Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/9/2014 - RegularRoanoke County Board of Supervisors December 9, 2014 NOTE: There will not be a 7:00 p.m. evening session as no public hearings are scheduled. INVOCATION: Reverend Joseph "Joe" H. Klontz, Jr. Northview United Methodist Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG Disclaimer: "Any invocation that may be offered before the official start of the Board meeting shall be the voluntary offering of a private citizen, to and for the benefit of the Board. The views or beliefs expressed by the invocation speaker have not been previously reviewed or approved by the Board and do not necessarily represent the religious beliefs or views of the Board in part or as a whole. No member of the community is required to attend or participate in the invocation and such decision will have no impact on their right to actively participate in the business of the Board." Page 1 of 5 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda December 9, 2014 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for December 9, 2014. Regular meetings are held on the second and fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursday at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. Board of Supervisors meetings can also be viewed online through Roanoke County's website at www.RoanokeCountyVA.gov. Our meetings are closed -captioned, so it is important for everyone to speak directly into the microphones at the podium. Individuals who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005 at least 48 hours in advance. Please turn all cell phones off or place on silent. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS Recognition of Paramedic/Firefighter David Jones of Fire and Rescue for having received a Governor's EMS award for Outstanding Contribution to EMS (Richard E. Burch, Jr., Chief of Fire and Rescue) 2. Recognition of Diana Rosapepe, Director of Library Services, for receiving the Elizabeth M. Lewis Award (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County Administrator) 3. Resolution of appreciation from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to Barry L, Tayloe, Deputy Sheriff -Major, upon his retirement after more than thirty-three (33) years of service (Charles Poff, Sheriff) Page 2 of 5 D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on the results of the 2015 General Reassessment (William E. "Billy" Driver, Director of Real Estate Valuation) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to grant an additional half-day Christmas Holiday on Wednesday, December 24, 2014 (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County Administrator) 2. Resolution directing the County Administrator to review various policies, practices and procedures, assess their effectiveness and to report his findings and recommendations (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) 3. Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia opposing the Mountain Valley Pipeline (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) 4. Resolution electing and certifying the method for reimbursement of revenues to the Commonwealth of Virginia for fiscal year 2014-2015 (current fiscal year) (W. Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCE -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission 1. The petition of Morgan Ventures, LLC to obtain a Special Use Permit for a broadcasting tower (cell tower) approximately 195 feet in height in a C-2, High Intensity Commercial, District on approximately 1.00 acre, located at 4247 Bonsack Road, Vinton Magisterial District 2. The petition of Roger and Deborah Rardin to rezone an approximately 8.00 acre portion of an approximately 19.44 acre parcel from 1-2, High Intensity Industrial, District to R-1, Low Density Residential, District and to remove a proffered condition from the 11.44 acre portion of the property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, District, located west of the Norfolk Southern Railroad near the 5000 block of Poor Mountain Road and north of Bydawyle Road, Catawba Magisterial District G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES Ordinance appropriating $542,611 for the Department of Social Services Building Renovation Project (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance; Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator) Page 3 of 5 H. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the granting of a non-exclusive easement, which varies between twenty (20) and thirty (30) feet in width, to Verizon Virginia LLC on property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors (Tax Map No. 027.13-04-01.0000) for the purpose of an underground communication system (Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services) 2. Ordinance authorizing the vacation of an unimproved right-of-way shown as Nelms Lane on the Map of Airlee Court Annex in Plat Book 2, page 103, of the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office, said right-of-way located in the Hollins Magisterial District (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) APPOINTMENTS 1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee (appointed by District) 2. Economic Development Authority (appointed by District) 3. Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Commission (appointed by District) 4. Social Services Advisory Board (appointed by District) J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY 1. Approval of minutes — October 14, 2014 2. Resolution establishing the meeting schedule for the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for calendar year 2015 3. Confirmation of appointments to the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority 4. Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $4,828 from the Virginia Department of Fire Programs to the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department for the repair of the existing burn building 5. Request to approve the loan of a 1990 Chevrolet Police vehicle for display at the Virginia Museum of Transportation Page 4 of 5 K. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS L. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Outstanding Debt M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. Charlotte A. Moore 2. Al Bedrosian 3. Joseph B. "Butch" Church 4. P. Jason Peters 5. Joseph P. McNamara N. