HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/26/1995 - Adopted Board RecordsAT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-1 EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO FREDERICK W. "BILLY" BOWER
FOR OVER 24 YEARS OF SERVICE TO ROANOKE COUNTY
WHEREAS, Frederick W. "Billy" Bower was first employed
in September, 1970, with the Roanoke County Public Service
Authority; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bower has also served as a Maintenance
Mechanic, Motor Equipment Operator II, and Courier; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bower always went above and beyond his job
requirements as a Courier to provide the highest quality of
customer service; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bower volunteered to assist with the
Commodity Distribution Program sponsored by the Department of
Social Services; portrayed Roanoke County's Santa Claus during the
1992 Christmas season; and was nominated on numerous occasions to
the Extra Mile Club; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bower, through his employment with Roanoke
County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life for
its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, expresses its deepest
appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County
to FREDERICK W. "BILLY" BOWER for over 24 years of capable, loyal
and dedicated service to Roanoke County.
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best
wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement.
y
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
D. Keith Cook, Human Resources
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-2 EXPRESSING APPROVAL AND SUPPORT
OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S
PROJECT ROUTE 221, BENT MOUNTAIN ROAD.
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation held a
public hearing on March 24 and 25, 1995 for the purposes of
discussing the proposed corridors to State Route 221 project; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on
September 12, 1995 for the purpose of receiving citizen comments on
the proposed corridors; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors does hereby approve and
support the proposed improvements to State Route 221 but request
the existing alignment to remain the general corridor for future
improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution
duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of
Transportation Salem Residency Office by the Clerk to the Board of
Supervisors.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution and
request that no additional corridors will be studied, and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: Supervisors Kohinke, Eddy
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
CC: File
Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections
Virginia Department of Transportation
A-92695-3
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 26, 1995
AGENDA ITEM: Debarment of Wayne Engineering Corporation from
consideration for award of future contracts.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: /J I
This action is to debar Wayne Engineering Corporation
("Wayne") from consideration for the award of future contracts, and
in particular, contracts for the acquisition of "One -Arm Bandit"
garbage trucks.
This matter was originally scheduled for June 13, 1995, and
was postposed to June 27, 1995, at the request of the attorney for
Wayne Engineering. This matter was heard on June 27, 1995, and
Wayne's attorney, Mr. William H. Fralin, Jr., addressed the Board
with respect to Wayne's opposition to this debarment proceeding.
The Board directed staff to meet with Wayne's representatives in an
attempt to resolve this dispute. These negotiations have failed to
achieve a satisfactory resolution to this dispute.
Roanoke County had purchased 3 garbage trucks from Wayne
Engineering Corporation in 1994, and funds for the purchase of
another garbage truck are included in the proposed 1995-96 budget.
The County has had numerous mechanical, warranty and environmental
problems with these vehicles.
Article III of Chapter 17, "Procurement" of the Roanoke County
Code provides for the debarment of prospective contractors for
cause by the Board of Supervisors, after consulting with the County
Attorney, and after reasonable notice and reasonable opportunity to
be heard. The grounds for debarment are the unsatisfactory
performance of Wayne Engineering's vehicles, and the failure of
Wayne Engineering Corporation. to reimburse the County for the
damages caused by its defective equipment.
These provisions in the County Code are authorized by Section
1
:p�- C-)-,
11-46.1 of the Code of Virginia.
The debarment shall not be for a period of more than three (3)
years.
In accordance with the procedures in the County Code the
County Attorney has provided Wayne Engineering Corporation with
notice of this proposed debarment action and advised it of its
opportunity to be heard on this matter.
Section 17-106 of the County Code lists the causes or grounds
for debarment. Staff is recommending debarment based upon the
following provisions:
(4) b. A recent record of failure to perform or of
unsatisfactory performance in accordance with the terms of one
or more contracts; provided that failure to perform or
unsatisfactory performance caused by acts beyond the control
of the contractor shall not be considered a basis for
debarment.
(5) Any other cause the board of supervisors determines to be
so serious and compelling as to affect responsibility as a
county contractor, ...
The County is experiencing major stress damage ("cracks") in
the frames of all three of the garbage trucks purchased from Wayne.
All will require extensive repair work to reinforce the supporting
frames of the truck bodies.
All three vehicles have experienced problems with the roller
operation of the trailer trays. The rollers have come out of
alignment and bent the trays.
All three units have experienced structural cracks in the
grabber assemblies of the lifting unit.
The two stage hydraulic pumps have been replaced at least once
on each vehicle, and this pump has been replaced twice on one of
the vehicles.
The packing cylinders have had to be replaced on all three
vehicles, and replaced twice on one vehicle.
The hydraulic systems have been a recurring problem on all
three vehicles, resulting in numerous blown hoses and hydraulic
fluid spills. For example, on June 23, 1994, as a result of a
defective connection design, a hydraulic line on one of the garbage
trucks came loose and approximately 45 gallons of hydraulic fluid
2
': 1) , '0'\,
were released onto Greenway Drive. Over the summer the County
worked with the affected citizens and property owners, hired
Environmental Directions Inc. ("EDI") to assist the County in
developing a remediation plan suitable to both the citizens and
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and conducted
remediation activities. The total cost of the clean-up activities
was $43,011.67. Wayne was regularly apprised in writing (on June
29, July 20, and August 5) of the actions taken by the County
during the summer, and copies of EDI's report was given to Wayne.
Since the County had similar problems with the other garbage
trucks purchased from Wayne, staff inquired of Wayne the cause and
solution for this problem. Wayne's authorized representative for
warranty repairs advised the County Garage that the pump manifold
on the vehicles should be replaced with barbed fittings and to
double clamp the hydraulic hoses to prevent future reoccurrences.
This work was performed immediately the June 23, 1994 spill.
On October 19, 1994 the County billed Wayne for its
contribution to the reimbursement of these expenses. In January,
1995 Wayne replied that it "has no express or implied legal
responsibility requiring us to burden any financial responsibility
pertaining to this spill."
The County Attorney is currently preparing appropriate legal
pleadings to be filed in the near future to seek a judicial
resolution of this dispute.
Staff has tracked downtime for the Wayne vehicles since
October, 1994. The downtime for all three Wayne vehicles has been
significant, and if transport is included, two of the Wayne
vehicles have been unavailable for use approximately 20% of the
time.
Apart from the merits of this future litigation, Wayne's
refusal to stand behind its vehicles, and to share the burden of
remediating the damages caused by its defective equipment is so
serious and compelling that this debarment proceeding is justified.
