Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/8/2011 - Adopted Board RecordsAT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 ORDINANCE 030811 -1 READOPTING ORDINANCE 022211 -4 TO AMEND THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE BY THE ADDITION OF AMENDMENTS RELATING TO SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS WHEREAS, in June of 2009 the Roanoke County Planning Commission and Community Development staff identified various provisions of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to review and update as provided in Section 30 -14 of the Roanoke County Code and Section 15.2 -2285 of the Code of Virginia; and, WHEREAS, wind energy was one topic identified not only by County staff but also requested by citizens for further research to develop provisions to recommend be incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed wind energy issues in ten work sessions over the past eighteen months, and on January 24, 2011, completed its recommendations for proposed amendments incorporating small wind energy systems; and, WHEREAS, wind energy is a renewable source of alternative energy and alternative sources of energy are beneficial to Roanoke County, the Commonwealth of Virginia and the United States of America; and, WHEREAS, public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice are valid public purposes for such recommendations by the Planning Commission and action by the Board of Supervisors; and, Page 1 of 9 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held its public hearing on these proposed amendments on February 1, 2011, after legal notice and advertisement as required by law; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held its first reading on this ordinance on February 8, 2011, and its second reading and public hearing after legal notice and advertisement as required by law on February 22, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors hereby reaffirms and readopts this ordinance on March 8, 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That the following sections of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended to read and provide as follows: Article II, Section 30 -28 — Definitions and Use Types Anemometer: An instrument for measuring wind force and velocity. Net metering: A program offered by a utility company that allows customers with eligible renewable energy systems to offset a portion of the electric energy provided by the utility. Rated nameplate capacity: The maximum rated output of electric power production equipment specified by the manufacturer. Shadow flicker: The visible flicker effect that occurs when rotating turbine blades cast shadows on the ground and nearby structures, causing the repeating pattern of light and shadow. Wind energy: Power generated by converting the mechanical energy of wind into electrical energy through use of a wind generator. Wind energy conversion system: An electric generating device, the main purpose of which is to convert the kinetic energy available in the wind to mechanical energy, consisting of one or more wind turbines, a tower, associated control or conversion electronics and other accessory structures and buildings, including substations, electrical infrastructure, transmission on lines and other appurtenant structures and facilities. Wind energy system, micro (building integrated): Abuilding - mounted wind energy conversion system that has a manufacturer's rating of 10 kW or less. Page 2of9 Wind energy system, small: A wind energy conversion system consisting of a single wind turbine, a tower, and associated control or conversion electronics, having a rated nameplate capacity of not more than SO kilowatts (kW)Jor residential uses and not more than 100 kWfor other uses. For the purpose of residential net metering, Virginia Code X56 -594B limits the electrical generating facility to a capacity of not more than 10 kilowatts (kW). Wind energy tower: The structure on which the wind turbine is mounted. Wind monitoring or temporary meteorological tower: A temporary tower equipped with devices to measure wind speeds and direction; used to determine how much wind power a site can be expected to generate. Wind turbine: A wind energy conversion device that converts wind energy into electricity through use of a wind turbine generator; typically having one, two or three blades, nacelle, rotor, generator, controller and associated mechanical and electrical conversion components mounted on top of a tower. Windmill: A machine designed to convert the energy of the wind into more useful forms of energy, such as grinding, pumping, etc., using rotating blades driven by the force of the wind to turn mechanical equipment to do physical work, without producing energy. Article III — District Regulations SEC. 30 -32. - AG -3 AGRICULTURAURURAL PRESERVE DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -32 -2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right 6. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -33. - AG -1 AGRICULTURAURURAL LOW DENSITY DISTRICT. Sec. 30-33-2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right 5. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -34. - AR AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -34 -2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right 5. Miscellaneous Uses Page 3of9 Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -36. - AV AGRICULTURAL /VILLAGE CENTER DISTRICT. Sec. 30-36-2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right 6. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small* SEC. 30 -41. - R -1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -41 -2. - Permitted uses. (A) Permitted By Right 4. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -42. - R -2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -42 -2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right 3. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -45. - R -3 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -45 -2. - Permitted Uses. (B) Special Use Permit 4. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -46. - R -4 HIGH DENSITY MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -46 -2. - Permitted Uses. (B) Special Use Permit 4. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -61. - I -1 LOW INTENSITY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -61 -2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right Page 4 of 9 6. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -62. - I -2 HIGH INTENSITY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -62 -2. - Permitted Uses. (A) Permitted By Right 6. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small SEC. 30 -71. - EXPLORE PARK DISTRICT. Sec. 30 -71 -3. - Permitted Uses. (D) The following uses are allowed only by special use permit pursuant to section 30 -19. An asterisk ( *) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. 1. Miscellaneous Uses Wind Energy System, Small Article IV —Use and Design Standards SECTION 30 -87 -6. Wind Energy System, Small (A) Purpose and Intent: The purpose of this section is to regulate the placement, construction, and modification of small wind energy systems while promoting the safe, effective and efficient use of small wind energy systems and not unreasonably interfering with the development of independent renewable energy sources. The requirements set forth in this section shall govern the sitting of small wind energy systems used to generate electricity or perform work which may be connected to the utility grid pursuant to Virginia's net metering laws or serve as an independent source of energy. (B) General Standards; 1. Type of Tower: The tower component of any small wind energy system shall be one that is recommended and certified by the manufacturer. 2. Tower Color: Small wind energy system towers shall maintain a galvanized steel finish, unless Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standards require otherwise. The zoning administrator may allow a property owner, who is attempting to conform the tower to the surrounding environment and architecture, to paint the tower to reduce its visual obtrusiveness. A photo simulation may be required by the zoning administrator. 3. System Height: Page 5of9 (a) System height is defined as the vertical distance measured from average grade at the base of the tower or other supporting structure, whether mounted on the ground or on a rooftop, to the highest point of the turbine rotor or tip of the turbine blade when extended to its highest elevation. Parcel Size (Acres) Maximum System Height U to 1.00 80 eet Greater than 1.00 100 feet (b) A small wind energy system may exceed the height limitations listed in this section if a special use permit has been obtained by the property owner. (c) The applicant shall provide evidence that the proposed height of the small wind energy system does not exceed the height recommended by the manufacturer or distributor of the system. 4. Setbacks: The small wind energy system shall beset back a distance at least equal to one hundred ten percent (110 %) of the height of the wind energy system from all property lines, and roadways. The setbacks for a small wind energy system may be reduced if a special use permit has been obtained by the property owner. Setbacks established in this section or through a special use permit shall supersede any other setback requirement in the zoning ordinance. S. Ground Clearance /Safety: The minimum distance between the ground and any protruding blades utilized on a small wind energy system shall be 20 feet, as measured at the lowest point of the arc of the blades. The lowest point of the arc of the blade shall also be twenty (20)feet above the height of any structure within one hundred fifty (150)feet of the base. The supporting tower shall also be enclosed with a 6-foot tall fence or the base of the tower shall not be climbable for a distance of 12 feet. 6. Number of Towers: More than one tower may be permitted on an individual piece of property provided that all setback requirements have been met. 7. Noise: The wind energy system shall not exceed 60 decibels (dBA), as measured at the closest property line, except during short -term events such as severe windstorms. 8. Lighting: No lighting shall be incorporated on the tower or wind turbine unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other appropriate authority. 9. Advertising: Signs, writing, pictures, flags, streamers, or other decorative items that may be construed as advertising are prohibited on wind energy systems, except as follows: (a) Manufacturer's or installer's identification on the wind turbine, and (b) Appropriate warning signs and placards. 10. Speed Controls: A small wind energy system shall be equipped with manual (electronic or mechanical) and automatic overspeed controls to limit the blade rotation speed to within the design limits of the small wind energy system. 