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to provide the National Incident Management System (NIMS) overview (Richard E. Burch, Jr., Chief of Fire and Rescue) O. CLOSED MEETING, pursuant to the Code of Virginia as follows: 1. Section 2.2.3711.A.3 Discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for a public purpose, or the disposition of publicly held real property, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the Board of Supervisors (419 Library) P. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION Q. ADJOURNMENT Page 5 of 5 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Recognition of Paramedic/Firefighter David Jones of Fire and Rescue for having received a Governor's EMS award for Outstanding Contribution to EMS SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Richard E. Burch Jr. Chief of Fire and Recue Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The 2014 Governor's EMS Award winners were recently announced at the 35th Annual Governor's EMS Awards Ceremony in Norfolk, Virginia. Governor Terry McAuliffe recognized ten (10) outstanding EMS providers and organizations from across the Commonwealth for their excellence in EMS and dedication to the system. The awards were presented in conjunction with the Virginia Department of Health's Office of Emergency Medical Services 35th Annual Virginia EMS Symposium. This week long training event is the largest EMS training event in the State and one of the largest in the nation. The symposium welcomes more than 1,800 providers from across the Commonwealth and issues approximately 25,000 hours of continuing education credits. "In the last 35 years, the Virginia EMS Symposium has offered an incredible educational opportunity to thousands of EMS providers Statewide, which has helped to shape Virginia's EMS System into one of the largest and best in the nation," said Gary Brown, Director, Office of EMS. "This incredible feat would not be possible without the hard work and talent of the providers recognized during the Governor's EMS Awards ceremony. Their remarkable efforts to serve the citizens of Virginia and better the EMS System are exceptional and we're proud to honor them with the highest award given at the state level. Congratulations to this year's Governor's EMS Award winners! You have set the bar high for excellence in EMS." Page 1 of 2 Roanoke County Paramedic/Firefighter David Jones received the Governor's EMS Award for Outstanding Contribution to EMS Health and Safety. David Jones lives and breathes physical fitness and wellness, which is evident through his enthusiasm serving as Roanoke County's , Medical and Fitness Coordinator for the past ten (10) years. In 2004, the initial goals of the department were to develop a a fitness program modeled after the International Association of Fire Chiefs and International Association of Fire Fighters' c Wellness Fitness Initiative. Under David's leadership and dedication, Roanoke County's wellness and fitness program has met this goal and is regularly called upon by other agencies to demonstrate its progress. The program requires all Roanoke County fire and rescue personnel to have an individual fitness profile, which is designed to help achieve personal goals. David has shown great commitment to helping all of Roanoke County Fire and Rescue to be as healthy and physically fit as possible, so that they can provide high quality service to their patients. David Jones' significant contributions to Virginia's local, regional and state EMS system are exceptional and greatly valued in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C-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: December 9, 2014 Recognition of Diana Rosapepe, Director of Library Services, for receiving the Elizabeth M. Lewis Award Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Diana Rosapepe, Director of Library Services for Roanoke County since 2001, has been selected by her Statewide peers to receive the Elizabeth M. Lewis award for 2014. "Libby" Lewis was the longtime head of the Library and Network Development Division (LDND) of the Library of Virginia. During her career, she was an unwavering and enthusiastic proponent of public libraries. After her retirement, the Virginia Public Library Directors Association created the Elizabeth M. Lewis Award in 2009 in her honor. It is a Statewide award, given annually as a way to recognize the library director that best exemplifies the "enthusiasm, nurturing spirit, and love of libraries" that characterized Libby's career. Any library director in Virginia is eligible to be nominated but the nomination must come from another of the ninety (90) directors in the State; in this particular case, there were three nominees on the ballot. Voting takes place in the fall, with the award winner being announced in late October. The following is an excerpt of the press release concerning the award to Ms. Rosapepe. "Rosapepe has been Director of Roanoke County's libraries for a number of years. Her nomination and selection was based on her tireless efforts to promote public libraries and their role in the community. Page 1 of 2 According to her nomination, she is known by her staff, patrons and fellow library directors as a hard-working Director with boundless energy and ingenuity. She has emphasized the value and worth of Roanoke County's older buildings while shining the light on what new libraries can and could be for patrons, citizens and community, and economic development." Attached to the Board report is a copy of the press release announcing the award. Page 2 of 2 Roanoke County library director receives Elizabeth M. Lewis Award - R... http://www.roanoke.com/community/swoco/roanoke-county-library-direc... Roanoke County library director receives Elizabeth M. Lewis Award Posted: Tuesday, November 4, 2014 10:00 am The director of the Roanoke County Public Library System, Diana Rosapepe, was awarded the Elizabeth M. Lewis Award on Oct. 23 by the Virginia Public Library Directors Association at the Virginia Library Association meeting in Williamsburg. Rosapepe has been director of Roanoke County's libraries for a number of years. Her nomination and selection was based on her tireless efforts to promote public libraries and their role in the community. According to her nomination, she is known by her staff, patrons and fellow library directors as a hard-working director with boundless energy and ingenuity. She has emphasized the value and worth of Roanoke County's older buildings while shining the light on what new libraries can and could be for patrons, citizens and community and economic development. In October 2009, the state association voted to establish the Elizabeth M. Lewis Award, which