Its performance with respect to these vehicles is unsatisfactory.
In April, 1995 Wayne entered into a "strategic alliance" to
distribute its automated side -loader refuse collection vehicles
with the Leach Company. The Leach Company has the exclusive right
to distribute and service Wayne's vehicles in North America under
the Leach name. These vehicles will continue to be developed and
manufactured by Wayne. Therefore this debarment must include Wayne
vehicles distributed by Leach.
Since the June 27, 1995 hearing on this matter, the County has
experienced additional structural design problems with these
vehicles. In mid-August certain welds associated with the packing
cylinder bracket failed resulting in damage to the front frame and
3
the packing cylinder. Carter Machinery Company, Inc. has provided
the County with estimates to repair structural design problems of
approximately $4800.00. This estimate does not include the
repair/replacement cost for the packing cylinder. The repairs have
been completed on all three vehicles, yet Wayne refuses to pay for
any of these repair costs.
The debarment of one of the manufacturers of automated side -
loader refuse collection vehicles may limit the competitive
opportunities for the County under the proposed competitive sealed
bidding procedures for purchase of such vehicles in future fiscal
years.
The Board may take the following actions, after Wayne has had
an opportunity to be heard:
1) Debar Wayne Engineering Corporation (and refuse
collection vehicles developed, manufactured and serviced by Wayne
Engineering Corporation but distributed by the Leach Company) from
consideration for the award of future contracts from Roanoke County
for a period of time not to exceed three (3) years; or,
2) Refuse to debar Wayne Engineering Corporation, and permit
Wayne to bid if it so desires, in the future on County contracts.
It is recommended that the Board debar Wayne Engineering
Corporation, and refuse collection vehicles developed, manufactured
and serviced by Wayne Engineering Corporation but distributed by
the Leach Company, from consideration for the award of future
contracts for a period of three (3) years from the date of this
action.
william Rana
Director, General Services
4
• ��.c.c,� � yK,�.ai
Elaine Carver
Director, Procurement
D'a
Approved by, ,A
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to No Yes Abs
Denied ( ) _debar Wayne Engineering Eddy X
Received ( ) Kohinke X
Referred ( ) Johnson X
To ( ) Minnix X
Nickens X
CC: File
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney
William Rand, General Services Director
Elaine Carver, Procurement Director
5
r
A-92695-4
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: September 26, 1995
AGENDA ITEM: Recriest to accept Family Preservation Act monies
and make application for a grant to be administered
by the Community Policy and Management Team
COTIETY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:_
BACKGROUND:
In 1993 Congress passed and began implementation of a new
federal family preservation and family support services program
(FPA). The new legislation requires joint planning between the
state and federal governments in the development and implementation
of a five-year plan. The plan must provide family -centered,
community-based social services to children and families.
We must also prepare an initial application detailing the
planning process to meet Roanoke County needs. This local plan
will become part of a four year state plan describing the
involvement of communities in the assessment of their family
preservation and family support service needs.
The Virginia Department of Social Services will administer
this program. The County's Community Policy and Management Team
(CPMT)is responsible for coordinating the community assessment
process and the submission of the plan for the current fiscal year.
CPMT will work with the Mental Health Association in performing the
community needs assessment and submitting of the local plan. The
plan must be submitted by January 1, 1996 so that the monies will
be available for the second half of the federal fiscal year (April
1 through September 30, 1996).
Each Virginia locality will receive at least $10,000. The
initial amounts estimated for Roanoke County are $22,362 for
FY1995-96; $33,645 for FY1996-97; $36,064 for FY1997-98; and
$38,483 for FY1998-99. Of these monies, 75% represents the federal
share, 150-. the state share and 10% a local share. We anticipate
using other monies of the Comprehensive Services Act for the local
match for 1995-96. We also received a $2,000 allocation to be used
1
as a part of the planning process, the development of our community
needs assessment and filing our plan with the State.
The County's CPMT anticipates that our plan will call for FPA
monies to be earmarked for cases considered non -mandated by the
Comprehensive Services Act but which meet FPA's program criteria.
When using FPA monies, community-based services must be given
priority over out of community placements. The use of these monies
will be restricted to residents of Roanoke County or the Town of
Vinton.
FISCAL IMPACT•
The CPMT requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the
Family Preservation Act Grant allocation of $22,362 for the 1995-96
fiscal year and the $2,000 grant for the planning project. The
local match will come from monies already designated for the
Comprehensive Services Act and will require no new appropriation of
monies for this project.
ALTERNAT VES:
1. Accept the Family Preservation Act monies for $22,362 for
FY1995-96 and $2,000 for the development of a community needs
assessment and program plan.
2. Do not accept the Family Preservation Act monies.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The CPMT recommends Alternative #1 to accept the Family
Preservation Act monies as outlined above.
Respectfully submitted,
John M. Chambl ss, Jr.
Assistant County Administrator
Approved by,
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
-------------------
ACTION
Approved (X) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens
VOTE
Denied (
Received
) to approve
acceptance of funds
Eddy No
YXs Abs
(
Referred (
) and annly
)
for grant
Kohinke
X
To (
)
Johnson
X
Minnix
X
Nickens
X
CC: File
John
Betty
Chambliss,
McCrary,
Assistant County Administrator
Social
Diane
Hyatt, Finance
Services Director
Director
ft
ACTION NO. A-92695-5
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 26, 1995
AGENDA ITEM• Request to approve the plan for the Virginia
Juvenile Community Crime Control Act to be
submitted on behalf of Roanoke County for
administration by the Community Policy and
Management Team
I
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR''SS /COMMENTS •
,y� 1
BACKGROUND:
In the past Roanoke County has received approximately $237,000
annually in the form of block grants to assist with operating
expenses at Youth Haven II. This money was supplemented by per
diem rates established according to State guidelines. During 1994-
95 the per diem rate at Youth Haven II was $42.31.
The 1995 Virginia General Assembly implemented the Virginia
Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA). This act eliminated
the block grant monies previously received by community-based,
residential programs like Youth Haven II. The monies allocated
under the VJCCCA formula are based upon juvenile arrest data as
reported on the UCR reports compiled by the Virginia State Police.
Under this methodology, Roanoke County would be eligible for
$97,106 compared to the $237,000 previously received under the
block grant method. The VJCCCA formula becomes effective January
1, 1996.