11. Electric Utility Notification: The applicant shall provide evidence that the provider of electric utility service to the site has been informed of the applicant's intent to install an interconnected customer -owned electricity generator, unless the applicant intends, and so states on the application, that the system will not be connected to the electricity grid. Page 6of9 12. Use: A small wind energy system shall be considered an accessory use. The applicant shall provide information demonstrating that the small wind energy system will be used primarily to reduce on -site consumption of electricity. 13. Wind Monitoring or Temporary Meteorological Towers: Small wind energy systems shall comply with the following: (a) A wind monitoring meteorological tower with an anemometer and other wind measuring devices may be installed with the issuance of a zoning permit for the purpose of monitoring wind and other environmental conditions relevant to sitting wind energy systems and used to determine how much wind power a site can be expected to generate. The zoning permit shall be valid for a period of one year. (b) No wind monitoring meteorological tower for small wind energy systems may rise more than the allowable height of the proposed small wind energy system and shall meet the setback requirements in Sec. 30- 87 -6(B)4 of this ordinance. 14. Removal of Defective or Abandoned Small Wind Enerav Systems: (a) Each year following the issuance of a zoning permit for a small wind energy system, the owner of such small wind energy system shall submit to the Zoning Administrator an affidavit that verifies continued operation of the wind turbine use and compliance with all requirements of this ordinance and other applicable regulations. Failure to submit required documentation shall result in the Zoning Administrator considering the small wind energy system abandoned. The owner of the small wind energy system shall remove the small wind energy system within ninety (90) days of receipt of notice from the County instructing the owner to remove the abandoned small wind energy system. (b) Any small wind energy system and micro wind energy system found to be unsafe or inoperable by the building official shall be repaired by the owner to meet federal, state and local safety standards or removed within ninety (90) days. 15. Compliance with Other Regulations: Small wind energy systems shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. SECTION 30 -88. Accessory Uses and Structures (A) As defined in section 30 -28, accessory uses and structures may be commonly found and associated with principal use types. Principal uses which are allowed by right or by special use may include accessory uses and activities, provided such accessory uses and activities are appropriate and incidental to the principal use, and provided they are designed and located in accord with the intent and provisions of this ordinance. Sec. 30 -88 -1. Accessory Uses: Agricultural Use Types. (A) Agricultural use types may include the following accessory uses, activities or structures on the same site or lot: Page 7of9 5. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than 15 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district. Sec. 30 -88 -2. Accessory Uses: Residential Use Types. (A) Residential use types may include the following accessory uses, activities or structures on the same site or lot: B. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than 15 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district. Sec. 30 -88 -3. Accessory Uses: Civic Use Types. (A) Civic use types may include the following accessory uses, activities or structures on the same site or lot: 7. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than 15 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district. Sec. 30 -88 -4. Accessory Uses: Office Use Types. (A) Office use types may include the following accessory uses, activities or structures on the same site or lot: 7. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than 15 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district. Sec. 30 -88 -5. Accessory Uses: Commercial Use Types. (A) Commercial use types may include the following accessory uses, activities or structures on the same site or lot: 6. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than 15 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district. Sec. 30 -88 -6. Accessory Uses: Industrial Use Types. (A) Industrial use types may include the following accessory uses, activities or structures on the same site or lot: Page 8of9 9. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than I5 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district 2. That these amendments shall be in full force and effective from and after the date of their adoption. On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Church NAYS: Supervisor Elswick 111 " 944 cc: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning Page 9of9 ACTION NO. A- 030811 -2 ITEM NO. E -2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: March 8, 2011 Request for authorization to execute Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Roanoke County Economic Development Authority (EDA) and Edward Rose Properties, Inc. (Attachment A) and appropriate $100,000 from the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), Catawba Magisterial District Doug Chittum Economic Development Director B. Clayton Goodman III County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Edward