recognizes a Virginia library director who most embodies the enthusiasm, nurturing spirit and love of libraries that characterized Libby Lewis. dianarosapepe 102914 sw p01 Diana RosapepeDirector of Roanoke County libraries Over the course of her 33 -year career in libraries, Lewis was involved in nearly every aspect of public and institutional library activity. As a Library of Virginia consultant, she traveled across the state counseling library directors, trustees and board members; attending library dedications and board meetings; and conducting workshops. Lewis retired from the Library of Virginia in 2009. Submitted by Izabela Cieszynski 1 of 1 12/1/2014 11:12 AM ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Barry L. Tayloe, Deputy Sheriff -Major, upon his retirement after more than thirty-three (33) years of service SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 0 Barry L. Tayloe, Deputy Sheriff -Major, retired on November 1, 2014, after thirty-three (33) years and eight (8) months of service. Mr. Tayloe is expected to attend the Board meeting to receive his resolution and quilt. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution. Page 1 of 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO BARRY L. TAYLOE, DEPUTY SHERIFF -MAJOR, UPON HIS RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTY-THREE (33) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Major Barry Tayloe began his service to our community and country in 1969 when he joined the Navy and became a Hospital Corpsman. He was eventually assigned to Charlie Company, 3rd Medical Battalion, 3rd Marine Division and stationed in Okinawa, where he prepared to be deployed to Viet Nam. After four and a half years of service, he left the Navy in 1973 and returned to Roanoke, where he started working with the Roanoke City Sheriffs Office as a Deputy Sheriff Paramedic; and WHEREAS, he also joined the Cave Spring Rescue Squad, where he volunteered his service for over ten (10) years. In this position, he was a pioneer of emergency services and helped create the advanced life support services we know today and was one of the first three (3) paramedics in Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, in 1976, he resigned his position with Roanoke City to pursue a degree in nursing. After obtaining his nursing degree, he worked for the Lewis Gale Hospital as an Emergency Room nurse. It was in this position that he worked with Dr. Richard Fisher to create the valley's first helicopter service, Life Guard 10 and was on the original Board of Directors for the helicopter service; and WHEREAS, on March 1, 1981, he started his career with the Roanoke County Sheriffs Office as a medical supervisor; he was also a member of the Sheriffs Office' SWAT team for ten (10) years. During this same time, he volunteered with the Bent Mountain Rescue Squad and flew as a Flight Paramedic with Life Guard 10; and Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, in 1990, he left the Sheriffs Office and joined the newly created Roanoke County Police Department as a police officer. He returned to the Sheriffs Office in 1992, at the request of former Sheriff Gerald Holt and worked as the Corrections Administrator for almost twenty (20) years. In 2010, he transferred to the Court Services Division as the Division Commander and remained in this position until his retirement on November 1, 2014; and WHEREAS, while he was with the Sheriffs Office, he spearheaded many community programs such as the Easter Bunny Foundation events for children and the St. Francis of Assisi events for service animals. He served on the original committee for the creation of the Western Virginia Regional Jail. He also served on the Roanoke Valley Prevention Council, Unified Hostile Incident Committee, and countless other committees; and WHEREAS, on November 1, 2014, Major Barry Tayloe began his well-deserved retirement with over thirty-three (33) years of service to the citizens of Roanoke County and a Law Enforcement career that spanned over 37 years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to BARRY L. TAYLOE for more that thirty-three (33) years of capable, loyal and exemplary service to Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. D-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: December 9, 2014 Briefing on the results of the 2015 General Reassessment William E. "Billy" Driver Director of Real Estate Valuation APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: �4 V�� - UpvtAxt% ke, etX(�5 �j SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for Billy Driver, Director of Real Estate Valuation, to present the results of the 2015 General Reassessment of Real Property. This presentation is timely as individual property reassessment notices are scheduled to be mailed to County property owners on January 2, 2015. General reassessments are conducted in accordance with 58.1-3201 of the Code of Virginia which states: All real estate, except that which is exempted by law, shall be subject to such annual taxation as may be prescribed by law. All general reassessments or annual assessments in those localities which have annual assessments of real estate shall be made at one hundred percent (100%) of fair market value. The 2015 reassessment reveals an overall market value increase of .83% for residential, multi -family, agriculture, commercial and industrial properties. After factoring in new construction values, the overall increase is calculated at 1.52%. This represents an increase of $1,300,832 in tax revenue for calendar year 2015 at the current tax rate. The total taxable value for 2015 is approximately the same as the 2012 total taxable value. This is the first increase in market value since 2011. The Real Estate Valuation office would like to share some pertinent information, which was used to conduct the appraisal process for 2015: Page 1 of 3 • In 2013, there were 968 qualified sales. In 2014, the number of qualified sales decreased to 856. The decrease in the number of sales from 2013 and 2014 in Roanoke County was consistent with Statewide sales throughout Virginia. The 2013 sales were used as the basis for the 2015 reassessment. • In Roanoke County, the median sale price of a residential home is now $206,000, which represents a slight increase compared to last year. With the slight increase in the median sale price, the hope is that Roanoke County may be seeing an end to the local housing slump. This optimism is also supported by the Roanoke Regional Partnership which states that