During FY95-96, we will receive $118,960 representing one-half
year of block grant monies earmarked for Youth Haven II. Also,
because of a hold harmless provision, for the current fiscal year
only, an additional $118,960 (instead of $48,553) will be given to
the County to be administered in accordance with the guidelines of
VJCCCA. VJCCCA guidelines cover youth under the jurisdiction of
the County's Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court who were not
previously covered under the Comprehensive Services Act. Some of
1
these youth may be eligible to participate in the Youth Haven II
program.
The Act requires that a plan for use of the VJCCCA monies be
prepared by the locality, reviewed by the local Court Service Unit
Director and Juvenile Judge and forwarded to the State Department
of Youth and Family Services (DYFUS) by October 15, 1995 for
approval. The Roanoke County CPMT recommends that the VJCCCA
monies be used for the treatment of juveniles previously designated
as non -mandated cases under the Comprehensive Services Act who are
under the jurisdiction of the J & D Court. The CPMT also
recommends that priority be placed for community-based services
rather than out of community placements.
Because of the reduction in block grant monies for Youth Haven
II during the current fiscal year, it may become necessary to
increase the per diem cost from $42.31 to $82.21 to recognize the
loss of revenue. As a result of this change in funding, staff is
currently evaluating the appropriateness of the treatment program
of Youth Haven II as compared to other community service needs. A
report will be brought back to the Board of Supervisors with the
results of our findings.
Because the State has not made a determination as to whether
or not hold harmless provisions will be in force for the next
fiscal year, it is difficult to project all of the financial
implications at this time. VJCCCA reporting requirements require
us to document the expenditures for the treatment of Roanoke County
youth. Monies spent on group home type programs which have
benefited youth other than Roanoke County youth cannot be claimed
as meeting the service of the target population of this Act.
Should all of the VJCCCA monies be applied to Youth Haven II, we
will need to identify other funding sources to treat the male
population and any other person not appropriate to Youth Haven II.
Roanoke County is scheduled to receive $237,920 for FY1995-96.
Of this amount, $118,960 represents the reduced block grant monies
for Youth Haven II. The remaining $118,960 must be applied under
VJCCCA guidelines. This Act will have an adverse impact to the
operation of Youth Haven II in the form of increased per diem rates
or the appropriation of new monies to replace lost block grant
monies.
I
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Accept the $237,920 of VJCCCA monies utilizing $118,960 for
the cost of operating Youth Haven II. The remaining $118,960
would be administered by the Roanoke County CPMT. The CPMT
would limit each use to non -mandated cases that are under the
jurisdiction of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District
Court for Roanoke County. This alternative will provide the
greatest flexibility in meeting the needs of the youth of
Roanoke County.
2. Accept the $237,920 of VJCCCA monies and apply all of said
monies to Youth Haven II operations. This will allow the per
diem rates at Youth Haven II to remain at the $42.31 level for
all participants. Under this scenario, Roanoke County must
provide other monies to cover the cost of services provided to
the male population or for programs used other than Youth
Haven II. Roanoke County will not be able to claim the
expenses incurred for non -Roanoke County placements at Youth
Haven II in the accountability of VJCCCA monies. This may
jeopardize the funding amount in future years for Roanoke
County.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION•
The Roanoke County CPMT recommends Alternative #1 as outlined
above.
Respectfully submitted,
ih
ohn M. Chambli s, Jr.
Assistant County Administrator
Approved (X)
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred ( )
To ( )
Appr9ved by,
Z�� Z Z
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
--------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Motion by: Lee B. Eddy to No Yes Abs
approve Alternative #1 Eddy X
Kohinke X
Johnson X
Minnix X
Nickens X
CC: File
John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator
Bev Waldo, Youth Haven II Director
Diane Hyatt, Finance Director
A-92695-6
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER C — 3
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 26, 1995
AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve the grant for CORTRAN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ' S COMMENTS •
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Rail and Public
Transportation has advised Roanoke County that the operating grant
for the CORTRAN Red Line and Blue Line programs has been approved
for the federal fiscal year beginning October 1, 1995. With this
grant, Roanoke County contracts with Unified Human Services
Transportation System, Inc. (RADAR) to operate the Red Line service
which serves as a feeder system to Valley Metro.
In April,1995, the Red Line route was implemented in North
County and the additional grant monies are for a proposed Blue Line
program to serve Southwest County. If the grant is accepted by
Roanoke County, staff will work with RADAR to devise a route which
has a rural beginning and interconnects to a Valley Metro point to
improve the public transportation system to County residents. The
staff of RADAR and Roanoke County are currently promoting the Red
Line Service. We will also include a segment on this service during
the October Roanoke County Today program.
RADAR also provides the CORTRAN system for Roanoke County,
which is a demand -based service for the elderly and disabled
population of Roanoke County. Attachment A shows the ridership
history of this service.
FISCAL IMPACT•
The cost of the CORTRAN system to Roanoke County for FY1995-96
is $68,406.
1
E -3
The Red Line Service, which would be funded by the above -
referenced grant would cost $17,163 - federal; $9,346 - state; and
$7,817 - local. Attachment B shows the utilization of the Red Line
System from April through August, 1995.
The proposed Blue Line Service would cost $26,805 - federal;
$15,220 - state; and $8,584 - local. The routing, if approved,
will be developed by RADAR and County staff.
In the 1995-96 Roanoke County budget, $70,200 has been
included for public transportation services.
The Department of Rail and Public Transportation has indicated
that this funding source for the grant should be stable for the
next 18 to 24 months; however, they do not know the long-term
impact of the federal dollars.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Accept the grant from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department
of Rail and Public Transportation to continue operating
CORTRAN for the elderly and disabled population for Roanoke
County, the Red Line System in North County, and at an
appropriate time institute the Blue Line Service for Southwest
County. This would require an additional appropriation of
$14,607 from the general fund unappropriated balance.
2. Accept the portion of the grant from the Commonwealth of
Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation to
continue operating the CORTRAN service for Roanoke County and
the Red Line Service in North County. This alternative would
require an additional appropriation of up to $6,023 for the
period October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996.
3. Do not accept the Department of Rail and Public Transportation
grants and only continue the CORTRAN service to the elderly
and disabled population on the same schedule as the service is
currently being provided (Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends Alternative #2 which accepts the grant monies
for the Red Line Program and continues the basic CORTRAN service to
the residents of Roanoke County and appropriation of $6,023 from
the fund balance of the General Fund of Roanoke County.
2
Respectfully submitted,
ohn M. Chambli s, Jr.
