "s O ~ N cl C U 1pY U6 U~~ 2 ~ ~ LL h °n< "'~ W W~ ~W W cc 6 ~w > C i d ~~ J ~ i ~ w ~w~-~ ic?J ~ eS§g ¢a''$ ~~ N va¢S~~cg? X oe v~y e dp ~ ~~ p~ m~ ~ U 9 a ~Nr ~obbo ~ j 2 ~~~ O O g F p ~~ ~g~~g~~ ~ OO ~ >~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0 U u~ ~s~e~~ ~ F ~ V( ~ m ---------- moo: ----- ~ -- z_ atF ~ `°[.'ee~a €6;-t .%4 i"apO ' ,~!!' ~ r •' \ r ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \\ ~~. ~~ : Ely j1~ ,~~7j ~ °f _ ,A~ ' ^c _- W ^~^'' W =~ Q ~ z Q J i--• w z W C J _~ _J `y~ .ae C `W i • 8 x ~ m R~ Ufa `~~ i - r^, ' E ` 1~ EC~~: t ~~~@a s ~p~Y~r~~ 6i~ Y5• n_8~e~ E~ ~4°pa ~a 6 c. ~ ~:~ County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning • 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 r - - -- _- :-i LL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) 1~1 Rezoning ^ Special Use ^ Variance Applicants name/address w/zip Kahn Development Company 3321 Forest Drive, S>,iite 11-B Col>,unbia, South Carolina 29204 Owner's name/address w/zip See attached Schedule A • • Property Location Four parcels located along Route 419/ Keagy Road Tax Map No.: 67.18-02-01; 67.18-02-02; ~ ~ a o n7 n2 . ~7 Q1 _(17_(1Li ,.___ c.a_rrrT,.,, n..l<. 1' Vl v..Naa v ~~ Date received: Received by: a3 ~a ~ Application fee: PCL)~date: ~ 1 :7~~~~CW`s Placards issued: BOS date: 3a ~~ Case Number _ 3 ~(~() ^ Waiver ^ Administrative Appeal Phone: ~~(540) 224-8018; FAX (540) 224-8050 ~}~ Maryellen F Goodlatte, Esq. max Attorney for Applicant Phone #: Work: Fax No. #: Magisterial District: Windsor Hills Windsor Hills Community Planning area: ~ See attached 67.18-02-01 (C1) Existing Zoning: f,7.18-02-02. 02-03 and 'I Size of parcel(s): Acres: ~~Cres ~ Existing Land Use: Vacant and residential ~REZO:'1'L-'~'GSPECl~i t-SEPF_R'I1IT_9.'~'Djf'9IIFRAPPLICAV'TS(R/Sl~'4) Proposed Zoning: C2 Proposed Land Use: Mixed tlse (office/retail/and. possible residential) developme t Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes ,X No ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes ~ No ^ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ^ No ^ ~y l%AIZIA.'!'CE, J ;2IJER~1't'~~fD_11I:'1~ISTR.ITI7£_9PPEALAPPIICa~'~'TS(i~%{t~%i_4) i Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/S/W V/AA R/S/W V/AA R/S/W V/AA Consultation 8 I/2" x 1 ]"concept plan Application fee Application Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the ro tty or the owners agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the lrnowledge and consent ~A~T~DE ~ '1' COMPANY of the owner. Rv ~ i ~ 1~4~-,(~~ /~, Owner's Sigrtature .IUS'I`:[F'IC.~'TiON FOR REZONING. SYECL-~i, US>; YL+'KM1~ 2 s~ ... JUSTIFIC.-~"1'I()ti FOR REZI)NING, SPECIAL, t-tiE PERMIT OR Z'VAIVERREQL~EST' • Applicant Kahn Develo ent Com an The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The Cotmty's zoning ordinance recognizes that C2 (General Commercial Districts) are most appropriately found along major arterial thoroughfares which serve large segments of the Cotmty's population. This project, located at the intersection of Rotate 419 and Keagy Road is appropriate for the location. Its mixed use design and nature (office/retail/and possible residential) provides a buffer for the existing residential neighborhoods behind this development. • • Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Mixed use oriented toward Route 419 and Keagy Road promotes the policies contained in the County's Comntmity Plan. The proffered conditions in particular are intended to assure a high quality development which will serve the economic and lifestyle needs of the comRnmity while buffering the existing residential neighborhoods behind. the proposed development. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fue and rescue. No negative impacts are anticipated as a result of the development of this property. Necessary turn lanes off Rotate 419 to provide proper ingress and egress to the facility will be provided. Public sewer will be extended. Improvements to Keagy Road are contemplated. JUSTIFICATIO\' FOR ~'_aRL~~CE REQUEST I 3 ~~ `~ [7 SCHEDULE A COUNTY OF ROANOKE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING & ZONING APPLICATION FOR REZONING Name/Address of Owners Property and Owner Tax Map Number Owner/address Existing Zoning 67.18-02-01 Herbert D. McBride Cl 5105 Greenfield Street, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 • 67.18-02-02 Country East, L.L.C. Rl P. O. Box 4143 Roanoke, Virginia 24015 67.18-02-03 Country East, L.L.C. R1 P. O. Box 4143 Roanoke, Virginia 24015 67.18-02-04 Country East, L.L.C. Rl P. O. Box 4143 Roanoke, Virginia 24015 i• `°~~...~ ~".r • SCHEDULE B COUNTY OF ROANOKE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING & ZONING APPLICATION FOR REZONING Community Planning Area Tax Map Parcel 67.18-02-01 is identified as Transition in the 1998 Comprehensive Development Plan. The other three parcels are identified as Development in the 419 Development Plan and Neighborhood Conservation in the 1998 Comprehensive Development Plan. • b~`.~~ ,.~.zw L;vF., • CONCEPT PL,~u'~r CHEChL1S'T A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building pemut. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan maybe altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minunum: ALL APPLICANTS _ a. Applicant name and name of development b. Date, scale and north arrow c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties • e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties g. All property lines and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional information required for REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers .7 m Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify that all items required in the checklist above are complete. KAHN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Sig-n~uure of applicant Maryellen F. Goodlatte~ its Attorney Date 6 c` ~;-y • Description of 9.8471 Acre Parcel (Tax Parce167.18-2-1) BEGINNING at a concrete right of way monument at the intersection of the westerly right of way of Electric Road (Va. Route 419) and the northerly right of way of Keagy Road (VA Sec. Route 685); thence leaving Electric Road and with the northerly right of way of Keagy Road, S. 20°49' 15" W., 79.64 feet to a concrete right of way monument; thence continuing with said right of way, S. 57°25'43" W., 66.62 feet to a concrete right of way monument; thence continuing with said right of way on a curve to the right whose radius is 954.93 feet, whose length is 124.12 feet, and whose chord is S. 61°36'34" W., 124.03 feet to a concrete right of way monument; thence continuing with said right of way, S. 65°28'00" W., 4.22 feet to a point; thence continuing with said right of way, S. 24°32'00" E., 19.74 feet to a point; thence continuing with said right of way, S. 63°36'48" W., 117.26 feet to a point; thence continuing with said right of way, S. 60°31'48" W., 302.30 feet to a point; thence leaving the right of way of Keagy Road and with the property of Annie M. Hall (DB 400, Pg. 142), N. 30°06'12" W., 226.70 feet to a point; thence continuing with the property of Annie M. Hall, N. 34°35'12" W., 129.30 feet to a point; thence continuing with the property of Annie M. Hall, N. 45°09' 12" W., 269.81 feet to a point, an iron pin found bears S. 34°55'01"W., 0.41 feet from the corner; thence leaving the property of Annie M. Hall and with the property of Edward B. Via (WB 48, Pg. 1100), N. 34°55'01" E., 458.49 feet to an iron pin found; thence continuing with the property of Edward B. Via, S. 54°13'12" E., 433.83 feet to an iron pin found; • thence continuing with the property of Edward B. Via, S. 82°O1' 12" E., 272.80 feet to an iron pin found in the westerly right of way of Electric Road; thence leaving the Via property and with the right of way of Electric Road on a curve to the left whose radius is 1,712.02 feet, whose length is 194.46 feet, and whose chord is S. 15°18'01" E., 194.35 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 9.8471 acres, being all of the property conveyed to Otis H. and Mary N. McBride in DB 427, Pg. 267 as recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke and being as shown on Boundary Survey for Kahn Development Company by Caldwell White Associates dated 18 Nov. 2003. Description of 2.634 Acre Parcel (Tax Parcel 67.18-2-2) BEGINNING at an iron pin found at the southeast corner of the property of Annie M. Hall (DB 400, Pg. 142), and being on the line of the property of Jean W. Stultz, Michael B. Wertz, and Heather E. Wertz (DB 1613, Pg. 1509) and the northerly right of way of Keagy Road; Thence leaving the right of way of Keagy Road and with the property of Stultz and Wertz, N. 29° 51'20" W., 291.37 feet to a point; Thence continuing with the Stultz and Wertz property N. 45° 09' 25" W., 228.39 feet to a point, an iron pin found bears N. 39° 48' 35" W., 1.94 feet from the corner; Thence leaving the Stultz and Wertz property and with the property of Edward B. Via (WB 48, Pg. 1100) N. 34° 55' Ol" E., • passing an iron pin found at 200.53 feet, for a total distance of 200.94 feet to a point; Thence leaving the Via property and with the property of Herbert D. McBride (WB 57, .., '~ • Pg. 18) S. 45° 09' 12" E., 269.81 feet to a point; Thence continuing with the McBride property S. 34° 35' 12" E., 129.30 feet to a point; Thence continuing with the McBride property S. 30° 06' 12" E., 226.70 feet to a point in the northerly right of way of Keagy Road; Thence leaving the McBride property and with the right of way of Keagy Road, S. 65° 19' 09" W., 205.17 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 2.634 acres, and being all of the property conveyed to Annie M. Hall in DB 400, Pg. 142 recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, and being shown on Boundary Survey for Country East LLC, dated 18 November 2003 by Caldwell White Associates. Description of 1.116 Acre Parcel (Tax Parce167.18-2-3) Starting at a point in Keagy Road, said point being the southwest corner of Parcel I of the property conveyed to Jean W. Stultz, Michael B. Wertz, and Heather E. Wertz (DB 1613, Pg 1509), Thence leaving Keagy Road and with the property of Earle C. and Marcelene Atkins (DB 806 Pg. 579) and Quit Claim DB 892 Pg. 242), S. 28° 39' 25" E. 295.16 feet to a point, the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, an iron pin found bears N. 76° 41' 11" E. 0.90 feet from the corner; Thence with the property of Atkins and Curtis D. & Ethel V. Peters (DB 844 Pg. 61), N. 60° 36' 39" W., passing and iron pin found at 56.70, for a total of 100.92 feet to an iron pin found; Thence leaving the Peters property and with the • property of The Mounfield Family Limited Partnership (DB 1553 Pg. 1691) N. 34° 29' 20" E. 60.06 feet to an iron pin found; Thence leaving the Mounfield property and with the property of Edward B. Via (WB 48 Pg. 1100), N. 34° 55'01" E. 257.23 feet to a point, an iron pin found bears N. 39°48'35" W. 1.94 feet from the corner; Thence leaving the Via property and with the property of Annie M. Hall (DB 400 Pg. 142), S. 45°09'25" E. 228.39 feet to a point; Thence leaving the Hall property and with the northerly line of Parcel I of the Stultz and Wertz property, S. 59°44'35" W 295.51 feet to the True Point of Beginning, containing 1.1159 acres, being all of Parcel II conveyed to Jean W. Stultz, Michael B. Wertz, and Heather E. Wertz in DB 1613 Pg. 1509 as recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, and being as shown on Boundary Survey for Country East LLC by Caldwell White Associates dated 18 November 2003. Description of 2.0516 Acre Parcel (Tax Parcel 67.18-2-4) BEGINNING at a point in Keagy Road, said point being the southwest corner of Parcel I of the property conveyed to Jean W. Stultz, Michael B. Wertz, and Heather E. Wertz (DB 1613, Pg 1509), Thence leaving Keagy Road and with the property of Earle C. and Marcelene Atkins (DB 806 Pg. 579) and Quit Claim DB 892 Pg. 242), S. 28° 39' 25" E. 295.16 feet to a point, an iron pin found bears N. 76° 41' 11" E. 0.90 feet from the • corner; Thence leaving the Atkins property and with the southerly line of Parcel II of the property of Jean W. Stultz, Michael B. Wertz and Heather E. Wertz (DB 1613 Pg. 1509), ~ ....~ • N. 59° 44' 35" E. 295.51 feet to a point; Thence leaving the aforesaid Parcel II and with the westerly line of the property of Annie M. Hall (DB 400 Pg. 142), S. 29° 51' 20" E., passing an iron pin found at 291.37 feet, for a total of 303.48 feet to a point in Keagy Road; Thence with Keagy Road S. 61° 20' 35" W. 301.74 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 2.0516 acres, being all of Parcel I conveyed to Jean W. Stultz, Michael B. Wertz, and Heather E. Wertz in DB 1613 Pg. 1509 as recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, and being as shown on Boundary Survey for Country East LLC by Caldwell White Associates dated 18 November 2003. • • ~.e ... AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 15.7- ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT ROUTE 419 NEAR ITS INTERSECTION WITH KEAGY ROAD (TAX MAP NOS. 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 AND R-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF KAHN DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 24, 2004, and the second reading and public hearing were continued from March 23, 2004 and held April 27, 2004; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 2, 2004; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 15.7 acres, as described herein, and located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road (Tax Map Numbers 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C- 1, Office District and R-1, Low Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District with conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Kahn Development. 1 ~~~ 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing conditions attached hereto as Exhibit A which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Tax Parcel No. 67.18-2-1 containing 9.8471 acres - C-1 to C-2 Tax Parcel No. 67.18-2-2 containing 2.634 acres - R-1 to C-2 Tax Parcel No. 67.18-2-3 containing 1.116 acre - R-1 to C-2 Tax Parcel No. 67.18-2-4 containing 2.0516 acres - R-1 t C-2 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 2 EXHIBIT A ~„ PROFFERED CONDITIONS KEAGY VILLAGE March 2, 2004 1. Concept Plan: a. The property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan dated January 22, 2004, revised February 26, 2004, made by DMR Architecture, P.L.L.C., subject to those changes that are required by the County during comprehensive site plan review and subject to petitioner's right to relocate or reconfigure the buildings, service areas and parking layouts shown on the concept plan. Building relocation, however, shall not change the overall concept of retail and commercial uses oriented toward Route 419 and Keagy Road, and office or residential uses buffering the retail and commercial uses from the adjacent residential properties along Keagy Road. The entire site will include sidewalks connecting all buildings to encourage pedestrian connectivity between all uses and parking areas. b. A nature/walking trail shall be incorporated into the design of the center. It is anticipated that the trail will be located along the edge of the property, where possible, and will provide walking opportunities for users of Keagy Village as well as neighbors by connecting to on-site sidewalks and street crosswalks. c. Any building constructed along the western boundary of the property (adjoining tax map parcel number 67.18-2-5, the home of Mr. and Mrs. Atkins) shall be no more than one story high and shall contain only office uses. Screening (which shall consist of plantings and a stained wooden fence starting approximately 50' from Keagy Road) shall be installed within a 30' buffer on the developer's property along said line substantially as set out in a conceptual landscape plan dated February 23, 2004 made by the Land Plan Group. Said landscape buffer shall be in place no later than the time the parking lot and/or office building adjacent to the 30' buffer strip is completed. A decorative brick column shall be placed at the end of the fence closest to Keagy Road. 2. All buildings shall be designed to be compatible with one another. All facades of buildings shall be of similar design, compatible materials and similar detailing. 3. Plazas, hadscape, landscaped areas and site amenities shall also be compatible to the established building character and shall include outdoor seating areas, varied paving materials to add contrast and texture, and decorative containers with seasonal landscape. Restaurant tenants will be encouraged to provide outdoor dining areas with tables, chairs and umbrellas. ~~ 4. Roofline treatment shall be of compatible design on all buildings. 5. Single, large building masses without articulated facades shall not be permitted. Large building walls shall be required to incorporate multidimensional design features, such as, changes in plane, canopies, awnings, dimensional signage, windows, doors, facias, arcades, and changes in texture, material and color or vary in height to add interest. Retaining walls shall be subject to proffers 7 and 8 relating to construction materials or be composed of textured keystone blocks. 6. Required screening of service and trash areas shall be with finish materials compatible with the adjacent building. The loading area at the northwest side of the proposed grocery store shall be screened with a freestanding wall with similar finish as the adjacent building. 7. Acceptable building finishes include: a. brick b. wood, vinyl or composite wood substitute lap siding and trim c. glass, with clear glass required in retail storefronts d. stucco or exterior insulated finish system (EIFS) e. stone face colored concrete block f. stone or cast stone g. standing seam metal, copper, composite slate file or asphalt shingle roof 8. The following building finishes are prohibited: a. unpainted or bare metal panels b. 4 x 8 plywood or composite panels c. bare exposed concrete that is not exposed aggregate, hammered, sandblasted or covered with acement-based acrylic coating d. unfinished wood other than cedar, mahogany, teak or redwood. 9. Site Lighting: a. All lighting near the property lines shall be shielded "cut off' types to internalize illumination and avoid spillover to adjacent sites and public roads. b. Sidewalks shall be illuminated with decorative pedestrian-scaled pole or building mounted luminaries. c. Plazas may be illuminated similar to sidewalks but may include additional feature lighting for attractions and outdoor dining. e. Landscape lighting may be employed to enhance site entrance and feature areas. f. No exposed neon or fluorescent lighting shall be permitted. g. The maximum height of freestanding light fixtures shall be 30 feet. 2 . µ M~~ 10. Site Signage: a. Off.premises signs (billboards) shall not be allowed on the property. b. The main freestanding multi-sided project identification sign shall be at the corner of Keagy Road and Route 419 and shall be monument style utilizing materials approved as acceptable building materials and shall not exceed 25 feet in height. c. Minor freestanding entrance signs shall be multi-sided monument style and shall not exceed 10 feet in height. d. Tenant signage visible to off-site shall be encouraged to be creative in order to add interest and texture and, in addition to letters, may include logos and images. Projecting blade signs and projecting three-dimensional signs are also encouraged. Box signs, exposed raceways and exposed neon are prohibited. Signage maybe internally or externally illuminated. 11. Non-specialty drive-in or fast food restaurants and gasoline stations shall not be permitted. Establishments primarily serving specialty foods (such as coffee, baked goods, e.g.) with drive-through windows are not included within this prohibition but would require a special use permit in accordance with the requirements of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Drive-through windows are not permitted directly facing the street unless they are completely screened. 12. The Concept plan indicates offices uses buffering the retail uses from the adjacent residential properties along Keagy Road. Residential use may be substituted for up to 50% of the office square footage as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Except as set out in 1(c) above, buildings labeled on the concept plan solely as "office" shall be used only for office or residential purposes. Building configurations, building heights, number of buildings and parking layouts may vary to accommodate the residential substitution. 13. The developer shall comply with all VDOT requirements for improvements to adjoining Route -419 and Keagy Road including any required easements for sight distance as well as the donation of any additional right-of--way along Keagy Road and Route 419. KAHN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY By: ~_ .----'.~ T dd J. Walter ice President /Development e 3 i• i• i• ~~- ~ w ~.-, _ H~ - -1 rr hF -~ ~ ~ A ~ U ~ `v, ~ V ' 1~ `I _ u ~ L O ~ ~ ~ ~ e -' I 1 ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ / J 1 ~ M W 1 ~ TTT~~~- vv '~ f ~ - ~~ J ~ ~~\/\J~~' m _ ~ aE ~` C `;~ ~ ~ ~ " 'f / o ~U ~T~ ""' Y \ ~ z ~y~ F 1 '~ 1 ~~ • _ _Keagy___Road _ _ .~_ _... __. .. . a . . ~` Y,v,, ~ ~ A ~t h ` ArvvE hrscE 1 ~ NY •• : ...., Level _T_wo Ret_a_i_I _ (Office Similar) ~-= ~~ Level One Retail (Office Similar) Parking Lot h+r+.wr~1a~-.:.-: I a~IvE .use .. - -.-.-. .. ,, .. ~ i--- ~ I Two Level Typical Retail Building Cross Section (Office Building Cross Section similar) i• Typical Retail Building Side Elevation at Entry Drive (Office Building Elevation similar) • DMR • ArcDiteuure Mpttlf Plpnninp G rap D.c DesipD I nta rrpr Dps•pn DN11 Ar e~rr~Ltec~ PLLC KEAGY VILLAGE Roa~oke ~ ,9,~ a 'i~ c e F f E E ' aoas eas One Level Typical Retail Building Elevation Facing f~eagv Road (Office Building Elevation similar) • ra.~n• :.r - KF1~rf V I LL?G~ . Two Level Typical Retail Building Elevation Facing Parking Lot (Office Building Elevation similar) -fE~ '' :. i '~%. ~~'- V .4... EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS ~~~~.} CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ~y> "" "rr r~ai u i Development Zoning C1C 4'~ 1 ~~ ti Existing Zoning C> ~o 2. .~®~ 9. Ex~ing Zo~ing R 1 ~a :f PJ 37 11. il. :a:e ~ 4• Leo ,~v~ 3. 5~ 7. ~v`8. 8. _ o~ _ ~ a. C- OY? -a •C'.6 .rb~ SSJI P 10. 12. ~ 't 8. 13- l~ ~ DN ~c~ ~~~ ,aa~ e 10. 14. :u~ 5~ O 0 I8. ~ ~g95 9• ~J~l 550 18. E8. L7. ®~o~ 26. Sa;e $~° 18. ~o ,aoa %zz bQ4 24. s: u 19. ~• 27.1 ups >.o. - ;~rr Er:z 18. 22. N 4 ~0 '-nr s~rr; c.o. 33. 20. ~, 27. ~;r G^15 .~;s 32. ~1 28. 15. ~. Oi'l l !~• ~ C ~ tO:.Y 7. 19. n n ~, s. B. 4. ROANOKE COUNTY Applicants name: Kahn Development Company DEPARTMENT OF Proposed Zoning: C-2 Existing Zoning: C1 and R 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tax Map No. 67.18-2-1,2,3,4 f aawaw~r zsalz`ndt ~~ wwzerwc a HqG J• HMO 8i ^RS IW ••i'VI Y•J oo-ll ~~~~~~ u61•• p ~eli•{ul u61••p e1Vd•ip •, luu•Id ~•1•eA • n{e•{IV•~Y ~~Q lloo-low•a•Q••H~r~ mll-a • aoss-aoc toss) mi • oo-c-auc (ore) L1O-8 ~ 'a7ONY0a ' 0980 SOH 'O'i ' 1•M 'a[Ilm~~ a6OY®f CO8- BiiHKNYId / 61I0]CaAHIl6 / 61Ia3NIflN8i s~s~~oss~ ~six~zz~a~~ ~~~~ 'dIN10211A 'Jl1Nf100 3NONt1021 ~~ dd0a Jl9d3N P~~ /4~b021 012110C3~13~3/1b'f11\15,~ '~ Nb'~d ONINOZ32! ~b'1N3W3~ddf1S a ~} ~ ~ '~ \ ~ J ats~~al ~` ~ ~ ~ ' ' - \ `~ / S~4 ~ ~c - '/ / . / / /~ /'~ yp /. -- - --,--__ - ~ 11 ,- o i r- ~ ~~ i i ~ / /~ I ~ / r `JI~_ _ ' s i ~ _ ~• ~~ _.J I I I \ \ ~ -~ ~' ) I ~~ I \ ~ it .~~ - ___---~ 1 V \ ` ~ - ~ \ - .Isar ^ ~- I `fi ACTION NO. A-042704-8 ITEM NO. S-5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 27, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of an ordinance to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill tl, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Janet Scheid Chief Planner Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATQR'S COMMENTS SUMMARY OF INFORMATIQN: This time has been set aside for a public hearing on the second reading of an ordinance to rezone 17.01 acres of R-3 property, 8.03 acres of C-1 property and 4.92 of C-2 conditional property to C-2, General Commercial for an office/retail mixed use commercial development. The parcels have several Future Land Use Designations as outlined in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan for this site. The parcels closer to Electric Road with a C-1 zoning are designated as Core. The R-3 parcels and C-2 conditional parcels are designated as Development. Without additional information that planning staff and VDOT is requiring, planning staff will not support the proposed re- zoning. } l V TE: Supervisor Wray motion to refer the matter to staff for a period of 30 days for further review Motion Approved Yes No Absent Mr. McNamara ® ^ ^ Mr. Church ® ^ ^ Mr. Wray ® ^ ^ Mr. Altizer ® ^ ^ Mr. Flora ® ^ ^ cc: File 2 ~~ __ r~R, PETITIONER: Slate Hill CASE NUMBER: 7-3/2004 Planning Commission Hearing Date: April 6, 2004 (Continued from March 2, 2004) Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: April 27, 2004 (Continued from March 23, 2004) A. REQUEST The petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC, to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Several citizens spoke against the proposed rezoning. They had concerns about the unknown uses, the tree removal and grading, possible storm water runoff concerns, the appearance of the buildings, traffic congestion and access. Several representatives from the Sierra Club spoke against the project. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. John Murphy presented the staff report. Ed Natt represented the petitioner. The Commissioners had significant concerns about the unknown uses, appearance of the buildings, and storm water management. There were specific concerns expressed by several commissioners about VDOT's response to the traffic study. The commissioners discussed the size of buildings, the amount of parking, and the grading of the site. There was discussion between the Commissioners and Mr. Natt about the development of the site with the existing zoning. The commissioners repeatedly attempted to have the petitioner clarify the uses and provide more information about the project. D. PROFFERS 1. The C-2 uses set forth on the attached Exhibit A would be prohibited. 2. The square footage of any building located on the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. 3. No building will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. 4. The roads shall be in the approximate located as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant permission to construct a portion of the road on the VDOT property as shown on said plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. Structures constructed in Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in appearance, materials and design, but will be subject to requirements of specific users. ~,.. ~~~ ~N~ E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. McNeil made a motion to make a negative recommendation on the rezoning. The motion carried 4-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Janet Scheid, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission PROFFERS Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's/Owner's Name 4486 Summit Street Roanoke, VA 24014 077.20-01-03 077.20-01-04 077.20-01-52 077.20-01-54 077.20-01-55 087.08-03-11 SLATE HILL I, LLC SLATE HILL II, LLC WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC PROFFERS S ° ~J The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The C-2 uses set forth on the attached Exhibit A would prohibited. 2. The square footage of any building located on the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. 3. No building will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. 4. The roads shall be in the approximate located as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant permission to construct a portion of the road on the VDOT property as shown on said plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. Structures constructed in Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in appearance, materials and design, but will be subject to requirements of specific users. \\JOLLY\SYS\USERS\CBaumgardnerlZONING\Slate Hill PROFFERS.doc Page 1 of 2 April 13, 2004 ~~ Applicant/Owner: SLATE HILL I, LLC BY ~~ ITS ,i - SLATE HILL II, LLC BY /,/~~ ITSJ~,ct,,,~- WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC BY~~~~ ITS ,~~.... , ___ \\JOLLY\SYS\USERS\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Slate Hill PROFFERS.doc Page 2 of 2 April 13, 2004 Exhibit A ~~`~ " ~ : - ~.. x r Slate Hill Proffered-Out Uses PERMITTED USES IN C-2 DISTRICT ~ 1. Residential Uses Accessory Apartment Home Occupation, Type I Multi-Family Dwelling Two-Family Dwelling 2. Civic Uses Park and Ride Facility Post Office Public Parks and Recreation Areas Utility Services, Minor 3. Office Uses None 4. Commercial Uses Agricultural Services Bed and Breakfast Boarding House Commercial Outdoor Entertainment Gasoline Station Pawn Shop Commercial Indoor Sports & Recreation Commercial Outdoor Sports & Recreation 5. Industrial Uses Recycling Centers and Stations 6. Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower Parking Facility \WOLLY\SYS\USERS\CBaumgardnerlZONING\Slate Hill-USES-C2.doc Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A Slate Hill Proffered-Out Uses Special Use Permit 1. Civic Uses Halfway House Religious Assembly Utility Services, Major 2. Commercial Uses Automobile Dealership, Used Automobile Repair Services, Major Car Wash Convenience Store Dance Hall Equipment Sales and Rentals Manufactured Home Sales Mini-Warehouse Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service Surplus Sales Truck Stop 3. Industrial Uses Custom Manufacturing Landfill, Rubble Transportation Terminal 4. Miscellaneous Uses Outdoor Gatherings \\JOLLY\SYS\USERS\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Slate Hill-USES-C2.doc Page 2 of 2 Mar 30 04 10:45a RIFE 8~ WOOD RRCHITECTS 1(540] 344-5982 P•3 I 6~~ G ~ ~ G Jc-oo b K O b . O ~ ~~~ ~ s~. 6 L+ {~ E E Y ~ C. _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ eb O. /e~ ~~a ~`9~ ~`/® s ~~ o ~~ r ~.~ ._ ~~' ~ir+ ~ I 1 S ~ 5 ~ ~ .n ~ y 1 +,d 8 1 0 D T L 60 ' d 1FJ101 ~~ ~~. ~+ ;~ .r o ~'' . ~' ~ 1 ` ~ ` u •~ '~ '"1` ~O~ ~~' mN. ~ ~r a ~^ ~ J t _ `~ _ o ~.~±t- _4 ~, ;~ .-•. h+~ `` s d .'., QI f~'1 Al ~` \` ~ *_ ` ` ~'.`: ```~ `l ~~ ~~ ~~• ~`;` `~ 0 ~o~ A ~ ~, a ~ i v ~.~ 1 1 1 I y 1!~ 1 1 1 ~ r r ' ~` ~ ~I ty o ~7 '. P ~~ 0 i ~ ,. J ~ 1 ~ ~' L` _~~ 60i60'd ti960bLL0bSZ 11dN NdWd~~I~ld 1QflOHa3150 bT:tiT b00Z-T6-~Idti ' w,r • Memo To: Roanoke County Planning Commission Fmm: John Murphy, Associate Planner Date: March 31, 2004 Re: Slate Hill Rezoning Request On March 3, 2004, the Slate Hill rezoning request was continued for 30 days, to allow the applicant time to complete the VDOT required traffic study and analysis and to develop a set of proffers that planning staff was strongly encouraging. Staffs original request was fora 60 day continuance to allow county staff and VDOT sufficient time to review and comment on the traffic analysis. At the public hearing the applicant assured the planning commission that this could be accomplished in 30 days. • The applicant provided a copy of the traffic study and analysis to planning staff at close of business on March 29, 2004. At this time staff has not adequately reviewed the traffic study and has not received comments from the Virginia Department of Transportation. Staff has discussed proffers with the petitioner's attorney but has not received any written proffers. • ' STAFF REPORT , Petitioner: Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC and Woodcliff Investments, LLC • Request: This is a request to unconditionally rezone a total of 29.98 acres of C-2 conditional, R-3, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential, and C-1, Office District to C-2, General Commercial for retail and office use. Location: The subject parcels are located on the hillside generally between the 4200 block of Electric Road and Valley Avenue adjacent to the Lowe's Home Improvement Store. Magisterial District: Cave Spring Proffered Conditions: None. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request to unconditionally rezone 17.01 acres of R-3 property, 8.03 acres of C-1 property and 4.92 of C-2 conditional property to C-2, General Commercial for an office/retail mixed use commercial development. The parcels have several Future Land Use Designations as outlined in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan for this site. The parcels closer to Electric Road with a C-1 zoning are designated as Core. The R-3 parcels and C-2 conditional parcels are designated as Development. Without additional information that planning staff and VDOT is requiring, planning staff will not support the proposed rezoning. • 1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Site plan review shall be required. VDOT review and entrance approval shall be required. A traffic analysis and study will be required by VDOT to determine access and impacts on Electric Road and Franklin Road and adjoining streets and intersections. C-2, General Commercial, allows many uses including retail sales and office uses. Fast-food restaurant uses will require a Special Use Permit if developed on out parcels within a shopping center. The conditions from the C-2 conditional zoning proposed to be rezoned to C-2 relate to the development of the Lowe's Home Improvement Center. Specifically the conditions require the garden center to be on the northern side of the property, an out parcel will require a Special Use Permit when developed, existing vegetation adjacent to Quail Valley Condominiums will remain and adequate access to houses on Washington Road will be maintained. 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS • Background -The developers have been acquiring the subject parcels and several adjoining parcels for over three years. Many of the adjoining parcels fronting on Electric Road already have a C-2, General Commercial zoning in place. During the grading plan submittal phase of the site development in early ,~. ~M.rv .... 1 ... ~, , ~~tr rY ' December 2003, the developers indicated that they had the appropriate zonings they needed to develop their project. At that time comments were presented to Community Development staff indicating an interest in an office park complex with some elderly housing facilities. Based on that information a grading permit • was issued on January 20, 2004. The entrance to the site from Electric Road is only approved by VDOT as a temporary construction entrance. On January 23, 2004, the applicant filed a rezoning request for an office and retail campus on the subject parcels and several adjoining parcels. The application includes a concept plan that shows the proposed private road curving through the site beginning at the former Woodmaster's site in the 4200 block of Electric Road and terminating near the cul-de-sac on Valley Avenue below the Lowe's property. TopographyNegetation -The collective total of all parcels subject to rezoning have a thick mature growth of trees and significant slopes. Some of the lower parcels on the Electric Road and Franklin Road sides were once the site of the McNeil Roofing business years ago, prior to a fire. These parcels are already zoned C-2. West of the former McNeil site, or higher up the slopes, are the C-1 parcels owned by Woodcliff Investments, LLC. The R-3 zoned parcels are situated further to the south, generally behind the self storage facility. These slopes are very steep and showing some signs of erosion. These R-3 parcels are owned by Slate Hill II, LLC. The final area subject to rezoning is the Slate Hill I, LLC property that is immediately adjacent to the access driveway into the Lowe's facility and directly north of the Lowe's Garden Center. This area has significant slopes and there has been evidence of past erosion and sloughing of the hillside. Slope map information generated by Roanoke County Community Development Department indicates a large percentage of the R-3 area has slopes in excess of 33 percent. In addition, a significant portion of the C-1 zoned area has slopes in excess of 33 percent. Due to the steep slopes and this location being a gateway to Roanoke County it is critical to insure that if the site is going to be developed, it should be done in a site sensitive design and aesthetically pleasing fashion. The applicant has indicated that • retaining walls will be required for this project. These would need to be evaluated to insure slope retention and to indicate the actual area that could potentially be developed. The location and design of these walls could negatively impact adjoining properties below the developed site. Surrounding Neighborhood -The general vicinity from Elmview Road, across from Tanglewood Mall, east to Franklin Road has generally been identified as the Slate Hill neighborhood. There are several homes and small churches on Elmview Road that border the subject site. Roanoke County has a water tank on a parcel above the Elm Park Estates Retirement Community. The properties on Elmview Road are zoned R- 3, Medium Density Multi Family District. The commercial properties on Electric Road are zoned C-2, General Commercial. The adjacent and frontage parcels on Franklin Road are zoned C-2. The Lowe's property is also zoned C-2 conditional. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site LayoutlArchitecture -The plan that has been submitted with the application is conceptual, and has not been proffered. No specific information has been supplied related to the size of buildings, site plans, architectural features, retaining wall locations, storm water management or specific uses owners or tenants. Staff has requested this information on several occasions without success. This location is a significant gateway into Roanoke County along the Route 220 Expressway and Electric Road and Business Franklin • Road from Roanoke City. The site is as visible to Roanoke City residents as it is to Roanoke County residents and all traveling through the Roanoke Valley on the Route 220 Expressway. Without a proffered plan showing the types and appearances of any buildings, the site may potentially be a big box or a series 2 ~,,,.,' of small office/retail spaces. ~' • AccesslTraffic Circulation - A traffic impact assessment meeting was held at the Virginia Department of Transportation Office in Salem on February 19, 2004, to address access impacts from the proposed development on Electric Road and Franklin Road. Roanoke County staff, VDOT staff, the applicant and their traffic consultant were present. VDOT is requiring a traffic analysis and study based on this proposal. The traffic consultant will need a minimum of 45 days to complete the study. Once completed the information will require extensive review by Roanoke County staff and VDOT personnel. Without this critical information neither VDOT nor Roanoke County staff can safely evaluate the impacts on already congested stretches of Electric Road and Franklin Road. Preliminary Roanoke County Police Department data on reported traffic accidents show that Electric Road, in this section in the Tanglewood Mall area, is the primary location for traffic accidents in Roanoke County since 2000. For calendar year 2002, 49% of all accidents on Electric Road occurred in this stretch of road. With this type of preliminary data staff is recommending that the Planning Commission continue the petition until the required information is supplied by the applicant and County and VDOT staff have had sufficient time to review the information and respond to the applicant's traffic consultant. Fire & Rescue/Utilities -Fire and Rescue services will be provided by Cave Spring and Clearbrook Fire and Rescue. Fire and rescue comments following their review of the proposed concept plan indicates concerns about the extreme traffic congestion at both proposed ingress /egress points presently and in the future. They do not anticipate an extreme increase in the number of rescue or fire calls generated from this proposal. Public water and sewer are not currently available to the subject site. Both public water and sewer, of adequate capacity, may be provided by extensions of public facilities. • 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The current C-1 zoned parcels are designated as Core in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. Core is the future land use area where high intensity urban development is encouraged. Core areas may also be appropriate for larger scale highway oriented retail uses and regionally based shopping facilities. Planned shopping centers and clustered retail uses are encouraged. The centers should incorporate greenways, bike and pedestrian trails into their design and link them to surrounding neighborhoods. The site is not designated as an Economic Opportunity Area in the Community Plan. The C-2 conditional area of the site and the R-3 zoned area are designated as Development. Development is the future land use area where most new neighborhood development will occur, including large scale planned developments which mix residential with retail and office uses. Environmental sensitivity in site development is a key objective. This designation also encourages greenways and bike and pedestrian trails. The primary objective of the Development designation is for residential development with a maximum limit set on the retail land. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS The petition that has been submitted refers to a "planned campus" and "carefully planned road system which uses existing traffic patterns and traffic lights." Planning staff does not see the proposed rezoning as either of these. With a C-2 rezoning, without any proffered conditions, this property may be developed from an office/retail complex to several big boxes without any County input on the design features, location of stormwater facilities and ingress/egress for the entire 29.98 acre site. The same reasons the developers • wishes to rezone the property for development the high traffic counts, the high visibility from two major highways, the development along a ridgeline, are the same reasons Roanoke County must insure that safe access to and from the site as well as safe traffic movements on adjoining highways and intersections is 3 • • • .~ provided. Due to the critical slopes involved with the property, with a substantial portion of the grades over 33%, it is imperative to insure that the development of the property is done in a fashion to protect the adjoining parcels and water courses below the subject property. The location is a gateway to Roanoke County from multiple directions and highly visible from traveling motorists through the Roanoke Valley. Planning staff will require that the traffic analysis and study be completed and reviewed by County staff and VDOT. Planning staff does not support this petition and recommends that the petition be continued until such time as all necessary information is provided to fairly and completely analyze the petition. CASE NUMBER: PREPARED BY: HEARING DATES: # 7.312004 J. Murphy PC: March 2, 2004 BOS: March 23, 2004 4 } =e,. ~~ ~~ ~~ • .,~' ~~~ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Philip Shucet PO BOX 3071 COMMISSIONER SALEM, 24153-5127 March 12, 2004 Mr. Hunter Smith 4415 Pheasant Ridge Rd. SW Suite 303 Roanoke, VA 24014 Subject: Slate Hill Development Route 220, Roanoke County Dear Mr. Smith, JEFF ECHOES RESIDENT ENGINEE This is in reference to the proposed grading and erosion & sediment control plan for this • development. The traffic impact study update for the commercial development on Franklin Road for Lowe's and others in 1998 commented that " ... consideration should be given to widening Franklin Road " (Route 220) in this area " ... to provide for three thru lanes in each direction". The recently updated ion;-range transportation plan (2025) for the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization shows this section of Route 220 on the financially constrained list with a recommended improvement to 6 lanes. Improvements to Route 220 from the current four lane divided roadway to a six lane divided highway would involve needing most of the existing limited access right of way along this section of Route 220. The improvements could also include the interchange with Route 419, the ramps and the median. The grading plan for the Slate Hill proposal shows the placement of fill within the existing limited access right of way. This proposed grading would impact the ability to make improvements to this section of Route 220. The proposed fill is also shown to come to the top of the existing rectangular drainage channel along the southbound on ramp. The integrity of this channel is a concern with the amount of fill shown. Therefore, the proposed plan has a major impact on future improvements to this section of Route 220 and is not acceptable as presented. VDOT would be willing to review and give possible consideration to a proposal that has much less impact to the limited access right way of way. C7 ~..;~._ ~.: TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 714 SOUTN BROAD ST. FAX (540)397.5407 "°~ ..,. ;. .~~~' • Page 2 Hunter Smith Letter March 12, 2004 I am available to meet on items for this development. Please advise if additional information is needed. Sincerely, ~J 1 ~ ~ ~ i /~' ~~ ~ ~~ '/ % Jeff Echols, P.E. • Resident Engineer Cc: The Honorable Brandon Bell The Honorable Onzlee Ware Mr. Dana Martin Mr. Elmer Hodge Mr. Fred Altizer, Jr. , P.E. :"~. ' ~ ._.. - 1 ~, t , - ~~t i ~i ~ ;~:. . ~1 ,!,°- ! ~ • • r~ County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 For Staff Use Onl ~""`°° "~~ Date received: Received by: Application fee: I PCBZA date: Placards issued: ~ BOS date: Case Number ALL APPLICANTS _ Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Rezoning ^ Special Use ^ Variance ^ Waiver ^ Administrative Appeal Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: 540/772-5090 Slate Hill I, LLC , Slate Hill II, LLC, Woodcliff Investments, LLC Work: 540/772-5090 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Cell #: 540/874-5755 Roanoke, VA 24014 Fax No.: 540/772-0106 Owner's name/address w/zip Phone #: (same as Applicant's information) Work: Fax No. #: Property Location Magisterial District: Cave Spring 4486 Summit Street Roanoke, VA 24014 Community Planning area: Cave Spring Tax Map No.os7.os-o3-11.00-0000, 077.20-01-52, Existing Zoning: C2C, C1, R3 077.20-01-54, 077.20-01-04, 077.20-01-55, 077.20-01-03 Size of parcel(s): Acres: C-2C to C-2: 4.92907 Existing Land Use: Vacant C-1 to C-2: 8.0377 R-3 to C-2: 17.01791 TOTAL ACRES: 29.98468 REZONINGSPECL4L USEPERMITAIVD WAIVER APPLICANTS (R/S/V~ Proposed Zoning: C2 Proposed Land Use: Retail and Office Use Does the parcel meet the m;n;mum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes X No ^ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the pazcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes X No D IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIItED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes D No ^ VARL4NCE, WAIVER AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL APPLICANTS (Y/WlAA) ;, Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to • Is the appltcatton complete'[ r1C8Se cneclc u enaosea nrrr.an uvi. ~'~ 1LL 1~ V 1 DG Al.l.a.a a a:v ,. rv. a v.' ...uv" ... ~...... ~.._....__...._.. _ __ _ _.. _ _. __ __ _ _ 1t/S/W V/AA R/S/W V/AA R/S/W V/AA ~ Coreuhation ® 8 12" x 11" concept plan ® Application fee Application Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable Justification Water and sewer applicazion Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. / .Q. Owner's Signature 2 .. 3USTIFICATION FOR REZONIl~G, SPECIAL USE PERMIT OR WAIVER REQUEST ' • Applicant Slate Hill I, LLC , Slate Hill II LLC Woodcliff Investments. LLC The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit or waiver requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. SEE ATTACHED SHEET • • Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. The Slate Hill Project in the Magisterial District of Cave Spring in Roanoke County is in conformance with the Roanoke County Community Plan. The Community Plan designates the area in question as a core area that includes office and retail uses along Routes 419 and 220. The planned use is in conformance with existing adjacent property uses: Lowe's and Rent-A-Space, and Country Store. The ridge line will not be disturbed, and the owner will take every measure available to retain a portion of the natural vegetation. The project does not impact existing Roanoke County parks or the Blue Ridge Parkway. The land owner has experience developing several quality developments in the Roanoke Valley and Southeast US, including Pheasant Ridge in Roanoke. The project will provide for an opportunity to attract several businesses that will provide for white collar employment opportunities. While increasing employment opportunities for the County, the project will enhance the commercial core of Tanglewood Mall and surrounding businesses. It is the opinion of the property owner, that the Slate Hill project will benefit the County and Mall by attracting retailers to the area. The property, which borders Routes 419 and 220, will be landscaped. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adj oining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fue and rescue. The project does not include a residential component which would lead to an increase in school enrollment. The project will increase the tax base of Roanoke County to help make improvements to the fire and police departments and the existing school system. The adjoining property owners are existing businesses who will benefit from the new retail and office traffic: Lowe's, Rent-A-Space, and Country Store. All other land that borders the project is landlocked or owned by an entity related to the property owner. It is the lack of commercial development in the County that has contributed to the County's dependence on real estate taxes to provide needed public services. The property owner has built and leased one hundred and fifty thousand square feet of Class A office space less than one mile from the Slate Hill project and several other office projects across Southeast US. It is this type of project that is best suited for the property in question. It is sound community planning to change the current zoning from an unconforming use, C2C, C1, R3, to a use suitable for the County's commercial corridor and the busiest intersection in the Valley. 3 r,~, , .. L ~., # ,, ,.~. .,~ Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The Slate Hill Project encompasses 29.98468 acres in the magisterial district of Cave Spring in Roanoke County of which a small portion needs to be correctly zoned from C2C, C1, R3. The property owner intends to bring to this area a mixed use of retail and office space in a campus-like development by bringing access to vacant landlocked property. The purpose of Roanoke County's zoning ordinance is to supply the citizens of the Cave Spring District and Roanoke County, of which the developer is a member, a high quality of life. Each provision of the ordinance is answered in an outlined form below. 1. Slate Hill will have two points of access. One point of access will be at Route 220, at an existing traffic light at the intersection of Route 220 and Summit Street. The additional entrance will be used from an existing point of business: furniture store. The project is less than five miles from the Clearbrook Fire Department and Rescue Squad. 2. The project will be a planned campus. The road improvements for the project include a carefully planned road system which uses existing traffic patterns and traffic lights. 3. Slate Hill is a planned community development that incorporates all uses in a harmonious manner. The property owner has extensive experience building planned communities throughout Southeastern US and the Roanoke Valley, which includes the Pheasant Ridge complex in Roanoke City. The addition of access to the landlocked properties will open a new area of commercially taxable land that was previously vacant residential property in a highly commercial area. 4. The existing public facilities are adequate to serve this project: Clearbrook Fire and Rescue Squad. The expanded tax base for Roanoke County, as a result of this project, will help support areas of need elsewhere in the County. Currently, the property is vacant and inappropriately zoned, which results in it being of little benefit to the County's citizens. 5. The 29.98468 -acre development does not include any historic structures. 6. The project does not include plans for overdevelopment or crowded density. The owner has experience with projects in the Valley and will take the necessary measures to make sure the project conforms to its neighbors and existing developments in the County. • 7. The project will include both office and retail uses. 8. Due to topography and location, the land in question is not suitable for agriculture and it is surrounded by over one million square feet of retail space. Any use at this location other than retail or office would result in under utilization of the property. 9. The land owner intends to improve the existing property to be a suitable gateway to the County's commercial area. The use of retaining walls will be employed along Route 220 to maintain the slope in an aesthetically pleasing manner and it will include landscaped areas. 10. Thomas Bros. excavating companies will be responsible for the ground disturbance. Thomas Bros. is a local firm with experience in working with the County staff. Also Thomas Bros. was chosen because of their quality of work and experience with large projects. 11. Thomas Bros. excavating companies will be responsible for the ground disturbance. Thomas Bros. is a local firm with experience in working with the County staff. Also Thomas Bros. was chosen because of their quality of work and experience with large projects. 12. The project before the planning commission does not include a residential use. The purpose of C-2 zoning, General Commercial District, is to provide locations for a variety of commercial and service activities in an urban area, which serves a large portion of Roanoke County. The project satisfies this requirement. The area is surrounded by existing retailers: Lowe's, Wal-Mart, Rent-A-Space, Tanglewood Mall, Hunting Hills Square, etc. The immediate area around the Slate Hill development includes over one million square feet of retail space. The project is also located at the busiest intersections in Roanoke County with a traffic count of in excess of 88,000 vehicles daily. There is not a more suitable location for a project of this type in Roanoke County. The adjacent property owners will not be adversely affected by the rezoning of the property in question. • The Slate Hill project will increase business for existing retailers and increase their property value. At this time, the neighboring property owners are adversely affected by the current zoning because it is non- conforming and it results in an unattractive environment for retailers. The Slate Hill project will increase the tax base of the County, improve the gateway to the County's commercial corridor, and provide the opportunity for white collar employment. { } u%x~ ~. rY • A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the Land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. . The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations ands n require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions aze proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imp a special use permit or variance, the concept plan maybe altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver and variance applications. The plan should be '_ ~ prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. aThe County planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS /a. Applicant name and name of development ~ / b. Date, scale and north arrow . L/ Lot size in acres or squaze feet and dimensions } / d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties ~ ~e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. • . ~ t/f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties j _~g. All property lines and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights i ~ i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the / development -~ ~. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces ,i i Additional inforntasion required for REZ011~ING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS ' k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site t 1. Any driveways, entranceslexits, curb openings and crossovers m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n, Approximate street grades and site distances. at intersections o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants ' p, Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed i q, If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule . ~ I certify that all items required is the checklist above are complete. / 23 ~ ate . Signatur o applicant 6 ~~ • • SLATE HILL'S RETAIL NEIGHBORS (Partial Listing of Retail Within 114 Mile) Retail Center Square Footage Wal-Mart Store at Huntin Hills Plaza 117,573 Huntin Hills Plaza Stri of Stores 47,760 Lowe's 134,641 Pla It A ain S orts 5,973 First National Exchan a Bank 4,284 Outback Steak House 6,465 Food Lion 31,687 Petland and $1.50 D Cleaners 13,740 Tan lewood Mall 393,582 A lebees 22,462 First Union Bank 6,298 Firestone 7,876 Kro er 61,244 Barnes and Noble 25,800 Carmike Cinemas 36,625 Grand Pavilion 98,823 Fashion Floors 12,723 IHOP 5,013 Mac and Ma ies 5,935 Carlos Resturant 5,555 Airlee Cleaners 3,410 Famous Anthon 's 3,100 Wend 's 2,235 Total Retail Square Footage 1,052,804 ~,.n ~ ~:. ~ Integra Your Investment Partner. A member of the Roanoke Valley business community ... Integra Investments, LLC, specializes in the design, development, financing, marketing, strategic planning and operation of facilities. The chief executive officer is Mr. James R. Smith. Mr. Smith is a Roanoke native, who attended school in Roanoke and graduated from Virginia Tech. Mr. Smith has been in business since 1983 building communities throughout the Southeastern United States, communities such as, Pheasant Ridge. Pheasant Ridge, located in Roanoke, Virginia, is a 60-acre campus with on-going development since 1997. The campus includes Integra's corporate headquarters in an 184,000-square-foot office park, a 101-bed skilled nursing home, a 90-unit assisted living • facility, including a specialized Alzheimer's care unit, and a 128-unit condominium project built in four phases. Phase 3 of the condominium project will be completed in the Spring of 2004. The campus has multiple panoramic views of the downtown Roanoke skyline and the Alleghany Mountains. Mr. Smith has grown his business to be one of the largest development companies in the country, managing more than $30 million new projects annually. These projects include nursing homes, assisted living facilities, medicaUoffice buildings, continuing care retirement communities and mixed use facilities. Integra has been successful because it has provided high-quality, cost-saving development solutions to communities. We have done this by working closely with local community leaders, hospitals, civic groups and families to provide quality services. Over the years we have established solid relationships and have broad-based experience with community agencies. We know the business. Integra's track record speaks for itself. Respectfully, /~~ Hunter D. Smith 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE ROAD, S.W., SUITE 303, ROANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540) 772-5090 / Fax: (540) 772-0106 E-mail: hsmith@rev.net ~~...~ r ... . f ~ Integra Your Investment Partner. January 23, 2004 Dear Members of the Roanoke County Planning Commission: The Slate Hill Project is an opportunity for the landowner and Roanoke County to work together to build a commercial area in the County in which everyone can take pride. Currently, the property is vacant, under-zoned, and unsightly to everyone who enters the Roanoke County to work, live, and shop: please see attached photo. We can make it better. The landowner, James R. Smith, a Roanoke native, is asking to rezone 29.98468 acres from a vacant residential use to an office and retail center: Slate Hill. The property is located in the core area of the Cave Spring Community Plan and will bring much needed employment to the County. The property's neighbors are retail businesses that total over a million square feet of • retail space. Located at the comer of Routes 419 and 220, the Slate Hill property has a traffic count of over 90,000 cars daily. When completed, this $200 million project will generate a minimum of $2,224,000 a year in local tax revenue without placing a burden on public facilities. It will not result in a strain on the school system and be assured that we will not disturb the ridge line. To best serve the County residents, this property needs to be commercial. As we work together, we will build a new neighborhood of service and retail businesses that will make Roanoke County stronger. It is this development that will provide the needed spark to enrich this commercial corridor of the County to a level of higher prosperity. It is sound community planning to support the Slate Hill project as a place for Roanoke County citizens to work and play. We want input from County officials in the initial stages of the project in order to make this a major addition to the economic base of Roanoke County. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 772-5090. I am looking forward to working with you. Respectfully, e~~~ Hunter Smith • HDS/pj Enclosures 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE ROAD, S.W., SUITE 303, ROANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540) 772-5090 / Fax: (540} 772-0106 E-mail: hsmithCrev.net -~. ., ~~ ~ Integra Your Investment Partner. January 23, 2004 Dear Members of the Roanoke County Planning Commission: The Slate Hill Project will be built in phases. The first phase of the project will be the rough excavation of the site to allow access throughout the property. Thomas Bros. has been retained for this service, and they will be completed by 260 +/- days from January 29, 2004. • Once the rough excavation is completed, the project will be built in zones in the order corresponding to the attached concept plan. At this time, a timeline has not been established for the construction of the different zones. Roanoke County will be kept apprised of any new information and timelines. Respectfully, Hunter Smith 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE ROAD, S.W., SUITE 303, ROANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540) 772-5090 / Fax: (540) 772-0106 E-mail: hsmith@rev.net --, ~, .... ~ #T`~ ~.. UNSIGHTLY APPROACH INTO ROANOKE ON U. S. ROUTE 220 AT SLATE HILL PROPERTY ~.. ~ SLATE HILL AERIAL iii 9 i•~ i• ~ ` iq ~ : 8 F $ .( ~ $ 1 'n 'Z D ~8 tp R F: ~ t~ ~ . i ~ x I ~ g b g a _ ~ .~ a ~ 3 _ a a ~ ~ sy 'a 1 elj~ ,P • ~~~_ ~~ rn he st s~d en Nnar~sr is yil ~,1 ~ ~ U ;O zv' ~! 6 V F ~° S °z o~ ~~ a~ ~~ s ~ ~\~~ ~ $ i rn ~ ., ~O ~~ ~~ U rn z v ~tl a~ a R h U rr ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~> ( ~ 8 °°> ~ ~m ~ ~o G ~ U ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~K ~w°aoo Wr'` o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ci ~~"O xcooHc~"ioti ~~''+ ~y~,, a~ ~ ~r`~~aF^ ~~0?„jw Wqr'~cWqtiM~X4~i 'M~'~ `~ ~°'~~ ~~~~ mlfjmoar ~+~ New Ew. ao ~n'i4a4~~ ~ ~ `n ^ ~~ v h ,m. ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ ~ U o ~ 'o` v a ~! ~~~~5~8~ oo e 0 : _4N K .~ .s~a~ o~c ~ + ~ _., dINIJ2ilA `3~ONV021 oMazuueo.ugvueo~eooe~v - WOJ7dN3OSWnli~lMN ~11VW-3 BtObZ VIN17alA '3~IONVOTI em oav~ ~ Sbb6-ZCL IOb5l ~xvi 6990L %OB 'O'd 5213NNd'ld-SNOA3A21[1S-S~33N1`JN3 .ust-•t q,,,~ tcz-eo ,~*~ ltbbT[C (Ob51 ~3NOHd MS~3nN3AV NO13l8WVN8 b99b "1'J ~C"7I {d 1~0S5'{~ N~as~n'~ boon •ez ~de'nrror ,~~, • ~ ~°'~. ~7 t ..~~, ... f ~ f, ~Q~ .~ ti• . _ ~ ,. ~ ~ . f. •->:. ., = ~.~ .y ~•. • ~~ •~ 7/ l ~ t• - • .Q , Z. ~~y~~ ~ •~w ` y 1 ` ~ ~. 1 .. o .. ~• ~ 4 ~•. _ ~ do .~ - .?~,~,;... ~3 Q • ~iV ` ~-, ~ p ~ . N ~ ` ~~~~.~. s~ .~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~G + 't 4 ~ ` ti~ ~o a~ • i~-' O r :.. k~9 ~ ~ ~~~`~~ ~i/ ~~ . ~ ~ ` I~~ a "~ Vl I• y 'a ' N n , . • _ ~ ' ~~ ~ ~ t y' ; ' ~ 4 ~ Y L ~ '= . ~ Aoe~eKa • ! i~ d E E, a ~ ~ ' . d . '` ~ gin,. t ~ ~ ~ ' ~oa ~ ~ i ~ ~ ' ~ '~ e t 1 r ~ ' ''s O ~ ~ ~ ® ' / O .Mw' ~' A' O a-~A°. A ~ d f~ t~f ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ • Y f O ~ ,\W ~ ! ! l eel ~!1!~ } d r n t f»~!~ ~ ! . ' ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~~l '~ ~ _ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ if i ' - 1~~ . s . ~ ~eEi~! t © .~,f ! Z ~ . ' X11 ,~ ~ ati ~~ ~ O ~ :'~ ~~~~l~ ~ t ~ , .' f ® ~ V ~ ' , i o 3 ~ ~ ~ oQ ~ ~ .;.~ o ~ ~,s. ~~,~ it~Eit 4 e ~-.. mss....."'.. ~~ ~ 'f ~t ~ f '`' ~ tt ~l~t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .,. ^^^ li[ ti t j i d ~ I~ ~ ~[ r If~t ~ + ~ ~ !! 6 ~ ~ ! ' g 5 ~ ~ ~~ ,~ „, '~ , ~ I {[4i14 ~' ~ 1\ '~a~ ~ ~4• t NO. M' ... ~~ . M ~ ~ ~ yy~ i ~ ~ j ~ ~'~ IIIIII~ - . ~1~lt ,~~, • ,~ ~ ~ ~f}~ .~ • r~ • OMCZLLLCCO\tlf18~L1000 \C00[ V/ wo»aN3oswm~irow irow-a etobz v~N(~a(n'aHONVOa VINIJ2~fA 3HONb'021 s,e Lwvo Sbb6-ZLl (Ob5) ~XVd 6990Z7f08'O'd S213NNV'ld-SNOA3Ab[1S-S'2~33NIJt~3 Lni--~ g,,,,g itz-eo ,~ ~ Llbb-bLL (0651 ~3NOHd MS'3nN3nV N013l8WVa86996 "1'S ~C"7f~i'lOC`C~.7 Ai'.7aC'fAi (lr'i eooz'6z ~ddnNVr J U J:1.L. IJ JJ V 11:1 JY~LI l ( .~tvo ~~ s~ LY! 5d 9Z S'd A7 N1'lOIH311 ~ ~ - ~~ ~~~ r .--~~ " (+ ~ ~. .,. ;. ~ ~, ~~`; `, ``~ `~ ~ ~ ~~ ~_~xa~i4did' ~.t-- ~~.~~, ~`~ ~~` _- ~ `' ~~R~ ~~ N ~ '~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ` a e _~ ~, ~ `\ p ~~ ~~~~ m~ z~ ,4 ~ ~~F~ ~ ~ ffi y~v p@ ~~~ ~~a ~ _ ___, ~ 'y ~~a~t ~ ~- ~ e ------ _~ ~*-- :~ e.~ ~~ ~t ~ ~ € s ~ ~ ~. L ~ ~r'~y I~ ~~ ~'~~@ L She ~ ~~~ ~ ~8~ B ` ~ ` C~~ ye~~~T'~'~~~,~e (,. ~iQ4` '~B.. b'~ ~. i `,,\ ~ t ~% ~ ~ e~ U ~: W ~I ~ ~ O C ~ o, [ WQ~mgY [wy ~~ ~~o ~ ~C U ~.:_ ~:r,~ • To: John Murphy, Community Development From: Ramona P. Kem, Crime Analyst Date: February 16, 2004 Subject: Electric Rd Traffic Crash Analysis Listed below is an excerpt from the 2003 Traffic Crash Analysis Report. Electric Rd has remained the primary location for traffic crashes in Roanoke County since 2000. "Electric Rd runs from the Roanoke City line at Franklin Rd to the Salem City line near Keagy Rd and is over 5 miles in length. For the year 2003, 17% of reportable traffic crashes occurred on Electric Rd as compared to15% in 2002, while the remaining locations account for 6% or less. Further analysis revealed that of the tota1281 crashes on Electric Rd, 44% of the crashes occurred between the intersections of Ogden Rd and Franklin Rd. This stretch of Electric Rd • accounts for approximately'/2 mile of the total road. For the year 2002, 49% of all crashes on Electric Rd occurred in this same stretch. This area consists of a shopping mall, fast food restaurants, gas stations and other local businesses. Crashes tend to occur on Fridays between 15:00 and 19:00, Tuesday between 11:00 and 15:00 and Saturdays between 11:00 and 19:00. The primary cause for crashes is Following Too Close (52%) and Driver Inattention (13%). In 76% of the crashes, the driver was charged. 22% of the crashes resulted in some type of personal injury." • OF pOANpf~ a ~- .--M;...'- z ~`' `' .~ a ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ • 7836 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, ARNOLD COVEY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, GEORGE W. SIMPSON, III, P.E. CHIEF PLANNER, JANET SCHEID February 19, 2004 Mr. Hunter Smith 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Building 1, Suite 303 Roanoke, Virginia 24014 VIA FAX: 540.772.0106 Dear Mr. Smith: ~,4~ `.w.-j . DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS MAPPING/GIS PERMITS PLANNING & ZONING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The meeting conducted on February 19, 2004, at the Virginia Department of Transportation Office in Salem with Roanoke County staff, VDOT staff and your traffic consultant has indicated some significant issues that planning staff feels must be addressed prior to Planning Commission action on your petition. The discussion focused around the VDOT requirement for a traffic analysis to determine the access impacts on Routes 220 and 419 from your proposed development. In addition, there was discussion about improvements and/or additions to taming lanes, right turn in and right tam out, access at the traffic signal • near the Wendy's restaurant and the access close to the south-bound on-ramp to Route 220. In previous discussions, planning staff has indicated the need to have design or appearance standards related to proposed buildings within your site. To date, planning staff has not received any proffered building elevations, site plan, design criteria, retaining wall information, final stormwater management information or use restrictions on the site. Without these critical issues being addressed, planning staff cannot adequately evaluate the land use impacts of your petition. Therefore staff will recommend to the Planning Commission that your petition be continued until such information is received. Please feel free to contact me at 772.2042 if you have any questions related to this letter. Sincerely, John Murphy Associate Planner CC: Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Arnold Covey, Director Community Development Jeff Echols, Resident Engineer VDOT Susan Hammond, Assistant Resident Engineer VDOT Roanoke County Planning Commission • Elmer Hodge, County Administrator Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 • PHONE (540) 772-2080 • FAX (540) 772-2108 ®Recycled Paper APR. -05' 041MON) 13:29 VDOT SALEM RES TEL:540 387 5407 P. 002 • n ' fJ 7 ~ ~ ,.. C®I~M®I\T~~~.I,T'I~ of ~IR~I~TIA PhtUp Sb~tat COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF TR4NSPORTATION PO BDX 3071 SALEM, 24153-5127 Apri15, 2004 john Murphy Roanoke County Planning P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, ETA 24018 FAX: 540-776-7I55 RE: Slate Hill Traffic Impact Study (received 03-29-04) Roanoke County -Routes 419 & 220 llear Mr_ ~Iwphy, 'VVe have reviewed the Traffic Impact Study submitted by Mattern & Craig, Tnc. The • study, as submitted, is uaclear and requires a more comprehensive presetltation- Clarification aad additional information that addresses the fi1Il unpact of the entire proposed development is needed for a thorough review. 'We would like to reserve our comments urnil the revised study is submitted. A meeting of parties involved may be beneficial for review of comments and traffic information. Should you have airy questions or comments, please advise. Sin ely, Susan Hammond Assistaat Resident Engvneer cc: Edward A Nett JEFF ECHOES RESIDENT ENGINEER 71s sa,~„ BAO..o sr_ TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY r+.oNE ra+o~ saa-sass F.Y ca~o> sa~.sao~ APR-06-2004 08 21 KP~ ~1~~~°Y • • DSTERHOUDT PRILLRMAN NATT i ~ ~~ .~ i .. d .~ ,. -- D 'P ' ~ ~\ N \ 1 11 \ 1{ { 1 ~~ 1 /\~ ~1 ~ / ~~ O w~ 15407740961 P.01/01 .. ~~~_ `_ ~~^ ~. ~ a ° o ~lg{{ 'ay ~ fed 00 O B~ ~~_~ ~~ __-- ~p ~0 ~ -- f ,~ ~~~~ O ~ -.•-- ---- - - ~_~~ -~~ ~ TOTAL P. 01 ,~~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A TOTAL OF 29.98-ACRES LOCATED AT 4486 SUMMIT STREET (TAX MAP NOS.77.20-1-3, 77.20-1 -4, 77.20-1-52, 77.20-1-54, 77.20-1-55, PART OF TAX MAP NO. 87.08-3-11) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS OF C-2 CONDITIONAL, R-3, AND C-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF SLATE HILL I, LLC, SLATE HILL 11, LLC, AND WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 24, 2004, and the second reading and public hearing were continued from March 23, 2004, and held on April 27, 2004; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter which was continued from March 2,004, and held on April 6, 2004; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required bylaw. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing a total of 29.98 acres, as described herein, and located at 4486 Summit Street (Tax Map Numbers 77.20-1-3, 77.20-1 -4, 77.20-1-52, 77.20-1-54, 77.20-1-55, Part of Tax Map No. 87.08-3-11) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-2C, General Commercial District with conditions, R-3, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential, and C-1, Office District to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. ,,,. ~ .