Rose Properties (the Company) desires to construct a new mixed use commercial development with potential uses including a hotel, office, medical buildings and multi - family structures on 31.4 acres of land off of Cove Road (Attachment B). The company plans to invest a minimum of $20,000,000 by December 31, 2017. As part of the project, the Company needs to construct certain public infrastructure improvements including water and sewer extensions with an estimated value of $225,000, a new public access road and intersection improvements from and along Cove Road and the new development and a right turn lane on Cove Road at the intersection of route 419. Of special note is the proposed water line extension. This extension will serve as a critical link in the eventual interconnection of water lines in the vicinity, thereby improving service for the nearby citizens of Roanoke County, and it is also consistent with the long range capital plan of the WVWA. In recognition of this, the WVWA will contribute $100,000 to the County, and the County will contribute $100,000 from the Public Private Partnership account to the EDA to provide a $200,000 Public Infrastructure Incentive Grant to the Company. The Grant will be paid to the Company by the EDA within thirty days of final Page 1 of 3 construction of the water line extension, and acceptance of the public infrastructure improvements by the WVWA. The Board of Supervisors and the EDA desire to promote and encourage economic development and vitality of Roanoke County and the region through the construction of new businesses in order to provide increased employment and corporate investment in the County. Therefore the County and the EDA will award up to a $300,000 Economic Development Incentive Grant to the Company after one or more commercial buildings have been constructed and occupied within the development. The Grant will be based on the amount of New Tax Revenue realized by the County from this new development. New Tax Revenues are defined as Real Estate tax, Business Professional Occupational License (BPOL) taxes, Business Personal Property and Transient Occupancy taxes. If the New Tax Revenues are less than $300,000, then the Grant will be less, and will only be calculated using the actual new taxes generated by the project. The Company may request a yearly Grant for any two calendar years from tax years 2013, 2014 2015 2016 or 2017. If no commercial buildings are built within this time frame, no Grant will be awarded. No new tax revenue from the residential multi - family units will be considered when calculating any potential Grant. FISCAL IMPACT: The $100,000 from the County for the Public Infrastructure Incentive Grant will be allocated from the Economic Development Public Private Partnership Account so no new funds will need to be identified. The WVWA will contribute $100,000 to go towards the public infrastructure incentive grant and these funds will need to be appropriated. The Economic Development Incentive Grant will be an amount equal to new tax revenues realized by the project so the Company will be "reimbursed" by foregone New Tax Revenues and appropriated in future budgets. ALTERNATIVES: Alternative One: Authorize the execution of the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Roanoke County EDA and Edward Rose Properties, Inc. and appropriate $100,000 from the Western Virginia Water Authority for the public infrastructure incentive grant. Alternative Two: Do not authorize the execution of the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Roanoke County EDA and Edward Rose Properties, Inc. or the appropriation of funds from the WVWA. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative One - Authorize the execution of the Performance Agreement between Roanoke County, the Roanoke County EDA and Edward Rose Properties, Inc. and appropriate $100,000 from the Western Virginia Water Authority for the public infrastructure incentive grant. Page 2 of 3 VOTE: Supervisor Church moved to approve the staff recommendation. Motion approved. cc: Doug Chittum, Director of Economic Development Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance Page 3of3 Yes No Absent Ms. Moore � ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer � ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora � ❑ ❑ Mr. Elswick � ❑ ❑ Mr. Church � ❑ ❑ cc: Doug Chittum, Director of Economic Development Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance Page 3of3 ACTION NO. A- 030811 -3 ITEM NO. E -3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 8, 2011 AGENDA ITEM: Request for approval of an amendment to the Roanoke County Investment Policy SUBMITTED BY: F. Kevin Hutchins Treasurer APPROVED BY: B. Clayton Goodman III County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County Of Roanoke's Investment policy was first established in 1987. We consider the investment policy to be a Living Document and subject to revision due to the ever changing investment market. The policy has been changed on six different occasions with the last revision occurring in 2007. The last change occurred when the U.S. Investment markets had a long period of positive interest rates for short -term Government Securities and money market funds, which actually had higher interest rates than those of long -term investments. This advantageous environment ended in 2008 following the collapse of the mortgage lending sector. The fallout from the reversal created