Assistant County Administrator
Approv d by,
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
-3
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION
VOTE
Approved (X)
Motion by: Lee B. Eddy to
No
Yes Abs
Denied ( )
approve Alternative #2 with
Eddy
X
Received ( )
understanding that staff will
Kohinke
X
Referred ( )
look at Blue Line route in SW
Johnson
X
To ( )
County and report back in May
Minnix
X
96 with ridership data.
Nickens
X
CC: File
John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator
Diane Hyatt, Finance Director
3
EI -3
Attachment A
CORTRAN
COUNTY OF ROANOKE RIDERSHIP
ONE-WAY TRIPS
Month
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
October
401
519
486
421
441
November
327
496
552
500
412
December
317
370
363
335
370
January
415
419
372
216
340
February
396
468
521
436
272
March
399
477
371
350
315
April
443
441
467
397
338
May
414
392
470
465
392
June
444
433
432
404
307
July
447
431
383
339
341
August
395
432
460
398
403
September
452
441
410
392
ANNUAL
4,850
5,319
5,287
4,653
3,931
-3
Attachment B
RED LINE
RIDERSHIP
APRIL 1995
18
MAY 1995
55
JUNE 1995
28
JULY 1995
39
AUGUST 1995
44
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-7 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
OF THE HANGING ROCK BATTLEFIELD AND RAILWAY PRESERVATION
ISTEA PROJECT, AND AN AGREEMENT WITH THE HANGING ROCK
BATTLEFIELD AND RAILWAY PRESERVATION FOUNDATION AND THE
CITY OF SALEM FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE GRANT WITH
RESPECT TO SAID PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation
Foundation obtained approval of a competitive Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) grant request in the amount
of $549,300 from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)
for its Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Project;
and,
WHEREAS, VDOT requires that a local governing body administer
the grant; and,
WHEREAS, Both the Foundation and the City of Salem have
requested the County of Roanoke to administer this grant on their
behalf.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, that:
1) That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute an agreement on behalf of the County of Roanoke with the
Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Transportation, on a form
approved by the County Attorney, to administer an Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) grant in the amount
of $549,300 for the development of the Hanging Rock Battlefield and
Railway Preservation Project.
2) That this project administration includes the assignment
of a project coordinator, project record keeping, fiscal management
and overview of preliminary engineering, right--of-way/property
acquisition and construction in order to complete this project
within two years.
3) The agreement provides that the County will expend these
ISTEA grant funds in compliance with all federal and VDOT
requirements or the County may be liable for all non -reimbursed
expenditures or for all expenditures in excess of the approved
grant.
4) That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute an agreement on behalf of the County of Roanoke between the
County, the City of Salem and the Hanging Rock Battlefield and
Railway Preservation Foundation for the administration and
development of this ISTEA grant, all on a form approved by the
County Attorney.
5) That the Director of Economic Development is hereby
appointed as project coordinator for the administration of this
grant project and these agreements.
6) That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to
forward an attested copy of this Resolution to the Clerk of the
City of Salem and to the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway
Preservation Foundation.
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the resolution and
appoint Timothy Gubala as Project Coordinator, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Y.-inke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
CC: File
Timothy Gubala, Economic Development Director
Forest Jones, Salem City Clerk
Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation.
0
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-8 STATING THE OPINION OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGARDING THE SEPTEMBER 1,
1995 REPORT OF THE RESEARCH AND ISSUES DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE OF THE URBAN PARTNERSHIP
WHEREAS, some of the larger units of local governments and the
chambers of commerce in Virginia formed the Urban Partnership in
1994, for the purpose of building support for the restoration of
Virginia's urban areas and to improve the economic competitiveness
of its urban regions, and
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors voted to
become a full member of the Urban Partnership in June, 1995, and
WHEREAS, the Research and Issues Development Committee of the
Urban Partnership has prepared a report dated September 1, 1995,
that includes recommendations for consideration by the Urban
Partnership members and the General Assembly of Virginia,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia
is in agreement with many of the concepts recommended in said
report, and
2. That the Board of Supervisors strongly opposes the
following recommendations in said report, and urges other members
of the Urban Partnership to take a similar position in the interest
of developing a consensus that can be submitted for consideration
by the 1996 session of the Virginia General Assembly:
a. Use of a local option sales tax to benefit
localities that achieve a prescribed level of
regional cooperation.
b. Distribution of incentive funds to localities based
upon the "disparity" formula of the Department of
Education which uses the concentration and number
of children who qualify for free lunch in each
locality. Other distribution formulae should be
developed.
C. Emphasis on reducing disparity of average income
between core cities and their suburbs. This
appears to be a peripheral issue not directly
related to the mission of the Urban Partnership.
d. Including the extent to which projects promote
"governmental integration" as a factor in the
selection of eligible projects for incentive
payments. "Governmental Integration" sounds like
another term for consolidation.
e. Giving the Commission on Local Government the power
to "order" granting a City Class A status and
setting conditions therefor if a city and county
are not able to reach a voluntary agreement on a
transition plan.
f. Changing the requirements so that a referendum on
consolidation will be determined by a majority of
the combined voters, and
3. That copies of this resolution be transmitted immediately
to the chief elected and appointed officials of each participating
member government of the Urban Partnership and the Chair, Co -Chair
and Executive Director thereof.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: Supervisor Johnson
ABSTAIN: Supervisor Kohinke
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
CC: File
Mr. Neal J. Barber, Urban Partnership
Robert C. Bob, City Manager, City of Richmond
Charles F. Church, City Manager, City of Lynchburg
Edwin Daley, City Manager, City of Winchester
Anton S. Gardner, County Manager, County of Arlington
A. Ray Griffin, Jr., City Manager, City of Danville
Gary O'Connell, Acting City Manager, City of Charlottesville
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager, City of Roanoke
William J. Leidinger, County Executive, County of Fairfax
Valerie A. Lemmie, City Manager, City of Petersburg
Edgar E. Maroney, City Manager, City of Newport News
Robert J. O'Neill, Jr., City Manager, City of Hampton
James B. Oliver, Jr. City Manager, City of Norfolk
Ronald W. Massie, Interim City Manager, City of Portsmouth
Lane B. Ramsey, County Administrator, County of Chesterfield
Earl B. Reynolds, Jr. City Manager, City of Martinsville
James K. Spore, City Manager, City of Virginia Beach
Clinton H. Strong, City Manager, City of Hopewell
The Honorable F. Seward Anderson, Jr., Mayor, City of Danville
The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor, City of Roanoke
The Honorable Gary W. Chrisman, Mayor, City of Winchester
The Honorable Rosalyn R. Dance, Mayor, City of Petersburg
The Honorable James L. Eason, Mayor, City of Hampton
The Honorable Paul D. Fraim, Mayor, City of Norfolk
The Honorable Katherine K. Hanley, Chairman, Fairfax Board of
Supervisors
The Honorable J. L. McHale, III, Chairman, Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors
The Honorable Meyera E. Oberndorf, Mayor, City of Virginia Beach
The Honorable Robert R. Saunders, Jr., Mayor, City of Hopewell
The Honorable David J. Toscano, Mayor, City of Charlottesville
The Honorable Gloria O. Webb, Mayor, City of Portsmouth
The Honorable Mary Margaret Whipple, Chairman, Arlington County
Board of Supervisors
The Honorable James S. Whitaker, Sr., Mayor, City of Lynchburg
The Honorable Leonidas B. Young, Mayor, City of Richmond
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
ORDINANCE 92695-9 AUTHORIZING QUIT -CLAIM AND RELEASE OF
WATER AND SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT WITHIN BOUNDARIES OF
MONET DRIVE AND LOCATED BETWEEN LOT 1 OF THE GARDENS OF
COTTON HILL, SECTION 1 AND TRACT 1 (TAX #96.02-1-45)
PROPERTY OF STRAUSS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION.