~ * .: -~ 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill I1, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC. 3. That a portion of this property was rezoned to C2C by Ordinance 102897-19 at which time the Petitioner proffered the following conditions which are hereby REPEALED: (1) Petitioner proffers to build the Lowe's store in substantial conformity with the preliminary site plan, dated October 7, 1997. Except that Lowe's will flip the location of the garden center and the truck loading docks to the northern property area of the proposed project. (2) Petitioner proffers that if any out parcel that requires C-2 zoning is proposed on this site or the adjoining site of White House Antiques, it will be subject to a special use permit regardless of the C-2 use proposed. This will allow the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors the opportunity to review traffic impacts, circulation and access issues. (3) Petitioner proffers to retain the existing vegetation between the Petitioner's site and the property of Quail Valley condominiums. The only exception to this will be the removal of vegetation that is necessary for improvements to the access road for the existing residential properties. (4) If any of the residential homes on Washington Road remain, Petitioner proffers to upgrade, pave and maintain Washington Road to provide continuous, adequate and safe access to these houses. This upgrade will be to a standard acceptable to the County and reviewed during the site plan review process. 2 ~.. .. ~. 4. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing conditions attached hereto as Exhibit 1, which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts. 5. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Tax Map No. 77.20-1-3 - C 1 to C2C Tax Map No. 77.20-1-4 - C1 to C2C Tax Map No. 77.20-1-52 - R3 to C2C Tax Map No. 77.20-1-54 - C1 to C2C Tax Map No. 77.20-1-55 - C1 to C2C Portion of Tax Map No. 87.08-3-11 - R3 to C2C The metes and bounds of the above-mentioned parcels are further set out on the attached Exhibit 2. 6. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. 3 ~..N. PROFFERS Address of Subject Property: Tax Map No.: Applicant's/Owner's Name: 4486 Summit Street Roanoke, VA 24014 077.20-01-03 077.20-01-04 077.20-01-52 077.20-01-54 077.20-01-55 087.08-03-11 SLATE HILL I, LLC SLATE HILL II, LLC WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC PROFFERS EXHIBIT 1 The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: The C-2 uses set forth on the attached Exhibit A would prohibited. 2. The square footage of any building located on the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. 3. No building will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. 4. The roads shall be in the approximate located as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant permission to construct a portion of the road on the VDOT property as shown on said plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. Structures constructed in Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in appearance, materials and design, but will be subject to requirements of specific users. l 1\JOLLY\SYS\USERS\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Slate Hill PROFFERS.doc Page 1 of 2 April 13, 2004 ~® .. ,.~ . ~' Applicant/Owner: SLATE HILL I, LLC BY !~ ITS .,i - SLATE HILL I1, LLC BY /,1~~ ITS ~11~.,.,~- WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC BY ~~~~_ ITS T~~_ \WOLLYISYS\USERS1CBaumgardner\ZONING\Slate Hill PROFFERS.doc Page 2 of 2 April 13, 2004 Exhibit A Slate Hill Proffered-Out Uses PERMITTED USES IN C-2 DISTRICT 1. Residential Uses Accessory Apartment Home Occupation, Type I Multi-Family Dwelling Two-Family Dwelling 2. Civic Uses Park and Ride Facility Post Office Public Parks and Recreation Areas Utility Services, Minor 3. Office Uses None 4. Commercial Uses Agricultural Services Bed and Breakfast Boarding House Commercial Outdoor Entertainment Gasoline Station Pawn Shop Commercial Indoor Sports & Recreation Commercial Outdoor Sports & Recreation 5. Industrial Uses Recycling Centers and Stations 6. Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower Parking Facility ~~ ~ ,,~. ., \\JOLLY\SYS\USERS\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Slate Hill-USES-C2.doc Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A Slate Hill Proffered-Out Uses Special Use Permit 1. Civic Uses Halfway House Religious Assembly Utility Services, Major 2. Commercial Uses Automobile Dealership, Used Automobile Repair Services, Major Car Wash Convenience Store Dance Hall Equipment Sales and Rentals Manufactured Home Sales Mini-Warehouse Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service Surplus Sales 3. Industrial Uses Custom Manufacturing Landfill, Rubble n ~ 4. ~ Miscellaneous Uses ~ ~ ~ Outdoor Gatherings \UOLLYISYS\USERS\CBaumgardner\ZONING\Slate Hill-USES-C2.doc Page 2 of 2 Mar :iU U4 1U:45a Klrt a. wuuL nr«.ni i ~~., i ~ ~ ....-,.., .... ........~ , ~, . ~< !. y4 ~i~ ~y~ r ~® ~_ ~/~\\\ ~~ V Q b`a y~ ~ .. .. 6`~ ~ . `~ 1td`'' ~ ~~~:~~. ~3 ,~ ~\ ~~ J oo` ~ooo ~ ~ *d -~ o 0 ~~¢ ~ a _~~~ ~ ~ B a V~ ~ ~< A ~~ ~ m R a8 Q ~ CL G~ r ~~ ~ / !~P i ~ ,.~ ~,,- ~,, ~ , !~ ._ .. __ _ .,. `~ f ~v ~~ u J `t /~ 'TY Y $ / / < ~~~~ ~ ~~~ r. ~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ r~ ` i•..1 ~ _~~.: ~~ ti. ~. ` ~. j' r$ - ~ -~ ~ \ , ~ ~~ , P ~. ~_ %~; 1 ` ~ /~ '~ ~~ ~ . ~,n r '~ o ~~ ~~ A ~~ ~ ~~ phi j 1 1 ~ i ~ 1 ~ ~ ,n ~ ~~ I ~, a e t 3 n c ^~ T ~~ ~ _/~ L ~~ ~ ~~ ---1 ' 60 ' d 111101 ~...~. ~.~. ~ _...~ ~ . ~' ~~ r 4~4 • ~,~ P ~ ~ ~~r ~~ ~~ O ,y r c ~~ .~° ~. ~= ~~ ~r ~ A _~ r :... { .. r ~ \ ``~~ ~~ `~~ ~` ~ ,• `\ •` \` •` •, ~` ~~ ~~• `~~ ~~ ~ c~~~ .~. n ~ ,~ v 60i60'd T960bLL0bST 0 i ~~ t` ~ d ~~~ ~` m Q ` : + tt3 ~~ " ~r `` c 11dN NdWti'1~ I ~Id 1Qf10H2i31S0 `"~"'f' , t 1 1 1 t 1 I f 1 t t t i f 0 ~y~~ ty a ~~ i~' fr -'~, ~a ( t f' L~~~~f bT:tZ b00z-ti0-add ' <. ~ ~.e. EXI~I~IT 2 Metes and Bounds of Slate Hill I and II, LLC to be zoned C-2 from R-3 Total Acreage 17.01791 North: 8681.17167 Line Course: N 23-21-43 W North: 8879.93582 Line Course: N 22-07-52:W North: 9039.75859 Line Course: N 61-50-50 E North: 9224.57256 Line Course: N 79-24-46 E North: 9227.16492 Line Course: N 05-34-10 E North: 9263.01446 Line Course: N 08-05-10 E North: 9867.13546 Line Course: S 85-46-50 E North: 9848.69262 Line Course: N 78-12-28 E North: 9883.27889 Line Course: S 13-46-53 E North: 9864.69732 Line Course: N 78-43-07 E North: 9940.41588 Line Course: S 19-38-01 E North: 9815.81235 Line Course: S 78-36-16 W North: 9737.41934 Line Course: S 08-52-15 E North: 9340.53781 Line Course: N 79-24-46 E North: 9357.29967 Line Course: S 14-28-48 E North: 9110.86458 Line Course: S 66-04-08 W North: 8681.17167 Line Course: N 75-57-50 E North: 8681.17167 East 53568.84778 Length: 216.51 East 53482.99147 Length: 172.53 East 53417.99308 Length: 391.70 East 53763.35186 Length: 14.11 East 53777.22105 Length: 36.02 East 53780.71689 Length: 610.19 East 53866.54784 Length: 250.65 East 54116.52332 Length: 169.24 East 54282.18971 Length: 19.13 East 54286.74743 Length: 387.05 East 54666.31877 Length: 132.30 East 54710.77080 Length: 396.77 East 54321.82565 Length: 401.69 East 54383.76776 Length: 91.23 East 54473.44398 Length: 254.52 East 54537.08498 Length: 1059.30 East 53568.84778 Length: 0.00 East 53568.84778 Perimeter: 4602.94 Area: 741,300.31299 sq. ft. 17.01791 acres ~~ page 1 Metes and Bounds of Woodcliff Investments, LLC ~ to be zoned C-2 from C-1 Total Acreage 8.0377 d North: 9867.13546 East 53866.54784 Line Course: N 54-37-50 W Length: 468.70 North: 10138.44151 East 53484.35324 Line Course: N 34-25-50~•W Length: 142.11 North: 10255.65914 East 53404.00113 Line Course: N 43-35-03 E Length: 323.03 III ~ North: 10489.65009 East 53626.70418 ~, Line Course: N 53-51-55 E Length: 161.32 North: 10584.77828 East 53756.99140 Line Course: S 35-59-02''E Length: 267.89 North: 10368.00252 East 53914.39529 Line Course: N 52-37-55 E Length: 12.09 North: 10375.34098 East 53924.00466 Line Course: S 35-56-05 E Length: 196.56 North: 10216.18927 East 54039.35875 Line Course: N 59-55-25 E Length: 126.69 North: 10279.68178 East 54148.99276 Line Course: S 34-12-15 E Length: 99.55 North: 10197.35137 East 54204.95343 Line Course: S 13-48-57 E Length: 323.43 North: 9883.27889 East 54282.18971 Line Course: S 78-12-28 W Length: 169.24 North: 9848.69262 East 54116.52332 Line Course: N 85-46-50 W Length: 250.65 North: 9867.13546 East 53866.54784 .Perimeter: 2541.27 Area: 350,122.42769 sq. ft. 8.03770 acres .,~^-~ °- page 1 Metes and Bounds of Cemetery "Not to be Rezoned" I Total Acreage .03892 North: 8133.46988 East 49768.64621 Line Course: S 03-35-02 W Length: 61.36 North: 8072.22719 East 49764.81033 Line Course: N BO-12-02;W Length: 28.51 North: 8077.07905 East 49736.71935 Line Course: N 03-35-02 E Length: 58.28 North: 8135.24141 East 49740.36229 Line Course: S 86-24-58 E Length: 28.34 North: 8133.46988 East 49768.64621 Perimeter: 176.49 Area: 1,695.24581 sq. ft. 0.03892 acres Metes and Bounds of Slate Hill II, LLC to be zoned C-2 from C-2c Total Acreage 4.92907 `Does not Include Cemetery" Total Acreage including Cemetery 4.96799 North: 9110.86458 Line Course: S 14-28-48 E North: 8822.37677 Line Courae: S 81-09-09 N1 North: 8791.66174 Line Course: S 62-53-11 W North: 8647.56194 ,p Line Course: S 74-08-15 W North: 8606.95978 Line Course: N 78-23-39':W North: 8608.97197 Line Course: N 28-10-53 W North: 8611.11340 Line Course: N 82-35-47 W - North: 8619.97847 Line Course: N 09-32-14 E North: 8623.76189 Line Courae: N 80-27-46 W North: 8640.33056 Line Courae: N 80-29-45 W North: 8681.17167 Line Course: N~66-04-08 E North: 9110.86458 East 54537.08498 Length: 297.95 East :.54611.58594 Length: 199.70 Eaet 54414.26356 Length: 316.18 East 54132.83397 Length: 148.55 East 53989.94332 Length: 10.00 East 53980.14581 Length: 2.43 East 53978.99848 Length: 68.80 East 53910.77607 Length: 3.64 East 53911.41172 Length: 100.00 East 53812.79388 Length: 247.34 East 53568.84778 Length: 1059.30 East 54537.08498 Perimeter: 2454.08 Area: 216,405.61596 sq. ft. 4.96799 acres ~ IIBVMIQMMM Z9Alz-tloL ~! 9110ZLfWL ~l NR~ ~ gpMD 0!C aPRS /pl ~N1r p7 OC91 JlM'++~WIMNiMO u6~eep ~e~~e~u~ u6~~ep o~ydo~p 6 u~uuo~d ~e~~oN . •~n~oe114 o~Y ~~Q i~oo~o~~~~Q~r~ mi.-a ' aoto-9oc (0>9> ~i ' oo-c-ooc (orv) .6i0-8 •INID8S4 '~10lI~O'Y ' 0080 IlOH '0'd ' •-1 'afllla•~ BBOif18)1 ooar suQxxria / suoxanxns / axa~xiox~ s~sxr~oss~ ~six~zz~~a~~ ~.~~~. `dIN102~1n '.11N(100 3~IONb'02~ ~~' ~ ~~ db02i A~b'3~i Puo ab'02~ ~12I1~3~3 31df111S ~ Nb~~d JNINOZ3~1 ~b'1N3W3~ddf1S a ~} k~ -~ ~ ~ ~~~G~ ~ i ~ f ~ eli~~~ --- 4 __ _-- - - --._... . // -- / / ~ ~ \ s I r \ ~ i , ;~ / , ~/ ///// /// / /_ ~~ I / / ~ ~^ i / / / / ~ ._ s , - f ~ ~7p \\ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ \ ~ \ ~ .~ r~ /^'~I I..L_ I,~ f~ ~ii. i ~, ~~ ' ~~ II fi O~ ROANp~.~ .> A i l~ rr ~ Z G1 ~ 2 ~ "a, 1838 C~u~xn#~ of ~u~rx~n~ Board of Supervisors PO. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 Richard C. Flora, Chairman Hollins Magisterial District Michael W. Altizer, Vice-Chairman Vinton Magisterial District April 28, 2004 Rev. Diane Scribner-Clevenger Unity Church of Roanoke Valley 3300 Green Ridge Road, NW Roanoke, VA 24019 Dear Reverend Scribner-Clevenger: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would invocation at our meeting on Tuesday, April 27, 2004. ask for divine guidance at these meetings, and the contribution. Joseph B. "Butch" Church Catawba Magisterial District Joseph McNamara Windsor Hills Magisterial District Michael A. Wray Cave Spring Magisterial District like to thank you for offering the We believe it is most important to Board is very grateful for your Thank you again for sharing your time and your words with us. It was good to have you with us. With kindest regards, Richard C. Flora, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors OFFICE: FAX: VOICE MAIL: (540) 772-2005 (540) 772-2193 (540) 772-2170 E-MAIL: bosQco.roanoke.va.us AGENDA NOTES Date: April 27, 2004 Vote Record: Yes No Abs AGENDA ITEM: ACTION #: Motion by: Mr. McNamara Mr. Church Mr. Wra y Mr. Altizer Mr. Flora Title: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR MIXED USE RETAIL & OFFICE SPACE KNOWN AS SLATE HILL DEVELOPMENT IN ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA For Integra Investments, LLC 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Building 1, Suite 303 Roanoke, Virginia 24014 April, 2004 Commission No: 2252 MATTERN & CRAIG, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS 701 FIRST STREET, S.W. ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24016 (540) 345-9342 FAX: (540) 345-7691 SUMMARY General This study was undertaken to determine the traffic impact on U.S. Route 220 (Franklin Road) and Route 419 (Electric Road) from the construction of commercial development consisting of retail and office space on a 30 acre tract located at the corner of Routes 419 and 220 in Roanoke County. Additionally, this study was to determine what, if any, off-site road improvements will be required to provide acceptable level of service operations. Conclusions The commercial development, known as Slate Hill, is projected to generate 6,224 trips per day; 3,112 entering and 3,112 exiting the development sites. Of the total number of trips to be generated, only about 78 percent (4,860) are anticipated to be new trips added to the existing roadway system. The other trips would be pass-by and internal trips. The weekday peak hours for traffic generated by the development is expected to coincide with the peak hour for traffic on the existing roadways. Level of service operations on Franklin Road at the Valley Avenue intersection experiences less than desirable operations under existing (2004) conditions. This is due partially to the signalized intersection at Franklin Road with Crossbow Circle/Walmart Entrance. However, the Buildout year 2008 traffic operations at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue do not differ significantly from today's existing conditions, although two movements drop to LOS F operations. It is recommended that the left-turn lane for northbound traffic on Franklin Road be lengthened as much as possible to accommodate this traffic. i K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd E Utilizing trip generation data regularly used for studies of this type, it appears less traffic will be imposed upon the Franklin Road at Valley Avenue intersection with the type of development being proposed verses the traffic that would be allowed under a currently zoned R-3 land use. During the p.m. peak hour, Slate Hill traffic exiting onto Electric Road can be expected to experience level of service F operations and extended delays due to traffic backing-up from a downstream traffic signal. It is recommended that a separate right-turn lane be provided for Route 419 south traffic turning into the new development. This turn lane should be independent of the Route 419 south right-turn lane for southbound Franklin Road traffic. In other words there should not be just one continuous right-turn lane for Route 419 south traffic pass the proposed point of ingress and egress to Slate Hill. Slate Hill traffic exiting onto Electric Road could be better served by utilizing an existing signalized intersection. 11 K:~2212252\Revised Rp[.wpd oor Sea Date: Tuesday, Time: ~:~ The petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.9 acres from C'i Gffice District to C2 General Commercial District and 5.8 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to C2 Gen- eral Commercial District in order to constructa general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, vVindsor Hills Magisterial District. TWENTY THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ~ ~~ OF VIRGINIA 'R 3 2004 ROBERT P. DOHERTY JR., CHIEF JU DGE ROANOKECOUNiYCOURTHOUSE CIRCUIT COURT C~frMG~E'6FYMFT,t'+QF~FLA.4Pi0 E 305 EAST MAIN STREET CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE CITY OF ROANOKE SALEM, VIRGINIA 24153 CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE CITY OF SALEM (540) 387-6293 (540) 387-6278 FAX COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Apri122, 2004 James R. Creekmore, Esq. Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, P.L.C. First Union Tower, Suite 1400 P. O. Box 14125 Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125 Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Roanoke County Attorney P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Edward A. Natt, Esq. Osterhoudt, Prillaman, Natt, Helscher, Yost, Maxwell & Ferguson, P.C. P. O. Box 20487 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 RE: David & Dorothy Runion et al., Plaintiffs v. Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County and Cotton Hiil Land Company, Inc., Defendants Roanoke County Circuit Court, CH 03-296 Dear Counsel: The Plaintiffs have filed a bill of complaint seeking to reverse the adoption by the Board of Supervisors of an ordinance permitting the rezoning of a 22.75-acre tract of land owned by Defendant Developer from agricultural/rural ("AR") to residential single family ("R-1"). Plaintiffs allege in their bill of complaint that the rezoning was unlawful in that the Board's decision "bore no reasonable relation to the public health, safety and general welfare" of the Back Creek community, that the rezoning is inconsistent with the Community Plan, and that the Board failed to consider adequately the impact ~zpon the community. Alternatively, the Plaintiffs contend that the rezoning constitutes illegal spot zoning done solely for the benefit of a private party. The Defendants deny both these Apri122, 2004 Page 2 allegations, arguing that the rezoning reflects an appropriate exercise of legislative discretion by the Board of Supervisors. An evidentiary hearing was held, after which the Court viewed the area in issue. For the reasons given below, the Court denies each of the Plaintiffs' claims. ABUSE OF DISCRETION Within the governmental scheme of the Commonwealth, a board of supervisors functions as the legislative branch of the county. With this in mind, the courts of the Commonwealth have long recognized that a decision of a board of supervisors in granting or denying an application for rezoning is a legislative act that is presumed to be reasonable. This presumption will stand until the party challenging the decision presents probative evidence that the legislative act was unreasonable. If the challenge is met by the board with evidence of reasonableness sufficient to render the issue fairly debatable, the legislative action must be sustained by the courts. It is only when the board's action is unconstitutional or arbitrary and capricious or constitutes an abuse of discretion- i.e. clearly wrong- that the courts have the authority to overturn the decision of the legislative branch. The issue is fairly debatable if, when evaluated by quantitative and qualitative measures, the evidence in support of the opposing views could lead objective and reasonable persons to reach different conclusions. Gregory v. Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, 257 Va. 530, 537 (1999); City Council of Salem v. Wendy's of Western Va., Inc., 252 Va. 12, 14-15 (1996). But when two reasonable zoning classifications apply to a property, the legislative body has the prerogative to chose between those reasonable zoning classifications. Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County v. Miller & Smith, Inc., 242 Va. 382, 384 (1991). In this case, the Court finds that the Defendants have met their evidentiary burden of showing that the decision to grant the rezoning was sufficiently reasonable so as to make the matter fairly debatable. The Plaintiffs have maintained that the rezoning of the Parcel from AR to R-1 was unreasonable for a panoply of reasons, including: that the rezoning is not in accord with the Community Plan; the failure of the Board to take into account the impact upon the infrastructure of the County; the disturbance to the neighbors, especially the tivildlife rescue center; and the destruction of~natural habitat. However, even if one assumes for the sake of argument that the Plaintiffs' evidence could lead some people to believe that the rezoning was unreasonable, the evidence submitted by the Board supports the position that a reasonable, disinterested person could have reached a different conclusion than that advanced by the Plaintiffs, and thereby find that the rezoning was reasonable. The Board was presented with the reality that development of the Parcel would occur and that it had a choice of either allowing athirty-eight unit development of the Parcel under AR zoning, with no proffers and with the likelihood that a number of driveways would feed directly onto Cotton Hill Road, or of allowing aforty- four unit development under R-1 with the attached proffers and a more controlled traffic scheme. Additionally, a reasonable person could believe that the difference in the traffic burden under the competing zoning classifications would be marginal. The same can be said as to the impact upon the school, police and fire and rescue services. Moreover, the Plaintiffs' claim that the Developer could have achieved nearly the same level of Apri122, 2004 Page 3 economic return under the existing AR classification neglects to account for the benefits to the community arising from the attached proffers, such as the fencing, the easements and dedications, the architectural review committee and the promise to limit logging. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the Developer will not fully honor all of its proffers in this case. Also, the staff reports and the recommendation of the Planning Commission give additional credence to the Board's decision. Finally, while the current AR classification does call for restrictions to growth, it also contemplates expanded residential development; as such, one could fmd that an R-1 classification reasonably comports with the Community Plan and that it is in line with the scheme of development along Cotton Hill Road. Therefore, the Court finds that a reasonable and objective person could reach a different position than that advanced by the Plaintiffs. See Barrick v. Board of Supervisors oflifathews County,.239 Va. 628, 634-35 (1990).. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs claim of abuse of discretion on the part of the Board of Supervisors in its rezoning of the Parcel is denied. SPOT ZONING The Court also fmds the Plaintiffs' claim of illegal spot zoning to be without merit. Spot zoning is only illegal when the purpose of a zoning ordinance is solely to serve the private interests of one or more landowners, rather than to further a locality's welfare as part of an overall zoning plan that may include a concurrent benefit to private interests. Riverview Farm Associates Virginia General Partnership v. Board of Sup~~visors of Charles City County, 259 Va. 419, 429-30 (2000). Undoubtedly in this casethere is a benefit to the Developer that stems from the rezoning: However, the evidence presented to the Court shows that the Board granted the rezoning as part of a continuing plan of development for the County. The Community Plan recognized that development in Back Creek was inevitable as the County continued to mature and grow. By granting the rezoning with the attached proffers, the Board was better able to protect the interests of the County than it would have by merely allowing development under the AR classification. The Board's action therefore furthers many of the interests of the County. Additionally, when one takes into account the presence of the Gardens/Groves subdivisions directly across Cotton Hill Road, the rezoning of the Parcel is compatible with the surrounding area. See Barrick, 239 Va. at 631-32. Accordingly; the Fiaintiffs' claim of illegal spot zoning is denied. Counsel for the Developer should prepare an appropriate order, incorporating this letter opinion by reference, and present it for entry after obtaining endorsement of counsel. Very truly yours, t~ c Robert P. Doherty, Jr. RPDjr/cwi SLATE HILL PROGRESS MEETING APRIL 19, 2004 ELMER HODGE, ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MICHAEL WRAY, ROANOKE COUNTY SUPERVISOR JAMES R. SMITH, PROPERTY OWNER SLATE HILL MEETING Executive Summary Dates and Dollars III. Zoning IV. Concerns V. Conclusion Executive Summary Integra April 19, 2004 Dear Roanoke County: Your Investment Partner. The Slate Hill project was initiated in August of 2001 with the purchase of the Steak and Ale Restaurant on Electric Road. Over the last three years, Integra investments has acquired 28 separate parcels to connect Interstate 220 to Route 419. To date, the total project expenditure is $3,400,000. The Slate Hill Project is an opportunity to improve the tax base. The rezoning request is rezone 15 acres from R-3 to C-2, 5 acres from C2c to C-2 and 8 acres from C-1 to C-2. Over 60% for the Slate Hill project is zoned commercial with the 15 acres zoned R-3 which is surrounded on three sides by commercial zoning: please see map. The development will have two points of ingress/egress. One access will be at a four way light on interstate 220. The second access will use the existing curb cut for the Rocking Chair property. A traffic report was submitted prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Per VDOT's request, the plan has been amended and resubmitted to VDOT and the County on April the 16th The landowner has agreed to several proffers and design standard: see enclosed. As part of the traffic study the landowner has agreed to forfeit the right on one point of access on 419. The current zoning allows for the construction of 440 houses and office and retail space at the corner of Route 419 and Interstate 220. The access points will be Interstate 220 for the residential portion and the two existing curb cuts on Route 419 for the retail center. Respectfully, ~~ Hunter D. Smith 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE ROAD, S.W., SUITE 303, ROANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540) 772-5090 / Fax: (540) 772-0106 E-mail: hsmithCrev.net II. Dates and Dollars SLATE HILL AERIAL III. Zoning SLATE HILL ZONING AND COMMERCI~-L NEIGWB~}RS ~ Operating Commercial Parcels .~ Slate Hill Proposed Office Park and Retail Acreage ~.. Red Areas Existing C2 Zoning A c~ to c2 B R3 "Multi-Family" to C2 C C2c to C2 - ~ , L ~~ . _. .-- ~ `- ~$ a nd ~. V O N W O O N W$ ~~ - (1 f, r ~~~ ~~ ~d ~~ :~ to ~p y ~ g. ~ ~, ~ ~~AO~ ~~~ ~' a~~ OyN C w ~' M a ~ ~ // v A W `i i~ ~~ ~ .\ ~ ~ ~; ~~1„. '~. ~,,. 0 d0 L IV. Concerns SUMMARY General This study was undertaken to determine the traffic impact on U.S. Route 220 (Franklin Road) and Route 419 (Electric Road) from the construction of commercial development consisting of retail and office space on a 30 acre tract located at the corner of Routes 419 and 220 in Roanoke County. Additionally, this study was to determine what, if any, off-site road improvements will be required to provide acceptable level of service operations. Conclusions The commercial development, known as Slate Hill, is projected to generate 6,224 trips per day; 3,112 entering and 3,112 exiting the development sites. Of the total number of trips to be generated, only about 78 percent (4,860) are anticipated to be new trips added to the existing roadway system. The other trips would be pass-by and internal trips. The weekday peak hours for traffic generated by the development is expected to coincide with the peak hour for traffic on the existing roadways. Level of service operations on Franklin Road at the Valley Avenue intersection experiences less than desirable operations under existing (2004) conditions. This is due partially to the signalized intersection at Franklin Road with Crossbow Circle/Walmart Entrance. However, the Buildout year 2008 traffic operations at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue do not differ significantly from today's existing conditions, although two movements drop to LOS F operations. It is recommended that the left-turn lane for northbound traffic on Franklin Road be lengthened as much as possible to accommodate this traffic. K:~22~2252Utevised Rpt.wpd Utilizing trip generation data regularly used for studies of this type, it appears less traffic will be imposed upon the Franklin Road at Valley Avenue intersection with the type of development being proposed verses the traffic that would be allowed under a currently zoned R-3 land use. During the p.m. peak hour, Slate Hill traffic exiting onto Electric Road can be expected to experience level of service F operations and extended delays due to traffic backing-up from a downstream traffic signal. It is recommended that a separate right-turn lane be provided for Route 419 south traffic turning into the new development. This turn lane should be independent of the Route 419 south right-turn lane for southbound Franklin Road traffic. In other words there should not be just one continuous right-turn lane for Route 419 south traffic pass the proposed point of ingress and egress to Slate Hill. Slate Hill traffic exiting onto Electric Road could be better served by utilizing an existing signalized intersection. 11 K:~22~2252Utevised Rpt.wpd ax C~~~xxr~ ~~ ~~~~.~.~ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, ARNOLD COVEY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, GEORGE W. SIMPSON, III, P.E. CHIEF PLANNER, JANET SCHEID March 22, 2004 Limited Liability Company 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Roanoke, VA 24014 Re: Slate Hill Approved Agreements Dear Sir or Madam: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS MAPPING/GIS PERMITS PLANNING & ZONING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Enclosed please find a copy of your approved Erosion & Sediment Control Agreement forms for the above referenced project. Sincerely, ~ ~ ~ ennifer Whittaker Customer Service Representative, II Department of Community Development, Development Review Enclosure P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 • PHONE (540) 772-2080 • FAX (540) 772-2108 ®Recycled Paper SLATE HILL PROJECT TIMELINE OF PROGRESS WITH VDOT Communication Type Date Letter Fax E-mail Meeting Phone 9/18/03 9/25/03 9/30/03 11 /14/03 12/10/03 12/10/03 12/12/03 12/16/03 12/17/03 12/23/03 1 /15/04 1 /23/04 1 /27/04 2/9/04 2/9/04 2/12/04 2/12/04 2/13/04 2/14/04 2/17/04 2/18/04 2/18/04 2/19/04 2/19/04 2/19-2/20/04 2/23/04 2/24/04 2/26/04 3/2/04 3/2/04 3/2/04 3/4/04 3/4/04 3/8/04 3/9/04 3/10/04 3/10/04 3/11 /04 3/11 /04 3/17/04 3/17/04 3/17/04 3/20/04 3/23/04 3/29/04 3/31 /04 4/1/04 4/2/04 4/7/04 4/7/04 4/13/04 4/16/04 61 Communications PLANNING COMMISSION APPEARANCE REQUESTORS Name and Address Spoke at Meeting Comments Mr. Jimm Starke x Quail Valle resident concerned with commercial traffic 5260 Crossbow Circle 5-3 Roanoke, Vir inia 24014 Mr. Ral h Davis x Site Ian re uirements of Count 6633 S Ivan Brook Rd Roanoke, VA 24018-5219 Mr. Bob E bent x Environmental concerns with excavation Sierra Club-Roanoke River Grou 3571 Bradshaw Rd. Salem, VA 24153 Mr. Sherman Bamford x Environmental concerns with excavation Sierra Club Post Office Box 3102 Roanoke, Vir inia 24015 Ms. Elizabeth Abe No comment Sierra Club 6909 Ma B Place Roanoke, VA Mr. Charles Hofer No comment Sierra Club 6235 Saddlerid a Road Roanoke, VA 24018 MS. Frances E. Boatman x Quail Valle resident concerned with usin Quail Valle 5260 Crossbow Circle, #5-C as access for Slate Hill Roanoke, VA 24014 Michael K. Smeltzer No comment POB 14125 Roanoke, VA 24038 Annie Krochalis Environmental concerns 9428 Patterson Drive Bent Mountain, VA APR-19-2004 10 38 OSTERHOUDT PRILLAMAN NATT PROFFERS Address of Sub'ect Pro a 4486 Summit Street Roanoke VA 24014 Tax Map No.: Apnlicant's/Owner's Name: 077.20-01-03 077.20-01-04 077.20-01-52 077.20-01-54 077.20-01-55 087.08-03-11 SLATE HILL I, LLC SLATE HILL Il, LLC WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC PROFFERS 15407740961 P.02i07 The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The C-2 uses set forth on the attached Exhibit A would prohibited. 2. The square footage of any building located on the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. 3, No building will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. 4. The roads shall be in the approximate located as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant permission to construct a portion of the road on the VDOT property as shown on said plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Frxhiblt C. 5. Structures constructed in Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in appearance, materials and design, but will be subject to requirements of speck users. \VOLLYISYS\USEFtS1C8aum9ardnerlZONINGISIate Hill PROFFERS.doc Page 1 of 2 April 13, 2004 Integra April 19, 2004 Dear Roanoke County: Your Investment Partner. The Slate Hill project was initiated over three years ago. To date, the land owner has invested $3,400,000 in the project. The request to rezone R-3, C-2c, and C-1 to a uniform C-2 will allow the County to increase its tax base and allow for the construction of a connector road between Interstate 220 and Route 419. The proposed C-2 zoning will make Roanoke County a destination point for shoppers who want to pick up specialty items: clothes and organic foods. If the property is developed under the current zoning, 440 houses will be developed which will generate twice the traffic. The retail component will be developed without the benefit of access on Interstate 220 and use the existing curb cuts on Route 419, which will not improve the current traffic pattern. It is not the preference of the landowner to develop a residential use; however, an excavation contract has been executed and landowner does control the land fee simple. Slate Hill will be developed. Respectfully, e~ G Hunter D. Smith 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE ROAD, S.W., SUITE 303, ROANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540) 772-5090 / Fax: (540) 772-0106 E-mail: hsmith@rev.net Robert K. Egbert Chair, Roanoke River Group Of the Sierra Club 3571 Bradshaw Rd Salem, Va. 24153 540-384-7448 April 27, 2004 Chairman, Richard C. Flora Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Subject: The Slate Hill Rezoning Request Sir, I have come to you this evening to make three simple requests: First: I ask that you deny the rezoning request for the Slate Hill project. The land is just too steep for building, and the intersection is too busy far more traffic. If this project is completed as planned it will set a precedent. It will be, in effect, a declaration that there is virtually no land in Roanoke County that is off-limits to builders. Second: If this plan does proceed, with or without the rezoning; I ask that the Board instruct the planning and legal staff to take all steps necessary to ensure that absolutely all legal, environmental requirements for site development and construction are carried out to the letter. Third: I ask that the Board of Supervisors have ordinances written and enacted that will protect our steep hillsides and ridgelines in the future. The Slate Hill project has shown that it isn't enough to rely on good intentions, and voluntary compliance to protect our neighborhoods and quality of life. Our citizens should have the right to be left alone on their own property; and that right should be at least as important as the right of builders to make a profit. Thank you. Respectfully, ,~ Robert . Egbe~ Robert K. Egbert Chair, Roanoke River Cxroup Of the Sierra Club 3571 Bradshaw Rd Salem, Va. 24153 540-384-7448 April 27, 2004 Chairman, Richard C. Flora Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Subject: The Slate Hill Rezoning Request Sir, I have come to you this evening to make three simple requests: First: I ask that you deny the rezoning request for the Slate Hill project. The land is just too steep for building, and the intersection is too busy for more traffic. If this project is completed as planned it will set a precedent. It will be, in effect, a declaration that there is virtually no land in Roanoke County that is ofl`limits to builders. Second: If this plan does proceed, with or without the rezoning; I ask that the Board instruct the planning and legal staffto take all steps necessary to ensure that absolutely all legal, environmental requirements for site development and construction are carried aut to the letter. Third: I ask that the Board of Supervisors have ordinances written and enacted that will protect our steep hillsides and ridgelines in the future. The Slate Hill project has shown that it isn't enough to rely on good intentions, and voluntary compliance to protect our neighborhoods and quality of life. Our citizens should have the right to be left alone on their own property; and that right should be at least as important as the right of builders to make a profit. Thank you. Redly, ~~"'~'l ~~ Robert K. Egbert Robert K. Egbert Chair, Roanoke River Group Of the Sierra Club 3571 Bradshaw Rd Salem, Va. 24153 540-384-7448 Apri127, 2004 Chairman, Richard C. Flora Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Subject: The Slate Hill Rezoning Request Sir, I have come to you this evening to make three simple requests: First: I ask that you deny the rezoning request for the Slate Hill project. The land is just too steep for building, and the intersection is too busy for more traffic. If this project is completed as planned it will set a precedent. It will be, in effect, a declaration that there is virtually no land in Roanoke County that is off-limits to builders. Second: If this plan does proceed, with or without the rezoning; I ask that the Board instruct the planning and legal staff to take all steps necessary to ensure that absolutely all legal, environmental requirements for site development and construction are carved out to the letter. Third: I ask that the Board of Supervisors have ordinances written and enacted that will protect our steep hillsides and ridgelines in the future. The Slate Hill project has shown that it isn't enough to rely on good intentions, and voluntary compliance to protect our neighborhoods and quality of life. Our citizens should have the right to be left alone on their own property; and that right should be at least as important as the right of builders to make a profit. Thank you. Respectfully, ~k~ ~ Robert K. Egbert Integra ~pri127, 2004 Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors: Re: Slate Hill Rezoning Your Investment Partner. The enclosed information package on the Slate Hill project has been designed to follow the verbal presentation. The issues covered in the presentation deal with the existing R-3 zoning. This is one of the largest contiguous tracts of R-3 zoning in the County. This property is surrounded by C-2 zoning. We believe the current zoning and future needs of the County are best served by an increase in jobs. The property is owned by the developer. Roanoke County's staff has approved the S&E plans. The developer has signed a contract for the previous excavation and the work that is being performed. The presentation will cover future potential commercial growth in the Route 419 and Route 220/I-581 corridor. We believe the requested rezoning, if approved, will be an important step toward relieving the traffic in the intersection. The existing zoning will prohibit the growth and not alleviate the traffic. I hope you choose to support the re-zoning from R-3 to C-2 and provide an opportunity for much needed jobs in the Roanoke Valley. Respectfull James R. Smith JRS/pj Enclosures 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE ROAD, S.W., SUITE 303, ROANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540} 772-50f~0 / Fax: (540) 772-0106 E-mail: hsmith@integrallc.com SLATE HILL ZONING AND COMMERCIAL NEI~H~~RS ~ Operating Commercial Parcels' Slate Hill Proposed Office Park and Retail Acreage ^~~ Red Areas Existing C2 Zoning A c~ to c2 B R3 "Multi-Family" to C2 C C2c to C2 ,~ ~ ___ i ... i ~ ROFFERS Ad ss of Sub ect Pro e Tax Map No.: Aonlicant's/Owner's Name: 4486 Summit Street Roanoke, VA 24014 077.20-01-03 077.20-01-04 077.20-01-52 077.20-01-54 077.20-01-55 087.08-03-11 SLATE HILL I, LI~C SLATE HILL Il, LLC WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC PROFFERS 1 J4YJ ((4YJ7bl ('', 10~/{~'( The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: 1. The C-2 uses set forth on the attached Exhibit A would prohibited. 