data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis shows that Roanoke is the second leading growth economy in the Commonwealth. The Roanoke economy is growing faster than more than half of U.S. Metros. Statistical data from the Virginia Association of Realtors, reports that the median sale price for a single family home in Virginia, is now $260,000. • According to MLS data, the number of days on the market for Roanoke County properties is now at eighty-eight (88) days, which is a decrease from the year before. Another indicator that shows buyers are once again entering the market place. The number of foreclosures has dropped dramatically over the past year. According to data collected by Real Estate Valuation staff, there were one hundred and fifty three (153) foreclosures in 2013 and one hundred and thirteen (113) foreclosures in 2014. In Roanoke County, it appears that foreclosures have had minimal impact, on overall market values. For most residential, commercial and industrial property owners, the biggest challenge has centered on borrowing money, for most of the year. There are indicators that the banking industry appears to be thinking of lessening requirements for down payments on homes in the past few months. One key measurement of Roanoke County's economy continues to be the low unemployment rate. Roanoke County's rate remains lower than State and Federal numbers, which enables further stability and recovery in the local market. Roanoke County will be conducting informal real estate appraisal appeals from January 21 through January 28, 2015. Also, the Board of Equalization (BOE) will meet three (3) times from May through November in order to provide an opportunity for citizens to make formal appeals. The dates for the BOE meetings are April 30th, July 30th and November 5th, 2015. Real Estate Valuation staff would also like to make the public aware of the "Tax Relief for the Elderly" program. This program allows citizens who are disabled or over age 65 and who have a combined income of less than $56,566 and have net assets not exceeding $200,000 to receive tax relief in 2015. If the public needs further information on this program, they may contact the Commissioner of the Revenue's office at 772-2046 ext. 114 or 197. Page 2 of 3 The Commissioner of the Revenue's office also administers another tax relief program — the "Real Estate Tax Exemption for Disabled Veterans" program. There are a number of factors a veteran or a surviving spouse must meet to qualify forthis program. Information is available on the Roanoke County website or citizens may contact the Commissioner of the Revenue's office at 772-2046 ext. 114 or 197. The Real Estate Valuation Office also promotes a land use program to anyone whose land is devoted to bona fide agriculture, horticulture, forestry production, or open space and meets qualifying standards. Citizens may contact the Real Estate Valuation Office's Land Use Coordinator at 772-2035 ext. 217 for further details. Page 3 of 3 2015 Reassessment Class Description 2014 Reassessment (Jan 1 land book) 2015 Reassessment (as of 11-23-14) Difference Between Assessments Percentage of Change 2010 1.5% oMulti-Family Residential 1.0% 2011 0.s 01-00 Single Family Residential - Urban 4,083,865,600 4,130,357,400 46,491,800 1.14% 02-00 Single Family Residential - Suburban 2,318,006,400 2,369,579,200 51,572,800 2.22% 03-00 Multi -Family Residential 231,445,000 235,987,200 4,542,200 1.96% 04-00 Commercial / Industrial 1,032,113,100 1,048,554,400 16,441,300 1.59% 05-00 Agricultural / Undeveloped 20-99 Acres 154,880,700 155,790,000 909,300 0.59% 06-00 Agricultural / Undeveloped Over 99 Acres 29,953,800 29,338,800 565,500 -1.89% Sub -total Commercial 1,032,113,100 1,048,554,400 16,441,300 1.59% Sub -total Residential 6,818,151,500 6,921,052,600 102,901,100 1.51% Total $7,850,264,600 $7,969,607,000 119,342,400 1.52% Assessment Increase Attributed To: New Construction $54,057,300 0.69% Market Value $65,285,100 0.83% Total Increase $119,342,400 1.52% Percentage of Increase by Classification Construction @Single Family Residential - Urban 2.5% ■Single Family Residential - Suburban 2.0% 2010 1.5% oMulti-Family Residential 1.0% 2011 0.s oCommercial /Industrial o.o % 2012 -0.5% New -1.0% ■Agricultural /Undeveloped (20-99 Acres) -1.5% New -2.0% @Agricultural / Undeveloped (Over 99 Acres) $54,057,300 New Construction New Construction 2009 $65,244,125 New Construction 2010 $42,752,800 New Construction 2011 $47,129,400 New Construction 2012 $37,583,000 New Construction 20131 $51,975,400 New Construction 20141 $54,057,300 History of New Construction 80,000,000 60,000,000 40,000,000 20,000,000 Ga New Construction 2009 ■ New Construction 2010 o New Construction 2011 ■ New Construction 2012 o New Construction 2013 ■ New Construction 2014 12/2/2014 r- 4--) 0 c - W ru E D ru W W �--� ru r �W/ w ru r V Ln ,--I 0 N O - O LL s O (D O O m 00 O O C'14 Lf) r AW CD o 0 CD CD }+ M V ., N Lf) 00 M O N ., i V = N }' O ca Q � > z � qk 1* %*4*4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-0- N N r r O O O r r N N qk O r N M LL) O O O O O O N N N L N N ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ci O O M M N i N Lq D Cl) LO _ O N O O L a O r N M LL) O O O O O O N N N N N N ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ CD O N M 00 O M `O TOM r TOM {�} i V Q •� p DC H � � V � � - V � H H O E z IM -19 HP.O., WMAIMLEIMMILMI qk O O N M O O O 00 O Cfl O � O N O N O N O N O N O N WMAIMLEIMMILMI qk qk rm 10 ■� W W F r. O m E 4° = M M Cfl M M ti LO LO L r N _O V i LL O O O O O ON M O L O w T T- T C4 O O O O O N N N N N W F qk qk Ln � M L 0 i C N O C) ru � � — O f 'L (� N JN 0- Un _0.— 4� Q) f O ru pp v :3 � N N 4 -L- E C _ L- E O LLQ '— 0 L � � ca.0 E o `� D � 4-3O C Ln � � — 0 L � Q) ■ '� ru Q ru L cn > 0- O r�E a� � co w u w > p � ru `�0 0 pa x O fo w L U')00 z C: Q) 0 — lb4-)— 4- fu L -0 C: 0.Ln ru w Q0 wl N oC Q E — •� Q �' O Ln >� (nru N a o E D - w ca Q) >% N L � ru x r� O ru U �, E rn (1) C: 0 pC N 0 LL LU > O 0 A E O V I* V D CL 4 - x ru O V ru O E O E O W 91 O x LU io x �a >4 +r L CL 0 L no 1■ 01 O L- CL a x ruO .E ru A x 12 1 • 0) 1•. L- 0 r� r� O V 4- O E E. O -W (u E 0 4- 7=m 07 > 4- 0 x LU Tel O 0- ru L O > C: 4-; L O X O OL �Ln •0 M V i O N 4-) O (1) _0 4-J, O 0 -0 � N OL 0 -0 L � 4-) -0 L 01 O 4-) o � Q `.