WHEREAS, in order for Monet Drive to be accepted into the
state secondary road system, the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) requires that the right-of-way be free and
clear of any third party rights or encumbrances; and,
WHEREAS, VDOT has requested quit -claim and release of an
existing water and sanitary sewer easement within the boundaries of
Monet Drive and located between Lot 1 and the remaining portion of
Tract 1 (Tax Map #96.02-1-45) Property of Strauss Construction
Corporation, to the Commonwealth of Virginia, subject to certain
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, it will serve the interests of the public to have
Monet Drive accepted into the state secondary road system and the
release, subject to the issuance of a permit and other conditions,
will not interfere with other public services and is acceptable to
the Roanoke County Utility Department.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the
Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real
estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of
this ordinance was held on September 12, 1995; and a second reading
was held on September 26, 1995; and,
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be
released are hereby made available for other public uses by
conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia for acceptance of Monet
Drive into the state secondary road system by the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT).
3. That quit -claim and release of the water and sanitary
sewer easement within the boundaries of Monet Drive and located
between Lot 1 of the Gardens of Cotton Hill, Section 1, and Tract
1 (Tax #96.02-1-45) Property of Strauss Construction Corporation,
to the Commonwealth of Virginia, is hereby authorized subject to
the following conditions:
a. VDOT issuance of a permit for the water and sanitary
sewer lines or facilities.
b. The facilities located within the 60 -foot right-of-
way, between Lot 1 of the Gardens of Cotton Hill, Section
1, and Tract 1 (Tax #96.02-1-45) Property of Strauss
Construction Corporation, may continue to occupy the
street or highway in the existing condition and location.
C. The release would be for so long as the subject
section of Monet Drive is used as part of the public
street or highway system.
4. That the subject easement is not vacated hereby and shall
revert to the County in the event of abandonment of the street or
highway.
5. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute such documents and take such further actions as may be
necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on
form approved by the County Attorney.
6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the
date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Arnold Covey, Engineering & Inspections Director
Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney
Gary Robertson, Utility Director
Virginia Department of Transportation
y
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
ORDINANCE 92695-10 DECLARING A PARCEL OF REAL
ESTATE TO BE SURPLUS AND ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR THE
SALE OF SAME; NAMELY THE WHEELER WELL LOT
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, the subject property, having been made
available for other public uses before permitting disposition by
sale, is hereby declared to be surplus.
2. That an advertisement for bids for the sale of surplus
real estate was advertised in the Roanoke Times & World News on
April 9, 1995.
3. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading of this ordinance was
held on August 22, 1995; and a second reading was held on September
26, 1995, concerning the disposition of the following parcel of
real estate identified as follows:
Wheeler Well Lot Tax Map Parcel No. 87.11-3-28
4. That offers for said properties having been received, the
offer of Lyndon R. Carr to purchase this property for the sum of
$13,525 is hereby accepted.
5. That the purchase price for the property shall be paid
upon delivery of a deed therefor and all proceeds from the sale of
this real estate are to be paid into the capital improvements fund.
6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
1
execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke
County as are necessary to accomplish the sale of said property,
all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney.
7. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the
date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
John Willey, Property Manager
Gary Robertson, Utility Director
P
N
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
ORDINANCE 92695-11 DECLARING A PARCEL OF REAL
ESTATE TO BE SURPLUS AND ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR THE
SALE OF SAME; NAMELY THE ALGOMA PARK WELL LOT
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, the subject property, having been made
available for other public uses before permitting disposition by
sale, is hereby declared to be surplus.
2. That an advertisement for bids for the sale of surplus
real estate was advertised in the Roanoke Times & World News on
April 9, 1995.
3. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading of this ordinance was
held on May 9, 1995; and a second reading was held on September 26,
1995, concerning the disposition of the following parcel of real
estate identified as follows:
Algoma Park Well Lot Tax Map Parcel No. 87.06-2-22
4. That offers for said properties having been received, the
offer of J. Larry Lyons to purchase this property for the sum of
Sixteen Thousand Three Hundred ($16,300) Dollars is hereby
accepted/rejected.
5. That the purchase price for the property shall be paid
upon delivery of a deed therefor and all proceeds from the sale of
this real estate are to be paid into the capital improvements fund.
1
That the Utility Department be reimbursed for the costs for the
relocation of the existing water line from the proceeds of this
transaction.
6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to
execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke
County as are necessary to accomplish the sale of said property,
all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney.
7. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the
date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
cc: File Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
John Willey, Property Manager
Gary Robertson, Utility Director
2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-12 APPROVING AND
CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET
FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM L - 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 September 26, 1995 designated as Item L -
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. Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the
Industrial Development Authority.
2. Approval of a Raffle Permit for the Virginia Junior
Miss Scholarship Program.
3. Resolution in support of Catawba Hospital's
application to operate a class E non -emergency
patient Transport Van.
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 Kohinke to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
JV
Mary H.'Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney
Commissioner of the Revenue
A -92695-12.a
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER L.. `/
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 26, 1995
AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the
Industrial Development Authority
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The following nomination was made at the September 26, 1995
meeting.
1. Industrial Development Authority_
Supervisor Kohinke nominated Carole Brackman to serve a four
year term which will expire September 26, 1999.