2. The square footage of any building located on the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. 3. No building will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. 4. The roads shall be in the approximate located as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant permission to construct a portion of the toed on the VDOT property as shown on said plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Frxhiblt CC. 5. Stnuctures constructed in Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in +appearance, materials and design, bu# will be subject to requirements of specific users. 1VOLLYISYS\USEF~S1CBaumgardnetlZONING1SIdte Hill PROFFERS_doc April 13, 2004 Page 1 of 2 ApplicantlOwner: SLATE HILL 1, LLG 8Y ITS '- SLATE HILL 11, LLC BY ~~ ITS WQOhCLIFF IN1/ESTMENTS, lLC BY ~- ITS ;12, IWOLLYISYSIUSERS1CBaumgardnerlZONING151abe Hill PRQFFER3.doc page 2 of 2 April 13, 2004 r.~4ie~ Exhibit A Slate Hill ProfFered-Out Uses PERM TTED USES IN C«2 (STRICT 1. Residential Uses Accessory Apartment Home Occupation, T pa I Multi-Famil Dwellin Two-Family Dwelling 2. Civic Uses Park and Ride Facility Post Office Public Parks and Recreation Areas Utility Services, Minor 3. Office Uses None 4. Commercial Uses A ricultural Services Red and Breakfast Boardin Hausa Comm®rcial Outdoor Entertainment Gasoline Station Pawn Shop Commercial Indoor Sports & Recreation Commercial Outdoor Sports & Recreation 5. Industrial Us®s Recycling Centers and Stations 6. Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower Parkin Facility ~1JOI..I.YISYSIUSERSIGBaumgardnerlZONING181ate Hilla.I3ES-C2.doc (~ege y of Z Exhibit A Slate Hill Proffered-Out Uses S cial Use Permit 1. Clvlc Uses Halfway House Reli lous Assembly Utility Services, Major 2. Commercial Uses Automobile Dealershi ,Used """ Autt~mobile Repair Services, Major Car Wash Convenience Stvre C7ance Hall Equipment Sales and Rentals Manufactured Home Sales ini-Warehouse Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service Surplus Sales Truck Stop 3. Industrial Uses Custom Manufacturin t_andfill, Ru ble Transportation Terminal 4. Miscellaneous Urea Qutdaar Gatherings 1UOLLYISYSIUSERSICBaumgartlnarlZONING1Slate Mfll-USE8-C2.doc Paga 2 of 2 ,. ~~' ~-~i I ;~ + ~' ~, -- ~__,_ ,~ r ' r ~"""'~ r ~r ... ~. ~.r. a.~~~ rrr ~~rr Q ~ 4~~ 4~ ,'r ~ . ~ r~ J (~ C T ~ +~ ~ 0 ; ~ ~ ~~ ~ r ~ a r ' •~ r ~, ~ r ,?~ ~ 1 C }~ ~• ~ t ~ f~ i • r w ~ ' `, `` ~ . 1 ~ ~~ ~ 1 4 r ~ ` ` ~~~ w~~; ~ ~+. ,1 ~• r • ~ ~ 1{1` ~• b ~` ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~°~ ~~ L ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~~~ '~ ,~ ~ ,~ ~- ~ «,~ ~ r ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~.a ~ ~~~ 0 v 4 c d j~ O 0 E _ c c ~ A ~ N ~ R y °i as o to U o c v` T 2 V A ~ r ~ C O U O ~ 4 ~ A V h W i'1 ~ m A A ~ E w ~ M R 7 ~ v J J N d ~ ~ v M R a c U o ~ a i~ ^~ o a > ~ E v ~ J O W c N a ~ M ~ O O A ~ _ .~ O M ~. J M T w A N }r ~ J 0 .~ ~ O :: ~ M 4 ~ L y ~ d ~ c 3 v E WI ~ v o 4 D N O 3 ^T~ i d Q. k v a ~ v ~ : o d LL .~..I to Q a Q O M C ~' O. Ri O F- ~ a ~ ~ o ~, p. v o ~ N ~ "~ E u Q o a` ~ d y L y ~ U Q ~ a N R ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ o d a` > ~ E ~ N G ~w ~ D• N Q a` ~ (A ~i t U c p u Q a N T 6 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ a` ~ ~ = ~ a y 4 p~ i .= U 7 Q O ao o Q a a ~ c A ~ Q 'j Y O' ~ v Q VI ~] f ~ l d, r~ d ~ • r ~, ~ ~~ ,; ~~ ``~ ..1 . _ ,oe ~' 9~ 4~ `"`~' ~ .... Jam'/ r : t '~ ' " ~ J SFr, ~ i (r ~ `" " _'------ ~' t~, 51 / .. G ~ ~ ~/rt'ti 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ M ~$ ~ A ~ ~ `' _ 1 !} t ~. ~ r ~ -''+.1 ~, 1 = . /'r ~ Y CSC r-t ~ ~~ , ~t ~~.,. ~,:il ~ Gr t~ ~ ~ ,.,,ti .r ~ ~ Y ~~ 4 f ~ ,~. q i~ ~k` _ ~ t 1„ a i ~+ •• _ ~ ~ ~. _-. Y~ ~Y t .~ ~t Y5 ~~ S Sc ` ,.~ f YV~ ~ 1 r ~ ti .1., ` 'th ~1 .. r` ,. µa ~ ~H'! x!< ~ ~ ,r ,i ~ ` ~ E ~. r_,~ f_^-'_. ~7p~A- fir, }~ ~~ :~r.-.~r ,t ~~ t `~~' < _. s y ~; ~"E a ~. ~~-~ ~.+~°~ r^-..~-• ~" t 5./~~ ~ t ,~ T ~; ..~ t . . W%2 O N N H H U p~ W~ ~ ~ O 00 ~ ~ ~ - J ~ J . ~ _~ wW H a~ J I- V~ U W W ~q a r~ ;, ~; l .., ~ , , II ,1 ~r ~~ ,,x. ~ ~~ 1~f~ w~~ ,- i', 6' ~~ i~~ ~-' `~M ~~ '~ ~ ~~ ~ i ~~ ~. ~~~ Q Q H ~ UW ~~ O O a = , J ~ -O = OC w u. ~-- w J ~ ~ H U r~ a ~ ~~ ~ `~ W a ~,:. k, r ` 1~ '}c' ~ l ~ .M 5 } ~ t ~, ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ C ~" F~, ~i ~ 6 I ~,~ ~. ; f 1 ai ~ L '*d ~ 1~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ + ' (~ ~` ~ ~ ~ t ~'~ ~ ,~ ~, ~ ~; ~- ~~r +~ ; .1.~,.. } f, ~ ~ ;~ ~ ~ ~ ' I I ~ ~ ~ 'a AGENDA ITEM NO. /PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: .S/~4T~ /~%//, L~ c I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~~f' _-~~id ADDRESS: 5-2~O ro rr~o~/ C~'~-~~~~ y~ l~o~•t/c~~~ v/a zs-~~. PHONE (OPTIONAL): GROUP/ORGANIZATION: ~c~sioc~.~ E -.. AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: 1~ ~~~. I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, 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: ~'63~"~ 7",~C E~ ~~'~ti ~ ADDRESS: ~ ~7l ,G'f'~~1 S/~,q c,v ~~~ ~ SAl ~~~ , ~*.~~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): .~- y o - 3 ~ `i - ~y ~i ~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: S ~ ~ ~' ~' ~' G~. u E AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ~/ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~' ~oy~.P/~ ~~ct~u~~r o ~' -s~ ~ ~/~ ~ ~-o? d,~ G~~~l {~' ~~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, 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): GROUP/ORGANIZATION: d ~~~ 'c. 1/ .A-L~. ~ E AGENDA ITEM NO. l PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~'~~; ~~ i /~ / 1 ~J 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: ~~ '"7 ~~ ~~~ ,~i PHONE (OPTIONAL): GROUP/ORGANIZATION: PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~f ~_ f iT t ~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given three (3) minutes to comment, whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ The speaker will be limited to a presentation of his/her point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the Clerk to the Board. ^ Individuals speaking on behalf of an organized group shall file with the Clerk written authorization from the group allowing the individual to represent them. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME: EJ (_._-~Z_-;~~ ~`l~~ `~~~~ ADDRESS: L~ ~~ L? ~'~ 1Y~~_,~_ ~ ~~,~Zs ~~~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~ l __~ ~ Z--2_.L~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: e AGENDA ITEM NO. AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: LI'C~ ~ ~ ~ I I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, 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 LEGIBL/Y AND GIVE TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD NAME.^~~~~I~~ ~~~/~l--fL~;7 ADDRESS: ~~ y~~ ~ e ~a~; l~'ti~ li~~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~~~~~~~5~'~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: f •„ .~- The Paw and Whisker ii, 1111 `~~~ • ~M~~ e' research and grantsmanship for envrronn~entaJ and comrr~imity k~ased concerns Comments to the Board of Supervisors April 27,2004 Annie Krochalis 9428 Patterson Drive Bent Mountain, Va. 24059 Members of the Board, I read the headline in yesterday's Roanoke Times saying, "Supervisors' Choice Will be a Landmark", and the reasons were familiar to me. These include citizens' experience of disdain, or even annoyance at their input, and, I quote a sense of the "County being wide open to whoever appears and offers a handout to enhance the tax revenue". I add my concern that ashort-term boom in construction does not fund long-term service and infrastructure costs. New residential developments are being added on questionable slopes while we cut teaching positions in our schools and review Fire & Rescue reports that state that services can not be rendered in a timely fashion. Tonight we are discussing commercial development without VDOT approved access, no storm water runoff plan, and non-compliance with DEQ regulations. The County Comprehensive Plan notes that development in this community should be carried out with "environmental sensitivity". The permitting process itself does not support this goal. Slate Hill has slopes from 33 to 57%. The risk of further erosion and landslides will aggravate the water pollution that is already classified as "impaired" in the Ore Branch which runs downstream. The area of this project has nnnie k!ochalis Page 1 Q4/27i04 experienced water runoff problems. Staff at the Lowes Store have reported that the store bonus of last year was spent on shoring up the sliding hillside, and the convenience store nearby on Rte.220 has reported storm water backup and flooding. Discussion of the Slate Hill project has brought to light the need for greater coordination of County and DEQ regulation of erosion and sediment control ordinances and enforcement. There is no built in cross check system to ensure that a project has complied with both sets of regulations. Clearing and grading work are allowed prior to re-zoning permits, building, driveway and road permits. It seems that full sets of large format construction documents are not required before a re-zoning is even considered. This is an area of concern to citizens and one that I believe the Board and Commission should address in order to make the County permitting process a meaningful one. This area is one with high visual impact as an entrance to the community. The Slate Hill ridgeline is the southern gateway to the County and should be protected as a draw for visitors and tourists to the area. All of these concerns, erosion, storm water runoff, water pollution, traffic, noise, environmental sensitivity and the visual presentation of our southern gateway to the County, provide strong reasons to deny this request. It is my hope, as a citizen, that you will do so. a«nie kr~chalis Page 2 04/27/04 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~_ PUBLIC HEARINGORDINANCE -CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~ c ('e I'~ ~ ~l I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, 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 : S l-~-C-~- ~-~- N ~~ ~:--.,~„-~d ADDRESS: ~ a F~ ~ 4c ~ l c ; Z `(a ~ PHONE (OPTIONAL): GROUP/ORGANIZATION: ~ `~-+-~ C ~ mot' 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: ,~~~`~~~ ~r ~% ~'~"ll_r??~.~~ ADDRESS: `'r~l ~ ~ d~~~~ ~~ `s~~ ~,- ~~ r ~Ut~~~ ~~6~~, . l/~ o~ 1~~~ t ~T PHONE (OPTIONAL): GROUP/ORGANIZATION: ~ ~~,;; AGENDA ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE -CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~n~ l~Q Q. 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 T~F~{F..~L-@KK TO THE BOARD NAME: ~ !~j 1~... ~.~/~ Y'l~(~ ADDRESS: a~ C~ ( ~ (~ ~/ PHONE (OPTIONAL): GROUP/ORGANIZATION: SPEAKER NO. of AGENDA ITEM NO. S-4 X PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: Keagy Village -Khan Development 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: ~`',~~ r ~, ADDRESS: %~;.~ ~ S .~`` PHONE (OPTIONAL)~~""~~~ %~-~~ ~= ~'~-~ GROUP/ORGANIZATION: SPEAKER NO. L AGENDA ITEM NO. S-4 X PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZEN COMMENTS SUBJECT: Keagy Village -Khan Development 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: /-/~~ ~~ %~iP~ ADDRESS: ~,Z~.S ~~U~~N ~GLCi PHONE (OPTIONAL): ~~SyG ~zs- ~~~ 3 GROUP/ORGANIZATION: ~~'«TEX /-~o~~ti~ f~~c~~,~ ~~,~tu~<~Ty,~.f5~~~_ \~ TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR MIXED USE RETAIL & OFFICE SPACE KNOWN AS SLATE HILL DEVELOPMENT IN ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA For Integra Investments, LLC 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Building 1, Suite 303 Roanoke, Virginia 24014 April, 2004 Commission No: 2252 MATTERN & CRAIG, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS 701 FIRST STREET, S.W. ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24016 (540) 345-9342 FAX: (540) 345-7691 SUMMARY General This study was undertaken to determine the traffic impact on U.S. Route 220 (Franklin Road) and Route 419 (Electric Road) from the construction of commercial development consisting of retail and office space on a 30 acre tract located at the corner of Routes 419 and 220 in Roanoke County. Additionally, this study was to determine what, if any, off-site road improvements will be required to provide acceptable level of service operations. Conclusions The commercial development, known as Slate Hill, is projected to generate 6,224 trips per day; 3,112 entering and 3,112 exiting the development sites. Of the total number of trips to be generated, only about 78 percent (4,860) are anticipated to be new trips added to the existing roadway system. The other trips would be pass-by and internal trips. The weekday peak hours for traffic generated by the development is expected to coincide with the peak hour for traffic on the existing roadways. Level of service operations on Franklin Road at the Valley Avenue intersection experiences less than desirable operations under existing (2004) conditions. This is due partially to the signalized intersection at Franklin Road with Crossbow Circle/Walmart Entrance. However, the Buildout year 2008 traffic operations at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue do not differ significantly from today's existing conditions, although two movements drop to LOS F operations. It is recommended that the left-turn lane for northbound traffic on Franklin Road be lengthened as much as possible to accommodate this traffic. K:~22~2252Utevised Rpt.wpd Utilizing trip generation data regularly used for studies of this type, it appears less traffic will be imposed upon the Franklin Road at Valley Avenue intersection with the type of development being proposed verses the traffic that would be allowed under a currently zoned R-3 land use. During the p.m. peak hour, Slate Hill traffic exiting onto Electric Road can be expected to experience level of service F operations and extended delays due to traffic backing-up from a downstream traffic signal. It is recommended that a separate right-turn lane be provided for Route 419 south traffic turning into the new development. This turn lane should be independent of the Route 419 south right-turn lane for southbound Franklin Road traffic. In other words there should not be just one continuous right-turn lane for Route 419 south traffic pass the proposed point of ingress and egress to Slate Hill. Slate Hill traffic exiting onto Electric Road could be better served by utilizing an existing signalized intersection. ii K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd a TABLE OF CONTENTS P~ INTRODUCTION .............................. .............1 A. Purpose ................................ .............1 1 B. Procedure .............................. .............. 3 C. Site Location and Study Area ................. .............. D. Existing and Proposed Site Uses ............... .............. 3 E. Existing and Proposed Nearby Land Uses ......... .............. 5 F. Existing Roadways and Programmed Improvements ... .............. 5 I II. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................... 6 A. Daily and Peak Hours Traffic Volumes ......................... 6 B. Levels of Service Analyses ................................ 13 III. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT SLATE HILL DEVELOPMENT ........ 15 A. Daily and Peak Hours Traffic Volumes ........................ 15 B. Levels of Service Analyses ................................ 21 IV. TRIP GENERATION ........................................ 21 V. SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS ......... 24 VI. ANALYSIS OF FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH DEVELOPMENT .......... 24 A. Future Daily and Peak Hours Traffic Volumes ................... 24 B. Levels of Service Analyses ............................... 31 VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................... 31 APPENDIX A 12-HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS APPENDIX B LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSES LIST OF TABLES 1. Level of Service Criteria for Two-Way Stop Control .................... 13 2. LOS for Existing 2004 Conditions -Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue ......... 14 3. LOS for Existing 2004 Conditions -Franklin Road @ Lowe's Southern Entrance .. 15 4. Trip Generation Data for Slate Hill Development ...................... 23 e 111 K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd Fi urge e No. Page 1. Location Map ............................... ............... 2 2. Slate Hill Aerial .............................. ............... 4 3. March 2, 2004 12-Hour Traffic Count ' 7 s Southern Entrance Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe ............... 4. March 2, 2004 24-Hour Projected Volume ' 8 s Southern Entrance Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe ............... 5. March 2, 2004 A.M. Peak Hour Count ' 9 s Southern Entrance Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe ............... 6. March 2, 2004 P.M. Peak Hour Count ' 10 s Southern Entrance Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe .............. 7 March 12, 2004 A.M. Peak Hour Count . Electric Road @ Southbound Ramp to Route 220 ........ .............. 11 8 March 12, 2004 P.M. Peak Hour Count . Electric Road @ Southbound Ramp to Route 220 ........ .............. 12 9. Projected Year 2008 24-Hour Volume Without Development (Background Traffic} Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe's Southern Entrance .............. 16 10. Projected Year 2008 A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Without Development (Background Traffic) Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe's Southern Entrance .............. 17 11. Projected Year 2008 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Without Development (Background Traffic) Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe's Southern Entrance .............. 18 12. Projected Year 2008 A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Without Development (Background Traffic) Electric Road @ Southbound Ramp to Route 220 ........ .............. 19 13. Projected Year 2008 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Without Development (Background Traffic) Electric Road @ Southbound Ramp to Route 220 ........ .............. 20 14. Conceptual Site Plan, Slate Hill Development ........................ 22 15. Projected Year 2008 24-Hour Volume with Development Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe's Southern Entrance .............. 25 16. Projected Year 2008 A.M. Peak Hour with Development Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe's Southern Entrance .............. 26 6 1V K:122~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd a 17. Projected Year 2008 P.M. Peak Hour with Development Franklin Road @ Valley Avenue & Lowe's Southern Entrance .............. 27 18. Projected Year 2008 24-Hour Volume with Development Electric Road @ Proposed Slate Hill Entrance ........................ 28 19. Projected Year 2008 A.M. Peak Hour with Development Electric Road @ Proposed Slate Hill Entrance ........................ 29 20. Projected Year 2008 P.M. Peak Hour with Development Electric Road @ Proposed Slate Hill Entrance ........................ 30 21. Projected Year 2008 A.M. & P.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service with Development ............................... 32 V K:~22~2252~R~vised Rpt.wpd I. INTRODUCTION A. Purnose A new commercial development known as Slate Hill has been proposed for 30 acres of land located at the corner of Routes 419 and 220 across from Tanglewood Mall in the County of Roanoke as shown in Figure 1. Primary access to the site will be provided from entrances at its intersection connecting to Valley Avenue (Route 862) with Route 220 (Franklin Road) and right-turns in and out on Route 419 (Electric Road). This study was undertaken to determine the traffic impact on the existing roadways in the vicinity of the proposed development. Recommendations regarding any improvements necessary to accommodate the additional traffic anticipated to be generated by the development are also part of the study. B. Procedure To assess the impact of the development, a traffic analysis was conducted following the conventional procedures involving trip generation, distribution, and assignment. Data concerning existing traffic volumes on Electric Road and Franklin Road were obtained from VDOT and supplemented by collecting turning movement counts. Information on the proposed development, as far as it is presently known, was furnished by Integra Investments, LLC. The traffic to be generated by the proposed development was estimated utilizing this data in conjunction with trip generation rates contained in a report (7`'' edition) published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers entitled "Trip Generation" . Traffic volumes for the proposed development have been estimated for an average weekday and the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the adjacent street system. e 1 K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd 1P S (¢~ ~tP V P V i MONTGOMERY AvE i P~ O~`'~` is / PVf. ~SUGE,Op,VE <P p~4. .~ C °v C~"S Q ~ O c• SPRUCEUppp ~0 ' \ m ~ O A ~r L~LfuppD "'] HDLLOWELL `9~ ~~ ~°~ QO ~O/ / IIDUN ~~~~ uyfRDgLf Q `~° ~. 3 ~E / ~O Y~ \4 ),~ v //AD/AM/CIR" /\~P=~// DR FlSNBLA4N PARK V.u.CC. f~e~SSaPO?P~~ a 4. C QO+~ i~ O • RDBERTS PO =`'~ v O RD ~~ a'~" / BANNISTER Ey RPM 0 ' y~~ ,~9/~4c ~/ f ` 9 J Rc~ Qo ~° 1 `FOQ' `Q~ CDURi ¢ ~~~ ~_ ty Q `~Q ~ VIRGINIA H "Yy ~ ~4. '.. ~~ uE57fRN gpP~ ~ 000 FQ ~"' ' ~ ClYLfGf ~ ys F,~~S ~~~ < ~RpBERiS ~ <y c ~+c'~ ~ ~ ~~ I ~Q~* ~l ~~ ~ S S~EP``NG m°/ ~v~\v~ ~/lower ?9/y ~. R ~'0,~,+a Sr C '/ V. SSF 9 s ~ /i ~! ORTGHtuODO ~~ <? z c' PNE ~ O ~~ ~ h ~LEpppLE t~-~" e° L SOMERSET P~ POPN AR ~\~~ ~ 3 2 Q¢k QPP` o ~ z° IANGLfu000 = Nau / C Q~"~~F9g~~ RIVERBIRCR ~-/ WDODt <<+ O °~ ~oc,Ea°~ HiL C y~2 R LPT 0 1 i m ~ o~`yi ~ ~ ~DPlN po = !y q` gpS ~ (~; 'oy~\\ HEATHERTON i ~ Z / ~V`L m PO ~ SO ! g~ ~i O~Pr'r~, / Utt~EP~ ` y~0/ c,0 JOPLIN ~~ ,r~ q BRl$iDl ~ \ RD ~P~~Ey PNE A? \1_~,\\s HILL ST ,~e ~~o°p PROJECT E ~ 51 TE~ LHUKAR 1 BIRD ~~ `~~ A$TDR $T ~`~ o ,~O ¢ i ~~ ~ EDEN ~~ ~, Q r ~' ¢ CHURCHII 2• AvE OYERLPND SKYL CRESEVI gL yO ~~ ELK HIL DR ~ e f`1 wm o s 3 9 R 0 H"~S o~ ~~V~r~ 9 f0 m i P C HUNIlNG H/LLS COLMIRY CLUB SCPLE o Tooo• zooo• 8 9) ~~ 220 NARROMS LN RIDGE 7f/~ 0 J4. L OCAT I ON MAP Figure 1 2 C. Site Location and Study Area The project site is located about four miles south of downtown Roanoke and immediately east of Tanglewood Mall. It is bounded by Franklin Road on the east, Lowe's on the south, mixed use retail and multi-family development on the west and Electric Road and Tanglewood Mall on the north. The tract of land being considered for the development is shown in Figure 2 and is relatively steep. Access is presently restricted and probably a principal reason the tract has not been previously developed. The study area for this project has been limited to those roadways immediately adjacent to the project site. Specific attention for study has been given to the Franklin Road/Valley Avenue intersection and the point of ingress and egress onto Electric Road. D. Existin~~and Proposed Site Uses The present site is undeveloped and is covered with underbrush and trees. The developer proposes a mixed use of retail and office space in a campus like development. The land is currently zoned C1, R3, and C2c and is being petitioned to be rezoned all as C2. 3 K:~22~2252Utevised ~pt.wpd SLATE HILL AERIAL E. Existing and Proposed Nearby Land Uses The existing land uses surrounding the site includes over one million square feet of retail space. Existing retailers include Lowe's, Wal-Mart, Rent-A-Space, Tanglewood Mall, Hunting Hills Plaza and others. Some multi-family residences are also present adjacent to the northwest corner of the tract proposed for development. Proposed nearby land uses are not anticipated to change anytime in the near future. East of the site and east of Franklin Road opposite Valley Avenue could be developed commercially in the next few years. F. Existing Roadways and Programmed Improvements The study area thoroughfares consist of two Urban Primary Arterial Roadways: Routes 419 and 220. Both are four-lane divided roadways with raised medians and separate left and right-turn lanes at major intersections. Sight distances on both Franklin Road and Electric Road are good where traffic from Slate Hill will access these roadways. The posted speed limits on Franklin Road and Electric Road at these points are 45 mph and 35 mph, respectively. A minor urban street, Valley Avenue (Route 862), is only about 450 feet in length and intersects with Route 220 (Franklin Road). It is basically atwo-lane street which widens at its intersection with Franklin Road to accommodate two left-turn lanes and a separate right-turn lane for eastbound traffic. There are no immediate plans for improving the roads that would have an impact on the traffic service needs associated with the plans for the proposed development under consideration in this Study. However, future Interstate Route 73 is a planned north/south roadway that will generally follow the Route 220 corridor 6 5 K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd between I-81 and the North Carolina line. The exact location of this facility has yet to be determined, but the Virginia Department of Transportation has a consultant under contract performing environmental studies at this time. The construction of this facility can be expected to significantly reduce the traffic volumes on the section of Franklin Road impacted by the proposed development considered in this Study. II. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Daily and Peak Hours Traffic Volumes Daily traffic volumes were developed by factoring up 12-hour turning movement counts collected on Franklin Road, and peak hour counts collected on Electric Road. The 24-hour volumes on Franklin Road in the vicinity of the study area ranged between 39,050 and 41,200 vehicles per day (vpd). On Electric Road the 24-hour volume in the vicinity of the proposed point of ingress and egress to the proposed development is 52,000 vpd. The results of the turning movement counts are shown in Figures 3 through 8. As may be noted, the recorded peak hours occurred as follows: A.M. P.M. Franklin Rd. @ Valley Ave. 7:30 to 8:30 4:45 to 5:45 Electric Rd. @ SB on Ramp 7:30 to 8:30 4:45 to 5:45 The highest hourly volumes were recorded during the p.m. peak hours. They were 3,267 on Franklin Road, of which 1,956 were southbound, and 2,025 recorded on Electric Road (Route 419 South). Appendix A contains the summarized traffic counts collected for this Study. 6 K:~22~2252\Revised Rpt.wpd ~ 0 -v 1433 B/3 i 1462 I 67 ~ I 774 I 30,779 v R ~ ~ ~~ M v N . : a 0 N N ti O t~ lp N ~ M ~ ~ 29l5I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j ti ~ ~ ~ v ~ - - MAR. 2. 2004 12-HOUR COUNT 6 29x855 7:00 A.M. T 0 7:00 P.M. 0 MAR. 2, 2004 PROJECTED 24-HOUR VOLUME 1 M ti I 2972 I rn 2~ N N ~ v Q, 74 l43 69 -. N 47 N s 0 J ~ ~ ~ N N 2930 3 3 I 34 I o~o ~i N N SIN ~~ P N ~ O N 296/ 9 O MAR. 2, 2004 A.M. PEAK HOUR 7:30 A.M. T 0 8:30 A.~vl. O N N W ti O O j 10 MAR. 2, 2004 P.M. PEAK HOUR 4:45 P.M. T 0 5:45 P.M. Flqure ti 6 0 U W oil Q ~I~ 11 I tar I MAR. l2, 2004 A.M. PEAK HOUR 7:30 A.M. T 0 8:30 A.M. Figure -. 0 U V W rn Q W 6 MAR. l2, 2004 P.M. PEAK HOUR 4:45 P.M. T 0 5:45 P.M. B. Level of Service Anal The adequacy of a street or intersection to accommodate traffic volumes using it is measured in terms of level of services. Level of Service (LOS) is a term used to describe the degree of traffic congestion and is expressed by the letter A through F, with A reflecting the best situation and F the worst conditions. Level of Service E represents the condition in which the traffic volumes are about equal to capacity. When volumes exceed capacity and forced flow conditions develop with vehicular back-ups, LOS F exits. For unsignalized intersections .LOS is expressed in terms of delay (seconds/vehicle). Table 1 shows the average total delay for the various levels of service. TABLE 1 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR TWO WAY STOP CONTROL Average Total Daily Level of Service (Sec/Veh} A <10 g > 10 and < 15 C > 15 and < 25 D > 25 and < 35 E > 35 and < 50 F > 50 Total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line; this time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last-in-queue position to the first-in- queue position. The analyses for level of service operations in this study were made using signalized and unsignalized intersections. The Franklin Road at Valley Avenue intersection was analyzed as a signalized intersection. Franklin Road at Lowe's 13 K:~22~2252~Revised Rp[,wpd E Southern Entrance and Electric Road at Proposed New Entrance to Slate Hill were analyzed as unsignalized intersections. Level of service analyses were performed for the existing volumes collected where 12-hour counts were obtained. The analysis and evaluations reflect methods set forth in the Highway Capacity Manual, (HCM 2000) published by the Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. On Franklin Road the analyses reflects 17% truck volumes, 2% grade, and a 120 second cycle which is comparable to Franklin Road at the Crossbow Circle / Walmart Entrance signalized intersection. An analysis of the existing traffic operations at the Franklin Road at Valley Avenue intersection revealed the following LOS operations: TABLE 2 LOS for Existing 2004 Conditions Franklin Road at Valley Avenue PEAK HOUR DATA EB NB SB Approach Delay 46.8 23.1 17.7 A.M. A proach LOS D C B Intersection Delay 22.0 Intersection LOS C Approach Delay 48.1 15.0 68.5 P.M. A roach LOS D B E Intersection Delay 46.2 Intersection LOS D Critical travel times on Franklin Road at Valley Avenue are northbound in the A.M. and southbound in the P.M. During the A.M. the northbound through and left-turn movements experience LOS C and D operations, respecitvely. .In the P.M. these movements experience B and E operations. For the southbound movement in the A.M. the through and right-turn movements experience LOS B 14 K:~22~2252VLevised Rpt.wpd E and A, respectively and in the P.M. E and A. LOS D operations exist on the east approach (Valley Avenue) during both peak hours. Table 3 presents the LOS operations for the intersection of Franklin Road with Lowe's most southern entrance. TABLE 3 LOS for Existing 2004 Conditions Franklin Road at Lowe's Southern Entrance PEAK HOUR DATA EB Approach Delay 11.3 Sec. A.M. Approach LOS B Approach Delay 17.7 Sec. P.M. Approach LOS C Since the entrance for the proposed Slate Hill Development does not presently exist, no level of service analyses were performed on Electric Road for existing conditions . Appendix B contains the data for the existing level of service analyses. III. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT A. Dail~and Peak Hours Traffic Volumes The existing volumes have been projected to 2008, the year in which the proposed development considered in this study is assumed to be completed, by applying a growth factor of 1 percent to the existing 2004 traffic counts. On Figures 9 through 13 are shown the year 2008 traffic without the proposed new development. This traffic is commonly referred to as the Background Traffic. 15 K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd 0 N N W O O PROJECTED 2008 24 -HOUR VOLUME WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT 16 0 N N W O i~ O 2 PROJECTED 2008 A.M. PEAK HOUR WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT ~o 0 N N w O O 2 Y PROJECTED 2008 P.M. PEAK HOUR WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT is W m ~i- W PROJECTED 2008 A.M. PEAK HOUR WITHOU7~ DEVOPMENT 19 rn ~- W 20 PROJECTED 2008 P.M. PEAK HOUR WITHOUT DEVOPMENT Flgure l B. Levels of Service Anal The level of service operations for the year 2008 Background Traffic are anticipated to remain the same as the 2004 existing volumes for all practical purposes. With such small increases in the traffic volumes, only the 2008 volumes with both Background Traffic and traffic associated with the proposed new development have been analyzed. IV . TRIP GENERATION The overall magnitude of traffic anticipated to be contributed to the existing roadways by the proposed development during the peak hours, as well as the total number of trips for an average weekday, is a concern from a traffic engineering viewpoint since this would be the critical volumes. This information is important with respect to providing safe, efficient ingress and egress to the site. The development proposed by Integra Investments is shown on a preliminary site plan in Figure 14. Trip generation rates for an average weekday and the a.m. and p.m. peak hours of the adjacent street system were utilized to develop traffic for this study. The peak hours of traffic associated with the normal every day use of the planned development are expected to coincide with the peak hours for traffic on the existing roadways which will serve the proposed new development. Table 4 presents traffic generation data for the proposed new Slate Hill Development. At buildout, the proposed development is expected to generate an additional 6,224 trips per day with one-half entering and one-half exiting the new development. As shown in Table 4, 585 trips will be generated in the a.m. peak hour and 838 in the p.m. peak hour. Of the total number of trips to be generated by the new development, some will come from pass-by and internal traffic, specifically, that for buildings 1-A and 2A. Even some traffic destined to other buildings in the development will come from pass-by traffic. 