a prolonged time small returns that have crossed into the banking sector and subsequently into money market fund yields. This has affected overnight funds held with our local bank that serve to boost our returns by utilizing all of our cash. To offset these declines, it has become necessary to utilize the Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) which is a AAA rated fund run created in 1981 run by the State. We have used this fund for many years and it is very effective with short term yields. However, the language within the investment policy is conflicting and outdated. We allow Page 1 of 2 for up to seventy -five percent (75 %) of our total funds to be placed within the LGIP, but left language which limited that same seventy -five percent (75 %) to be no more than $15,000,000. This language has been carried over through subsequent policy changes since the early 1990's without regard to our total portfolio value which is four to five (4 to 5) times larger today. At this time, we request that we strike the limitation of $15,000,000 and allow the allocation percentage of seventy -five percent (75 %) to remain on its own merit. The County is presently only limited by our own Investment policy as to the specific allocation that we allow ourselves to invest into this category, since the stated investments are authorized under Section I B -8 , and 2 A -1 of our own investment policy as allowed by Sec. 2.2 -4501 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. By changing this outdated restriction, we will allow increase the return of our short term funds in this unfavorable market without incurring any additional risk. FISCAL IMPACT: Adopting the change to the Investment policy will increase the interest earning potential of County funds. There will be no negative impact. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Treasurers Office and Staff recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Investment Policy. VOTE: Supervisor Flora moved to approve the staff recommendation. Motion approved. cc: F. Kevin Hutchins, Treasurer Page 2 of 2 Yes No Absent Ms. Moore � ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer � ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora � ❑ ❑ Mr. Elswick � ❑ ❑ Mr. Church � ❑ ❑ cc: F. Kevin Hutchins, Treasurer Page 2 of 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 RESOLUTION 030811 -4 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM H- CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for March 8, 2011, designated as Item Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6 inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes — February 22, 2011 2. Resolution adopting guidelines for the 2011 Redistricting Process of Roanoke County, Virginia 3. Acceptance of Aston Lane into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System 4. Acceptance of Glen Haven Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System 5. Request for appointments of representatives to the Roanoke County Community Policy Management Team (CPMT) 6. Confirmation of appointment to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals (Fire Code Board of Appeals) On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church NAYS: None A C Y TESTE: Deborah C. Jacks Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 2 of 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 RESOLUTION 030811 -4.a ADOPTING GUIDELINES FOR THE 2011 REDISTRICTING PROCESS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, on February 22, 2011, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County held a public hearing to receive public comments on developing guidelines for the redistricting of Roanoke County in accordance with the decennial census; and WHEREAS, notice of this public hearing was published in the Roanoke Times, the Salem Times Register, the Vinton Messenger and the Roanoke Tribune; and written notice was sent to numerous civic organizations; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors finds that the following procedures shall guide the 2011 redistricting process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That Roanoke County shall continue to be divided into five single- member election districts; and 2. That the Town of Vinton should be contained entirely within one district; and 3. That each district will have equal population based upon the 2010 Census, with no more than a plus /minus five percent (5 %) deviation between districts; and 4. That each district should reflect "communities of interest" taking into consideration rural, suburban and urban interests, as well as income and neighborhood characteristics; and that election districts should attempt to conform with high school attendance zones; and Page 1 of 2 5. That election districts should be compact and contiguous, and unusual elongations or irregularity of boundaries should be avoided; and, 6. That election districts should have clearly definable and distinguishable boundaries such as streets, rivers, streams, drainage features, or other permanent physical features shown on official maps; and, 7. That racial or language minorities should be identified and located for purposes of establishing election districts and complying with the Voting Rights Act; and, 8. That one or more 2011 redistricting plans for Roanoke County shall be prepared by Roanoke County Registrar, Deputy Director of Planning, and County Attorney; and said plans shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for its review, consideration and adoption. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church NAYS: None A C PY TESTE: Deborah C. Jacks Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Judith Stokes, General Registar Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning Page 2of2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 RESOLUTION 030811 -4.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF ASTON LANE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Form AM -4.3, 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 representative for VDOT has advised this Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Virginia Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements; and WHEREAS, the County and VDOT 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 VDOT to add the street(s) described on the attached Additions Form AM -4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1 -229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, after receiving a copy of this resolution and all outstanding fees and documents required of the developer, whichever occurs last in time. 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 Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Page 1 of 2 On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, church NAYS: None A CO Y TESTE: Deborah C. Jacks Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development Brian Epperly, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 030811 -4.b adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on Tuesday, March 8, 2011. Deborah C. Jacks6/ Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 2 of 2 In the County of Roanoke ■ . ■ ■ ■ M . • . ■ . w w . . ■ ■ . . r . . . • . . . . r r ■ ■ . r r ■ r . . . . w . w . * . w . . . * * . . ■ * * ■ . ■ . • r • r ■ r . r . w . ............. w . r r . r . By resolution of the governing body adopted March 8, 2011 The following YDOT Form AM- -4.3 is hereby attached and incorporated as part of the governing body's resolution for changes in the secondary system of state highways. A Copy Testee Signed (Coitnty Official) • ° Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision Morgan's Glen Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition 'rhe following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required; is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.1 -229 Street Name and/ot Route-Number Aston Lane, State Route Number 1479 Old Route Number: 0 0 From: Int. of Route 676, Back Creek Road To: End, Cul -de -sac, a distance of: 0,33 miles, Recordation Reference: P.B. 24, PG. 31 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 feet VD01' Form AM -4.3 (4/20/2007) Mainrenunce nivisiun Date of Resolution: March 8, 2011 Page 1 of 1 RT 220 VICINITY • MAP . NORTH ,,. - \ =3IM'4r'[ 17.33' OWN r& ACC W 0 � Oar 4'00" E 3 4 a• a& o'er, s r n UPI 1 pall; DRANOYM - :. LOT 7 / ,� l • �/ • 3.551 ACRES n1► 2a o4- S3W&3'31W"r L46' • , + s 1 4'23 '38•w 17,53• W►�0 ' I t.5�3 ACREg. I s - - -- -- ~�'- 9tf'it'44'1Y �� -� � '���► � so9•sa' a 1w aa.14' O t t- - W7 A-4A Z, RES *0' allr4rP 113.42'--- op {' r`r41'34`1r 33 4.74 1 — r .r .� • K1 .._�� I Pa �1 5 t . 211' M. 00 10. ¢W1�04 4 wwM WATM t M 13 14"W 6"2 I 11 I MAXPAL ORM CtK.EXpC i 4 .rC4 I '' 28.04 x • 2_ f I 9 4;" - J l � �� �� r E �O T I PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION LENGTH RIGHT OF WAY ROADWAY WIDTH 1 SERVICES Miles Feet Feet Houses Astdn Lane -from the intersection - with Back Creek Road (VA Sec. Rte # 676) to Its cul -de - sac 0.33 50 18 3 ROANOKE COUNTY Morga n's Glen DEPARTMENT OF Acceptance of Aston Lane into the Virginia COMMUN DEVELOPMENT Department of Transportation Secondary System. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 RESOLUTION 030811 -4.c REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF GLEN HAVEN DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Form AM -4.3, 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 representative for VDOT has advised this Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Virginia Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements; and WHEREAS, the County and VDOT 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 street(s) described on the attached Additions Form AM -4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1 -229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, after receiving a copy of this resolution and all outstanding fees and documents required of the developer, whichever occurs last in time. 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 Residency Administrator for VDOT. Page 1 of 2 On motion of Supervisor Altize r to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Elswick, Church I A 1 I" A abPY TESTE: D C. Jacks L/ Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development Brian Epperly, Transportation Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 030811 -4.c adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on Tuesday, March 8, 2011. C164a� ""5eb orah C. Ja ks Cl Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 2of2 In the County ----------------- r . w . r . . . ■ . r r . ■ . w . . County 9f . of . r ■ . r r r r . r . r ■ ■ ■ . ■ . ■ ■ ■ r ■ --- w ■ ■ . ■ r ■ ■ r w . w . ■ . r ■ r By resolution of the governing body adopted March 8, 2011 The following VDOT Form AM-4.3 is hereby attached and incorpor d as p art of the governing body's resolution for changes in the secondary system of state highways, A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): 1 0. Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Hig p � Y Project /Subdivision Glen Haven Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.1 -229 Street Name andios Route NuMbe[ Glen Haven Drive, State Route Number 1487 Old Route Number: 0 i From: Int. of Route 780, Cove Road To: End, Cul -de -sac, a distance of: 0.09 rnifes. Recordation Reference: P.B: 29, PG. 142 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 feet VDDZ' Form AM -4.3 (4/2012007) Muinten:anc;e Division Date of Resolution: March 8, 2011 Page l of 1 North COVE G F + . VICTi TY .MAP . NORTH J J ► �v � f ~ _ z1 r y`► "'i - �� 24 ,l AL k LOT �. a•25s ll S � ! • ew nn I n rn I •n mow• - • ""• W~ • ~ T7 + PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN DESCRIPTION LENGTH RIGHT OF WAY ROADWAY VVIDTH SERVICES Miles Feet Feet Houses Glen Haven Drive -from the intersection with Cove Road , N.W. (VA Sec. Rte # 780) to its 0.09 40 28 18 cul -de -sac. a ROANOKE COUNTY _ Glen Haven DEPARTMENT OF Acceptance of Glen Haven Drive into the Virginia COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT p � Department of Transportation Secondary System, �www R ,,..AA V 'fffl` GEA4 u AP 0.21. ti - FA s L , i - -- 3 `'%%Frl g O� 1 L0] Lot I 0.. AC J J ► �v � f ~ _ z1 r y`► "'i - �� 24 ,l AL k LOT �. a•25s ll S � ! • ew nn I n rn I •n mow• - • ""• W~ • ~ T7 + PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN DESCRIPTION LENGTH RIGHT OF WAY ROADWAY VVIDTH SERVICES Miles Feet Feet Houses Glen Haven Drive -from the intersection with Cove Road , N.W. (VA Sec. Rte # 780) to its 0.09 40 28 18 cul -de -sac. a ROANOKE COUNTY _ Glen Haven DEPARTMENT OF Acceptance of Glen Haven Drive into the Virginia COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT p � Department of Transportation Secondary System, ACTION NO. A- 030811 -4.d ITEM NO. H -5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 8, 2011 AGENDA ITEM: Request for appointments of representatives to the Roanoke County Community Policy Management Team (CPMT) SUBMITTED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell Assistant County Administrator APPROVED BY: B. Clayton Goodman III County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: There is currently a vacant position for a private provider representative on the Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT). The CPMT has solicited applications from private providers and recommends that Dr. Suzanne Bentley, Executive Director of Depaul Community Services, be appointed to fill the vacant volunteer position. Also, the Courts Services Unit of the 23 District has requested that Andrea Scott, Probation Office Senior be appointed as an Alternate Representative. The appointment of alternate representatives ensures that a quorum will be present in meetings as required. Both of these appointments are in accordance with the CPMT bylaws. It is staff's recommendation that the Board of Supervisors approve the appointments of Dr. Suzanne Bentley as Private Provider Representative and Andrea Scott as Alternate Representative for the Court Services Unit to the Roanoke County Community Policy and Management Team. VOTE: Supervisor Altizer moved to approve the staff recommendation. Motion approved. cc: Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Patience O'Brien, Assistant Director of Social Services Yes No Absent Ms. Moore � ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer � ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora � ❑ ❑ Mr. Elswick � ❑ ❑ Mr. Church � ❑ ❑ cc: Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator Patience O'Brien, Assistant Director of Social Services ACTION NO. A- 030811 -4.e ITEM NO. H -6 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 8, 2011 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of appointment to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals (Fire Code Board of Appeals) SUBMITTED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: B. Clayton Goodman III County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals (Fire Code Board of Appeals) ➢ The four -year term of Wilmore T. Leffell expired on December 12, 2010. At Supervisor Flora's request, the Clerk to the Board contacted Mr. Leffell, who expressed his willingness to serve an additional term. Confirmation of this appointment was placed on the Consent Agenda. VOTE: Supervisor Altizer moved to approve the staff recommendation. Motion approved. Yes No Absent Ms. Moore � ❑ ❑ Mr. Altizer � ❑ ❑ Mr. Flora � ❑ ❑ Mr. Elswick � ❑ ❑ Mr. Church � ❑ ❑ cc: Joel Baker, Building Commissioner AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 RESOLUTION 030811 -5 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's 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 iden'ti'fied 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 Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Elswick A cnRnr - rES - rE: Deborah C. JacksV Clerk to the Board of Supervisors 9. Micro wind energy systems that project no more than I5 feet above the highest point on the structure and complies with the height requirement of the zoning district 2. That these amendments shall be in full force and effective from and after the date of their adoption. On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Moore, Altizer, Flora, Church NAYS: Supervisor Elswick 11 " 944 cc: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning Page 9of9