RECOMMENDATION•
It is recommended that this appointment be confirmed by the Board
of Supervisors.
Respectfully submitted,
rn�-y� ird• Carl-c��..
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board
Approved by,
e/4-
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (X) Motion by: Edward G. Kohinke No Yes Abs
Denied ( ) to approve appointment Eddy X
Received ( ) Kohinke X
Referred ( ) _ Johnson X
To ( ) Minnix X
Nickens X
CC: File
Timothy Gubala, Economic Development Director
Industrial Development Authority File
A -92695-12.b
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER 'L-- Z
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 26, 1995
AGENDA ITEM: Request for Approval of a Raffle Permit from the
Virginia's Junior Miss Scholarship Program
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Virginia's Junior Miss Scholarship Program has requested a permit
to hold raffles in Roanoke County on dates in November and
December, 1995, as specified in the application. This application
has been reviewed with the Commissioner of Revenue and he
recommends that it be approved. The application is on file in the
Clerk's Office.
The organization has paid the $25.00 fee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the application for a Raffle Permit from
Virginia's Junior Miss Scholarship Program be approved.
SUBMITTED BY:
Mary H. Allen
Clerk to the Board
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
-------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (X) Motion by: Edward G. Kohinke
Denied ( ) to approve No Yes Abs
Received ( ) Eddy X
Referred ( ) Kohinke X
To ( ) _ Johnson X
Minnix X
Nickens X
cc: File
Raffle & Permit File
Commissioner of the Revenue
RAFFLE PERMIT APPLICATION - z
Application is hereby made for a raffle game permit. This
application is made subject to all County and State laws, rules,
ordinances, and regulations now in force, or that may be enacted
hereafter and which are hereby agreed to by the undersigned
applicant and officers of the organization and which shall be
deemed a condition under which this permit is issued.
Raffle games are strictly regulated by Title 18.2-340.1 et. sea. of
the criminal statutes of the Virginia Code, and by Section 4-86 ett_
sea, of the Roanoke County Code. These laws authorize the County
Board of Supervisors to conduct a reasonable investigation prior to
granting a raffle permit. The Board has sixty days from the filing
of an application to grant or deny the permit. The Board may deny,
suspend, or revoke the permit of any organization found not to be
in strict compliance with county and state law.
Name of Organization
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip
When was the organization founded?
Purpose and Type of Organization Scj-io�c��S�,P pCDg�cin,�
Has the organization been in existence in Roanoke County for five
continuous years? YES_ NO
Is the organization non-profit? YES ✓ NO
Is the organization exempt under 5501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code? YES_ NO
Attach copy of IRS Tax Exemption Letter. (If applicable)
Does your organization understand that any organization found in
violation of the County Bingo and Raffle Ordinance or Section 18.2-
340.10 et. sea. of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is
subject to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder,
agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the
above referenced Codes may be guilty of a felony? 4e2s
Does your organization understand that it must maintain and file
complete records of receipts and disbursements pertaining to Raffle
games and that: such records are subject to audit by the
Commissioner of the Revenue?• y e_,,s
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA P.O. BOX 20409
COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE ROANOKE, VA 24018
1
Does your organization understand that it is a violation of law to
enter into a contract with any person or firm, association,
organization (other than another qualified organization pursuant to
S 18.2-340.13 of the Code of Virginia), partnership, or corporation
of any classification whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing,
managing, or conducting Raffles ? 14"
L- 2
DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES TO BE RAFFLED, VALUE OF SUCH ARTICLES:
Article Description Fair Market Value
ly
�p �G
gl�.A
DATE OF RAFFLE [vec 6�t*nn;n9 Nov 3. 1995
�99Co
If this application is for an ANNUAL RAFFLE PERMIT, list below all
dates raffles will be held.
Specific location where Raffle drawing is to be conducted?
E NUJA o ke A Zgoli
NOTE: This perm t shall be valid only for the above location.
Any organization holding a permit to conduct bingo games or raffles
shall use twelve and one-half percent (12.5%) of its gross receipts
from all bingo games or raffles for those lawful religious,
charitable, community or educational purposes for which the
organization is specifically chartered or organized. (County Code
S4-101) State specifically how the proceeds from Raffle(s) will be
used. List in detail the planned or intended use of the proceeds.
Use estimated amounts if necessary.
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA P.O. BOX 20409
CONEMSSIONER OF THE REVENUE ROANOKE, VA 24018
N
Officers of the organisation: L-
President: L o r-, b Q.r'A� Phone : O -5954-376S7
Address: 'lLA�C)ye-t-r-"W"S�(L oano��. A zcfoig
Vice President:
Address: -) q"1
Secretary:
Address: �a
Treasurer:--,,..—
Address:
reasurer:—,,..—Address: ') A
"7 G,y
Phone: 946
Phone: (240)
5$g-
376,,Y
S_AAM k&
VA
0 g o
t i
Member authorized to be responsible for Raffle operations:
Name: V�!'1 1. L 0 r1ijIJ
Home Address -)4-)D
�Rp RNU�c
Phone q2oj- D Bus Phone
Member responsible for filing financial report required by the code
if your organisation ceases to exist:
Name: .s AM L
Home Address
Phone 9'n -3� CVS Bus Phone 3Q
Does your organisation understand that it will be required to
furnish a complete list of its membership upon the request of the
Commissioner of the Revenue? Lje S
Has your organization attached a check for the annual permit fee in
the amount of $25.00 payable to the County of Roanoke? Ve t
IF ALL QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED, PROCEED TO NOTARIZATION.
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA P.O. BOX 20409
COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE ROANOKE, VA 24018
3
NOTARIZATION
THE FOLLOWING OATH MUST BE TAKEN BY ALL APPLICANTS:
L_2
I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set
forth in 518.2-434 of the Code of Virginia, that all of the above
statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and
beliefs. All questions have been answered. I further swear that
I have read and understand the attached copies of sec. 18.2-340.1
et., seg. of the Code of Virginia and section 4-86 et. seg. of the
Roanoke County Code.
Subscribed and
aa-/7.C4(Va
-�Yo i'f,
before me, this day of
�in the
County/O#�f-
NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED
, Virginia.
:ommission expires: L -3 19C
The above application, having been found in due form, is approved
and issued to the applicant to have effect until December 31st of
this calendar year.
DateCobm1 Toner of t Revenue
�f.
The above application is not approved.