21 K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd e J 1 v _' ~` L..J Q a ~_ U ~~ ~~ d~ ~, ~~= ~ , ~~ ~~~ ~! ~ ~, ~ _. `~ ~ v ~ ~ . ~ , h-~ L d u ~ ~ l'J' ~ ~i~ `~ '~~ ~ ~_ /~ .~ ^^~''. V ~ `v ~~ i -Jn~_ ~1! _ ~ Q~ s ~ ~~'- V ---~- ~~ ~, _ '; ., C~c? :~~ ~ ~ ~ ._ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ d° i !', ~ rah ~t' ~ %, ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ .~ ~~ - . ~~ ~~~ j ~r ~ ~~ : ,~ 1 ~V/1 \ R. ~~ 1. O ~.L~ar ~~~ ~~~-~,` •\ ~ ` '~ ~' ~ _ Q ~~. ~~ : ,. ~ ~° ~. ~ ~~ •, 1 ~ V y' ~ =1~ .. , ~' ~~!~ M ~> ~~^~Q ~-~ ~` ~ -~ Z ~ 1, ~ ~ - v-. ~P~~~ ;i' ~~ ~-` ~J~_j a+~n ss~ o, /V/' \ ~ ~r ; ~bn. ~~ ~~rti ~ `~ ~ v h ~'' ~' c9 L~ `~ c=, ~ ~, ° ~o ~ ~ ~'~> `.S ~ ~~ ~ -- W G ~ ~ 5, ,d p ~ ~!~ M , {J ~ ~ ~ ~,~I W 0 U ~ a~ ,. U O _ rJ W -, W(Y-, A I a Ql O~ ~ O ~~ ~, f~ ~ o ~~ ~, o~ N p ~~ ~o .~ E Q~ u Q '~ ~ 0 o u O .,. w m a~ ~ _ T~ i `r/ `' G r-------- ~~ ~ . ~ o ~ ,y ~ ~ ~1~~~ ~~ ~, :_~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ; 411 ' i o /i~~ ( I v~~~~ ~// ~c~ ~ / ~~ ~~:~~ ~~:~ Figure 14 E 22 0 C ~ O N N O ~ ~ U m ~ ~ ~ (6 U (~ U ~z .., f~ > ~ v y W ~ z y a ~i f-a y ~ i L [~ .ate ~ ~ z C Q 0 a~ ~ Q ~ ~ __ ~ 2 Y 0 ~ C cII ~ ~ ~ . c U O ~ ~ a`~ O ~ ` C _ ~ ~ ~~ ee III N Y C X ~ ~ ~ r ~ ,~ O ~ $F ~ `i 'a ~ ~ N y N m ~ O DO ~ ~ M N t~ M ~~ l D N ~ ~ N v ~ ~ , ~ ~ti ~ ~X y + ~ ° w = o, ~ : ~ , f,- ; Y ~ C N -~ n ~ F~ . ~ ~ N CD N (D CO V' ~ O n- C F- N ~ W ~ ~; . d ~ ~0 n LC) , ~~- ',: CD O) ~ t .~ M O O CD ' ~ O O O to ~".' ~ S " ~ N 7 w. ~ l ~ « « ; ~ tt~ r to ~ N N ~- ~ O I l 2 p~ c9 'L n O O t ' « « N O ti M a0 op ~ M ti ~ M M M M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w Q y N~ ~ to N C C C C C ~ ~ C C N U~ O O O U C - C C C C ~ w C N c9 p_ ~ Y ~- ~ a~ w ~ w ~ ~a m ti o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C!1 O° O O O ~ CD 'c1' ~ O O_ N N '~T ~- 'C ~-- M N N ~~ h ~- ; : w .-, ` {: ~ 1,° ~ o ~ o O 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 o 0 o 0 ° z ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 Q ' , r . O O O ~~ Q V N ~ ~F,. ~ ti ti :,. 3., LL i• - ~ ~ E E ~~ ~ ~ E to ~ N ~ O uj - O y N ~ ~ O ~ (~ ~O y O y h ~ ~ Q fn d N i i ~ to ~ ~ ~ tq ~ -, ~ ~ to ~ tq ~ N O ~ _ O C .~ ~~~~ m C O ,~ ~ ` t O r pOj ~ O~ ~ ~ y y O~ ~ O ~ _ N ~ ~ - - -~ O7 . C O '~ C ~ O C O ~ C . m C O ~ C ~ C _~ .~ _ ~ ` N~ V ~ ` O ~ U ~ N~ U i U Y ~ ~ N ~ U (6 n CO O a U t0 n f0 O a •, V CO n (9 O a (q p n ,< ~ O O Q Q m Q m U ~ Q m U ~ O ~ N N '- c'7 M M M ~ ~ ~T ;~ m ~ ~ m m ~ c ~ m ~ ~ o -~ N m ~ - ~ - a - =a - =a - ~ - ~ - ~ - =a - - m m m m m m m m m m c 0 a ~~ ~ M ~t ' ct 0 0 0 o v v v E= ~ U M rn .-- w ao ~ ti ti ti ~ ~ ti ti C O c~ , ; iii w ~ ~ O m Q w v 0 U 0 Y M C M O d O Q U o o ~ 0 m •- a> io ~ ~ ~ ~ O O C C y ~ C ~ (6 +4 C C U O (9 ~ C C C C O ~~ (D N C C C a~ °~ U U n ,n F~ ~ W W F- F- m °~ ~ L F- ~ 23 Of the 6,224 daily trips, 870 are expected to be pass-by trips and another 494 would be internal trips. Therefore only 4,860, 2,430 entering and 2,430 exiting, would be new trips anticipated to be added to the existing roadway system. V. SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS Site-generated traffic is anticipated to be drawn to the development from throughout the Roanoke Valley. However, it is expected that the largest traffic generators will be the land uses associated with Buildings lA, 2A and 2B. It is also anticipated that the major access to these sites will be via the entrance on Route 419 (Electric Road). For the remaining development access will be provided by both Route 419 (Electric Road) and Route 220 (Franklin Road) with slightly more using the access from Route 419. VI. ANALYSIS OF FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH DEVELOPMENT A. Future Dail~and Peak Hours Traffic Volumes The buildout year (late 2008) traffic volumes were developed by combining the background traffic (buildout year without the proposed development) with the site- generated traffic. The volumes developed took in consideration that 14 percent of site-generated traffic would come from pass-by trips, that is, traffic already "passing by" the site which decides to stop, and another 8 percent which are considered to be internal trips, that is, beginning and ending within the development. Figures 15 through 20 show the projected 2008 average daily traffic, a.m. peak hour, and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes for the existing roadway system with the proposed development volumes included. ~ 24 K:122~2252Vtevised Rpt.wpd O N N 25 j W O PROJECTED 2008 24 -HOUR VOLUME WITH DEVELOPMENT Flqure 0 N N W R O j PROJECTED 2008 A.M. PEAK HOUR WITH DEVELOPMENT 26 0 N N W ti J O O j PROJECTED 2008 P.M. PEAK HOUR WITH DEVELOPMENT a~ 0 U ti V J W o~', P' W 28 PROJECTED 2008 24 -HOUR VOLUME WITH DEVOPMENT F/gure /8 0 U ti V W 01 ~t W 29 PROJECTED 2008 A.M. PEAK HOUR WITH DEVOPMENT Flgure l9 0 W 30 PROJECTED 2008 P.M. PEAK HOUR WITH DEVOPMENT 20 B. Levels of Service Analyses Utilizing the background plus site traffic volumes, level of service analyses were performed for the three points of ingress and egress to the proposed development. Figure number 21 depicts the results of these analyses for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively. The only level of service changes at the Franklin Road/Valley Avenue intersection between the existing and buildout conditions are that the northbound left-turn movement drops from D to F in the A.M.; and in the P.M. the southbound through movement drops from E to F and the left and right-turns from Valley Avenue drop from D to E. For Electric Road LOS C can be expected for traffic exiting Slate Hill during the A.M. However, during the p.m. peak hour the level of service operations for traffic exiting the site onto Electric Road can be expected to be F with long delays. Traffic exiting the Slate Hill development no doubt will adjust when this occurs and some will use Franklin Road as the point of egress. Installation of a signal on Electric Road would improve level of services operations for Slate Hill traffic but would severely penalize the Electric Road traffic. VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS There is an insufficient number of lanes on Franklin Road to obtain an acceptable level of service for the P.M. northbound left-turn movement onto Valley Avenue under existing conditions. The same is true for the southbound through movement during the p.m. peak hour. Operations at this intersection are influenced by the signalized intersection to the south (Franklin Road at Crossbow Circle/Walmart Entrance). The level of service operations for the Buildout year 2008 traffic volumes at the Franklin Road/Valley Avenue intersection are not significantly different from that of the existing 31 K:~22~2252~Revised Rpt.wpd A.M. PEAK HOUR F-~ C -;- P M_PFAK HnUR E~ B '~~ PROJECTED 2008 LEVELS OF SERV/CE WITH DEVELOPMENT 2r 32 conditions. As for Franklin Road, the northbound A.M. left-turn dropped from LOS D operations to LOS F and the P.M. southbound through movement dropped from LOS E with 73.3 seconds of delay to LOS F with 88.1 seconds of delay. It is recommended that the northbound left-turn lane be extended to the maximum length possible. It would be desirable to extend its full lane width by 100-feet, but this is limited by the proximity of the left-turn provided for southbound traffic turning onto Southern Lane. Should the section of Slate Hill property be developed as currently zoned (R-3), it would impose a significantly higher traffic volume on the Franklin Road/Valley Avenue intersection than would the proposed development considered in this study. There is also an insufficient number of lanes on Electric Road to adequately provide acceptable level of service operations during the p.m. peak hour at the point of ingress and egress to Slate Hill. Better level of service operations could be provided for Slate Hill traffic by exiting onto Electric Road at an existing signalized intersection. For the site plan considered in this Study, it is recommended that a separate 350-foot right-turn lane with an 100-foot taper be provided for Route 419 southbound traffic turning into Slate Hill. The provision of this turn lane should not be made a continuous right-turn lane in conjunction with the existing separate right-turn lane for southbound Route 419 traffic destined to southbound Route 220. ~ 33 K:~22~22521Revised Rpt.wpd .. , C- F } ~- Z~ a _ .^ ~. ~ ~~ ~ ~, i ~, M. .F ay ~ .~ n x _ - ht 'M- C .. S -. ~SY R T - _ ~ 'Y i ~ t ! 4 `` ; f ~ ac. rF ,} i ~ a ~ ~ Y ~ Z S.. _'~ H _'' _ _ 7 1 ; !. ~ 3 ~ = L ~ ~ _} i +.. r r ,; , ~~ f N ' -ri ~ ~ t ~ a ~~ ~ 5 jF Ly - - .. ~~ _ r ~ - 4 ~ ~~ . y7r b - _ ~ :k_ ~. f ~ r. - ~ - " v S~~. ~ . ~ * F fie .~ f ~ , ~ y , i A ~ Y 4 1 ~ ( i ,. _ ~ rr _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ' ~~~ ~ ~,NDIX~ ~4_ j _ a ~ r APPENDIX A Traffic Volumes l.V,~1,~IV,\111'.,\Llll lll' \ Il~l.lilli\ DLI'AItT`II:YT UI' IUGII~YAYS DIIVISION OF TRAFFIC ~~ND SAFETY rRAaKLI~ >QaA~ /1/AlC-EY A~6~1uE DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC MOVEMENT -INTERSECTION OF ROUTES COUNTY Qo%,.~oK.E LOCATION DATE ~ / 2 / ~ 4- WEATHER 0 STREET EAST -HOURS LT. HRU RT. roo 7:30 _ - 7:30 :8:00 - - 8:00 - 8:30 _ _ _ 8:30 - 9100 _ s:oo - ~o:oo - - ~ - i,:0o - ,2:00 - - - ~2:00 - ~:oo -- - - 1:00•=:2:00 2:00 - 3:00 - - - '-' - '" 3:00 - 4:00 - - , 4:00 ~- 4:30 _ _- 4:30 -5:00 _ _ s:oo 5:30 - - - 5:30 - 6:00 s:oo • 7:00 12 -HOUR TOTAL 24 • HOUR TOTAL _ -- _ - - - _ -- APPROACHING INTERSECTION THE WEST lT. THRU RT. S ~ r (a - q _ o 15 - ¢ - Z t4 - 3 Z8 - o ,, _ t_ Ion - 1¢ rz5 - Zs iQS - zc~ 123 - 2.1 rob - r3 n~ - z8 114 - Z° 30 - 7 29 - ca 30 - 5 Zo _ ¢ - G 22 - IZ 3Z - l2 Zo - S 11 0 1235 - 227 STREET NORTH LT. THRU RT. - 1 C.3 a - 205 ICo - ZZ2 13 - 2 rS r(., - 23 r 2Z - 230 23 - 21t. 24 - IBS ZZ - goo 13 4- - 8c~r fQ.S - avs Ise - la 63 /3 4 - Ifos Izr - I(07 !az ~- 1430 /2~ - 4 0l L7 - 361 ~ Z - S7 23 - 4ZS 3Z - alo z~ - 4S1 38 - 4S7 3(~ - 34~ 2S 1320 ~~ 13,631 1433 FRO THE SOUTH LT. THRU RT. ? 38S S 4or - !S 5~3 - 8 4S~ - Z3 Sot. - Z3 35~ - 9 4aS - rs 335 - G3 roar. - 7G 1~~5 - 7q ro35 - 8o r175 -- ~ 1 1143 - Cob tolq - G7 toG4- - /u ~ ZS'l - zZ z8z - 15 324 - r~ zs~ - z~ zso - 23 3Go - 20 3l0 - r 0 Z~7 "' Coo S8o 813 ld,48a TOTAL $'73 co3a $ Z.~- 751 784- ~ 8S G S <- s7s 2x57 2300 23ZS 25S(~ X555 25do 28Z~ ?, 8 0 zsa.s 31,StS RECORDED BY INTERSECTION LAYOUT ON BACK e MATTERN & CRAIG TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT Q SCe.,...~ E ZZo ~o,.,"E 41 S DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC MOVEMENT -INTERSECTION OF so~~~c~ '~cvr. COUNTY (CITY ~~ Aa ° KE LOCATION DATE 3 / IZ /= WEATHER RECOROEO BY eINTERSECTION LAYOUT ON BACK APPENDIX B Level of Service Analyses TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Franklin Road/Valley Avenue Existing 2004 A.M. Peak Hour ........................................... .................................................1 2. Franklin Road/Lowe's South Entrance Existing 2004 A.M. Peak Hour ........................................... .................................................6 3. Franklin Road/Valley Avenue Existing 2004 P.M. Peak Hour ........................................... .................................................7 4. Franklin Road/Lowe's South Entrance Existing 2004 P.M. Peak Hour ........................................... ...............................................12 5. Franklin Road/Valley Avenue Buildout 2008 A.M. Peak Hour ......................................... ................................................13 6. Franklin Road/Lowe's South Entrance Buildout 2008 A.M. Peak Hour ......................................... ................................................18 7. Route 419/Slate Hill Entrance Buildout 2008 A.M. Peak Hour ......................................... ................................................19 8. Franklin Road/Valley Avenue Buildout 2008 P.M. Peak Hour .......................................... ..................................... ...........20 9. Franklin Road/ Lowe's South Entrance Buildout 2008 P.M. Peak Hour .......................................... ................................................25 10. Route 419/Slate Hill Entrance Buildout 2008 P.M. Peak Hour .......................................... ................................................26 K: \22\2252\TOC-LOS . doc Long Report Page 1 of 5 LONG REPORT ^ ;neral lriforniation '`.~~~ w~~ fi '~.:,`~ ,,' . . ;';;f °; ~ Stte=Information ~ . ~ ,~ ~`; - r- ~ ~` ,lyst Mike Agee Intersection Franklin Rd. /Valley Ave. Agency or Co. Mattem & Craig, Inc. Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/14/2004 Jurisdiction City of Roanoke, Va Time Period 7:30 am - 8:30 am (AM Analysis Year Existing 2004 Peak) Iritei•section~Geome - -*.^ ~~<.;~{~'~ ~~~~ ~ ~x ~rw A, ; ~ , .~ ~ r ,<. Grade = 2 ~ 2 ° --~ - ~- _ _ I -~- ~ ji Grade = Shan North Artuw ~- _t_ ~ 2 ~~ ..i 1 J ;_ i-i-- i I - __;_-1 0 = R r .. o , i t.. ~ i o ;.._ r._~ _~ ~ ~ - •- -- - +-a- ; -s Grade = -s j f 3 ; -' ~ '- {_ ~ = L T ~~~~ , _~-'~ ~ j_ --j~~;-, i t` ~ _ .-;-_~~- ' Grade -2 Y~ = L T R ~ z o Volume and .Timm `~~Irt . ut ^' ~- ti , , ~ ~ - _ r .~~s,... s , Eg WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume (vph) 42 5 69 1958 898 74 Hea veh 5 5 5 17 17 5 PHF 0.70 0.42 0.75 0.87 0.97 0.80 Actuated P/A A A A A A A Startu lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. reen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival t o 3 3 1 1 2 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking (Y or N) N N N N N N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped timing 3.2 3.2 3.2 EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only Thru & RT 07 08 G= 15.0 G= G= G= G= 15.0 G= 73.0 G= G= ing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= (Duration of Analysis (hrs) =.0.25 C cle Len th C = 120.0 f le•UC''•~TF.MP\s2k47A.tmn 4/14/04 Long Report Page2of5 VOLUME ADJUSTMENT AND SATURATION FLOW RATE WORKSHEET ~.; r , ~ K General Informafion ~~ ~ -'°°' ~~4 ` `~'~~"""' y'Y~:` ;'~.j ~'~ ' Project Description 2004 Exist. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existam3-2004 Vo(ume'~Axd'ustment .F .~ 'r=.', ;f' _" EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume 42 5 69 1958 898 74 PHF 0.70 0.42 0.75 0.87 0.97 0.80 Adj. Flow Rate 60 12 92 2251 926 92 Lane Group L R L T T R Adj.~flow rate 60 12 92 2251 926 92 Prop. LT or RT - - 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 . ,.., Saturation Flow Rate - - , . Base satflow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Num. of lanes 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 fVV 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fHV 0.952 0.952 0.952 0.855 0.855 0.952 fg 1.030 1.030 1.010 1.010 0.990 0.990 fp 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fbb 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fa 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 fLU 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 fLT 0.950 - - 0.950 1.000 - 1.000 - Secondary fLT -- - - - fRT - 0.850 -- - 1.000 -- 1.000 0.850 fLpb 1.000 - - 1.000 1.000 - 1.000 - fRpb - 1.000 -- - 1.000 - 1.000 1.000 Adj. satflow 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Sec. adj. satflow -- - -- -- Z ~,__,~.._~~-~~,~n~~~t,n~e *,,.,.. 4/14/04 Long Report Page 3 of 5 CAPACITY AND LOS WORKSHEET Y ~ General:lnformation n ,~~~= ~~ ~~~ " w Project Description 2004 Exist. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existam3-2004 Ca aciAnal sis ~ '~; ~- d ~ - , ~~ ~' K.; t;,~~`'~. ~~ '~s~; t~. EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 60 12 92 2251 926 92 Satflow rate 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.14 0.06 0.42 0.93 0.50 0.08 Flow ratio 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.72 0.30 0.06 Crit. lane group Y N N N N Y N N Sum flow ratios 0.74 Lost time/cycle 12.00 Critical v/c ratio 0.82 Lane'Grou Ca acit ,Control Dela , a nd`LOS beterm ination''` EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 60 12 92 2251 926 92 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.14 0.06 0.42 0.93 0.50 0.08 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Unif. delay d 1 46.8 46.3 48.5 10.9 13.2 2.8 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.45 0.11 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.2 0.1 1.3 7.4 0.2 0.0 PF factor 1.000. 1.000 1.095 1.316 1.411 2.108 Control delay 46.9 46.4 54.5 21.8 18.9 5.9 Lane group LOS D D D C B A Apprch. delay 46.8 23.1 17.7 Approach LOS D C B Intersec. delay 22.0 Intersection LOS C 3 iii nine Long Report Page 4 of 5 SUPPLEMENTAL UNIFORM DELAY WORKSHEET FOR LEFT TURNS FROM EXCLUSIVE LANES WITH PROTECTED AND PERMITTED PHASES General information ~ .5 "~z'~~'k` - ~~`~~- - _' N Project Description 2004 Exist LOS Analysrs 2252 Frank Valley-existam3 2004 ,y ., ;< - ~ ~ ' ~ ~ '~ ~~ v/c Ratio Computation - `;~' ~ _ ~} ~`~ ~ L'' '` ~ ~" EB WB NB SB Cycle length, C (s) 920.0 Prot. phase eff. green intvt, g (s) Opposed queue eff. green intvl, gq (s) Unopposed green intvl, gu (s) Red time, r(s) Arrival rate, qa (veh/s) Prot. phase departure rate, sp (veh/s) Perm. phase departure rate, ss (veh/s) Xperm Xprot (NIA for lagging left-turns) .. Uniform:Queue Size'and Dela Com~ utations '' " Y> p. - .; Queue at start of green arrow, Qa Queue at start of unsaturated green, Qu Residual queue, Qr Uniform delay, d~ ~ a,, .k 4 t? L;h~~ Z L; l 4 i lan~forr- Queue Size'and Defay<Equat~ons ~,, .~-Y~~°~"~:~~rFyf.r~,`? ~~ ~~ ~~~~ s'~~~s , ~,. ~-r,~,~ 4 t~r~~r t~;r :. ~ `.- -~ , Case Qa Qu Qr d~ If Xperm <= 1.0 & Xprot <= 1.0 1 gar Qagq 0 [0.5/(gaC))[~Qa + QatitSe - qs) +ggQu + Quv~Ss - qa> If Xperm <- 1.0 & Xprot > 1.0 2 C~a~ Qr +gagq Qa - g(SP - qa) [0• v(Sgaq ))[~Qa + g(Qa + Qr) +gq (Qr+ Qu) + Qu If Xperm > 1.0 & Xprot 3 Qr + of a q Qu - gu(Ss - (0.5/SCIaC)][ggQu + gu(Qa + Qr) + r(Qr + Qa) + If Xperm <= 1.0 la in lefts 4 0 qa(r + gq) 0 [0.5/(QaC))[~ + gq)Qu + Quvtss - qa> If Xperm > 1.0 (lagging lefts) 5 Qu - gu(Ss - qa) qa(r + gq) 0 [0.5/(qaC))[~ + gq)Qu + gu(Qu + Qa) + Qav(So - qa~ 4- d/1 d/(14 Long Report Page 5 of 5 BACK-OF-QUEUE WORKSHEET -r . ,.. .. ,~„ ~:<~ saw. ~. ~- ,y1,~ ?~ ~ '~ t ~•~`*,. ' Generai:anformat~on ~~ Project Description 2004 Exist. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existam3-2004 _. ...,_ Avera~` e~:Back,of.Queue- >,_~ ~ J ~~ EB ~ ~ WB~ NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane group L R L T T R Init. queue/lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow rate/lane 60 12 92 2251 926 92 Satflow per lane 1771 1584 1736 1640 1607 1523 Capacity/lane 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 Flow ratio 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.72 0.30 0.06 v/c ratio 0.14 0.06 0.42 0.93 0.50 0.08 I factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival type 3 3 1 1 2 2 Platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.91 0.67 0.67 PF factor 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.06 1.33 2.22 Q~ 0.9 0.4 3.0 33.9 12.1 1.5 kg 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 02 0.1 0.0 0.2 7.6 0.8 0.1 Q avg. 0.9 0.4 3.2 41.5 12 9 1 6 ;- r k of Queue (95th pe'~cenf{e) - ~ ~ j °'~ Back: P cents{e X X . ~ fe°~° 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.s 1.8 2.0 BOQ Q°i° 19 08 65 648 Queue,~St©y~age~,Ratio ~ ~`:.N~~:r ri _, : ~"'~~, ~ ~ ~ ; ~- f Q spacing ~~ 25 0 ~~ 25.0 •~ 25.0 25.0 231 ~ ,~~v x, L„k 25.0 32 ~ }.. 25.0 Q storage 200 200 300 1200 1800 340 Avg. RQ 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.2 0.1 95% Rc2% 0.2 0.1 0.5 1.3 0.3 0.2 TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d HCS2000 S ei~nma Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Geneal~ln~ormaion;,., .~ ._ .. ~, .. _ Sit'e'anfocmatlon - _ ... _ Analyst M. Thompson Intersection Franklin Rd. /Cowes So. Agency/Co. Mattern & Craig, Inc. 3/26/2004 Jurisdiction Enf. City of Roanoke, Va Date Performed 7:30 am - 8:30 am (AM Analysis Year Exist. 2004 Analysis Time Period Peak Pro'ect Descri tion 2004 Exist. LOS Anal sis File 2252-Frank-Cowes-existam-2004 East/Vllest Street: Cowes Southern Entrance North/South Street: Franklin Road Intersection Orientation: Norfh-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Veh1cY`e,~l~olumies~and Ad'ustments„ , ~ ~~~.,,: ~.. s Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 2027 0 0 900 3 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 2252 0 0 9000 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 _ Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 ~ Configuration T T R U stream Si nal 0 ~ Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 0 0 34 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 37 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 -5 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 ~ R Configuration ~~~ , - . e a, eue n'"~anc~~exel;of~Serarice ~. ~; ~. °~`.. - +~ ~ ~.~r~~. ~. ... . ,;~ App roach NB SB and Westbo Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration R 37 v (vph) C (m) (vph) 605 0.06 v/c 95% queue length 0.19 Control Delay 11.3 LOS 8 Approach Delay -- -- 11.3 Approach LOS -- -- B Rights Reserved ~ 3/29/04 rf_.//!'~.\TL^T X17]\..71.12(~'1r 4mr Lc?ng Report .- ylyst Agency or Co. Date Performed Time Period InterSection~:GE Grade = 2 SitiaW North hrrotr =T ° z ~ =R o ° ~~ =L ~ o = TR = G d ~~ = L T ra e ~~ = L R ~` ~ z o Volume"arid;Timin'~ 1n ~ ut :. ::, EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume (vph) 94 34 87 1217 1823 133 Hea veh 5 5 5 17 17 5 PHF 0.73 0.71 0.81 0.85 0.92 0.88 Actuated PIA A A A A A A Startu lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 reen eff Ext 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . . Arrival e 3 3 1 1 2 2 30 30 30 30 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking (Y or N) N N N N N N N N Parking/hr Bus stopsihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped timing 3.2 3.2 3.2 EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only Thru & RT 07 08 G= 15.0 G= G= G= G= 15.0 G= 73.0 G= G= 'ng Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 120.0 E 7 Page 1 of 5 LONG R EPORT n . Site Information ~~~ { ~'-~ ~. ~~ Mike Agee Intersection Franklin Rd. /Valley Ave. Mattem & Craig, lnc. Area Type All other areas 4/14/2004 Jurisdiction City of Roanoke, Va 4:45 pm - 5:45 pm (PM Analysis Year 2004 Peak) ~ z o ~ ~ ri_.i1n.\T~TdD\o71.AQS *,,,., 4/14/04 -1.,ong Report Page 2 of 5 VOLUME ADJUSTMENT AND SATURATION FLOW RATE WORKSHEET het;, ~, { .~..:. rr , y;: ~`;~,? ~~,~.' ~ s}~;~'7{~ ~yl ~ ~ ~.~.R ~ ~ ~ - Generat.lnfiormation Project Description 2004 Exist. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existpm4-2004 .~- ,~ ,:.,.. Volume"Ad ustment. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~€ EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume 94 34 87 1217 1823 133 PHF 0.73 0.71 0.81 0.85 0.92 0.88 Adj. Flow Rate 129 48 107 1432 1982 151 Lane Group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 129 48 107 1432 1982 151 Prop. LT or RT - - 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 -. Saturation `Flow Rate - Base satflow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Num. of lanes 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 fl/~i 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fHV 0.952 0.952 0.952 0.855 0.855 0.952 fg 1.030 1.030 1.010 1.010 0.990 0.990 fp 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fbb 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fa 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 fLIJ 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 ~,T 0.950 - - 0.950 1.000 - 1.000 - Secondary fLT - - - - fRT - 0.850 - - 1.000 - 1.000 0.850 fLpb 1.000 - - 1.000 1.000 - 1.000 - fRpb - 1.000 - -- 1.000 -- 1.000 1.000 Adj. satflow 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Sec. adj. satflow - - -- 4/ 14/04 Long Report Page 3 of 5 CAPACITY AND LOS WORKSHEET General Information ~x.... H< ~~-r - _~ - ~~~~ Project Description 2004 Exist. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existpm4-2004 Y ~„ Ca "aci Anal `sis ; °~_ ' ~ ~ ~ - rt °~.~ . ~-~~ _ .~ _ ~ - t" N` Y C'~{rf~ ~.fii"F~ EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 129 48 107 1432 1982 151 Satflow rate 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.30 0.24 0.49 0.59 1.07 0.13 Flow ratio 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.46 0.65 0.10 Crit. lane group Y N N N Y N Y N Sum flow ratios 0.75 Lost time/cycle 17.00 Critical v/c ratio 0.87 Lane Groin Ca acit ,Control:Del`a '~ a ndtOS Determ ination.:.... - EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 129 48 107 1432 1982 151 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.30 0.24 0.49 0.59 1.07 0.13 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Unif. delay d1 47.7 47.4 49.0 5.6 23.5 2.9 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.50 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.4 0.6 1.8 0.4 41.3 0.0 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.095 2.069 1.361 2.108 Control delay 48.1 48.0 55.4 12.0 73.3 6.1 Lane group LOS D D E 8 E A Apprch. delay 48.1 15.0 68.5 Approach LOS D 8 E Intersec. delay 46.2 Intersection LOS D 4 nnninn Long Report Page 4 of 5 SUPPLEMENTAL UNIFORM DELAY WORKSHEET FOR LEFT TURNS FROM EXCLUSIVE LANES WITH PROTECTED AND PERMITTED PHASES Generaf:'lnformation ,: r ~ ~< ~, Project Description 2004 Exist. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existpm4-2004 v/c~Ratio Computation '' ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ;'r. ~ r`:£ ~'~c,. r:{.y it ~Va r~ 3t",,;-'ix ~, m,~.. EB WB NB SB Cycle length, C (s) 920.0 Prot. phase eff. green intvl, g (s) Opposed queue eff. green intvl, gq (s) Unopposed green intvl, gu (s) Red time, r(s) Arrival rate, qa (veh/s) Prot. phase departure rate, sp (veh/s) Perm. phase departure rate, ss (veh/s) Xperm Xprot (N/A for lagging left-turns) Uniform Queue Size and Delay Computations Queue at start of green arrow, Qa Queue at start of unsaturated green, Qu Residual queue, Qr Uniform delay, d~ Uniform:Queue'Size.and Delay Equat~on s'_ . _. ' ` ~ ~- =_Y ~ ;~'~- .. " .'... + ~ ;= Case Qa Qu Qr di I<XpeO <= 1.0 & Xprot 1 qaf gagq 0 q0.5/(gaC)][rQa + Qay(Sv-gs)+ggQu+Quv(SS- tf Xperm <= 1.0 & Xprot > 1.0 2 ar q Qr + a q 9q Qa - g (SP - qa) [0.5/(gaC)][rQa + g(Qa + Qr) +gq (Qr + Qu) + Quv(Ss - qa> If X erm > 1.0 & Xprot p <= 1.0 3 Qr + qaf• gagq Qu - u Ss - 9( qa) [0.5/(gaC)][QgQu + gu(Qa + Qr) + r(Qr + Qa} + Qay(Sv - qa) If Xperm <= 1.0 la in lefts 4 0 a f + q ( 9q) 0 (q )][ gq)Qu tiss-qa~ [0.5/ aC ~ + + Qu ( If Xperm > 1.0 (lagging lefts) 5 Qu - gu(Ss - qa) qa(r + gq) 0 [0.5/(gaC)][f + gq)Qu + gu(Qu + Qa) + Qati(Sp - qa~ ,o Long Report Page 5 of 5 BACK-OF-QUEUE WORKSHEET General'Information ' `"±' -~ Project Description 2004 Exisf. LOS Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-existpm4-2004 ;: ,. -.,:: ;' Avera "~e"Bacic`of,Queue-. -",~" : ~:': EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane group L R L T T R Init. queue/lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow rate/lane 129 48 107 1432 1982 151 Satflow per lane 1771 1584 1736 1640 1607 1523 Capacity/lane 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 Flow ratio 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.46 0.65 0.10 v/c ratio 0.30 0.24 0.49 0.59 1.07 0.13 I factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arriva- type 3 3 1 1 2 2 Platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.69 0.70 0.67 PF factor 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.64 1.00 2.19 Q~ 2.0 1.4 3.5 17.1 34.8 2.5 ks 0.3 O.g 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 Q2 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.3 15.2 0.1 Q avg. 2.1 1.5 3.8 18.4 50.0 2.7 ... ;.1 Percentile Back of ~Queue`(95th percentile) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ° ' "' ' fe°i° 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.7 7.5 2.0 3 2 31 6 76 BOQ, Q°i° 4 3 7 5 8 n 5q4 - ~ Ply r t + ,.+ _ ,~ ~ (~ 4 xr '~+~k'y-'~", ','i'~F4y7 r ~~ ~F. ~ ~., 'aq ~ ~~-~ Queue~StorageiRatio ~' ~''' .. ~ n - - ` Qspacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Q storage 200 200 300 1200 1800 340 Avg. Ra 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.2 95% RQ°~° 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.7 1.1 0.4 ~le.~:.... d I d HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of hlontia, All K1gms Keserveu ~~ ~i~~in~ Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Ge eral'~nforma ion : ~ . ~ .: 5i ek nfocmat~on, , : Analyst M. Thompson Intersection Agency/Co. Mattern & Craig, lnc. Date Performed 3/26/2004 Jurisdiction Analysis Time Period 4:45 pm - 5:45 pm (PM Analysis Year Peak ~ .. :~. .. Franklin Rd. /Lowes So. Ent. City of Roanoke, Va Exist. 2004 Pro'ect Descri tion 2004 Exist LOS Anal sis File 2252-Frank-Lowes-exisf m-2004 East/West Street: Lowes Southern Entrance North/South Street: Franklin Road Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 1~ehacMe'~~liolumes~ d'us~ments ~ , w r ,~`; . ,; . ~y , , .~ ;:~~ • ~.. ~, .: ~ ~~ , ~: . r ~, Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 1304 0 0 1849 8 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1448 0 0 2054 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration T T R U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 0 0 74 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 82 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 D 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 -5 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 1 Configuration <, ."r' De a ueue; Len ti'' andel~oftS `-' f ~_, 'S 1'., ~" "y'_'~i"".. ;. `_e~'~G~1'.~f471fTh~iiAu~.t erv.ice , a , ,. ~ ~.. ; ... `-~: ~ .. .,;,-' • - ~ R ~{ `p~ x ~ =~~~'.`d, Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration R v (vph) 82 C (m) (vph) 366 v/c 0.22 95% queue length 0.85 Control Delay 17.7 LOS C Approach Delay -- -- 17.7 Approach LOS - -- C Rights Reserved Long Report Page 1 of 5 LONG R EPORT Gene~al;lnfo'r`maton :'> - ' ~.~'~ ~~~ _ Site Information .~ . `w~" - Analyst Mike Agee Intersection Franklin Rd. /Valley Ave. Agency or Co. Mattern & Craig, Inc. Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/14/2004 Jurisdiction City of Roanoke, Va Time Period AM Peak Analysis Year Buildout 2008 Intei~sectior- Geometer ~~ " '~"~: - `' ' F~ Grade = 2 2 0 Grade Volume (vph) Hea veh PHF ~ 2 0 ~-~. _ ..L L l ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ; i ! ' ~_ i ~ Grade = Sho~W North Amour T _ o ~ _R o ~~ =L o ~ = TR ~~ = L T ~~ = L R _2 ~~' = LTR ~ z 0 .. . ~ .:~ EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT 60 15 155 2040 935 150 5 5 5 17 17 5 0.70 0.42 0.75 0.87 0.97 0.80 A A A A A A Startu lost time Ext. eff. reen Arrival e 2.0 2.0 3 2.0 2.0 3 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 1 . 2.0 2 . 2.0 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking (Y or N) N N N N N N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 Ped timing 3.2 3.2 3.2 EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only Thru & RT 07 08 G= 15.0 G= G= G= G= 15.0 G= 73.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= l'= Y= Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 120.0 l3 a!~ ama Long Report Page 2 of 5 VOLUME ADJUSTMENT AND SATURATION FLOW RATE WORKSHEET Geri"e~a('Infoi-mation` - t - ~ qtr Project Description 2008 BuildoutAnalysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutam3-2008 Volume~Ad`ustment ~ Tom= 5 EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume 60 15 155 2040 935 150 PHF 0.70 0.42 0.75 0.87 0.97 0.80 Adj. Flow Rate 86 36 207 2345 964 187 Lane Group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 86 36 207 2345 964 187 Prop. LT or RT - - 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 ,. Saturation Flow Rate •. .. ; , ..- Base satflow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Num. of lanes 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 fW 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fHV 0.952 0.952 0.952 0.855 0.855 0.952 fg 1.030 1.030 1.010 1.010 0.990 0.990 fp 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fbb 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fa 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 fLU 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 fLT 0.950 - - 0.950 1.000 - 1.000 - Secondary fLT - - - fRT - 0.850 - - 1.000 - 1.000 0.850 fLpb 1.000 - - 1.000 1.000 -- 1.000 - fRpb - 1.000 -- - 1.000 - 1.000 1.000 Adj. satflow 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Sec. adj. satflow - "- "- - /Q- ~~~ aina Long Report Page 3 of 5 CAPACITY AND LOS WORKSHEET .. .. ,. ~. {, Generallnformation y '~ ~ `~ Project Description 2008 Buildout Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutam3-2008 Ca aci Anal sis: ~ •`` - Yi~.nn EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 86 36 207 2345 964 187 Satflow rate 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.20 0.18 0.95 0.97 0.52 0.16 Flow ratio 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.75 0.32 0.12 Crit. lane group Y N N N N Y N N Sum flow ratios 0.78 Lost time/cycle 12.00 Critical v/c ratio 0.86 Lane Grou Ca acit ;Control Dela ;:a nd-.LOS Determ ination EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 86 36 207 2345 964 187 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.20 0.18 0.95 0.97 0.52 0.16 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Unif. delay d1 47.1 47.0 52.2 12.3 13.4 3.0 Delay factor k 0.11 0.11 0.46 0.48 0.12 0.11 Increm. delay d2 0.2 0.4 48.0 12.3 0.3 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.095 1.263 1.411 2.108 Control delay 47.3 47.4 105.2 27.8 19.2 6.3 Lane group LOS D D F C B A Apprch. delay 47.4 34.1 17.1 Approach LOS D C B Intersec. delay 29.4 Intersection LOS C t5 Long Report Page4of5 SUPPLEMENTAL UNIFORM DELAY WORKSHEET FOR LEFT TURNS FROM EXCLUSIVE LANES WITH PROTECTED AND PERMITTED PHASES .:, - Genelral infolrmation h>'~} r = ~ ~~ r ~ ~~~ ~ _ ~ ,'h~ r~; . ~ >:~ ~~`~ _. . .. Project Descnptton 2008 Buildout Analysis 2252 Frank Valley-bu~ldoufam3 2008 i... ~,;~.. -. :~U r - ~Y:'.1~~,r~i~~ ~~riak ~~ ' a 1 $i'~~~Kti ~' r{~ vl'c Ratio Com'putation`...' , _ ,, u, .~ ~yr~~~ ~ ~~~,~ ~ `~'; ~ t,.ls~ r 3i s Y ~'I'sti:;r?s;'-:ZP+.~.,. $Y t~', r ~ t,: ~. ~~-._ -;~,~ _,~. ~~ ~B. »a WB NB SB Cycle length, C (s) ""~" Prot. phase eff. green intvl, g (s) Opposed queue eff. green intvl, gq (s) Unopposed green intvl, gu (s) Red time, r(s) Arrival rate, qa (veh/s) Prot. phase departure rate, sp (veh/s) Perm. phase departure rate, ss (veh/s) Xperm Xprot (NIA for lagging left-turns) Uniform.Queue~Size and-Delay Computations Queue at start of green arrow, Qa Queue at start of unsaturated green, Qu Residual queue, Qr Uniform delay, d~ §?"r: ~C'~NF' ~. ~._• uat~ons... , + s -lgy,~ yr a '~~='~`- i ~n~fon~rt~;Queue~S~ze and Delay;Eq. .~.~. ~-~° F '; ~~`~ ~ .~~,~~.~ µ ~,,;, / +~1 ~.~~~'. ~:.~»`5 Case Qa Qu C2r d~ S If Xpem, <= 1.0 & Xprot <= 1.0 1 qa~ gagq 0 s - (0.5/(gaC)][~Qa + QaycsP - qs) +9gQu + Quv~ qa) + If Xperm <= 1.0 & Xprot > 1.0 2 qaf Qr + gagq Qa - g(Sp - qa) [0.5/SgaC))[~Qa + g(Qa + Qr) +9q (Qr+ Qu) Quyt s qa) If Xperm > 1.0 & Xprot 3 Qr + qaf gagq Qu - gu(Ss - [0.5/SgaC)][QgQu + gu(Qa + Qr) + f(Qr + Qa) + If Xperm <= 1.0 la in lefts 4 0 qa(f + gq) 0 [0.5/(gaC))[f + gq)Qu + QutitSs - qa~ S If Xperm > 1.0 (lagging lefts) 5 Qu - gu(Ss - qa) a(~ + g4) q 0 p - [0.5/(gaC))[r + gq)Qu + gu(Qu + Qa) + Qay( qa~_ E 1 C. nnmm~ Long Report Page 5 of 5 BACK-OF-QUEUE WORKSHEET General'Inforination ° Y - ~, ~~. °°k ~ ~',~~ ~' . - Project Description 2008 Buildout Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutam3-2008 ... Avers ~e.Back~`.of Queue ~ - . EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane group L R L T T, R Init. queue/lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow rate/lane 86 36 207 2345 964 187 Satflow per lane 1771 1584 1736 1640 1607 1523 Capacity/lane 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 Flow ratio 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.75 ~ 32 0.12 v/c ratio 0.20 0.18 0.95 0.97 0.52 0.16 I factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival type 3 3 1 1 2 2 Platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.92 0.67 0.67 PF factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.32 2.17 Q~ 1.3 1.1 6.9 38.3 12.7 3.2 ke 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 Q2 0.1 0.1 2.4 10.0 0.9 0.2 Q avg. 1.4 7.1 9.2 48.3 13.6 3.4 :mow , ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ¢ _zr,~. ~.