� 0 O p (a O O 4-) U O D (A4-) (� 4-Ja--) . Z3 O O > c: -r- E _ •cn O O _0V J _0 -W L V V E L • E (� CD L 4- oC O 01 L J L O 4- Q -0 0 Q),�� iz-- O O 0 N 04 p,QAAI0 z of Yvaanokr v �aaa REAL ESTATE VALUATION WILLIAM E. (BILLY) DRIVER MEMORANDUM DIRECTOR OF REAL ESTATE VALUATION TO: Members of Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County Administrator Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Amy Whittaker, Public Information Officer Brent Robertson, Budget Director Rebecca E. Owens, Director of Finance Jill Loope, Director of Economic Development Gray Craig, 'Web Content Manager FROM: Billy Driver, Director of Real Estate Valuation DATE: December 9, 2014 SUBJECT: 2015 Reassessment Schedule of Events Enclosed is a copy of the 2015 summary of proposed assessments. I hope that this information will serve as a guide for each of you in answering any questions, which your constituents may have as they receive their "Notices of Real Estate Assessment Change". Below is a list of upcoming events related to assessment changes, informal appeals, and Board of Equalization hearings.. January 2nd, 2015 Notices mailed January 20a]—January 28fll, 2015 Public hearings held by Assessor's staff January 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28 8:30 a.m. — 4:30 p.m. January 24 8:30 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. January 26 12:00 p.m. — 7:00 p.m. January 29'h — February 13a', 2015 Staff review of appeals. April 30", July 30`x, November 5", 2014 Board of Equalization hearings Informal appeals are held within our office and allow the taxpayer to schedule an appointment to meet directly with the appraiser who appraised their property, ask any questions which they may have concerning the appraisal process, and make any appeals which they may have related to the appraisal of that property. Each citizen who appeals is asked to identify his/her appeal complaint as either (A) Assessed higher than market value, or (B) Not assessed uniformly with similar properties in same of similar neighborhoods. The schedule for public hearings does include one evening and one Saturday in order to provide maximum opportunity for appeals by citizens. Each appraiser has the authority during the appeals and review process to adjust any assessments which they do not consider to be indicative of market value or consistent with the assessment of like properties. Any citizen who appeals his/her assessment is notified by mail of a decision to change or not to change his/her property values. If the taxpayer is not satisfied with the outcome of his/her informal appeal, he/she may schedule a hearing with the Board of Equalization. After this, they may choose to make a final appeal to the Circuit Court. We welcome the opportunity to answer any questions which you may have and encourage the taxpayers of Roanoke County to meet with us during our appeals to voice their concerns. if any of your constituents would like to schedule a public hearing or speak with one of our staff members concerning their assessment, please have them call (540) 772-2035 ext. 0. WED/sip attachment(s) P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 • PHONE (540) 772-2040 IT Recycled Paper ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Request to grant an additional half-day Christmas Holiday on Wednesday, December 24, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell 1�)A Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The Commonwealth of Virginia 2014 Pay and Holiday Calendar states that the State will close state offices on December 24, 2014, for four (4) additional hours so State employees can enjoy additional time off to be with their families. The State has also announced that it will be closed for the Christmas Holiday for Thursday, December 25, 2014 and Friday, December 26, 2014, which is the same as the County. As Interim County Administrator, I am requesting that the Board of Supervisors grant an additional half-day holiday to County employees. I am proposing that the Board of Supervisors provide to the County employees an additional half-day holiday on Wednesday, December 24, 2014, with County offices closing at noon. Some employees such as public safety providers will continue to work the full day and such employees will receive holiday leave to be taken at a future date. FISCAL IMPACT: Employees who have to work the four hours would be given an additional four (4) hours of holiday leave to take at a future date so there would be no direct cost for additional pay. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Decline to grant additional Holiday hours. 2. Agree to grant additional Holiday hours. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 2, agree to grant additional Holiday hours. Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution directing the County Administrator to reviewvarious policies, practices and procedures, assess their effectiveness, and to report his findings and recommendations SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County Administrator has requested the Board of Supervisors to consider the adoption of the attached resolution. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board consider the adoption of the attached resolution. Page 1 of 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO REVIEW VARIOUS POLICIES, PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES, ASSESS THEIR EFFECTIVENESS, AND TO REPORT HIS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors desires that the County Government demonstrate the highest of ethical standards; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors acknowledges that personnel matters are the duty and responsibility of the County Administrator and not the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, recent events have called to question the manner in which allegations of inappropriate conduct are reviewed, assessed and acted upon; and WHERAS, the Board of Supervisors, during the recent process of selecting a new County Administrator emphasized their desire that the appointed County Administrator diligently assess the County Government's processes and practices related to ensuring ethical behavior of all County government employees; and WHERAS, the Board recognizes that ethical and fair procedures consistently applied result in improved citizen and employee confidence in their County Government; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, By the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County Administrator is hereby directed to review the various administrative policies and practices related to human resources management in Roanoke County and to assess their effectiveness in ensuring the highest of organizational ethics; Page 1 of 2 2. That the County Administrator shall specifically examine the County's disciplinary procedures as they relate to the performance of County government employees and to assess their effectiveness in ensuring fair, equitable and consistent treatment of all employees; 3. That the County Administrator shall develop a report to the Board of Supervisors highlighting any specific finding, conclusion or recommendation that results from these examinations and, as appropriate, may recommend to the Board for their consideration, any policy action deemed advisable for strengthening the ethical standards of the County Government. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. 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: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia opposing the Mountain Valley Pipeline SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney 1 APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Several Supervisors requested that the County Attorney's office draft a resolution opposing the construction of the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline through Roanoke County. FISCAL IMPACT None ALTERNATIVES: A. Approve the Resolution opposing the pipeline. B. Do not approve the Resolution opposing the pipeline. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None Page 1 of 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA OPPOSING THE MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE WHEREAS, EQT Corporation and NextEra US Gas Assets, LLC ("EQT/NextEra") recently announced the construction of a potential pipeline project; and WHEREAS, the pipeline shall be known as the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) and is expected to transport a natural gas supply from the Marcellus and Utica regions to various Southeast United States markets; and WHEREAS, the MVP is expected to be constructed between Wetzel, West Virginia and Pittsylvania County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the MVP will be governed by the United States Natural Gas Act, which requires a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC); and WHEREAS, as currently proposed, the pipeline will be up to forty-two (42) inches in diameter and will require an approximate seventy-five (75) -foot wide permanent easement (with an additional one hundred and twenty five (125) feet of temporary easement during construction); and WHEREAS, upon information submitted by EQT/NextEra, a possible compressor station or facility may also be located along the pipeline corridor in Roanoke County; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, MVP has initiated the Federal regulatory approval process to construct the pipeline through the FERC's pre -filing review process with the pre -filing of Docket No. PF 15-3-00; and WHEREAS, MVP has presented statements that the engineering aspects will include surveying and evaluating preliminary routing to help determine a final route with the least impact to landowners, cultural resources and the environment; and WHEREAS, MVP sent out letters on September 18, 2014, to affected landowners in Roanoke County stating that the landowner will be contacted by a right-of-way agent to request permission to survey and stake the proposed route; and WHEREAS, the current proposed route includes property owned by Roanoke County, more specifically the Camp Roanoke property (Tax Map No. 083.00-01-16.00- 0000), a longstanding County landmark facility serving our children and youth; and WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department of Roanoke County completed an initial map analysis based upon MVP's own maps and determined that the pipeline corridor would be "literally in the backyard of the Manager's Cabin" and all the buildings would be within approximately a 1,200 -foot radius of the corridor'; and WHEREAS, the current proposed route includes properties in the southwestern portions of Roanoke County, within the Poor Mountain and Bent Mountain communities crossing over the line into Franklin County; and WHEREAS, the proposed route of the MVP would traverse the Bent Mountain Community Planning Area and Glenvar Community Planning Area; 1 Quoting, Roanoke County Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, the proposed route of the MVP would traverse near the Spring Hollow Reservoir, while owned by the Western Virginia Water Authority, is a water source for the region; and WHEREAS, the County's Comprehensive Plan contains vision statements, goals, objectives and implementation strategies on the protection of the County's natural, cultural and scenic resources including the Blue Ridge Parkway and its view sheds, our mountains and ridges, our rivers, streams, floodplains and groundwater, our historic buildings and archaeological sites, and our agricultural, forestall, and rural areas especially in the Bent Mountain and Glenvar Community Planning Areas2; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors opposes the construction of the proposed Mountain Valley Gas Pipeline through Roanoke County, Virginia. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia hereby opposes the proposed route of the Mountain Valley Gas Pipeline that is included in Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC's pre -filing request Docket No. PF 15-3-00 with FERC due to the potential adverse impacts to Camp Roanoke and to the Poor Mountain and Bent Mountain Communities, and the Board further asserts that the adverse impacts to the citizens of County of Roanoke and the public at large outweigh the economic benefit, if any, resulting from the burden placed on public and private property by the construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia hereby directs the County Administrator, or his designee, to transmit this resolution to FERC for inclusion in pre -filing Docket Number PF 15-3-00. Z See, Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan (Revised 2005) Page 3 of 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution electing and certifying the method for reimbursement of revenues to the Commonwealth of Virginia for fiscal year 2014-2015 (current fiscal year) SUBMITTED BY: W. Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell I\D N Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On November 10, 2014, the General Assembly passed HB 5010, which amends Chapter 2, 2014 Acts of Assembly, Special Session I, to include this item. Item 471.30 requires that State aid to local governments be reduced by $30.0 million Statewide in fiscal 2015. Based on this legislation, Roanoke County's calculated reduction is $291,708. A list of the State's aid -to -local -government programs that serve as the basis for calculating Roanoke County's share of the $30.0 million of statewide reductions is attached for review. Item 471.30 requires each locality to elect and certify a reduction option and that the certification form be submitted to the Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) by January 1, 2015. Reduction Options Roanoke County may achieve its reduction by using one of the following methods: 1. Designate that the reductions be withheld from the payments for one or more of the programs in the list provided; 2. Make a reimbursement payment directly to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the full amount of your locality's reductions; or 3. Choose a combination of program reductions and a reimbursement payment. Page 1 of 2 Payment. If making payment directly to the state the reimbursement amount must be paid to the Commonwealth prior to December 31, 2014. Effective January 9, 2015, the State Comptroller will begin withholding rolling stock and recordation tax distributions if the County has not notified DPB of our reduction option. If withholding rolling stock and recordation tax distributions for fiscal year 2015 is not sufficient to fully cover the reduction amount, the remaining balance will be withheld from a local program that DPB deems most discretionary. FISCAL IMPACT The loss of $291,708 of State revenue will be accounted for by transferring existing budget allocations from the Fuel Contingency Reserve and by capturing additional personnel savings. Over the last several months fuel prices have declined appreciably; therefore, it is anticipated that there will be less need to transfer funds from the fuel reserve to operating departments. In addition, first quarter projections of organization -wide personnel savings due to employee turnover, retirements and frozen positions are expected to provide additional savings above the current budget. The County Administrator is authorized to make transfers between expenditure items within the General Fund. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Consistent with prior elections by the Board of Supervisors, staff recommends the election of Payment Option #2: Make a reimbursement payment directly to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the full amount ($291,708) of the County's reduction. Page 2 of 2 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v3 ss Eos ss ss 6.q ss v3 ss 6a 6.q ss 0 0 0 6 00 ss ss .q ss o , � a d � � W loq 000000000000 00000 00 0 �; C V1 l� l� 00 00 N l-: O v In Ov r- 00 M 00 �o r- � W) W) 17, N O1 --� --� N o M 00 � ss V v1 V W kr V W)O M V N 01 l� V kr 9 6 69 N \o 69 69 69 69 69 w 69 69 69 69 00 69 V1 69 69 69 � a y � o U o a 00 00 v o 0 00 00 OA V V M V V M v1 r-: M \o 00 00 N \o Vn �--i V V1 \o O\ V V M V O O l� V N O1 C M N 00 �o O� N r- 00 69 �O m F M M N F� N N V N 00 F N c 00 N O vi O V \o O V O N 00 (7, ON l� M Q\ CQ Mff3 69 01 N M v1 6 O l� V6oq _M _O O co r- 69 N 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 N .--i 69 69 69 69 W W 4� O N C O U % F p a O. O U U 0 a U d H a w U p O" 6JJ O Q" U O O 40. O a � � � O O O O O O O ^ cC cC 18 4 .y U p� U O O O O C7aaaa0000 U o Ud OU O O O O O O O O O a pp ,. 4� 4� 4� 4� 4� 4� 4� 4� 4� y� O O O 4� 4� 4� '� � yC yC yC yC � y yC y y Gtr C� y y y yC O O O O v�wwwwwwwwwv�QQ i�wwwrx o Z7 Z7 � U U V h 0I r � F7 F"i U WaaaiaacQCQwai>¢¢ �, UUti 4� 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� O O O H PAP 00000000000 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 RESOLUTION ELECTING AND CERTIFYING THE METHOD FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF REVENUES TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014-2015 WHEREAS, on November 10, 2014, the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia amended Chapter 2 of the 2014 Acts of Assembly, which included Item 471.30; and WHEREAS, this item reduced State aid to local governments by $30 million in fiscal year 2014-2015; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County's allocated reduction is $291,708; and WHEREAS, Item 471.30 requires each local government in the Commonwealth of Virginia to elect and certify a reduction option and to submit said election to the Department of Planning and Budget on or before January 1, 2015. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1. That Roanoke County elects to make a reimbursement of State funds directly to the Commonwealth of Virginia in the amount of $291,708 for the full amount of Roanoke County's reductions. 2. That this reimbursement payment shall be paid to the Commonwealth on or before December 31, 2014. 3. That to accommodate these reductions in Roanoke County's current budget the County Administrator is authorized to make transfers between expenditure items within the General Fund. Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. F.1-2 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: December 9, 2014 Requests for public hearing and first reading for rezoning ordinances; consent agenda Philip Thompson Deputy Director of Planning Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions; rather, approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for January 27, 2015. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1. The petition of Morgan Ventures, LLC to obtain a Special Use Permit for a broadcasting tower (cell tower) approximately 195 feet in height in a C-2, High Intensity Commercial, District on approximately 1.00 acre, located at 4247 Bonsack Road, Vinton Magisterial District. 2. The petition of Roger and Deborah Rardin to rezone an approximately 8.00 acre portion of an approximately 19.44 acre parcel from 1-2, High Intensity Industrial, District to R-1, Low Density Residential, District and to remove a proffered condition from the 11.44 acre portion of the property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, District, located west of the Norfolk Southern Railroad near the Page 1 of 2 5000 block of Poor Mountain Road and north of Bydawyle Road, Catawba Magisterial District. Maps are attached. More detailed information is available in the Clerk's Office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: 1. That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for January 27, 2015. 