Date Commissioner of the Revenue
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA P.O. BOX 20409
COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE ROANOKE, VA 24018
0
-
_ rersen to Lon;:►e:..::. .. Liar: i•::Cc �•
' - . oti.� rte' ► ';1 r i'i15S ,C,,r�;;_'i�= .' w ! C!3piICn$ i'ii:i�it:C:: YI
he Aim ..ted r5 Jv: O
• . (kVA►� �'•,c� �%-C .
3I= a,yC'I � Feter Pe'
tc:
P. Box
42780'nota- `3 , c�.. '••
,'ArOuilet Al. -0c
Dear Si_-' or Madam: '
is in Y
iY'C71T1 FE'dB= a-:. �-'=CCWe t$.`L. •
•r-•-^�_z•��-ion exL-r:;,_
a recc rzed as � e - 'A e
CC { Cr.- � � 1 � ^ ) O i } � :z' 11=r.. Z� •:•i.:.F`,.'3•v'?:1L:E'. ::d� 0�1
o� mon t
�2:�r.�--,t =%�• • ti's:'.: ;;�« � �'�= ::'lk'.� d2.�: tir1 .^.J � a :.,.
�Cq pZu'..:._
-e c s� cia j
four=tet? or. •xit;u., ..:. m a.r .•� .
:.Cruet509(a�(3�-
an orgr✓�-at'_an de
�...�.. Ct:.�Jl.? d5 ''='V �� � �? Z .r.�C'..�.Cfi Z�v G r f.�:-'. C•Jta � .
Ccr i----i3ut:-ons to }C:. a; e t: _
�t r roretr�'- to wove is "
} t::s r tt- ire_ by r-ta,: :. to
The tax exero., s�o. a •- _,� •,���f�-e3 0- re•r�:•�e•_.
in e£.Cect -and :ti' i
by the Interna? A :r can3e
:ted = dz: tt•.e e!'re•ct of
method of operation =13t be repo to us so the ma*r coni �.
h�-•;-a •;ur
the cha..7ga o you: exe.-rt s`..atus. You must also
name and address.
Thank you for 7-�U cvore_*-3tian-
S! ncerely yours,
g•F. Van Meter f
Exempt Organi.zatI cns SFeci2-1'5-
Past-It" bland fax transmlttai me a 7671
10
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-12.c SUPPORTING CATAWBA HOSPITAL'S
APPLICATION TO OPERATE A CLASS E NON -EMERGENCY PATIENT
TRANSPORT VAN
WHEREAS, Catawba Hospital, a division of the Department of
Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services,
located in Roanoke County has filed an application with the
Virginia Department of Emergency Services (DES) for permission to
operate two Class E vehicles for the non -emergency transportation
of wheelchair-bound patients from that hospital to local hospitals
or health care provider locations, and
WHEREAS, this Class E Non -Emergency Patient Transport Van will
not be available for public use, and will not be part of the
emergency services system for the Roanoke County area and will
service patients at Catawba Hospital only, and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County will continue to provide emergency
medical service coverage for Catawba Hospital, and
WHEREAS, DES requires a resolution of support from the Board
Of Supervisors of Roanoke county prior to approval of such an
application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Roanoke County endorses the application for an EMS Agency
License for Catawba Hospital to use and operate a Class E Non -
Emergency Patient Transport Van.
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-13 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia
has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an
affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of
The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, that such executive 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
executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and
2. Only such public business matters as were identified in
the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or
considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Alen, Clerk
cc: File Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Executive Session File
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
RESOLUTION 92695-14 EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO RONALD S. EDWARDS
FOR OVER 22 YEARS OF SERVICE TO ROANOKE COUNTY
WHEREAS, Ronald S. Edwards was first employed in
February, 1973, as a Firefighter with the Roanoke County Fire and
Rescue Department; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Edwards has also served as a Fire Captain,
Fire and Rescue Planning Officer, and Technical Services Officer;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Edwards was very instrumental as Project
Manager in the implementation of the new 800 MHZ Radio System,
which has improved the capabilities required in the areas of Public
Safety; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Edwards, in addition to his other duties,
reviewed site plans in order to assure sufficient fire hydrant
placements and access for fire and emergency equipment to provide
quality service to new sites; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Edwards, through his employment with
Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of
life for its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, expresses its deepest
appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County
to RONALD S. EDWARDS for over 22 years of capable, loyal and
dedicated service to Roanoke County.
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best
wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement.
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
D. Keith Cook, Human Resources Director
r
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
A RESOLUTION 92695-15 AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
SALEM AND THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE RELOCATING THE
BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN SAID GOVERNMENTAL
ENTITIES, AND AUTHORIZING THAT CERTAIN OTHER
ACTIONS RELATING TO SUCH BOUNDARY LINE BE
TAKEN AS PROVIDED BY LAW
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Article 2, Chapter 24,
Title 15.1, 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, the governing bodies
of the County of Roanoke and the City of Salem wish to petition the
Court for approval to relocate portions of the boundary line
between these two jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the relocation of the boundary line of such
governmental entities in the area proposed will permit more
effective and efficient delivery of municipal services and promote
the public health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of Salem has adopted
a measure reflecting its desire to relocate and change a portion of
the boundary line between the City and County as requested by
certain property owners within said areas; and
WHEREAS, the City of Salem and the County of Roanoke have
agreed to the boundary relocation by action of their respective
governing bodies.
WHEREAS, this action is being taken upon the request of
Patrick S. and robin S. Pillis.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, that:
1. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors is hereby
authorized to execute an agreement between the City of Salem and
the County of Roanoke, on a form approved by the County Attorney,
establishing a new boundary line at certain points between said
jurisdictions, as more particularly shown on a plat prepared by
T.P. Parker & Son, dated July 31, 1995, which is incorporated by
reference herein (Exhibit 1).
2. The boundary line set forth in said agreement will be
described by metes and bounds (Exhibit 2).
3. Notice of the proposed boundary line adjustment has been
duly published as required by §15.1-1031.2 of the State Code.
4. Upon approval of the execution of the agreement between
the governing bodies, the County Attorney is authorized to petition
the Circuit Court of one of the affected jurisdictions to relocate
the boundary line in accordance with the plats and the agreement.
5. Upon entry of an order by the Circuit Court establishing
the new boundary line, a certified copy of such order will be
forwarded to the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
6. The County Administrator and County Attorney are
authorized to take, or cause to be taken, such other actions, and
to execute other documents as may be required by law to effect the
change in the boundary line as set forth herein.
7. The Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to
forward an attested copy of this resolution to the Clerk of the
City of Salem.