~, M ~.-._ . . _._ ,,_ -~ Percentile Back of'Queue (95th percentile) ;~ ~' fe% 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.5 1.8 2.0 BOQ, Q°i° 2.9 2.4 17.2 74.4 24.2 6.7 @~ . R ,. Queue~'Storage Ratio ~ ~'= ~": `` t ~ ~ r° .~_ .... _,.n, ~ . , ; . . Q spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Q storage 200 200 400 1200 1800 340 Avg. RQ 0.2 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.2 0.2 95% Ro°~° 0.4 0.3 1.1 1.6 0.3 0.5 HCS2000TM Copyright ®2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4. Id i7 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 G~eneratlnforma it o ~} Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY . '"'` ~~ .~ Site Infocma ion M. Thompson Intersection Mattern & Craig, Inc. Jurisdiction 3/26/2004 Analysis Year AM Peak .. Franklin Rd. /Cowes So. Ent. City of Roanoke, Va Buildout 2008 Pro'ect Descri tion 2008 Buildout Anal sis File:2252-Frank-Cowes-buildoutam-2008 East/VVest Street: Cowes Southern Entrance North/South Street: Franklin Road Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 V..e~~hcle Nolumes.~a~d;Ad"ustments ,t~::~ . :. ..~ ,.: ~: ~ ~ . ~, ~ _ .. _ s Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 2195 0 0 945 5 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 2438 0 0 9050 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration T T R U stream Si nal 0 ~ Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 0 0 45 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 50 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 -5 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 9 Configuration R _ D.ela~Queue.Len th{~a nd~f~el,~f ~Ser~tice.. .. . _~~i ~?:- ~ ,Mw.ri ~ ~, ~~~.~~~,~ ~.~.. ~. - ~ .. ~ ~,.,.; .~ Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration R v (vph) 50 C (m) (vph) 578 v/c 0.09 95% queue length 0.28 Control Delay ~~-8 LOS 8 Approach Delay -- -- »•8 Approach LOS -- -- B Rights Reserved ~8 ' Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ~; ~;k tr~ t~ ~~ ~: _ ~-.~, ,r;. - ~ '` ~ ; Ste'lnformaton ~:n General'~Iriforrnation Rte. 41s/dare !-l ilt Analyst Mike Agee Intersection Entrance Agency/Co. Mattern & Craig, lnc. Jurisdiction Roanoke County Date Performed 4/14/04 Analysis Year Buildout 2008 Analysis Time Period AM Peak Pro•ect Descri tion 2008 Buildout Anal sis: 2252-419-Nl ?O h ~ IEast/West Street: Slate Hi!! Entrance 419 Electric Road R e h Street orth/So Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 Volumes and,Ad ustments= . " Vehicle . ' Northbound southbound or Street Ma 3 4 5 6 Movement 1 2 R L T R L T 1870 280 0 0 0 Volume 0 90 0 90 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 . . 311 HFR t R 0 0 0 0 2077 e, a Hourly Flow Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- - 0 Raised curb Median Type 0 RT Channelized 0 0 2 1 Lanes 0 0 0 7' R Configuration 0 U stream Si nal 0 Eastbound Minor Street Westbound 10 11 12 Movement ~ 8 9 R L T R L 0 T 0 0 0 0 75 Volume Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 8 ~ Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 8 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 ~ RT Channelized o 0 0 1 Lanes 0 0 0 R Configuration ~. De{a Qiieue'~Cen `~h"an~'d~Level;of'Service . - ~ ~` Eastbound Approach NB SB Westbound 12 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 Movement R Lane Configuration 83 v (vph) 277 C (m) (vph) 0.30 v/c 1.22 95% queue length 23.5 Control Delay C LOS 23.5 Approach Delay -- -- C Approach LOS -- -- Rights Reserved IS air ama i.ong Report Page 1 of 5 LONG REPORT General lnformatton '` rs=` -" ~}- ~, Siteanformation N~~"" .~~' '"~ - Analyst Mike Agee Intersection Franklin Rd. /Valley Ave. Agency or Co. Mattern & Craig, Inc. Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/14/2004 Jurisdiction City of Roanoke, Va Time Period PM Peak Analysis Year Buildout 2008 Intersection Geone ~ f'~` '~~~~~ -~ ' - ~ - ~ - ~ - ;:Y _ " Grade = 2 1 2 0 ~-~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ;! _. r_~-~-~.._.. _,~-.. ~---~-~,~--~'---~ ' - - ;-~- --}--a Grade = Sbaa North Arrow 2 o Grade = ~ z o ° ° ° 2 =T ~ =R ~1 J =L ~''~ = T R ~~ = L T ~~ = L R ~~ = L T R . .. ... _ In Volume:and Tmin' , ut ~ ~'' EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume (vph) 225 100 120 9265 1895 165 Hea veh 5 5 5 97 17 5 PHF 0.73 0.71 0.81 0.85 0.92 0.88 Actuated P/A A A A A A A Startu lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. reen 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival e 3 3 1 1 2 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking (Y or N) N N N N N N N N Parking/hr Bus stops/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped timing 3.2 3.2 3-2 EB Only 02 03 04 NB Only Thru & RT 07 08 G= 95.0 G= G= G= G= 15.0 G= 73.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 120.0 20 nitnma Long Report Page 2 of 5 VOLUME ADJUSTMENT AND SATURATION FLOW RATE WORKSHEET GeneraC~lnformation ` -~ "' '~' r ` ~` ~ ;; Project Description 2008 Buildout Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutpm5-2008 ,,. Volume°>Ad'ustment ~~- ~~~" ~~' - '' EB Wg NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Volume 225 100 120 1265 1895 165 PHF 0.73 0.71 0.81 0.85 0.92 0.88 Adj. Flow Rate 308 141 148 1488 2060 188 Lane Group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 308 141 148 1488 2060 188 Prop. LT or RT - - 0.000 - 0.000 0.000 - 0.000 Saturation Flow Rate Base satflow 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Num. of lanes 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 }~ 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fHV 0.952 0.952 0.952 0.855 0.855 0.952 fg 1.030 1.030 1.010 1.010 0.990 0.990 fp 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fbb 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 fa 1.00 1.00 1. DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 fLU 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 fLT 0.950 - - 0.950 1.000 - 1.000 - Secondary fLT - - fRT - 0.850 - - 1.000 - 1.000 0.850 fLpb 1.000 - - 1.000 1.000 -- 1.000 - fRpb -- 1.000 - -- 1.000 - 1.000 1.000 Adj. satflow 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Sec. adj. satflow - -- 2t ,, ~, n inn Long Report Page 3 of 5 CAPACITY AND LOS WORKSHEET General>Information ``~~ ~ ' "' :~ `~ ~ '~' Project Description 2008 Buildout Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutpm5-2008 Ca .'aci 'Anal sis~~~ ~~ ~, ~ - .Y ~~-~ EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 308 141 148 1488 2060 188 Satflow rate 3435 1584 1736 3116 3055 1523 Lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.72 0.71 0.68 0.62 1.11 0.16 Flow ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.48 0.67 0.12 Crit. lane group Y N N N Y N Y N Sum flow ratios 0.85 Lost time/cycle 17.00 Critical v/c ratio 0.99 Lane `Grou `Ca acit ;:Control. Dela , a nd'LOS Determ ination - :: EB WB NB SB Lane group L R L T T R Adj. flow rate 308 141 148 1488 2060 188 Lane group cap. 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 v/c ratio 0.72 0.71 0.68 0.62 1.11 0.16 Green ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.77 0.61 0.79 Unif. delay d1 50.5 50.4 50.2 5.8 23.5 3.0 Delay factor k 0.28 0.28 0.25 0.20 0.50 0.11 Increm. delay d2 5.7 11.4 8.5 0.5 57.4 0.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.095 1.990 1.310 2.108 Control delay 56.2 61.8 63.5 12.0 88.1 6.3 Lane group LOS E E E 8 F A Apprch. delay 58.0 16.7 81.3 Approach LOS E 8 F Intersec. delay 54.5 Intersection LOS D 2Z ` ~ Long Report Page 4 of 5 SUPPLEMENTAL UNIFORM D PRO ECTED AND PERMITTE PHASES OM EXCLUSIVE LANES WITH ~~ - General`'Information~., _ '~~ ._r ,~.. Project Description 2008 Buildout Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutpm5-2008 v/c`rRatio Computation s`' l ,F~y EB WB Ng SB Cycle length, C (s) ' "' -`" g (s) green intvl hase eff Prot , . . p green intvl, gq (s) osed queue eff O . pp gu (s) osed green intvl Uno , pp r(s) Red time , qa (veh/s) 'Arrival rate , phase departure rate, sp (veh/s) Prot . phase departure rate, ss (veh/s) Perm . X perm t (N/A for lagging left-turns) X pro Uniform Queue Size-and.Deiay Computations Queue at start of green arrow, Qa Queue at start of unsaturated green, Qu Qr Residual queue , Uniform delay d~ Ur~forni Queue~_S~ze,and-De ~ ,. . ~, ~ ;s {ay;Eguations a k~,.- - ~ _ - . Case Qa Qu Qr d~ ti s s P - q51 +ggQu + Qu t s - [0.5/(C~aC)][rQa + Qavt If Xperm <= 1.0 & Xprot 1 Char gagQ 0 qat <= 1.0 Q Q ) + Qa - g(Sp - r + u [0.5/(CIaC)][rQa + g(Qa + Qr) +Q4 ( If Xperm <= 1.0 & Xprot 2 qar Qr + gagq qa) Quytss - qa> > 1.0 Q Q ) + Qu - gu(Ss - r + a (0.5/(gaC)][ggQu + gu(Qa + Qr) + ~( If Xperm > 1.0 & Xprot 3 Qr + qaf Qag4 qa) Qatitso - qa) <= 1.0 If Xperm <= 1.0 4 0 qa(~ + gq) 0 [0.5/(C]aC)](r + gq)Qu + QuvtSs - qa~ la in lefts S If Xperm > 1.0 (lagging 5 Qu - gu(Ss - Qa(~ + gq) 0 P - (0.5/(gaC)][I' ` g4)Qu + gu(Qu + Qa) + Qayt lefts) qa) qa~ ~3 d/1 d/(14 Long Report Page 5 of 5 BACK-OF-QUEUE WORKSHEET ,r General Information ~''' ' ~ ~ '"' ~ ~ ~' ~'~~' ~'~~°"~ Project Description 2008 Buildouf Analysis 2252-Frank-Valley-buildoutpm5-2008 Avers a Back of Queue..:; EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Lane group L R L T T R Init. queue/lane 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flow rate/lane 308 141 148 1488 2060 188 Satflow per lane 1771 1584 1736 1640 1607 1523 Capacity/lane 429 198 217 2415 1858 1206 Flow ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.48 ~ 67 0.12 v/c ratio 0.72 0.71 0.68 0.62 1.11 0.16 I factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Arrival type 3 3 1 1 2 2 Platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.71 0.74 0.67 PF factor 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.58 1.00 2.17 Q~ 5.1 4.5 4.9 17.7 36.1 3.2 ka 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 Q2 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.5 19.1 0.2 Q avg. 5.8 5.2 5.5 19.2 55.2 3.4 Percentite~Back of Queue (95th percentile) fe°i° 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.5 2.0 BOQ, Q°~° 11.3 10.2 10.7 32.8 84.4 6.8 -s~. ; ,, Q eue`Storage.Ratio~ Q spacing 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Q storage 200 200 400 1200 1800 340 Avg. Ro 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.2 95% RQ°~° 1.4 1.3 0.7 0.7 1.2 0.5 HCS2000TM Copyright ~ 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 a 24 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 .. ~e , era~l nfonnaton Analyst Agency/Co. Date Performed Analysis Time Period TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ,, . ~. .,x ,~..,,„3~~ - k sue, "~' Site~lnformafion,:. ~r *..~. m ~ M. Thompson Intersection Mattern & Craig, Inc. ,lurisdiction 3/26/2004 Analysis Year PM Peak ,.. ,~.. . a. , Franklin Rd. /Lowes So. Ent. City of Roanoke, Va Buildout 2008 Pro'ect Descri tion 2008 Buildout Anal sis File:2252-Frank-Lowes-buildout m-2008 East/VUest Street: Lowes Southern Entrance North/South Street: Franklin Road Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 !~te~iicle l/ol>umes ~,a~id~,Ad user ents:~.k~.~., .,. .fi~, ,~~ , ~ ~.. .. ~ ..',. o~;^.> ~ h;~~ .,~ 4~, Ma'or Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 1385 0 0 1985 10 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1538 0 0 2205 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 - - Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration T T R U stream Si nal 0 1 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 0 0 135 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 150 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 -5 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1 Configuration R D~'~efa"~`~Queue~.Len°°fh~and~Leyei~~of iS ervce - - -k Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration R v (vph) 150 C (m) (vph) 331 vic 0.45 95% queue length 2.26 Control Delay 24.6 LOS C Approach Delay -- -- 24.6 Approach LOS -- -- C Rights Reserved ZS c_~__ iir._~mr.w ~rn~..~~_i Inn ~....,., 3/29/04 ' Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ~ `` "~; '~ Site~lnformation`r~' ~ ~ = ` ~` ~` ~ ` Rte. 419 /Slate Hill Analyst Mike Agee Intersection Entrance Agency/Co. Mattern & Craig, Inc. Jurisdiction Roanoke County Date Performed 4/14/04 Analysis Year Buildout 2008 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Pro'ect Descri tion 2008 Buildouf Anal sis: 2252-419-Slate-buildout m3-2008.hcu East/West Street: Slate Hill Entrance North/South Street: Rte. 419 Intersection Orientation: North-South Stud Period hrs : 0.25 VeFiicle>Vol~umes~and.Ad'ustmenfs ~ ~'.` ~` ;€` "' ~ ~ ' ~ '~ Southbound Ma'or Street Northbound ment ~ ~ 2 3 4 5 6 M ove T R L T R L 2080 135 Volume 0 0 0 0 90 0 90 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 . 1 . 150 HFR Flow Rate Hourl 0 0 0 0 231 , y Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 - - 0 e Median T Raised curb yp 0 RT Channelized 0 1 Lanes 0 0 0 D 2 T R uration fi 'C g on 0 U stream Si nal 0 t St Mi Westbound Eastbound ree nor 11 12 Movement 7 8 9 10 L T R L T R 0 340 l me V 0 0 0 0 o u 90 0 90 0 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 . . 377 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 0 0 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 -8 Flared Approach N N e Stora 0 0 g 0 RT Channelized 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 1 R Configuration M'. ..: i Dela <Queue l:en th, and!Cevel of Service ' ~'°~ Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 R (Lane Configuration 377 v (vph) 237 C (m) (vph) 1 59 v/c 95% queue length 23.51 322.0 Control Delay F LOS Approach Delay -- -- 322.0 Approach LOS -- -- F Rights Reserved 2G -- .,~ ,~.~_ ~.., .,,_~.,~ ~.-_ _ 4!14/O4 Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 1 aid y-ia-dl From: Diane Childers To: Martha Plank Date: 4/12/04 11:15AM Subject: RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Martha, One addition to this ad that was omitted when I sent it to you: (mac Where it states "R3 Medium Residential District" it should be changed to state "R3 Medium Density Residential District". Thanks and sorry for the omission. Hope you had a good weekend. Diane Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 »> Martha Plank <Martha.PlankC~Roanoke.com> 04/09/04 02:40PM »> here is the last one -runs April 13 and 20 -cost is 202.44. Thanks Diane.. LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC, to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2341926) MARTHA PLANK, LEGAL ADV. REP THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals C~3 roanoke.com HAVE AN ENJOYABLE DAY! -- > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2004 11:26 AM > To: legals C~ roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 2 > «File: 4-27-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, > 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are > wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to > 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of > public interest in several of the items. > Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? > Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 -: _ _- Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 1 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@roanokecountyva.gov> Date: 4/9/04 2:30PM Subject: RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Thanks Diane - ad will run April 13 and 20 -cost is 183.06. LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.9 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District and 5.8 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2341904) MARTHA PLANK, LEGAL ADV. REP THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com -- HAVE AN ENJOYABLE DAY! > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2004 11:26 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill > «File: 4-27-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, > 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are > wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to > 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of > public interest in several of the items. > Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? > Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 _ _ _ - _ -- Diane Childers RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 1 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@roanokecountyva.gov> Date: 4/9/04 2:14PM 1.r/ Subject: RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill This runs April 13 and 20 -cost is 149.42... Thanks LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Marc I. Wilson to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2341876) MARTHA PLANK, LEGAL ADV. REP THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com -- HAVE AN ENJOYABLE DAY! > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2004 11:26 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill > «File: 4-27-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, > 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are > wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to > 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of > public interest in several of the items. > Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? > Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 > ~ Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 1 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@roanokecountyva.gov> Date: 4/9/04 8:44AM / Subject: RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill ~V/ This runs April 13 and 20 -cost is 154.24. Thanks LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of D. Gregory Roberts to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2341152) MARTHA PLANK, LEGAL ADV. REP THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com HAVE AN ENJOYABLE DAY! > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2004 11:26 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill > «File: 4-27-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, > 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are > wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to > 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of > public interest in several of the items. > Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? > Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. > > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@roanokecountyva.gov> Date: 4/9/04 8:30AM Subject: RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Hi Diane, I'm sure you told Bennett and Roberts they have to prepay. I arr going to do theirs so they will be done when they come in or call in to pay. The others I may not get to until Monday.. I am swamped.. oh well, that's good I guess.... Thanks This runs April 13 and 20 -cost is 149.42. Thanks Page 1_~ LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Jeff Bennett to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2341132) MARTHA PLANK, LEGAL ADV. REP THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com HAVE AN ENJOYABLE DAY! > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2004 11:26 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill > «File: 4-27-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > > Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, > 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are > wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to > 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of > public interest in several of the items. > Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? > Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board ~ Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 2 > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 ~ Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 1 From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@roanokecountyva.gov> Date: 4/9/04 2:41 PM Subject: RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill here is the last one -runs April 13 and 20 -cost is 202.44. Thanks Diane.. LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC, to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2341926) MARTHA PLANK, LEGAL ADV. REP THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com HAVE AN ENJOYABLE DAY! > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2004 11:26 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill > «File: 4-27-Community Development.doc» > Martha, > Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, > 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are > wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to > 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of > public interest in several of the items. > Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? > Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. > Diane > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 Diane Childers - RE: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 2 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 Diane Childers -Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Page 1 From: Diane Childers To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 4/7/04 11:26AM Subject: Ads: Bennett, Roberts, Wilson, Kahn, and Slate Hill Martha, Attached are five legal ads to be published on April 13 and April 20, 2004. If you have any questions, please let me know. In case you are wondering, we have changed the time for our public hearings from 7 p.m. to 6 p.m. due to the number of them on the agenda and also the level of public interest in several of the items. Also, can you tell me where I would email an ad for ayard/moving sale? Thanks Martha. I appreciate your help. I hope you have a great day. Diane Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Jeff Bennett to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Tuesday, April 20, 2004 Direct the bill for publication to: Jeff Bennett 4040 Jae Valley Road Roanoke, VA 24014 540/427-3880 cell: 312-1999 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 1 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of D. Gregory Roberts to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Tuesday, April 20, 2004 Direct the bill for publication to: Greg Roberts 5228 Ponderosa Drive Roanoke, VA 24019 540/761-4734 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 2 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Marc I. Wilson to obtain a Special Use Permit to conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Tuesday, April 20, 2004 Direct the bill for publication to: The Sportscar Clinic Attn: Marc Wilson 3328 Peters Creek Road Roanoke VA 24019 540/563-1133 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 3 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.9 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District and 5.8 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Tuesday, April 20, 2004 Direct the bill for publication to: Glenn Darby Feldmann &Goodlatte Attn: Maryellen F. Goodlatte, Esquire 210 First Street, S.W., Suite 200 P.O. Box 2887 Roanoke, VA 24001 540/224-8018 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 4 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, April 27, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA on the petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff Investments, LLC, to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: April 9, 2004 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Tuesday, April 20, 2004 Direct the bill for publication to: Slate Hill I, LLC Attn: Hunter Smith 4415 Pheasant Ridge Road Roanoke, VA 24014 540/772-5090 cell: 540/874-5755 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Brenda Holton -Arbor Day Proclamation Page 1 From: Diane Childers To: Brenda Holton Date: 4/14/04 10:44AM Subject: Arbor Day Proclamation FYI -Janet Scheid said to just place this under reports on the April 27 agenda. Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 /~ . .. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2004 PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 30, 2004, AS NATIONAL ARBOR DAY IN ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, in 1872 J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees, and WHEREAS, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska, and WHEREAS, 2004 is the 132nd anniversary of the holiday and Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world, and WHEREAS, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce life-giving oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife, and WHEREAS, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and beautify our community, and WHEREAS, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Richard C. Flora, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim April 30, 2004, as NATIONAL ARBOR DAY in Roanoke County, and urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands; and FURTHER, urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations. Arbor Day Proclamation ,w . . Page 1 of 1 Whereas, In 1872 J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees, and Whereas, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska, and Whereas, 2004 is the 132nd anniversary of the holiday and Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world, and Whereas, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce life-giving oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife, and Whereas, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and beautify our community, and Whereas, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal. Now, Therefore, I, ,Mayor of the City of , do hereby proclaim of as the 132nd anniversary celebration Arbor Day in the City of , and I urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands, and Further, I urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations. Dated this day of Mayor file://T:\Board%20Meetings\2004\Apr%2027\Proclamations\Arbor%20Day%20Proclamati... 3/9/2004 Diane Childers - Re: Arbor Day Page 1 ~• . From: Janet Scheid To: Diane Childers Date: 3/9/04 1:03PM Subject: Re: Arbor Day Diane: That is great. Could you add in at the 3rd Whereas "and will be celebrated in Roanoke County on Friday, April 26, 2004; and" Thanks. Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540)772-2094 »> Diane Childers 03/09/04 12:52PM »> Janet, Below is the proclamation on the website. If this looks okay to you, we will draft based on this form and place on the April 27 agenda for approval. Diane Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 »> Janet Scheid 03/09/04 12:47PM »> Diane: Roanoke County is doing Arbor Day at Glen Cove Elem. school. As part of the Arbor Day festivities I need an Arbor Day Proclamation signed by the Chairman of the BOS. Should I put it together and send it up to you? Arbor Day will be April 30th. thanks. Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540)772-2094 Brenda Holton - Re: Arbor Day Page 1 From: Diane Childers To: Janet Scheid Date: 3/9/04 12:52PM Subject: Re: Arbor Day Janet, Below is the proclamation on the website. If this looks okay to you, we will draft based on this form and place on the April 27 agenda for approval. Diane Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 »> Janet Scheid 03/09/04 12:47PM »> Diane: Roanoke County is doing Arbor Day at Glen Cove Elem. school. As part of the Arbor Day festivities I need an Arbor Day Proclamation signed by the Chairman of the BOS. Should I put it together and send it up to you? Arbor Day will be April 30th. thanks. Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540)772-2094 CC: Clerk's Office Whereas, In 1872 J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees, and YVhereas, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska, and Whereas, 2004 is the 132nd anniversary of the holiday and Arbor Day is now ', observed throughout the nation and the world, and Whereas, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce life-giving oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife, and Whereas, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and beautify our community, and ', YVhereas, trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual ', renewal. Now, Therefore, I, ,Mayor of the City of , do hereby proclaim ', ~i as the 132nd anniversary celebration of Page 2 __ Arbor Day in the City of , and I urge all citizens to i celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands, and ~~ Further, I urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations. Dated this Mayor _ day of ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BO~tD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOkkE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: April 27, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring April 30, 1999 as Arbor Day in Roanoke County and Recognition of Roanoke County for being named as a 1998 Tree City USA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The National Arbor Day Foundation recently announced that Roanoke County has been named as a 1998 Tree City USA. The County has received this designation for its efforts to preserve trees through our community forestry program, our success in preserving the view sheds in the County and our protection of green space. Attached is a letter from John Rosenow, President of the National Arbor Day Foundation. Charles Blankenship who has been very active in the community forestry program and is one of Roanoke County's representatives on the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission will be present to brief the Board on this award. Becky Rowe, principal at Oak Grove Elementary School, will also be present. There will be an Arbor Day celebration at Oak Grove on April 30, 1999 when Roanoke County will officially receive the 1998 Tree City award. Attached for the Board's consideration is a proclamation declaring April 30, 1999 as Arbor Day in Roanoke County. Respectfully Submitted by: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Br.Lnda,Holton -Khan Development Page 1 From: Brenda Holton To: Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com v Date: 3/10/04 11:40AM Subject: Khan Development Martha, per our telephone conversation, would you please pull the legal ad for the petition of Khan Development to rezone property on Keagy Road which is scheduled to be published again on March 16, 2004. This rezoning has been postponed until the Board's April 27th meeting and will have to be re-advertised before that time. Thanks for your help Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us CC: Diane Childers; Janet Scheid Brenda Holton Re: Keagy Village From: Brenda Holton To: Janet Scheid Date: 3/10/04 11:27AM Subject: Re: Keagy Village Janet, Martha at Roanoke Times has agreed to pull the ad for next Tuesday, 3/16. I will email her to confirm this. I can put the postponement on the BOS web site but do you think it should also go on the main County page? Maybe Teresa could send out a "notice" or press release that the meeting has been postponed? We could also run something on the RVTV message board. Let me know what you think. From Paul's email, it seems that notification of concerned parties is the responsibility of the applicant. If you need a copy of Resolution 10990-3, let me know. Brenda Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us »> Janet Scheid 03/10/04 10:33AM »> Maryellen has asked to continue until April 27. She is putting it in writing to me today. Can the legal ad for next week be pulled? Paul: Does she still need to be present at the March 23 meeting? Can we put something on the website about the continuation to help inform the 250+ citizens who attended the PC meeting? Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540)772-2094 __ Page 1 CC: Diane Childers; Paul Mahoney LBrenda_,Holton -Fwd: Re: Kahn Development -Keagy Village (Vacation) Page 1 From: Brenda Holton To: Janet Scheid Date: 3/10/04 10:26AM Subject: Fwd: Re: Kahn Development -Keagy Village (Vacation) Janet, there was no message in this email. Brenda Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us »> Janet Scheid 03/10/04 10:24AM »> Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540)772-2094 »> Diane Childers 03/10/04 10:21AM »> I will be out of the office from Wednesday, March 10 through Friday, March 12. If you need immediate assistance, please contact Brenda Holton or Mary Brandt at 772-2005. ~ Brenda,Holton Re: Keagy Village Page 1 From: Paul Mahoney To: Brenda Holton; Janet Scheid Date: 3/10/04 11:20AM Subject: Re: Keagy Village Janet and Brenda: See Res. #10990-3. The applicant may request in writing a continuance from the Clerk, no later than noon on Thursday before the scheduled public hearing. Clerk may grant only one continuance. The are certain notification requirements placed on the applicant, as well as the costs of additional legal notices. Applicant does not have to appear before the Board if applicant satisfies this section of the Res. Paul »> Janet Scheid 03/10/04 10:33AM »> Maryellen has asked to continue until April 27. She is putting it in writing to me today. Can the legal ad for next week be pulled? Paul: Does she still need to be present at the March 23 meeting? Can we put something on the website about the continuation to help inform the 250+ citizens who attended the PC meeting? Janet Scheid, Chief Planner Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540)772-2094 CC: Elmer Hodge Diane Childers - RE: Khan Development Page 1 t From: Martha Plank <Martha.Plank@Roanoke.com> To: 'Diane Childers' <DCHILDERS@roanokecountyva.gov> Date: 3/8/04 9:11AM Subject: RE: Khan Development Hey Diane, hope you had a good weekend! Ad will run March 9 and 16 -cost is 187.98. Thanks! LEGAL NOTICE~~ROANOKE COUNTY~~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, March 23, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.9 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District and 5.8 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: March 5, 2004Diane S. Childers, Clerk (2319127) Martha Fisher Plank, Legal Adv. Rep. THE ROANOKE TIMES Ph.: 540-981-3440 Fax: 540-981-3415 Email: legals@roanoke.com > From: Diane Childers > Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2004 9:50 AM > To: legals@roanoke.com > Subject: Ad: Khan Development > «File: 3-23-Community Development.doc» > Good morning Martha, > Please find attached a legal ad to be published on March 9 and 16. If you > have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. > Diane S. Childers > Clerk to the Board > County of Roanoke > Phone: (540) 772-2003 > Fax: (540) 772-2193 __ Diane Childers - 3-23-Community Development.doc Page 1 - LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I' The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, March 23, 2004, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Kahn Development Company to rezone 9.9 acres from C1 Office District to C2 General Commercial District and 5.8 acres from R1 Low Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Community Development, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: March 5, 2004 Diane S. Childers, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times: Tuesday, March 9, 2004 Tuesday, March 16, 2004 Direct the bill for publication to: ', Glenn Darby Feldmann &Goodlatte Attn: Maryellen F. Goodlatte, Esquire 210 First Street, S.W., Suite 200 P.O. Box 2887 Roanoke, VA 24001 540/224-8018 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 __ Diane Childers - Ad: Khan Development Page 1 From: Diane Childers To: legals@roanoke.com Date: 3/4/04 9:50AM Subject: Ad: Khan Development Good morning Martha, Please find attached a legal ad to be published on March 9 and 16. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board County of Roanoke Phone: (540) 772-2003 Fax: (540) 772-2193 zevuaw~ seizrcwt ~~ v~wucrat cl ao¢x ar wrwu os[ awa rwi w~~r -~l aaei ~Tw ~u~cw ara „e .. ,. ,. ~ ~ o ~ ° ~ woo-IOV~•~•~••uvr~ mr-a ' aoeo-aac (orv) ~zva oorc-ooc (or9) ' • u6~t.p a~ydo,~ agora v~eilo~s aso~tvoa • oaaa ~ooa •o•a • Iw •aclNasv asoular soar ~ Eu~uuo~d ,y.ory ., n~ o.ll 4 0, ~ 6liTISAItl'Id / 62I0]C8A?IRS / 67i9~NIflI3S I s~s~~oss~ ~siH~zz~~a~~ ~ ~ ~Y ~l Q ~lal~~. (n b'INIO~IIn 'Jl1Nf100 3~IONb'0~1 at/0C2i .lO-b'3~1 PUS 4d02~ 01~1103~3 31`df111S '°; ~ Nb'3d JNINOZ3~1 3H1N3W3ldd(1S a ~ ~ -' c L Z, r _.__ I _. _...__ .......... ..... / ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ y~ ~ ~ '~ ----- { of ° g~~~~ i , ~g~~~ ~1E ~ ~/ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ • ' ~ ~ / / ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ . ~~ /, ~ Brenda Holton - Re: RVTV Message Board request From: Elaine Simpson To: Brenda Holton Date: 3/11 /04 11:14AM Subject: Re: RVTV Message Board request Got it. Thanks. Elaine Simpson Cable Access Director Roanoke Valley Television 541 Luck Ave., S.W. Suite 145 Roanoke, VA 24016 Phone: (540) 857-5021 Fax: (540) 857-5023 esimpson@rvtv.org Page 1 n -. _._-- _- _.. ____ _. -__ _._. _ _.. a Holton -RVTV Message Board request Page 1 f From: Brenda Holton To: Elaine Simpson Date: 3/11 /04 10:43AM Subject: RVTV Message Board request Elaine, Mr. Hodge requested that I put a message on RVTV announcing that the Kahn Development's rezoning on Keagy Road has been postponed from the March 23 meeting to April 27, 2004 at 7 p.m. This postponement was rquested by Kahn Dev. Attached is a message request to accomplish this. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know. 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 CC: Diane Childers; Janet Scheid; Mary Brandt B a Holton - RVTV Message Request Form.doc Page 1 ROANOKE VALLEY TELEVISION Message Request CO UNTY OF ROANOKE DATE MESSAGE SENT: 3-11-04 FROM: Department: -Board of Supervisors Contact Name & Phone #: Brenda Holton 772-2005 START DATE: 3-11-04 END DATE: 4-28-04 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Please run message as stated below Due to Kahn Development's request, the rezoning petition for Keagy Rd has been postponed from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting on March 23 to the Apri127, 2004, meeting at 7 p.m. For more information, call 772-2068 Messages may be Faxed to: 540-857-5023 or E-mailed to: esimpson@rvtv.org Roanoke Valley Television (540) 857-5021 Message can be no more than seven lines. No more than 40 characters per line including spaces. Please include phone number for more information. COUNTY OF ROANOKE Diane Childers -RVTV Message Baord Page 1 From: Brenda Holton To: Elaine Simpson Date: 3/24/04 5:33PM Subject: RVTV Message Baord Elaine, the time of the 4/27 meeting has changed from 3 p.m. to 2 p.m., and 7 p.m. to 6 p.m. We need to change the message for the Keagy rezoning and put a notice about the meeting time change. Both will expire on April 28th. Attached are two messages. I will be out tomorrow so if you have questions, please email Diane. Thanks, Brenda J. Holton Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Phone: (540) 772-2005 Fax: (540) 772-2193 bholton@co.roanoke.va.us CC: Clerks Office ROANOKE VALLEY TELEVISION Message Request COUNTY OF ROANOKE DATE MESSAGE SENT: 3-11-04 FROM: Department: -Board of Supervisors Contact Name & Phone #: Brenda Holton 772-2005 START DATE: 3-11-04 END DATE: 4-28-04 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: -Please run message as stated below Message can be no more than seven lines. No more than 40 characters per line including spaces. Please include phone number for more information. COUNTY OF ROANOKE Due to Kahn Development's request, the rezoning petition for Keagy Rd has been postponed from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting on March 23 to the April 27, 2004, meeting at 6 p.m. The time has been changed to 6 pm instead of 7pm For more information, call 772-2068 Messages maybe Faxed to: 540-857-5023 or E-mailed to: esimpson@rvtv.org Roanoke Valley Television (540) 857-5021 ROANOKE VALLEY TELEVISION Message Request COUNTY OF ROANOKE DATE MESSAGE SENT: 3-24-04 FROM: Department: -Board of Supervisors Contact Name & Phone #: Brenda Holton 772-2005 START DATE: 3-24-04 END DATE: 4-28-04 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Please run message as stated below Message can be no more than seven lines. No more than 40 characters per line including spaces. Please include phone number for more information. COUNTY OF ROANOKE The April 27, 2004 Board of Supervisors Meetin will be ig.n at 2 pm instead of 3 pm. The public hearings will start at 6 p.m instead of 7 pm. For more information, call 772-2005 Messages maybe Faxed to: 540-857-5023 or E-mailed to: esimpson@rvtv.org Roanoke Valley Television (540) 857-5021 County of Roanoke County Administrator's Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2004-2005 April 27, 2004 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Table of Contents County Administrator's Message .............................................. i Financial Summaries ..............................................................~ 1 Summary of Proposed Budget .............................................. 1 General Government Revenue Summary ..............................., 3 General Government Expenditure Summary ............................ 4 Uses of Available New Revenues .......................................... 5 Contribution Requests ............................................................. 6 Health and Human Service Agencies ..................................... 6 Cultural, Tourism, and Other Agencies ................................... 7 Additional Funding Requests ................................................... 8 Summary of Additional Funding Requests ............................... 8 Detail of Additional Funding Requests .................................... 9 Capital Improvement Program .................................................. 14 FY05-09 Summary of Capital Projects .................................... 14 Capital Planning Timeline .................................................... 17 e County of Roanoke FY 2004-2005 Proposed Budget April 27, 2004 Mr. Chairman and members of the Board of Supervisors, the proposed budget which is attached, allows us to accomplish many of the goals set forth by you and the Roanoke County School Board while maintaining a fiscally conservative philosophy in terms of taxation and spending. You'll find our strong financial position and diverse economic base allows us to continue to preserve or enhance current service levels for our residents. In addition, this budget ~`~ proposes funding for several large County capital projects. It also places strong emphasis on ~ ,public education, public safety, and economic development. The budget is balanced within ,~ t'~ ;yam existing tax rates and fees in place and does not include recommendations for new personnel 4 ~ positions. The Board and School Board have been extremely supportive of our employees and we have included funds for 3% salary increases and funds for health care and retirement increases. As of this date, the General Assembly has not yet adopted a state budget so we have assumed revenues from the Commonwealth at the same level as last year. The total budget, including all funds and Roanoke County Schools, is $314,969,985. FY2004-2005 Budget Summary Roanoke County is well prepared for the future. We continue to explore regional solutions to serve the needs of our citizens as we have done in the past. In recent years we have formed a joint authority and built a regional landfill and refuse transfer station with Roanoke City and Vinton for solid waste disposal. We have also entered into an agreement with the City for joint fire and rescue staffing. An agreement is also in place for valley-wide library services. Currently, another notable regional project is about to take flight with the formation of the proposed regional water authority. We are also enjoying many other accomplishments. Over the past several years the County has enhanced Public Safety by adding 40 firefighter positions in Fire and Rescue. The Police Department has added five School Resource Officers, six Dispatchers in the E-911 Center plus six Patrol Officers to staff a new patrol district. The County has also funded $70 million in school construction projects, successfully invested in economic development initiatives, and has nearly completed technology upgrades to increase efficiency throughout the county. We have done much to serve the needs of our citizens; however, there are still significant challenges that must be addressed. Some of these challenges include capital needs, growing public safety concerns, management of growth and development, establishing competitive employee benefits, and demographic changes. Funding of Operations -New Revenues The General Government Fund budget for FY2004-2005 is projected to be $135,889,036. Local economic conditions are improving, but growth is inconsistent. For instance, revenue growth in some categories is healthy while in other revenue categories it is sluggish. For example, real estate values and retail sales have shown strong growth; however, used car values have E decreased. Overall revenue growth is projected at $7,959,112 or 6.2% for FY04-05, but this growth includes some funds that are committed for specific purposes and programs. Of the $7.9 million increase, $800,000 of that amount is federal pass-through funds for social service program reimbursements. In addition, $400,000 is generated from rescue transport fees that must be utilized for fire and rescue services. Finally, investment in economic development initiatives for new retail and manufacturing companies will produce an additional $840,000 of real estate, business personal property, and sales tax revenue; however, this revenue will be returned to the companies as incentives reimbursements over the next several years. After taking into account the dedicated revenues, $5.9 million will be available to fund on-going county operations, an increase of 4.4%. State Budget Uncertainty The most difficult challenge during this year's budget process has been the inability of the General Assembly to develop and adopt a state budget in a timely manner. While state appropriations comprise a little over 6% of the county's operating budget, state funding represents more than 48% of the Roanoke County School system's $110 million operating budget. This uncertainty has made it difficult for both the Board of Supervisors and the School Board to determine pay raises for employees, to issue contracts for teachers, and to grant funding requests for important programs and services. Several years ago the state changed its fiscal year for funding social service programs to May 31St. Several localities are actually considering shutting down operations on that date because they are unable to negotiate new contracts for provision of services because there is no state appropriation. The Schools have used worst-case funding estimates provided by the Department of Education that propose to increase revenues by $5.5 million. This increased school funding may have an impact on state funding for other county services. Some of these include police, jail, social services and constitutional offices. The current proposed Roanoke County budget assumes flat funding from the state at prior year levels, with some adjustments for federal pass-through funding of social service programs. State appropriations for FY2004-2005 are projected at $8,671,198. x X Western Virginia Water Authority ~~ We continue to look for ways to improve service to the citizens of Roanoke County and beyond. __~~`` For the past year and a half, Roanoke County and the city of Roanoke have negotiated the ~Y`~ formation of a new water and wastewater authority. Contract negotiations are expected to be ~\~ completed by July 1, 2004 so that assets and personnel can be transferred to the newly formed Western Virginia Water Authority. When the Authority becomes operational, the county will have transferred approximately $28 million and 63 employees. The City will likewise transfer personnel and assets to the Authority. While this will make the City and County operations more efficient, the move does impact next year's budget. In the past, some County departments have performed services for the County Utility Department and have been reimbursed for their work. Water and Sewer fund transfers to general county operations for the services provided will no longer be made. This elimination of inter-fund transfers will cost General Fund operations approximately $315,000 that will need to be offset against new revenues. However, this cost is ii small when you consider the long term benefits that the Authority will provide water and sewer customers. Capital Improvements Over the last several years, the County has underscored its commitment to education by funding approximately $70 million of a $120 million construction and renovation program for Roanoke County Schools. While these projects were essential to maintain the excellence of our schools, the dedication of funds for these projects has left some of the county's capital projects unfulfilled. There have been no significant capital expenditures for county projects over the last 13 years (last G.O. bond issue was 1991). It is now necessary to address these critical needs. With many capital needs identified by staff, a Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Review Committee was established. This committee was comprised of county citizens who were given the task of evaluating and prioritizing capital projects from a community perspective based on priorities set forth by the Board of Supervisors. Based on their evaluations, the committee objectively ranked each project and submitted their results to the Board to be considered when developing the FY2004-2005 budget. Working from the CII' Committee's recommendations, the Board and staff developed a plan utilizing capital balances, existing funding streams, and expenditure savings over the next several years to address the following capital needs: • Replacement of Fire & Rescue Pager System $ 796,483 • New Public Safety Center 20,000,000 • Upgrade Public Safety Radio System 10,000,000 • Vinton Fire & Rescue Station 400,000 • Valleypointe Business Park- Phase II ($500,000/yr.) 3,000,000 • Regional Jail 15,000,000 It should be noted that this plan does not address all long-term capital needs for Roanoke County, but the above projects represent the most pressing safety and welfare needs of our citizens. Additional plamling is necessary to address other "quality of life" needs such as additional school projects, libraries, and parks. Capital Maintenance: During the evaluation of capital projects, the CIP Review Committee arrived at the conclusion that a number of capital projects (primarily in Parks & Recreation) were mainly maintenance issues that, due to deferral, escalated into capital requests. The committee recommended a review of maintenance budgets for possible increases to mitigate this problem in the future. As part of that staff review, the proposed budget includes increasing capital maintenance funds in Parks & Recreation by $150,000. Education • Increased the Operating Fund transfer for Schools to $56,413,151-- an increase of $617,910 to help fund an average 3% salary increase and other program enhancements. • Increased debt service contributions from $5,963,805 to $8,048,555 to pay debt for the most recent School construction projects that have been approved. iii Community Development • An additional $257,700 has been allocated to the Department of Community Development for increased drainage maintenance services to reduce storm-water runoff onto neighboring properties. • $90,000 in additional staffing was included in the Solid Waste Collection budget to double the frequency of bulk and brush pick ups to residences. • While tipping fees for garbage disposal will remain unchanged for F'Y04-O5, increased tonnages will require an increase of $65,000 to the Solid Waste Collection budget. Human Services • Increases in both case loads and costs for service provision have warranted an additional $1,000,000 allocation to the Community Policy Management Team (CPMT) transfer for mandated cases. This program is supported with local (county and school) funds and state allocations and provides services to "at-risk youth and families" through inter- agency cooperation. • The demand for certain social service programs (i.e. foster care and detention) continues to grow. Thus, an additional allocation of $800,000 has been made to the Social Services budget. Fortunately, these programs are 100% reimbursable and the cost is offset by federal pass-through funds on the revenue side. Other • Information Technology Upgrades. As previously reported, many of the county's hardware and software systems are 10-20 years old, have become outdated, and are currently being replaced. Recurring expenditures of $770,000 have previously been allocated to this project. The proposed budget allocates an additional $230,000 to this project to ensure timely completion of information system upgrades. • Due to jail overcrowding, $150,000 has been included in the Sheriff's budget for the outsourcing of inmates to other facilities. This allocation will help reduce the number of inmates at the county jail while planning for a new regional facility is completed. Employee Benefits • A salary increase averaging 3% for County and School employees has been allocated to next year's budget. The County cost of this increase is $1,140,000. • An increase in the VRS retirement rate represents a major cost increase in the proposed budget. The County's contribution rate increased from 7.5% to 13.5% and represents an increased cost of $2,000,000. • Health Insurance increases of $250,000 has been allocated due to a 10% increase in plan costs. This allocation represents one-half the total increase in health care costs; covered employees will be responsible for the other half of the increase. iv • An increase in the County's match for the deferred compensation program from $10 to $25 per pay period has been included in the proposed budget. This program encourages employees to set aside additional money for retirement. The allocation is $185,000. Conclusion I would like to thank the members of the Board of Supervisors for their hard work and guidance throughout this budget year. The Office of Management and Budget is also to be commended for their work in organizing and facilitating changes in the process and providing information needed for informed decision making. In addition, I would like to thank the School Board, superintendent and staff for their cooperation and willingness to work with the Board and County staff to bring together a plan that provides for all of the citizens of Roanoke County. e V County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Summary of Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Revenue Estimates Amount General Fund General Government General Property Taxes $ 93,189,846 Local Sales Tax 7,400,000 Business License Tax 5,050,000 Utility Consumer Tax 4,775,000 Motor Vehicle License Tax 1,760,000 Recordation/Conveyance Tax 1,195,000 Meals Tax 2,860,000 Cellular Phone Tax 1,000,000 Other Local Taxes 2,445,000 Permits, Fees & Licenses 633,577 Fines and Forfeitures 599,200 Interest Income 403,900 Charges for Services 2,397,200 Commonwealth 8,671,198 Federal 2,650,000 Other 859,115 Total General Government 135,889,036 E-911 Maintenance 970,000 Comprehensive Services 5,037,171 Law Library 41,735 VJCCCA/Life Skills 271,669 S B & T Building 404,273 Recreation Fee Class 981,694 Internal Services -Information Technology 2,974,293 County Garage 346,392 Total General Fund 146,916,263 Debt Service Fund -County 3,035,130 Capital Projects Fund 3,732,573 Internal Service Fund 956,898 Water Fund 18,140,858 Sewer Fund 9,881,911 School Operating Fund 110,986,972 School Cafeteria Fund 3,959,000 School Debt Service Fund 10,352,924 School Grants Fund 4,507,045 School Capital Fund 1,168,335 School Textbook Fund 928,016 Regional Alternative School 404,060 Total Revenues All Funds 314,969,985 Less: Transfers (81,370,548) Total Net of Transfers 233,599,437 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Summary of Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Proposed Expenditures Amount General Fund General Government General Administration $ 2,712,828 Constitutional Officers 8,840,587 Judicial Administration 1,110,435 Management Services 2,851,441 Public Safety 17,293,121 Community Services 10,552,518 Human Services 14,011,769 Non-Departmental 5,389,314 Transfers to School Operating Fund 56,065,852 Transfers to School Insurance 347,299 Transfers to Capital Fund 2,779,718 Transfers to Debt Service Fund 10,589,136 Transfer to Comprehensive Services 2,153,000 Transfer to County Garage 134,318 Other 1,057,700 Total General Government 135,889,036 E-911 Maintenance 970,000 Comprehensive Services 71 0~ *aM OtxC ~a4'E ~~ 5,037,171 Law Library 41,735 VJCCCA/Life Skills 271,669 S B & T Building 404,273 Recreation Fee Class 981,694 Internal Services -Information Technology 2,974,293 County Garage 346,392 Total General Fund 146,916,263 Debt Service Fund -County 3,035,130 Capital Projects Fund 3,732,573 Internal Service Fund 956,898 Water Fund 18,140,858 Sewer Fund 9,881,911 School Operating Fund 110,986,972 School Cafeteria Fund 3,959,000 School Grants Fund 4,507,045 School Debt Fund 10,352,924 School Capital Fund 1,168,335 School Textbook Fund 928,016 Regional Alternative School 404,060 Total Expenditures All Funds 314,969,985 Less: Transfers (81,370,548) Total Net of Transfers 233,599,437 2 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget General Government Revenue Summary Adopted Proposed Budget Budget FY 03-04 FY 04-05 Revenue Real Estate Taxes t9c~ • ~ • $60,047,500 $64,475,000 Personal Property Taxes 24,000,000 25,464,846 Other Property Taxes 3,050,700 3,250,000 Local Sales Tax 6,375,000 7,400,000 Utility Consumer Tax 4,775,000 4,775,000 Business License Tax 4,400,000 5,050,000 Bank Franchise Tax 475,000 425,000 Motor Vehicle License Tax 1,740,000 1,760,000 Recordation and Conveyance Tax 1,160,000 1,195,000 Hotel/Motel Tax 683,000 625,000 Meals Tax 2,675,000 2,860,000 Cellular Phone Tax 780,000 1,000,000 Other Local Taxes 1,440,000 1,395,000 Permits, Fees & Licenses 641,687 633,577 Fines and Forfeitures 639,400 599,200 Use of Money and Property 704,600 403,900 Charges for Services 1,910,600 2,397,200 Miscellaneous Revenue 668,500 671,000 Recovered Costs 105,816 188,115 Commonwealth 8,072,121 8,671,198 Federal 2,600,000 2,650,000 Total Revenue 126,943,924 135,889,036 Transfer from Other Funds 986,000 0 Total General Government $127,929,924 $135,889,036 ~ ~ . ~,. ,~~ «, ~ vehiacs aid +~ `~. R~ nuu car ~, ^ ui~k(~ ~ncstt~~5 , ads ~ car ualw-oa• ot~l b~ ~ ~n nru! cat ual~,.~. 3 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget General Government Expenditure Summary Expenditures General Administration Constitutional Officers Judicial Administration Management Services Public Safety Community Services Human Services Non Departmental Employee Benefits Internal Service Charges Miscellaneous Transfers Debt-County Debt-Schools Schools-Operating Schools Non-Recurring Capital Schools-Dental Internal Services Comprehensive Services Garage Board Contingency Total General Government Adopted Budget FY 03-04 $2,312,521 8,300,923 1,110,435 2,520,216 Proposed Budget FY 04-05 $2,712,828 8,840,587 1,110,435 2,851,441 16,334,687 17,293,121 9,895,328 10,552,518 12,655,252 14,011,769 1,340,000 1,805,047 2,399,417 2,694,267 821,000 890,000 2,636,225 5,963,805 55,447,942 125,000 3,388,515 347,299 937,906 1,153,000 132,513 2,540,581 8,048,555 56,065,852 0 2,779,718 347,299 957,700 2,153,000 134,318 107,940 100,000 $127,929,924 $135,889,036 3°la ~n~d , ~a~t in6 ~i , °t t~~iremcl~ ~n~~ e 4 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Uses of Available New Revenues Uses of Available Funds: Employee Benefits: VRS Retirement (7.5% to 13.5%) Health Insurance Increase Salary Increase (3%) Deferred Comp Match Operational Increases: Increased School Operating Transfer Enhanced Bulk & Brush Collection Increased Drainage Maintenance Services Economic Development -Incremental Tax Financing Elimination of Utility Transfers-General Government Elimination of Utility Transfers-IT Cortran Usage CPMT Mandated Cases (;p,~ho~ c~ 4aM I HP Migration Fuel Cost Increases Tipping Fees--Increased Tonnage SPCA Boarding Fees Enterprise-wide Software Licensing and Infrastructure Outsourcing Jail Inmates Capital Maintenance - P & R Administrative cost of Rescue Fees Increases in Gain Sharing Agreement -Vinton Increase in RVTV transfer Increased Operational Costs-Departments $ 2,000,000 251,237 1,140,000 185,000 617,910 90,000 257,700 839,846 252,000 64,000 78,000 1,000,000 230,463 50,000 65,000 22,000 120,000 150,000 150,000 75,000 70,000 8,100 242,856 $ 7,959,112 e 5 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Contribution Requests: Health and Human Service Agencies Agency Name. FY03 Adopted FY04 Adopted FY05 Request FY05 Proposed Funding Adult Care Center of the Roanoke Valley $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 12,000 $ 10,000 ____. American Red Cross ___ - 4,000 1,333 Bethany Hall 500 500 12,240 667 _ Big Brothers and Big Sisters of Roanoke Valley Blue Ridge Behavioral Health Care 3,000 117,755 3,000 117,755 7,500 127,398 3,000 118,585 _ Blue Ridge Independent Living Center - 10,000 0 Blue Ridge Legal Services, Inc. - 3,732 0 Bradley Free Clinic 5,000 5,000 6,500 5,000 Brain Injury Services of SWVA - 19,000 1,000 Child Health Investment Partnership (CHIP) 16,660 16,660 23,360 17,500 Children's Advocacy Center of the Roanoke Valley, Inc 3,500 3,500 5,050 3,500 Conflict Resolution Center, Inc. - 5,000 500 Council of Community Svcs-Info and Referral Center 3,000 3,000 3,150 3,000 Council of Community Svcs-Roanoke Regional Housing Network - 2,000 0 Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) 2,000 2,000 10,000 2,000 Family Service of the Roanoke Valley 4,000 4,000 5,000 4,200 Good Samaritan Hospice, Inc. 1,000 1,000 5,000 1,000 Goodwill Industries of the Valleys 5,000 4,000 5,000 3,667 Habitat for Humanity - 10,000 2,000 Literacy Volunteers of America-Roanoke Valley 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 LOA Area Agency on Aging 13,750 13,750 27,015 13,833 Mental Health Association 700 700 1,200 700 National Conference for Community and Justice 650 650 1,500 600 National Multiple Sclerosis Society - 3,000 500 Presbyterian Community Center - 3,000 0 Roanoke Area Ministries 1,000 1,000 3,000 1,000 Roanoke Valley Interfaith Hospitality Network - 8,333 0 Roanoke Valley Speech & Hearing Center 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Saint Francis of Assisi Service Dog Foundation - 1,000 10,000 1,383 Salem/Roanoke County Community Food Pantry -Operating 3,000 4,500 10,000 4,667 Salem/Roanoke County Community Food Pantry -Capital - 10,000 0 Salvation Army 2,000 2,000 3,000 2,167 Southwestern Virginia Second Harvest Food Bank 3,000 4,000 5,000 4,000 TAP 30,000 30,000 31,500 30,000 TAP-Transitional Living Center 20,000 20,000 21,000 20,000 TRUST _ 4,750 4,750 ~ 7,500 _ ~ _ 4,833 __._ YWCA of the Roanoke Valley - 8,000 1,000 TOTAL $ 252,265 $ 254,765 $ 430,978 $ 263,635 a~ ti ~~ o~ ~~5 ~ ~, ~ ~ . 1 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Contribufion Requests: Culfural, Tourism and Other Agencies Agency Name- < FY03 Adopted FY04 Adopted FY05 Request FY05 Proposed Funding Art Museum of Western Virginia - $ 2,500 $ 667 Arts Council of the Blue Ridge 2,000 2,000 3,000 2,000 Blue Ridge Soil and Water Conservation District 1,250 1,250 3,000 1,167 Center in the Square Operating 35,000 35,000 45,000 37,000 Downtown Music Lab - 5,000 667 Economic Development Partnership 130,000 130,000 140,054 140,054 Friends of the Lake (SML Water Quality) - 15,000 0 Harrison Museum of African American Culture 2,000 2,000 2,500 2,083 History Museum & Historical Society of Western Va. 7,500 7,500 10,000 7,500 _ _ _ ___ ____ ~__~ _.....___~_v_ History Museum & Historical Society of Western Va. ~... _.___~_ ...._ ~_ _ ___~.____~_ _.~ _.~_ _. _ _ _.___.- _ ~- O. Winston Link Museum - 5,000 1,000 Jefferson Center Foundation - 45,000 667 Julian Stanley Wise Museum 20,000 15,000 35,000 12,833 Mill Mountain Theatre 5,000 5,000 8,500 5,000 Miil Mountain Zoo 5,000 5,000 8,000 5,667 New Century Venture Center - 10,000 500 Opera Roanoke - 2,500 333 Roanoke Higher Education Center 10,000 20,000 10,667 Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce 2,500 10,000 3,333 Roanoke Symphony 6,000 6,000 7,000 6,000 Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission 29,614 47,411 46,798 46,798 Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau 130,000 130,000 150,000 130,000 Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission 10,800 10,800 17,400 15,000 Roanoke Valley Sister Cities 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,833 Salem/Roanoke County Chamber of Commerce 6,000 5,000 6,000 5,000 Salem-Roanoke Baseball Hall of Fame 3,000 2,500 contribution 2,000 Science Museum of Western Virginia 15,000 15,000 25,000 16,000 VA Western Community College -Scholarship 7,010 7,010 10,080 7,010 Vinton Chamber of Commerce 500 1,000 1,000 1,000 Vinton Dogwood Festival 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Virginia Amateur Sports 40,000 40,000 50,000 41,667 Virginia Museum of Transportation 5,000 5,000 10,000 5,333 Western Virginia Land Trust - 10,000 1,333 Western Virginia Land Trust /Read Mtn Alliance - 1,000 0 Williamson Road Area Business Association - 1,000 10,000 1,000 Young Audiences of Virginia, Inc. - 10,440 667 TOTAL $ 467,174 $ 487,471 $ 728,772 $ 513,779 e 7 County of Roanoke Proposed FY2004-2005 Budget Summary of Additional Funding Requests Human Services Library 91,519 Parks and Recreation Recreation 184,208 Grounds Maintenance 628,404 Totals $ 904,131 Community Services General Services 230,100 Totals $ 230,100 Constitutional Officers Commissioner of the Revenue 32,162 Sheriff 293,308 Treasurer 12,500 Totals $ 337,970 Internal Services Human Resources 17,290 Information Technology 40,077 Totals $ 57,367 Judicial and State Funded Services Magistrate $ 3,199 Totals $ 3,199 Public Safety Fire and Rescue $ 1,757,570 Police 1,154,489 Totals $ 2,912,059 Total $ 4,444,826 ~~~ r~~e5+~ ~ e rn o 0 0~ ao 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o eo m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~- o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p ao 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 ~ CO o t!') O O lf) O r~ N o0 O O O to ~ tf) O 0 0 ~ CO Qi CO r to to N ~ ~ O ~ ~ r- ~ d' N t~ Qi a0 N N ~ (O N M .,.. to r r ~ r N r r OD N d' M r- ~ N ~ !~ O U C O U y ~ ~ ~ O y Q N d a ° 11~ ~i R3 C a Q ~-+ Q d a Q' ~ O N C N ~ ~ . ~ ~ Q • O N G ~ O ~ ` (B 6 _ O 1 ~ C ~ ~ ~ N O U cq y N H O O ~' N ~ N N • > ~ L O ~ m ~ N ~ i ` U U ~ Q y ~ L N -O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ `~ w C6 ~ L > L > N ' O ~ N '~ N E ~ ~_ ~ W n E c6 0 0 ~ O ~ o O N O N L O U fn L N O_ 0 Q N f6 tt5 ~ _ _ ~ O (6 H (6 ~ ~ Q N O ~ L ~ W ~ ~ ~ O V ~ ~ O 00 f6 O ~ O N ~ O N O CO . c }• a~ '~-. r H ~ ~ c m > 3 o 0 ~` ca U o ~ ~ •- c w o ~ c O a c ~ -c rn L °> N a> c a> ~ ~ ca a> ~- a> , _ m ~ O ~ ~ ~«- N O o- O U ;_, H- O O ,C U N ~ O O ~ (6 ~ ~ p ~ ~ O ~ ~ a C c O ~ O O W N w 'V O c J O) N N C f6 ~ E ~ O Q ~O O N E Q L ~ ~ O V -o m > Q o N o 2 ~ L o o ~ ~ N U v ~ ~ Y ~ o o ~ c ~ c a~ . Q in n n c ~ o a ~ ca c6 ca ca ca a~ n >, o d ~ F- ~ U O I- ~ ~ U ~ Cn ~ I- ~ ~ ~ ~ C J LL ~ J Q LL d O U o- 0 0 U U U U U U n- 0- U U U U U U U U U ~ ~ U Y ~ • O Q ~ O C ~ Q O (0 . U ~ Q ~ Q N O ~ ~ U ~ ~ N M j N I- ~ d- U ~ ~ ~ U O O ~ N ~ O c C ~ U Y ~ N a N ~ C C 0 . ~ + -~ ~ ~ Q m U W ~ ~ ~ o lJ L •~ ~' ~' O ~ W Z ~ ~ ._ L Cn Y H ~ ~ d' d E ~O ?i ~ O E (0 O J J c i cn c~ Q cn 2 ~ cn Y m N C~6 ~ i ~ O N O ~ ~ Q O L N L (`6 C6 .C (n U 3 L ~ ~ N ~ ~ N • L O Cn ~ h c w ~ - u0i O ~ co O N ~` C O a d' w O o U ° ~ Y -a O a~ •~ ~ a' a`> O) c ~ O ~ ~ o >~ '~ I- (0 O O N X ~ C LL 0.. N N (D _~ _ U 'mot I- d' W O U C ~ y V ~ O ~ ~ C ~ ,4 ~ ~ a~i D •~ G1 N ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -o ~ ~ `p ~ O ~ U ~ ~ ~ a O L ~ = J ~ e O^ /L/~ 'V NNO LPL c O V w p~ O' W _~ O O = o ~„ o ~ LL O N ~ O Q O L a~ W 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V• im (~J ~ ~- M O M ' V ' O r 00 N d ~ N N r ~ O O Ch r. Cp oD 07 U t~ c ~ +r _ O c~ o ~ ~ O L N L N U ~ ~ U ~ w. L ~ O ~ O '~ ~ N L ` U ~ ~ ~ ~ ;D Y O p O 0 L O co U C ~ V) w ~ f6 N f6 L O i w L o. V d. L U °~ p ~ C ~ .~ ~ ~ _ N O L O U ~ C C ~ m ~ ~ ~ L c ~ a E > ° ' U •y ~ .p ~ (B O ~ Q N Q c ;., C ~ ~ fn "O N CV p U ~ ~ i C O ~ L- ~ ~ f0 E n ~ v -~ ~~ a ~ ~ ~ z cn U U U U U U L L '~ J Q ~ Z C ~-' 7 ~ U L (6 ~ 7 s ~ U w ~ ~ (U ~ N ~ ~ .a ~ ~ ~ M m Q Y ~ ~j •L L N ~ ~ o U ~ Q N ~ O m ~ ~ ;a ~ ... ~ M U C L 1 ~ O C p 'C ~ ~ U ~ f - z m C Q> a a~:; O O O O O O O O Ln O Cp ~ O M ~ C D M ~ N N 0 o ,;a -~ U N O ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N L O 'O ~ v O U (~ ~ ~ O ~ U ~ ~ U N 2~ .G ~ ~' 1C ~ ~ d v_ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ca CU m ~ L ° N •2 (n ~ ~ ~ ~ U i d d ~ ~ U O O O U C ~ ~ U 7 LL r ~ C .~ ~ ~- U Q fl.. ~ C C C ti ~ ~ N V ~~ N (D m ~ v~ .a m to C d C9 N N O O O O O ~ N O) ~ (D O LC) O O t(7 O N <- (a0 M `••' r N O Cf) O O lf) ~ O N nj M M .- M t17 t.f) ~ ~ N r- C'7 O ~ ~ c N O c c ~ O •~ o ~' ~ ~ c v ~ a~ U c~ ~ ~ ~ C C E N +r +J ~ C U c -O ~ U C ~ . U f0 c0 d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` a L o ~ o. ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O it d cn d U ~ ~ U ~ c := .a? ~ ~= .C O O O 'C ~ ~ (B (0 O w C U L C ~ i Q E E (6 p .C C(0 ~ •C O ~ O C C O d H x ~ F- ~ °- ~, ~ a~ w " y ' E ~ ~ y ~ 3 N ~ O ~ " .S ~ j ~ (Q a~ L N a~ L (n y ~ " ~ L ~ " ~ (U O ~ C N ~ a C U ~ (9 C ~ C • G • 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ cv o ! ' ~ L N L N ~ U ~ fQ ~ co ~ - a~ _ -a " ~ 0 0 +-~ ` Q ++ ~ a O U O U p ~ (A ~ ~ (~ Cn ~n U F - F - n- O O U O O U ~ ~ d p ~ 7 t' ~ ~ 0 A O `... _ _ ~ (~j ~ C a~ O :._ CC G ~ ~ L o v Q ~ N 'S f- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i U ~ •L ^^ ~ N U • t ~ >+ >, U C E ~ r Q • - U d E U a n ~ ~ Q li > U Cn U ~ 0 ~ p C CV [V N L O N c 0 .~ y N U ~ N L _V w+ N 0 U 0 r Y 0 O O U A~~ W LCD O O N Q N 0 0 a ~' G ~~ Q Vi .~ 0 c~ ~I.i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~n ao 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ N O ~ O O O O O N O 0 0 0 0 1~ O 1~ ~ O Cfl O O O ~ O CO ~`'~ O O ~ ~ C7 O r- I~ O O •-- N M In ~ N N ti +~ ~ ~ ~ r p7 N r M M O U O C O O a O ~ C N ~C O O L O- ~ ~ O O c N 'v a~ -o a ~ Q c ti F- O ~ ~ ~ ~ Q 'p ~ O ~ V C ~ ~ ~ ~ O w O ~ N d y N ~ ~ -p ,C OU O ~ U ~ ~ ~ U U O N "O "d ~ '~ M N ~ ~ Q _ L O O + cn c c N O O O N ~ ~ N ~ ~- ~ m _ ~ c ~ o ~ ~ a o ~ ~ m c ~ ~ a~ °~ a °- c ~ ~ ~ a~ o ~ 4- ~ ~ .~ o c ~ m '" a E m ~ O m a F- a~ p a~ ~ y RS (p -p /-~ • V' O L (6 o O c.> U fn O "a ~ N c0 a ~ ~ (n ~ ~ O ~? C p c • c c O `~. ~ (B (d t~ Q N C '~ ~ 'i ~ O U ~ N V `~ c~ ~ E o ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ t ~, -~ v ~ a~i QJ w O a (0 _ _ - L • ~ N ~ /~ fA ~ C~ ~ I- L U ~ ~ a 7 L O ~ 'O ~ 'O ~ 'O ~ L O a L U p- ~ ~ "p 'O = v, ~ v~ ~ Q a a U O ~ ~ Q O O O O O D U U U U U d 0 0 ~' N U ~ N a d ~ C O ~ U N E ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ E c o ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ L ~ U ~ 'D L N (q a ~ Y ~ L ~ L N L O '~ ~ N O) ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ fn CO Z C 'C C w + (n f6 L N O O U O ~ N 'C (6 'C O ~ U (n c~ C~ U cq O U cq ~ ~ ~ ~ c m 'C t4 C N- 0 L ° rn o ~ ti ~' o •-- N O O M r O ~ ~ ~ ~ EFl Q ~ O ~ c~ ~ a _ ~ U w O A ~ -co F- ~ O v ~ ' U O O >, V N ~ V N O U 0 ~ ~ ~ c . ~ ~ = L C O ~ (~9 U ~ C ~ ~ N ~ ~ ° .= a~ E L O N "~ O y0 ~i L U ~ U C ~ C O O ~ ~ C U ~ C L U C ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ o ~, ~ a C U '~ ' ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ o c a~ L o I- ~ O C ~-' O }, N d d L d r Y 0 0 ++ C O V H M W t!7 ,L' o a d' N ~ ~ a N Q O y~ ~ ~ o`. ~I.r ~.+ N O U O U,. 4= C O Q. .~ Q~ N 3 w C O .Lr lD C1. 