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Randolph Smith, Salem City Manager
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
ORDINANCE 92695-16 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT TO CAVE SPRING UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
TO EXPAND AN EXISTING CHURCH TO INCREASE THE
SANCTUARY AND CLASS ROOMS (TAX PARCELS 77.17-
5-20, CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Cave Spring United Methodist Church has filed a
petition to allow the expansion of an existing church to increase
the sanctuary and class rooms, located at 4505 Hazel Drive, in the
Cave Spring Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
matter on September 5, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia,
held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 1995; the second
reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26,
1995.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use
permit to allow the expansion of an existing church to increase the
sanctuary and class rooms, located at 4505 Hazel Drive, in the Cave
Spring Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the
adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the provisions of §
15.1-456 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and hereby
grants a Special Use Permit to the Cave Spring United Methodist
Church to allow said use, subject to the following condition:
Ei
(A) In accordance with Section 30-92-5(A)2, Petitioner will
provide innovative landscaping or architectural design on
the building site to achieve an equivalent screening or
buffering effect.
(B) Petitioner will construct a gate around the loop road to
discourage trespassers.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance with
condition (b) added, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
John W. Birckhead, Acting Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
ORDINANCE 92695-17 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
HELENE MAAYER TO OPERATE A PRIVATE KENNEL LOCATED AT 5502
SOUTH ROSELAWN ROAD (TAX PARCEL 86.03-1-30.3), WINDSOR
HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Helene Mawyer has filed a petition to allow the
operation of a private kennel located at 5502 South Roselawn Road,
in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
matter on July 5, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia,
held a first reading on this matter on August 22, 1995; the second
reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 26,
1995.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use
permit to allow the operation of a private kennel located at 5502
South Roselawn Road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District is
substantially in accord with the adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan
pursuant to the provisions of § 15.1-456 (b) of the 1950 Code of
Virginia, as amended and hereby grants a Special Use Permit to
Helene Mawyer to allow said use, subject to the following condi-
tions:
(A) There shall be a maximum of three dogs kept at the site,
effective October 1, 1995.
1
(B) The dogs shall be controlled with a no -bark collar when
outside and unattended.
(C) This Special Use Permit will be reconsidered by the
Planning Commission at its October 1996 public hearing. The
Planning Commission shall evaluate the applicants compliance with
conditions (A) and (B) and shall consult with the Roanoke County
Police Department Community Services Officers regarding any current
violations on the property. If the Planning Commission believes
that the conditions (A) and (B) have been violated, and that the
applicant has not successfully controlled the barking of the dogs
on the property, then the Commission shall recommend to the Board
of Supervisors that the Special Use Permit be revoked.
On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the ordinance with the
language in condition (C) modified, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: Supervisor Kohinke
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
John W. Birckhead, Acting Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
John Cease, Police Chief
2
r
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1995
ORDINANCE 92695-18 AMENDING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE
82592-12, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF ROANOKE COUNTY, BY
AMENDING THE FLOODPLAIN OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR ROANOKE
COUNTY
WHEREAS, the following text amendments have been mandated by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in order that
Roanoke County maintain its eligibility in the National Flood
Insurance Program; and
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as
required by law.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia as follows:
1. That the following sections pertaining to the
Floodplain Overlay District be amended and reenacted to read and
provide as follows:
FLOODPLAIN PROVISIONS OF THE
ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS AND USE TYPES
SEC. 30-28 DEFINITIONS
FLOOD - A general and temporary inundation of normally dry
land areas.
FLOOD, ONE HUNDRED YEAR - A flood that, on the average, is
likely to occur once every 100 years (i.e., that has a one
percent chance of occurring each year, although the flood may
1
occur in any year) .
SEC. 30-74 FO FLOODPLAIN OVERLAY DISTRICT
Sec. 30-74-4 Delineation of Areas
(A) The various floodplain areas shall include areas subject to
inundation by waters of the 100 year flood. The primary basis
for the delineation of these areas shall be the Flood
Insurance Study for Roanoke County prepared by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, dated October 15,"'
#1le:dC. These areas are more specifically defined "as
f o l Lows
3. The Approximated Flood lain shall be that p `
f
loo
d
1
ain
a
.P ....................
p as._. s�ic�w� oxo the f'�:c�c�� �nsur�r���
for which no detailed flood profiles or elevations are
2
Provide::�;�:�;...... a where the
drainage area is:.:;;:::::::;:.;::.:::::..;;.r.::;:;.P:::.:;;;;::::.:;;;;::.::.:;:<.;:.;:.»::>::>::
g great'er...thari 10 o acreareas Ma
s .
be en the Fleed insuranee Rate Maj9--. Where the specific
100 -year flood elevation cannot be determined for this
area using other sources of data such the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Floodplain Information Reports, U.S.
Geological Survey Flood Prone Quadrangles, etc., then the
applicant for the proposed use, development and/or
activity shall determine this elevation in accordance
with hydrologic and hydraulic engineering techniques.
Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses shall be undertaken
only by professional engineers or others of demonstrated
qualifications, who shall certify that the technical
methods used correctly reflect currently accepted
technical concepts. Calculations for the design flood
shall be related to existing land use and potential
development under existing zoning. Studies, analyses,
computations, etc., shall be submitted in sufficient
detail to allow a thorough review by the
Sec. 30-74-7 Floodplain Area Provisions, Generally
>' The 1 evat Sen of the one hundred year f l oc>d
3
Sec. 30-74-12 Existing Structures in Floodplain Areas
(A) A structure or use of a structure or premises which lawfully
____sting ;before the enactment of these provisions, but
which is .... V.not....... n conformity with these provisions may be
continued subject to the following conditions:
1. Existing structures and/or uses located in the Floodway
shall not be expanded or enlarged (unless the effect of
the proposed expansion or enlargement on flood heights is
fully offset by accompanying improvements).
2. Any modification, alteration, repair, reconstruction, or
improvement of any kind to a structure and/or use located
in any floodplain area to an extent or amount of 50
percent or more of its market value, shall be undertaken
only in full compliance with the Virginia Uniform
Statewide Building Code.
2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect
from and after its adoption. All ordinances or parts of ordinance
in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same
hereby are, repealed.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Terry Harrington, Planning and Zoning Director
Skip Burkart, Commonwealth Attorney
0
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
Main Library
John H. Cease, Police Chief
Roanoke County Code Book
Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff
John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator
Don Myers, Assistant County Administrator
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
O. Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Gary Robertson, Director, Utility
5