0I 0 O ~ M M M ~ 0 ~ 07 0 0 O O O j 0 0 M M N I~- ~I' M~ ~- ~ ~ M M EF! ER _N C ti ~ ~ ti ~ ~ t` ~ ~ ~ ti ti ~ ~ ~ ~ I.1.. N N N N N N N N ~ -n -a -o -a -o -a -o .r, ~ y N N ~ N ~ ~ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ~ •= •= •- •= CO L L L L i L L L L F ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ vim- V ~ L L L L L L L L ~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ~ ~ ' W • U U U ~ ( B C 6 N N f 0 N N N a Q Q a a n n. a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ f- f- H H H f- I-- F- U U U U U U U U Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O N 0) L ''^^ p o 0 0 0 0 '~ ~ ~ E E E ~ N ~ ~C Y (q U ~ U ~ ~ L U O N ~ 'a ~ , U ~~ 2 2 = ~ Y N N . ~ c0 wN W .~ a d C LJ.. d r .r+ C t4 tC .~ 7 N O 0 0 0) 00 00 M~ 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 0 O O O O ~ O ~ O M N ~ () t t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ M M M _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ O N ~ _ ~ _ _ O~ d• a0 M O N O M O C O ~ Q) d " C O N M ~ M ~ ~ (U C ~ C O ~ ~ ~ 4) N O ~ O ~ C -gyp N ~ U LL ~? U U N~ N Q C ~ O C y0 .~ O O U 'O ~ > ~~ O N U i ~ 0) N N 4) N O O •N `' • O O V N E (0 E L E ~ O ~ a '•' (A ~ N ~ ~ ~ > U > O ~ ~ ~ a N ~ ~ ~ ~ LL f6 ~ U ~ N fA ~ 0) C n • O O f6 ~~ S O L O N O C O 0) 0) D ~ ° C O Q- n Y T U ~ U U U (9 O V N ~ ~ ~ C fq V) "O N U ~ ~ ~ L O C ~ C •= N ~0 O 'O ~ C (C6 E N O • Q. ` ~ O fl- ~ 41 _ .~ y ~ cn ~ N N '~ C6 ~ tq ~ ~ ~ C' ~ 'O ~ co n a n o a~ U o~ ° c ~~ c~ -o ~ C ~ ~ C~ C U Q ~ \ cYS C ~~ U N ~ ~ ° ~ ° V) ~ CO U C C ° t6 2 O H O i O O N U lL C~ ~ ~ N O C O C a C 'C d J ~~ -O ~ ~ m N~~ N ~ ~""' ~ X ~~ n U ~ 7 O -O Q N C :~ .C ~ ~ ~ co ~ ~ ~ u~ ~ ~ ci5 O C ~ C ~ C C ~ ~ ~ _ f4 ~ ~ :_ ~ • ~ .C d N 7 U O~ •U ~ N V> ~ •~ N N O a~ O O O~ 'p 0 7 0 N ~ Q ~ 0 U • U J U U~ Q Q U U ~ F- Q' ~ S ~ Z ~ ~ aaa ~n.a~aao oooo o0 00 c 0 c o 0 oa 0_ .~ M M c > f06 T O ~ ~ ~ a- W to C _ _ N C ~ ~$ C (0 C a f6 C N Q - m N ~ ~ O W~ 'S ~' ~ ~ Q > ~ ~° C ` ~ d 0. ~ ~ O 2 '~ o ' ' 2 U U i LL.. ~ > m to C ~~ ~~ c 3 N CD fD Ct3 • t O ~ t' 6 N ~ N ~ ~ , O ~ ~ O ` Q~ L `~ U (/~ ~ U 0 N ° Q N U ~ ''^^ ~ V J c~ a ~ ~ c ~ •~ Z' ~ n m a ~ •°- a -moo ~ fn ~ fn Cn (n ~ a co W ~ • ~ o W ~ m ~ •E Q ~ U c .~ C C E O U ? ~ ~ N '~ ~ ~ N N N ° ~ 0.'S N 7 ~- 2 H tL (n 0.. LL n Q O '- 'O .C ~ LL Q d. 7 ~ n- U O A W N 7 U y O C Rf N LL _~ G1 _V a N r d Y c ca O 0 ~~'+ C 0 0 0 N 0 0 N L}l. -~ as 0 C. O a a C O 'vr a a O ~.. Q O O O Cp O lC) 0 0 CO N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p~ Q1 <p O O ti 0 <- O O O (O X 0 0 0 00 O 00 O '~t pp ~ N 0 0 ~ ~ 00 <- O O (O O O O O M O I~ O N E O pp CO op ~ 00 M ~t CO O CO O O O o0 CO N t!') I~ ti ~ N 'Ct N O ti r O ~ O r r N d' EJ4 GF~ Q~ N c ~ ~ c o m a ~ o> N *'' c O c c ~ o ~ N d 0 0 0 ~ ro o a ~ U r-- ~ c ~ o N O O d C3. ~ 'O ~ ~ C :~ ~ C N ~ C U N O ~ O O C ~ ~ N ~ ~ N N • O ~ y N N .N E O M C _ R C _ ..+ w .`~ O O _ 'fl ~ ~ ~ C coi ~ v o .C co cv O ~ C N ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' O. O •n d ~ o c c ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ fD ~ ZS fn ~ 'O O U U r LL N ~ 3 ~ ~ . Q O ~ w0.. a u ~ '~ ~ ~ ~; n i ~ ~' a ' ° c ~ ~ _ 3 m a~ c c m ~ -o > m c o a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O p c6 ~ d ~ ' ` ~ .o ~ p~ N >, . N X~ ~ c o L ++ C ~ ~ E c y Q cn (~ ~ a~ m c a~ ~~ o L ~ ~ o O~ U O~ a. ` U~ O U cB O W U ' ~ Q ~G -6 ca U o c a~ ~ O ca v ~ o c o o w o _° ~~°~ rn~ ~ F- O o o o ~ ~ ~ Cn > ~ ~ Q 2 d m ~ r> ~ t- t- I- ~~ da.n. a.n.~oo~~~~~~~ c ~' c ~ o ~~ o U C7 U ~ E 2 ~. O N ~ ~, U vOj '~ >, ~ N ~ ~~ O~ o O n U E~ rn ~ ca N _~ ~ _ v ~ ~ ~ U O C6 ~ O ~- C_ E ~ (6 U := ~ d O E C ~ C c O O N . ' m ~ 3 a~ ~ ~.c o o~~~~U~ ca °' °' cn ~ C ~ m ~ U > Q) ~ ~ ~' 'O ~ d pp Cfl ~ Y N N N ~ Q ~ i ~-' ~ i i y U i (6 O ~ U > ~p ~ 0 N J~~ ~ N N Q U Q N O C O~~ ~ N O O L p y W U U f0 U O V E ~ N N E J Y ~ L _ fn L L L ~ J ~.. U > > > U U U Q ~ ~ ~ U ~ C d t6 O. G1 N _U O M v d a _ ~Q Q '"' J Q F rn O 0 N~ii' ~7 4 0 N ~ yy N (~ w ""' V ' ~ . O Ll.l ? ~ m O N U O p ~+ ~ Q N ~ ~ C6 E O ~ ~ W 0 O N tq ~LL a c U O V N C. N O n. ~ o ~ ~ a ~~ V ' °o °o °o °o ~ O O O O C ~D 1~ O O C 7 O v1 vi C f` r+l 69 69 V ~ ~ r fA b O O O O C O O O O < O O O O C O .~-i h h C V1 69 by V N ~ 1` 69 b O~ 0 0 N OD 0 N 0 O N ti 0 0 N n O O N W O 0 N <O '~ °o' N N 0 0 N a 0 N O O N C C 3 LL d so Z v d O a` C d E ~v a d o° °o c O O r M O C ~ O ~ ~ h h N O ~ .. vj b b9 O O C O O C O O C vl O a N ~n r O N r 1 ~ 69 V o O <n oo o O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O o O c < M 7 O O O O O O O O < ~ O O < C ~° Ct\ [~ t~ ,-. .. N .-. Cn V3 O V M tit O O O N r 69 by 69 69 69 b9 N N 6 ~ v~ O M O O O O O O O O C O O oo V' O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C C O ~O V~ O O O O O O O C ~ l~ CT [~ .M. ^ .N.. O~ Vi O V M M O O O N r r ~ ~ b9 by 64 fag 69 69 N b9 N 69 b oMO O < V O C O C i h O C h O ~ b sA s> 0o O G V O C ~n O C vi O ~ V 69 by O O N C O O M C O ai ~ C O h d 7 ~ 1 ~ 69 V3 6 O O O < O O O < O O O C O ~ Vl < O l~ W 7 M ~ _ Vf 69 6 > N N M ~ ~ 1 ^N" b9 O O O O r N V'i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °o " b~' "' o o °o °o_ °o b' "' b`' b' "' "' ''' ~`' 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ by 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~° ~ 0 0 0 o v, v~ ° ° ° p p ~ v~ 69 o N vi N ~n Fit ~a Vi ^^ . D ,,. Vi ~ o ,~ b s b s ~ 64 69 69 64 69 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 bs bs o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 Fn en bs » bs bs b~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 bs bs 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° ' ~ ~ O ~ ~ o o ° ° ~ ~ rn v ~ 6 4 O N N ~ b ~ .~ ~ .-, ~ 69 69 N 69 Ff3 5H N Hi 69 69 69 F5 yq 0 o O O o o O o O O O O O o O O o 0 o O O O o 0 0 o O 0 o 0 O 69 by o O 0 o 0 o 0 O o o vi v> vj va 69 by o 0 o 0 of Fii o 0 Fsl o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O 0 O ~ O ~ O i \D O O O v i v i O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 69 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Mff) ~ ~ 69 5H 69 Vf Hj ~ of yi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 bs o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 b9 o 0 bs bs bs o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~c ~o h o 0 0 o vi o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Vl vt O O O Vt Vl M v1 N a M N O ~ h vl ~ 7 Vt Vt 69 69 69 O N ~D N Vl V3 ~° 69 .-. ,~ .. 69 .-. 64 .~ Vi bq 69 V1 b9 O ~ 69 O ,~ N 69 --~ b9 -~ 69 vl Hi 69 FH N9 6A 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 Fn vi 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0o v v> s9 vs v> o o FA by va vi oo v sq vj vj ss Nj v3 Fn 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ o o ~n vi o vi ~ a o rn ~n 64 bs vi b~F vi vi ~° by r sa v v> ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O N O O O O b9 Vf 69 O O FA O t1 O M 69 fag 69 FA 69 69 69 Vi 69 69 69 b9 b9 69 69 N M b'i N ~.~ ~° l~ M L` C` W aJ V ~O ~O N N N h -r ~ v~ o O ~n o O ~n 69 69 Ni Fa9 Y 69 t!1 c .~ ° ~ ~ :~ ~ o ~ ° O -° - ~ ~ ., p p a u ~ U ~ ~ b ~ ~ cn U c ,y q O C ~ O T G ° o o F" E C ~ ' ~ 7 ~ c p T ,~ ~ p ~ % 0. v ;a ' ~ 7 3 3 ~ ~ c"i w > ° ~ ° m° e y ~ ~ B 6 ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 0 .e ' A ~ v °~ ~ ' '~ Z v " 7 C7 °1 ~ u y '$ ° c ~ ~ p; Q m ° y. c , z b ~ u _°? ?? . v C . . C7 a i A a p .~ „ _ ~ ~ a ~ .C V a ~ ~ ~ ¢ h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ' u a ° v a3i a3i i ~ a .o c ~ CL `3 a a i V] 7 W ~ d CL ~ a ~•° ° a1 ro G `~ o ~ U ~ c u F ~ •C z z s C O d p,~ w O u 'd ~ A C iy °~ pp C o ~ v G d ?C ~ U v q O ~s V d T ~ ~ W 7 ~ ~ .~ C 'O rFL'i C O U ~ ~ED •~ .Y w '~ y ~ T °~ v C E ~" ~] !n V] [I b . > ~ c~ c7 x u > ~ ~ w ~ ~ m > as x x w ~ c7 x x ~ H .~ a , ~ E ° ,~ ~ 3 c C a y C u ~ V W w ~ C7 e r V d .O a o m V 0 t- I, J ~ a° O o f" } l L ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ - O N N' ~.... ~ 00 O O ~' N` } N LL N` o0 ~ 0 w ~. .fir - N ti O ~., . N C1 ~ W ' 0 ~ a ~ o N Y m ~ U ' °o N O ~ ~+ ~ O ~ E ° N iy ~, li ~ ', o N ~ 0 O N tq . W ,°~ '~ ~} a C LL f~` V o N O ~ V ~' O Q. N i N ..... a o } 1i ~i O C 7 LL' a 0 o c O O C O O C O O V h V1 6 V'f M b 6~9 ~ 0 o c O O G O O v o ~n a ^ M d VM9 ~ O O C d3 O d O 0 o c 0 o d 0 0 0 0 u, ~ 69 O O c O O ~ 00 69 69 o °o c 0 0 O O v o ~n « ~ b9 Ef 0 o c 0 69 0 0 0 0 0 o ~ 69 0 V d1 0 00 0 0 0o r O O O ~n O V V•1 N O W O D\ oNO O~ b O V' O .-. Vi ,., 6 69 d9 H9 dy °o °o °o °o °o ~ O O O h O V Vt N O a) O vMi oNO O~, b O ~- ^ di 69 d) s9 0 0 ~ O d O 6 9 6 9 b 9 O 0 0° oo °o °o v 0 0 0 0 0 O N w a O ~ a ~ ~ ~ 69 ~ ~ di d3 69 69 O O O ~ O ~ O O N Oi O '- 0~0 M ~ N 7 r 69 ,~. 69 d3 69 d d9 0 0 0 0 o c 0o s9 vi 69 69 M O 0 0 0 0 o c 0 69 69 v9 di 6F 0 69 0 0 0 0 o c 0 6A 6A 69 6° 0 d; 69 ~n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c I N --~ O O O O O O v1 N O ~ O O O O O v1 O vi O O O O O O O O O O O O O < O C N ~n t~ a u1 M ~D a N O v~ O O oo N h O C l~ ~O r N V ~O u1 M O~ ~O vi N O N .+ M a1 vi ~ N N ^ M N O ^ O~ M M ~n N l~ O o b C ~ df di 69 d3 69 d9 d3 69 69 69 69 69 b`i .a 69 ~ 69 69 6 u•, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c N ~--~ O O O ~n O O vi N O v~ O O O O O ~n O ~n O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O C N O vi O~ vi M ~D O+ N O vi u1 O u1 N h O f~ ~D M N r M V1 M a ~D O N O N ~-+ M O~ Vt 7 N N ^ O~ ^ O .-+ M M N O C ~ 69 69 69 d3 d3 ^, d3 69 69 Hi 69 di fH 69 d.^ d3 ~.. d3 69 d) b O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C d3 b9 di 69 d3 69 di 69 (+9 69 d9 d3 69 69 69 d3 df b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c 00 69 69 69 69 fag 69 di 69 d) 69 69 O 0 69 69 faY O o C c ~ v1 o v ~ ~ N °v W dj d 69 h O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C N dj O 0 O 0 d3 69 69 69 69 d3 O 0 di O 0 69 O 0 O o d3 C ~ O O V~ Vt O Vl V ~ ~ 69 6N9 6rN9 ~ r d y~ d3 ~ d ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c 69 0 O 0 d~ 0 O .n N o vi 0 O 0 O 0 ~n 0 V1 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O o O es o O c C O ~ ~ Vi M ~D O~ N O O ~/t O vi N O ~/ M N O M O M 0\ ~D O N O N --~ M a V1 V N O ~--~ ~ ^ V1 69 M N h M Vt M N C d1 69 69 d3 d) .--i 69 d) 69 U`f 69 69 d) d3 69 yo o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o O o 0 0 0 o c 69 69 69 69 69 d3 69 69 d9 HY 69 69 69 69 69 69 d) d t o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0< 69 O ~ 69 69 O 69 b9 b9 69 69 O b9 OO 69 69 b9 ~ ul O h M V V h Vt M \D C 69 Ndi dl d3 b 69 O v~ i N r ~ M I .M-. 0 N a) r I~ N 64 O f d3 0 v9 O O O 0 V 609 0 to 6~9 ~ o '° °~~' 7 E ~ ~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ? a o w oo ~ E b ~ N ~tl ° °' w' `° ~j ~ !-y N ~ ~Cy a Z ~ > ~ aEi a ~ c ~ w a y `~ ~ ~ .J o U V >, , ~ rV~y, f^ a, W ,.~_o cG ~l o v G x ~`o, .~ A" ~ a~R .~ ~ ° p. ~ d c a ,~ w o ~ ~ .a ~' c 7 R' U n. x x '~ ~ x ~ a a, ~ 3 ~ 0 0 '°- on p ~ P ~ a' a ~ G ~ aCi ° ~ ~ a ~ b w °~' x ~ a; ~ o rx a s ~ '~ ° :a y ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ o a °" '_' G c ,~ ~ a ~" w' o vS C F /-. 3 C "'~ ~ R. O ~ ' C O O R ~ O C 0. ~ ..+ v , G ttl ~ id d C a> ~ ~ d p ~ v .a u a~i ~ 7 R. ~ ~ `° ` ~ m u o C ~ '~ .C p„ ~ ~ ~ z S x C7 ~ > W CG F Gq a1 aF U ~ 3 C7 ~ a C7 w x > w a rn ~ ~ ~ ~ L Vyj Q. L L i y w ,a L ~ .C.i .a 0.i r V d a` o ~U J O Q o ~ H 0 ~ LL ~ o 0 rn ~ 0 N ~ N 00 O ~ O, N O N LL O y ~< ' O O N ~' ~ i+ d V ~ '1 ~ Q X N ~ ~ W ' O a ~ N Y °° ° ~ o'~ N O CV ~ E °o ,.. ~ ~ W O O N y c°v ~ LL ~ ~ ' ` U O ~ N , V O N ~ N L a °o ~ _ O C ~ LL a O N_ C ~ l~ < V~1 V V 69 •- r 69 b O N_ C O r C vii V ~ ds r N9 H 0 o c sv ss <f 0 o c ~ ss s< 0 o c v+ sn c ff o c O Ef ~? r ~ V s9 ~ 0 o c 69 69 fP. 0 0 0 69 69 69 N+ O < M O C ~D O C K) O C 7~ O C O C N 69 b O C M O C v °o c ~ O C bN9 b 0 o c vs va d 0 o c vj ss d 0 o c 0 0 ~ o N V1 vj ~ °o c M O C O O G N~ v1 G ~D v 0 o c ~ O C o c O bN9 ff 0 o c 69 69 ff ~ O O ~ O O 0 > O M s s9 O ~ O 0 °o 0 0 M r Vi 0 » i 0 H'i F °o i 0 0 V~9 o c O [ O C O ~ V'w t o ` 0 O ss o < 69 6 ao r 0 vi ~ 0 69 f o < 69 E V s°~s O ~ O O O O O 0 O 69 0 v3 ~3 0 0 0 O °~ ~ N ..+ h N ~ O~ ti ~ ~ N .M-~ ~ E/j ~ ~_ 69 ~ N O ~ ~ a a ~ ~ ~ v~ O vy 0 0 ~ o 0 vi 69 ~ O 0 vi a b 6~ ~ N M N 65 N .-i vi a H ~ .M. M ~ O A O M 69 pp N O CT v. 65 O N Eft ^ 69 v C U N 'a G Op F E Z y ~ +. C L ~ L ~ Q ~ v v W A -~. ~ a. .o E 0.01 U ~ 'U °' a .V. 0 C4 ~ ~ y v° N ° rj~ o a . ~« ~ + q U ~ .~ a 7 Q. ~n T (n ryry° FYI ~ o ° p 7 V] ~' ~ 7 '~. ° a ~ v ~ ] ~ U °; U A 'O v ~ G _ O ~ td , ;~ ~ cL ~ ~ v ~ ~ ° rj v ~ L ~ N U ~ aVJ ~ ~ b bb a ~ ~ ~ ~ v F H ~i O a y U :a o ~ t9 ~- v . IZI ~ Qn W ~ .f v ~ L ~ (/j "~' LC d H o ytQ, ^ V r e C w ~ C v ~ C ~ ~ O ~ C .~. ~ m C ~ o ~ ~ O ~ ~ v = O = ~; ~ N ~ c C C ~ c ~ N ; ~ ~ U ~ ~~ o ~j m ~ Q N w 0 l(') ° a 0 E .E m L U N O) C ~ t C N 7 (0 LL V T (6 a 0 o> 0 0 N C O J W O O E ° C O O ~ :_~ 1~ c0 O C ~ X I X M CO ~ ~ O rn U ~ ER OO O V O O O EFT ~ 00 O O ~ N ~ ~ ! m a~ ~ N N I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LL LL i N i O) C6 e c 0 E ~ ~ fp O O '~ C N O _ ~ ~ a 3 3 0 O O ~ m x X O O 0 0 0 0 0 N Efl ~, O O O O O O 0 0 O Y O ~ f6 ~ ~ T ~~a ~ ~ 0 ~ U U LL 0 ~o ~ a O W U W rn C ._ C0 N (0 U .~ 7 a c 0 E v m c ~ O c .E N ~p T O ~ ~ fl- 3 3 0 O O ~ CO x i i X O O 0 0 0 0 0 EA (V C cv °o ° O p O y .-. O ~ LL ~ N ? O C N O V" ~ O ,~ ~ a~ U ii N O f0 w f0 U a L N co U T x X O O 0 0 0 fR O O O ~ ~ p r O 69 ~ ~~ U O U O M O N N N o n C j N N n ~° °' w a~ ~ C LL ~- O .~ 7 U N N LL C O C L (D U T W a X i X O O 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 O y O ~ O O ~ w "C ~ ~ U ^. O L ~ \+ N O „\ C ~ O O a o m a~~~ ~ ~ fa > d ~ U O U O ~ O ~ ~ m N (0 L d N C_ O O_ fd C O 3 O O m x X C 1~ r O O 0 0 0 0 O O o O LL1 ~° 3 Q. ~ LL ~ ~ C } ~ J 7 N J ,~~ rn~ .~ ~ ao = Z -'y ~~7 ~ ~ •~ (0 O .~ N Q~ v ~~'iryini~ State Corp~ra.tion ("~,r~mission Pa.~r~ 1 of 1 4- • Commonwealth of Virginia 1ax~~:, ~ ~ ~ ,,,,~ ~; ~, ~ ~~,t,® ~,~~~~~ ~~~ ti-7EB#615 CIS 04/25/04 State TCP00003 LLCM3220 LLC DATA INQUIRY 15:39:37 Corporation LLC ID: 5093790 Commission 6 STATUS: 00 ACTIVE STATiJ5 DATE: 03/7 LLC NAME: Saate Hill I, LLC Enter DATE OF FILING: 03/19/2003 PERI^vD OF DURATION: INDUSTRY CODE Signoff STATE OF FILING: VA VIRGINIA MERGER CONVERSION INDICATOR: INDICATOR: P R I N C I P A L O F F I C E A D D R E S S Help STREET: 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE RD STE 301 CITY: RGANOKE STATE: VA ZIP: 24014-0000 Print R E G I S T E R E D A C- E N T I Pd F O R M A T I O N R/A NAME: NATIOANL REGISTERED AGENTS INC STREET: 526 KING ST STE 423 CITY: ALEXANDRIA STATE: VA ZIP: 22314-0000 R/A STATUS: 5 CORP/LLC/RLLP R EFF DATE: 03/19/03 LOC: 200 ALEXANDRIA C YEAR FEES PENALTY INTEREST BALANCE 00 COMMAND: NOTE: Function Key usage varies depending on the Application Screen. For specifics, refer to Function Key Documentation. • http://ditmvs3. state.va. us:8080/servlet/resgportal/resgportal 4/25/2004 ~ `b'ir~~inia. State ('orpnra.fiir.?n C~?mmssion Page i or ~ Commonwealth of Virginia I1 I~! Ilifp r ~ 'allh, a~~ WEB#615 CIS 04/25/04 State TCP00003 LLCM3220 LL C DATA INQUIRY 15:44:25 Corporation LLC ID: 5093792 2 STATUS : 00 ACTIVE STATUS DATE : 03/ 1 Commission LLC NAME: .Slate Hill II, LLC E me r DATE OF FILING: 03/19/2.003 PERIOD OF DURATION: INDUSTRY CODE STATE OF FILING: VA VIRGINIA MERGER INDICATOR: Signotf CONVERSION INDICATOR: P R I N C I P A L O F F I C E A D D R E S S Hel~ STREET: 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE RD STE 301 CITY: ROANOKE STATE: VA ZIP: ?_4014 -0006 Print R E G I S T E R E D A G E N T I N F O R M A T I O N R/A NAME: NATIONAL REGISTERED AGENTS INC STREET: 526 KING ST STE 423 CITY: ALEXANDRIA STATE: VA ZIP: 22314-0000 R/A STATUS: 5 CORP/LLC/RLLP R EFF DATE: 03/19/03 LOC: 200 ALEXANDRIA C YEAR FEES PENALTY INTEREST BALANCE 00 • COMMAND: NOTE: Function Key usage varies depending on the Application Screen. For specifics, refer to Function Key_ Documentation. http://ditmvs3. state.va.us:8080/servlet/resgportal/resgportal 4/25/2004 `~"~r~,~n~a ~~'~+,~ C~c~rpo?~al~~n t't>>,?m^~~ic~I? ~~~~:~ i -,~ ~ Commonwealth ~Q.~-~1~".° D .r.--~' ~--~~'~'' rJ22,.?"`S`S'~ of Vir inia g S G I7RK,:1 ~ !"~ „ 11 ' ~' 18 ' . t! :~;;~ilr i 1 a WEF3#015 CIS 04/25, TCP000O3 LLCbl322O L LC DATA INQUIRY 15:29 Corporation LLC ~f;. S09779~ STATUS : 00 ACTIVE STATUS DATE: (i Commission ~ ~ LLC NAME: Woodciifr ,.nvestmer.ts, LLC Enter DATE OF FILING: 05/21/2003 PERIOD OF DUP.ATION: IND USTRY COD -- Signoff STATE OF FILING: VA VIRGINIA MERGER INDICATOR: CONVERSION INDICATOR: P R I N C I P A L O F F I C E A D D R E S S Help STREET: 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE RD STE 302 CITY: ROANOKE STATE: VA ZIP: 24014- 000 _ Print R E G I S T E R E D A G E N T I N F O R M A T I O R/A NAME: NEIL V BIRKHOFF STREET: FIRST UNION TWR STE 1400 10 S JEFFERSON ST CITY: ROANOKE STATE: VA ZIP: 24011- 0000 R/A STATUS: 4 MEMBER OF VIRGI EFF DATE: 05/21/03 LOC: 217 RO ANOKE CIT YEAR FEES PENALTY INTEREST BALANCE 00 DEP ' ' ENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL LITY ~' STORMWAAGENERAL PERMIT - CONSCTION SITE INSPECTION REPORT De,r.v,~+A1.. ~iwn wnn.n. Ins ection date: p 3/04104 Date form completed: 3/11/04 Time spent: h 3 Hours Inspection by: Charles R. Via C ~.J Reviewed by: S. C. Hale Date of previous inspection: NA Present at inspection: ~ Joe C. Thomas, Jr. TYPE OF INSPECTION: Routine Re-inspection Compliance/assistance/complaint IR 2004-W-0169 X Has stormwater coverage been obtained for the site YES X NO Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan signed and available on-site?PII.B.2 YES NO X Erosion and Sediment Control Plan incorporated and available on-site? PII YES X NO Site map with drainage and flows available? PII.D.1.h On E&S Plan -YES X NO Dates when major grading activities recorded? PILD.2.a.2 YES NO X Stabilization within 7 days of temporarily or permanently ceased activities? a) Except when snow cover or frozen. b Tem ora stabilization if activities resume within 30 da s. YES X NO SWP3 controls; Sediment remaining on-site? PII.D.2 °YES X NO Sediments escape: Removed to minimize offsite impacts. P11.2.a.1.c NA YES NO Trash and debris minimized? PII.D.2.a.1.e YES X NO Silt fences, dikes, swales, traps, storm drain protection in place? PII.D.2.a.3 YES X NO Stockpile correctly maintained? PILD.2.a.3.c.4 YES NO X Construction entrances in use? PILD.2.a.3.c.2 YES X NO Roads cleaned of sediments each day? PII.D.2.3.c.2 NA YES NO Site inspection performed (14 days or 48 hrs of 0.5" rainfall)? PII.D.4 YES NO X Report summarizing the scope of the inspection? PII.D.4.c YES NO X Inspection documents non-compliance with follow.up/Certification? P11.4.c YES NO X Monthly inspections performed for stabilized areas? PII.D.4 YES NO X Contractors/subcontractors identified in SWP3 w/ signed certification: P11,E.2 - YES NO X COPIES TO: (X) DEQ/RO; (X) DEQ/OWPP; (X) Hunter Smith; (X} Joe Thomas, Jr.; ()EPA-Region III; (X) Other: S. Crist, DEQNVRCO ~- -- k` ~~~~ ~~ Permit No. - VAR103461 ! ''~p S~l Vauv~..+. The contractor was installing a temporary sediment basin at the time of the inspection, while waiting for 1) approval on VDOT of location and redesign for sediment basin number 1,an.d will also install a temporary sediment basin on the south end of the property for additional protection. 2) This project started after February 9, 2004. The trees to be removed fromthe site have been cut, most stumps have been removed and chipped. ;#,~ ~..,~ ^'. ~ ~, GO ECO ENQATIQ ~i"Q ~ IO~i,' - ~~}w :t, 1) Part II of the current permit requires a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWP') be developed and kept on site. Please provide documentation to this office that the SWP' has been developed and is on site. 2) Part II D 4 of the current permit requires inspections of the disturbed areas and materials areas at least every ` to this report fourteen days or within 48 hours of the end of a storm event that is 0.5 inches or greater. Attached is an example of the form that will be used. Please provide documentation to this office that inspections are being performed at the required frequencies. 3) Part II D 2 of the current permit requires that a record of the dates. when major grading activities occur, when construction activities temporarily or permanently cease on a potion of the site, and when stabilization measures are initiated. Please provide documentation to this office that a log of these activities is being maintained at the site. Part II.D.2.a.3.c.4 of the current permit requires controls to reduce pollutants from stored materials. Stockpiles 4) of soil on the site to be used later during the project are required to.have erosion and sedimentation protection. Please provide documentation to this office that erosion and sedimentation controls have been installed around the topsoil stockpile. 5) Discarded tires were found on the site during the grubbing process and placed on the south. end of the site until awaiting final disposal. Please provide documentation to this `office that.the tires have been disposed in a way that is allowable within current regulations. _T ~ §a i ~{ _ ~ ~< Il -,b ~: _,. y ~~ ~ ~+. ~,L C T ~ ~~ F2Rnkl,~N ls~u~~{ --~- i. ~~ J ': J~ a, '!~ Pro ~OS~Cl /1 1 ~,~. ~f' ,, / ~~ ~. Diu¢r6ioN ~' Scua~e 0 y~ giros from Slate Hill Development~AR 103461 .; F ~ ~_ ~~ ~~~~ ~" t ~~~ a ~ ..~.~ , ..,._ `~i ~ ~ ~"~ Depression on south end of project to be modified for temporary sediment basin. has woven wire behind for reinforcement .~, 0 .~ b 0 ~, V'~` gyp` ~ ~G '~" o `\~~,~2 °~aa~\~o~o a o~.Q ~ a° o~ ~o a ~~o • '~~~ ~°~ ~o~ o~~ ~ 5Q ~a Gro o° < 5 ~O`~~~ ~c~yQ°G JP~ ~~`~' ~~~~ ~~`~~°J,~a~~ a°a ~'~a~tGO1~a `~ Q a ~~ Goo 5J ~ o~ ;~~o c~ o~ ~~J ca of J o~ too aJ off'. o•• oa a~' J` etc Q° a'g`o °~o a~° 0 Apri127, 2004 County staff requests the Board to adopt a motion to enter into closed session within the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act as follows (A) to discuss pending litigation, Cellco Partnership d/b/a/ Verizon Wireless v. Board of Supervisors, in accordance with Section 2.2-3711 A 7 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. Robert K. Egbert Chair, Roanoke River Group Of the Sierra Club 3571 Bradshaw Rd Salem, Va. 24153 540-384-7448 April 27, 2004 Chairman, Richard G Flora Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Subject: The Slate Hill Rezoning Request Sir, I have come to you this evening to make three simple requests: First: I ask that you deny the rezoning request for the Slate Hill project. The land is just too steep for building, and the intersection is too busy for more traffic. If this project is completed as planned it will set a precedent. It will be, in effect, a declaration that there is virtually no land in Roanoke Cautrty that is off-limits to builders. Second: If this plan does proceed, with or without the rezoning; I ask that the Board instruct the planning and legal staff to take all steps necessary to ensure that absolutely all legal, environmental requirements for site development and construction are carried out to the letter. Third: I ask that the Board of Supervisors have ordinances written and enacted that will protect our steep hillsides and ridgelines in the future. The Slate Hill project has shown that it isn't enough to rely on good intentions, and voluntary compliance to protect our neighborhoods and quality of life. Our citizens should have the right to be left alone on their own property; and that right should be at least as important as the right of builders to make a profit. Thank you. Respectfully, -,~ ~ _ ~~~ Robert K. Egbert Integra April 27, 2004 Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors: Re: Slate Hill Rezoning Your Investment Partner. The enclosed information package on the Slate Hill project has been designed to follow the verbal presentation. The issues covered in the presentation deal with the existing R-3 zoning. This is one of the largest contiguous tracts of R-3 zoning in the County. This property is surrounded by C-2 zoning. We believe the current zoning and future needs of the County are best served by an increase in jobs. The property is owned by the developer. Roanoke County's staff has approved the S&E plans. The developer has signed a contract for the previous excavation and the work that is being performed. The presentation will cover future potential commercial growth in the Route 419 and Route 220/I-581 corridor. We believe the requested rezoning, if approved, will be an important step toward relieving the traffic in the intersection. The existing zoning will prohibit the growth and not alleviate the traffic. I hope you choose to support the re-zoning from R-3 to C-2 and provide an opportunity for much needed jobs in the Roanoke Valley. Respectfully, James R. Smith JRSIpj Enclosures 4415 PHEASANT RIDGE RDAD, S.W., SUITE 303. RQANOKE, VA 24014 Phone: (540) 772.5090 / Fax: (540) 772-0106 E-mail: hsmith@integrallc.com SLATE HILL ZONf~~ AND ~OMM~R~~ ~~~NS ~ Operating Commercial Parcels .~, Slate Hill Proposed Office Park and Retail Acreage ~.^ Red Areas Existing C2 Zoning A c~ to c2 B R3 "Multi-Family" to C2 ~+ C2c to C2 ~ ~" PROFFERS Address of Sub'ect Pro e 4488 Summit Street Roanoke, VA 24014 Tax Map No.: Applicant's/Owner's Name: 077.20-01-03 077.20-01-04 077.20-01-52 a77.2o-01-54 077.20-01-55 087.08-03-11 SLATE HILL I, LI.C SLATE HILL II, LLC WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC PROFFERS The undersigned owner does hereby proffer the following conditions in conjunction with the rezoning request: The C-2 uses set forth an the attached Exhibit A would prohibited. 2. The square footage of any building located vn the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. 3, No building will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. 4. The roads shall be in the approximate located as set forth on the "Slate Hiil Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant permission to construct a portion of the road on the VDOT property as shown on said plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the "Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and Development Plan" dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood Architects, attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. Structures constructed in Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in appearance, materials and design, bu# will be subject to requirements of specific users. 11JOLLYISYS1USEriSICBaurt~gardneriZONINGIS~dte Hitl PROFFERS_doc ~g~ ~ ~~ April 13, 2004 . _.......,., , , .. ~~ , , ,~ , , 1J~-FC! f (~iYJ701 r . n.~i n r ._ T rl AppliCant/Owner: SLATE HILL 1, ~LG BY_~ ITS '- SLATE HILL il, LI~C BY ~~ ITS WOODCLIFF INVESTMENTS, LLC BY ~- ITS n~ ,r~„Cy~i-'~2, .,. 1WC1LLY15Y51USER51CBaumgardnerl~ONING1Slate Hill PR~FFER3.doc page 2 of Z April 13, 2004 r. r Exhibit A Slate Hill ProfFered-0ut Uses PERNIiTTED USES IN C~2 i TRICT 1. Residential Uses Accessory Apartment Home Occupation, T pe Multi-Family Dwellin Two-Family Dwelling 2. Clvlc Uses Park and Ride Facility Post Office Public Parks and Recreation Areas Utility Services, Minor 3. Office Uses None 4. Commercial Uses A ricultural Services Bed and Breakfast Boardin House Commercial Outdoor Entertainment Gasoline Station Pawn Shop Commercial Indoor Sports ~ Recreation Commercial Outdoor Sports & Recreation 5. Industrial Us®s Recycling Centers and Stations 6• Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower Parkin Facility l1,lQU.YISYSIUSERS1CSaumgardnerlZONING1Slate HIII-USES-C2.doc Rage 1 of 2 A y • ~...~ ~ ~~~~ ~~rvu ~ ~ ~~l~~nl Inly Ivn I i 1J~1b ('(41T~b1 F'. 105/b'~ Exhibit A Slate Hill Rroffered-Out Uses 1. Clvlc Uses Halfway House Reli ious Assembl Utility Services, Ma'ar 2. Commercial Uses Automobile Dealership, Used "~ Automobile Repair Services, Major Car Wash Convenience Store Chance Hall Equipment Sales and Rentals Manufactured Home Sales Mini-Warehouse Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service Surplus Sales Truck Stop 3. Industrial Uses Custom Manufacturin Landfill, Rubble Transportation Terminal 4. Miscellaneous Uses Qutdoor Gatherings S cial Use F'ermlt lUOLL11SYS1USERS1c8aUt11g8rtlr1etlZONING4Slate Hltt-U8E$-C2.dOC Page 2 of Z J I~ i r ^ sr ~' A e ~"`°~- ~~ ~~ .,~ ~, 4~ t '. `" ~ ~ . '. ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ \ 4 ~ \ • ~ 4 ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~~ ~ t i ` ~ f .r, //'° A~ ~ ~ r . ~~" ~ C ~t _ } '1r `~' t r ,,.~ fl Q .~- ~ ~ ..> ~' ~ ~ ~ C~ ~~~ t+'~' ~"' ~~ .,... a t f~ ,~ 0 ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~3 ~ Q ~W! ~ ~'',~,, ~ ~~ ~i 0 v 4 o E _ A m ~~ v q w a s a" I~ N ~ E fq O U o c a O T = is ~ A ~ O U o O ~ a _' A .' % y W a! o m` ~~ N ~ A ~ E W H M ~ U ~ J J ~ N d ~ ° d G f a` i~ ^~ o d a > ~ E ~ A ~ J W N Qo ~ ~ O O O ~ J ^~ O M ER J M o ~` x .~.. A ~ }+ ~ J __ •O ~ .d. f0 ~ O U J Q ~ /~ /1 ~ v ~ u E *_+ ~ = ~ {") 4 a v C N ~ ^~ Q 2 1C o v a c : LL ~ _ ~i 1C o 7 E Q Q ¢ o M o c C ~ a ' a o v ~ c ~, N . o ~ E v na o ~ a` ~ 4 y ~ Q o ~i .= U ~ a G Q V N 4 ~` .~ y K ~ O a o a a` > ~ E ~` as ~ N a w ~ a„ ¢ ~ o a` ~ y !A ~ t .= U C p Q M~ N O T T L n~ a ~ c c a` ~ 9 L a p y U ~ ~ Qo ~ o y ~ Q a9 ~ 7 Q c '~ Y Q w Q fA r~ %~~ ~ s*kd s ~X~a ~ k. ~ ~ ~ ty~ UI~ ~..~ ; ~~~r `7 ffJ ~~.f _ ~ __ j ~~ •.~ f.~.:.. _ ~._. ~~. ~r ~ r) ~ ~ t ~,~ ~ ~~ jf l ~f !I t If ~+ •r'l ~ y ~~ ~ ~ ~~' /~ C i ~..~.- ~ ' yr. .. ! ,,, . ~~~iii .~ ~ R ~ r :y w t~ ~ ~r`~ k , ~ '.~'„ q I ati'S ~'•.. 3"t~wY .e I~ .. k `v _ 'ti r t ' ~ ~ ,-r ~y~5 ~t~ ~~~~ ~'-k.'" ~ r s'". ~ ~ 'S k p ti~~ ~ 3 I I t p^~' 1 ~ i.i .'} w ' j~ ~CF 1 t ~ .~1 . v It _1 II II111I ''li t t ~ ice, ~ 1 '~"r,~_~ v ~ ~ X11 ( ,5'~}• ~~ Y_. ~ I "- 1 I III t ~ q 7-' ~ ~~ ``lly I~I I~ y # ~~ ~ ` s' t ', ~ ?~ I I ~ II t ~ ' S ` rte'{. _-"~ ~ S~1 _. r" ~~7P f.. I ~I ~ II~ II y`t ~yy ~i ~y tt I' ~g ~r_ -'~ 'may ~ ~ e5_ g'~'ti t5 } ~`~ y~ ,y t ~\,~~1Y ~ f J ' ~~ r"~ r~ ~1 1 I t~~ s ~ ~..-^'~` - ~ ~" { ~ ~ ~ ~ .r~~ t~ O N N W ~- ~" O U p~ W~ ~~ O °0 ~ ~ a- .J ~ JO _~ _~ WW I- ~ J h- t/) U a w o. f° ~ ~j{ bi~~~,' ,.~~ ~ +~ ~'~ ;4 ~~ ~ ~, ~:L a ~ . ;,~ ~ i3. ~x„ 1 i ¢ 1 '~ t t 2„ r t ~f z ~~ ~ ~'~ ~1 ~ r ~.. ~~ ~ ~~~ _~ ~ ~, ~! :~ ~,~ Q Q U W ~ ~ O a ~ O a = J '~ x' ~~ .. ,~f 3 .. .. ~j4 ~~~ J >., . ~ _ ~ W ~ ~ W Q ~ J ~ H U ~ :a W a oc W a _. ~ ~ ~1 ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ;'~ 4 ~ - ~i a .~~ ~._ ~ ~ ~~ , ~j ~ ~ ~~ ~I ~ + ~ # l { ~ ~ . ,l_.~, i. ( ~ , 1 . _ ~ x .. ~ i ~ J J 1_tiw r ~~ • ~ ~ I e kw f ~ , ~ ~ {I }yff +j ~ ~- r• ! Y. L' °~ 1 ~. . ~ ~.~ ,.~ ~, at v- -~ ~~ .-. ~. •~' r~ ~'` ~ ~ ~~ ,. ~ ; 1 ~. ~.. '~ ~. ,,~ "r ~ :~ CL W ~q ~P ~~ ~~ ~~ 3u N e }: 1~"'~ f -"~,~ M~•~.` '. F ~ *~ ~ r . `•` r~ ,~~. ~ `~ o ~^ ,~ ~~~ .,,~ -r"~ ~ ~'~ •. r„~,r`` ~ /~'~~ ~ ti.J O ~r-r ~"'i; ,~ ~ u ~. sl 3 M. ~~ t f t U .~ CJ ~3 .~ L %1 %? .~ :~, v~ J /\ 1, ,, :> -_ ,. v ~~ r. ~.. :.-~ L: _;~ ~~ }~ . ~. .-. -~ ~ ~~ { T ~ ;.-. ' t~ k t ~s aJ ' ~~ e ,. i ~J ~~ ~~ *I "` i! ~ ~ C ~t Q O ~ a7 ' ~ ~ S ~'"„ v ~3~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ o~~m s ~~ ~ q ~ ~3 at ~r b p .+~ ' ~' a 5 ~ 't3 Q . ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ al~ to ~~"'+ /~ ~ J '~ o~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ '~h ~ ~ ~ ~ Q :~ L ~ ti ~ ~~~y ~+ u~~ ~ N . O ... ~ ~ ,~ _.. `'~`' ~ ~ a ~~ !~' /~ y ~ i~ ~ c ., .. ,~ ""' 4..,, ~ c -- ®~ 'a.j ~. "~.~ ',~, ! ..+ ~ r. _ ~~ ~~ ,`~ ~;i l i ~: 1. g.~` i ~,4 '3 r e} ~~ .r o ~ ~ c o.b ~ ~° > o ow 3 ~~~ C~'-o o ~• v ~`= ~ ~ N ~ ~ O O ~~' ~ 4, ~ N ~ ~ N O ~ ~ ~ ~ '" _ a.. P~+ O ~ ~ O ~ . ~ ~ a~.~ ~ b «3 ~ ~ ~ G H '„~ y `.. O~ 3 ~ ~ c y U ~ ~p ~ .a ~ y a~ ~ p ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ . u ~ a Q, ~ °' ~ .~ •~3 00~ ,~o~•.. ~xco 55~ ~~~ o ~w~~ v J ~ ` ~~ V a ~~ ti ~ ~ ~j ~ ~ .~ ~ 'C7 a0 ~ e~ w ~ ~ rt ~~ ~r°~v ~,-~ ~ o~ o ~ o y o r, o ~ o ~ ~ v ~ ~~~ :~ ~ v y `~ C. "~~ \ _ .C ~ 1 _ ..rte Mar .yu u•t iu: aroma ~ ~~ .,,,~ '~ ti • r ~_ • r'G~ U IG 1rG ~ WuIJL lit\~a1I1 1 Lv I'•+ a av ..... ---- ~A~ a `~ ~Y'~' . uoa 6~a ~ ~ ~ ~~ `~ ~/ ., _ ~ -, ~i~ ~ ~ ~ b o o' ~~~ d ~~ a c. f :r ~ Y~~ ~ /~~~ B I.O~ co '-+• ' < A s~~~R~ Qp a Uc~ C~ N ~~~ I` '. . ~~~~ 1~ _. ~~ ~ ~ ,..: ~p~.i; \ \~ \ •\ .` I~ ~~ ~ ''a\ 111~~N _~`~I, ~ ` , 1 ` L~ ~ ~, 1 oO ar ` ` k 1) _ r '~1'' a `i,1 Y 1 I~ ` ~ • a~ I ~~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ` ~ c ~ , 1~~t'~ as I_ _cJ ~~ •`, -, S ~ ~" I`__~ ~ t', ~~ r - --~' f ~\ e t. / ;1 ` ~ ~ , '~$Na ' ~~ ~/ O ~ . ~ ~ ~~^~f / / I ,~ ~ / -~ ,/~ , ' / ' -' ~ .;~~~ •`__ _ ,~: \'x{35 r~ }'i A 5 ~~ ~~~ ~~I~~ ~ ~ ~ ! 1 ' ~ .n ~_ ~ y 1~ i 1 N S 8 0 ~ Q T ~ ~ _,/'` L ~~ ~ \,(, e • se•d -mlol ~' ~1 ~ R/A • f 1~ ~ ,• ~, ~Q,4 ~~, y c "'C C A. F E'" Q- ~, ~~ ~ ~ . ~ ~,,, _ „~ a •r :.= . . / ``~ ~~ ~~~ ~` > ~~ `. .` ~` ~ . ~ ~ . ~ . ~ ~` ~` ~` ~` ~~`' ~,yt\t ~~ ~~ ~~ c'j ~ L~ .~ n i Q ~,~~. ~ y~'S~~ 'W1e~" ~/ . ~ r t t t 1 ~ t r i r r O ty~`~ a ~7 i ~ ~ ~4 ~~ Q i ~ ~~ '. w `` ;~' `~ I+Q ~ ~ •~' ~~ ~. ..: i{ ~,~. ~:. ~_ - `-x. e 60i60'd t960bLL0bST -- ' i i~ L~~~~~ 11tiN NtiWtiTiI?!d 1Qf10H~1S0 bt:tt b00Z-t0-?add " $_5Y` Y,. '~ EXHI~IT 2 Metes and Bounds of Slate to Hill I and II, LLC be zoned C-2 from R-3 Total Acreage 17.01791 North: 8681.17167 Line Course: N 23-21-43 W North: 8879.93582 Line Course: N 22-07-52~W North: 9039.75859 Line Course: N 61-50-50 E North: 9224.57256 Line Course: N 79-24-46 E North: 9227.16492 Line Course: N OS-34-10' E North: 9263.01446 Line Course: N 08-05-10 E North: 9867.13546 Line Course: S 85-46-50 E North: 9848.69262 Line Course: N 78-12-28 E North: 9883.27889 Line Course: S 13-46-53 E North: 9864.69732 ~ne Course: N 78-43-07 E North: 9940.41588 Line Course: S 19-38-01 E North: 9815.81235 Line Course: S 78-36-16 W North: 9737.41934 Line Course: S 08-52-15 E North: 9340.53781 Line Course: N 79-24-46 E North: 9357.29967 Line Course: S 14-28-48 E North: 9110.86458 Line Course: S 66-04-OS W North: 8681.17167 Line Course: N 75-57-50 E North: 8681.17167 East 53568.84778 Length: 216.51 East 53482.99147 Length: 172.53 East 53417.99308 Length: 391.70 East 53763.35186 Length: 14.11 East 53777.22105 Length: 36.02 East 53780.71689 Length: 610.19 East 53866.54784 Length: 250.65 East 54116.52332. Length: 169.24 East 54282.18971 Length: 19.13 East 54286.74743 Length: 387.05 East 54666.31877 Length: 132.30 East 54710.77080 Length: 396.77 East 54321.82565 Length: 401.69 East 54383.76776 Length: 91.23 East 54473.44398 Length: 254.52 East 54537.08498 Length: 1059.30 East 53568.84776 Length: 0.00 East 53568.84778 ~~ Perimeter: 4602.94 Area: 741,300.31299 sq. ft. 17.01791 acres e ,~~ b,:.,:; page 1 • Metes and Bounds of Woodcliff Investments, LLC to be zoned C-2 from C-1 Total Acreage 8.0377 North: 9867.13546 Line Course: N 54-37-50 W North: 10136.44151 Line Course: N 34-25-50~•W North: 10255.65914 Line Course: N 43-35-03 E North: 10489.65009 ~, Line Course: N 53-51-55 E North: 10584.77828 l Line Course: S 35-59-02'` E I North: 10368.00252 Line Course: N 52-37-55 E North: 10375.34098 Line Course: S 35-56-05 E North: 10216.18927 Line Course: N 59-55-25 E North: 10279.68178 Line Course: S 34-12-15 E North: 10197.35137 North: 9848.69262 Line Course: N 85-46-50 W j North: 9867.13546 East 53866.54784 Length: 468.70 East 53484.35324 Length: 142.11 East 53404.00113 Length : 3 2,3 . 03 East 53626.70418 Length: 161.32 East 53756.99140 Length: 267.89 East 53914.39529 Length: 12.09 East 53924.00466 Length: 196.56 East 54039.35875 Length: 126.69 East 54148.99276 Length: 99.55 East 54204.95343 Length: 323.43 East 54282.18971 Length: 169.24 East 54116.52332 Length: 250.65 East 53866.54784 Perimeter: 2541.27 Area: 350,122.42769 sq. ft. 8.03770 acres e i e Course: S 13-48-57 E North: 9883.27889 ine Course: S 78-12-28 W • Metes and Bounds of Cemetery "Not to be Rezoned" Total Acreage .03892 L, North: 8133.46988 East 49768.64621 I Line Course: S 03-35-02 W Length: 61.36 i,' North: 8072.22719 East 49764.81033 ~, Line Course: N BO-12-02:W Length: 28.51 North: 8077.07905 East 49736.71935 'il Line Course: N 03-35-02 E Length: 58.28 ;~, North: 8135.24141 East 49740.36229 ~`~ Line Course: S 86-24-58 E Length: 28.34 .% ~ North: 8133.46988 East 49768.64621 ~,; Perimeter: 176.49 Area: 1,695.24581 sq. ft. 0.03892 acres y~-~, e x._ -,. page 1 "`'. Metes and Bounds of Slate Hill II, LLC to be zoned C-2 from C-2c Total Acreage 4.92907 "Does not Include Cemetery" Total Acreage including Cemetery 4.96799 North: 9110.86458 Line Course: S 14-28-48 E North: 8822.37677 Line Course: S B1-09-09 W North: 8791.66174 Line Course: S 62-53-11 W North: 8647.56194 ,~ Line Course: S 74-OB-15 W North: 8606.95978 Line Course: N 78-23-39W North: 8608.97197 Line Course: N 28-10-53 W North: 8611.11340 Line Course: N 82-35-47 W • North: 8619.97847 Line Course: N 09-32-14 E North: 8623.76189 Line Course: N 80-27-46 W North: 8640.33056 Course: N 80-29-45 W North: 8681.17167 ,Line Course: N~66-04-08 E North: 9110.86458 East 54537.08498 Length: 297.95 East 54611.58594 Length: 199.70 East 54414.26356 Length: 316.18 East 54132.83397 Length: 148.55 East 53969.94332 Length: 10.00 East 53980.14581 Length: 2.43 East 53978.99848 Length: 68.80 East 53910.77607 Length: 3.84 East 53911.41172 Length: 100.00 East 53812.79368 Length: 2.47.34 East 53568.84778 Length: 1059.30 East 54537.08498 Perimeter: 2454.08 Area: 216,405.61596 sq. ft. 4.96799 acres e