2. That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Item(s) 1- 2, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. Page 2 of 2 County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 For Staff Use Onl Rate recei ed: Re eived by: 1 9 TM Applicadon fee: PCtBJA date:, Placards issued: Case Number l / i , is ALL APPLICANTS — -- - Check type of application filed (check all that apply) Aezoning IN Special Use 0 Variance 0 Waiver 0 Administrative Appeal 0 Comp Plan (15.2-2232) Review Apptlicants name/address w/zip Morgan Ventures, LLC phone: Can art: Gerry Sharpe 2435 N. Central Expressway Work: 12TH Fl. Cell #: 540.354 .4100 Richardson, Texas 75080 Fax No.: Magnottis Properties, LLC Phone #: 540.521.2177 Owner's name/address w/zip 38 Lakeland Circle Werk; 540.343.0555 Troutville, VA 24175 Fax No. #: Property Location 4247 Bonsack Road Magisterial District: V Jv T-6 IQ Roanoke, VA. 24012 Community Planning area; % p /\/ Sq C Tax Map No.: 040.18-01-34.00-0000 Existing Zoning: C2 Size of parcel(s): Acres: 1 Existing Land Use: small engine service REZ01VING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT,. WAIVER AND COMMPLAIV Ilsz 2232tVIEW APPLICANTS (Ii/SIWlCP) Proposed Zoning: C2 (no change in zoning requested) Proposed band Use: special Use Permit request for an unmanned wireless telecommunications jacility. Does the parcel meet the in inimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes (3 No 0 IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes 09 No ❑ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes 0 No 91 ACL r.A!?N -_ _ _ _- ;, FVt11VER AM3 AD11t11I1Vl,STRATI_YEf1PPl'riL APPLTCrlN7'S (Y/W�lAJ Variance/Waiver of Section(s) 11 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to is Inc application complete.( Please check it enclosed. AFFLIC:A IU1N WILL AOT BE ACCEP IF ANW)FMf ITk ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE, t1 4 COMMU✓uly Developitiont PJSlW/CP VIAA MIWICP VIAA R/SIW/CP VIAA Consultation S 112" x 1 I" concept plan Applic e Application Metes and bounds description N A Proffers, le Justification p, Water and sewer application X Adjoining pro I hereby certify thatl am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contras cltser and am acting with the know a ge and consent fthe owner. - '� Owner's Signature 2 JUSTWIC iMON FOR REZONING, SPECIAL -US F PERMIT WANE OR COMP PLAN (15.2 2.232) REVIEW REQUESTS,.:. Applicant, Morgan Ventures LLC The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or community plan (15? -2232) review requests to detennine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request flit-thers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. This request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County ordinance by working within the ordinance guidelines to develop a wireless communications facility that offers needed services for the nearby residential communities, businesses and traffic along the US460 corridor. The proposed use furthers the purpose of the zoning district classification by offering one of the variety of commercial services allowed by a SUP. This use is consistent with similar existing uses throughout the county adjacent to major arterial throughfares which serve large segments of the county's population. The site location we propose is a service related use that is required by AT&T to fill a void in services that would allow continuity in coverage for E911 emergency call and coverage for traffic on the US460 corridor and nearby residential and commercial users. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. This project conforms to the general guidelines and policies by not only offering a solution for AT&T in the community but also offering an opportunity for other carriers to enter this market and expand their network without the need to propose any additional new wireless communication facilities. The proposed project is designed with a tower to support the equipment for a total of 4 wireless carriers. Please describe the Impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire mid rescue. There is virtually little to no impact an the subject property as it is zoned C-2 and being used as commercial. The adjoining properties will only be impacted by the visibility of a portion of the tower that is above the trees_ There are numerous trees in the area that will help to block the view of the ground equipment. The only services required for the project are electric and telephone, so there will be no impact on services at all. 3 JUSTMCA'I'1ON FOR VARIANCE REQUEST Applicant The of Zoning Appeals is required by Section 15.2-2309 of the Code of Virginia to consider the following factors before a variance can be granted. please read the factors listed below carefully and in your own words, describe stow the request meeach factor. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. l . The variance shall not be contrary to the public interest and shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of the Zoning, Ordinance. 2. The strict application of the zoning ordinance would produce undue hardship; a hardship that approaches confiscation (as distinguished from a special privilege or convenience) and would prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property. 3. The hardship is not shared by other properties in the same'zoning district or vicinity. Such hardships should be addressed by the Board of Supervisors as amendments to the Zoning f?rdinance. '1.The variance will not be of ibstantial detriment to the adjacent properties or the character of the district. 4 JUSTIFICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REQUEST Applicant Please respond to the following as thoroughly as possible. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. 1. Reasons for appeal: The following information shall be required as part of the Special Use Permit for a Broadcast Tower in addition to standard application requirements. Proposed Site Qualities Utilities that are currently resent on site: Telephone and Electric Utilities required that arc not currently present on site: Exneeted route of linkage: none Estimated noise level in decibels: Air Condition units @ 56dBA, and the Generator @ 68.6 dBA. Broadcast Tower Structure Type: ❑ Monopole 0 Lattice Tower ❑ Guyed Tower ❑ Stealth Design (description) ❑ Other (description) Proposed height of tower excluding antenna: 195 feet Existing height of surrounding tree canopy and/or buildings: estimated at 80-100 feet Construction material and finish of tower: Specific tower location Material: steel Finish: matte Longitude: 3 7° 19 0 .12 7 Latitude: 79 52 ` 37.3G3 Ground Elevation in mean sea level of the proposed tower site: 1,023.5 feet Tower has structural ability to accommodate: ❑ One ❑ Two [A Three other providers. Three additional, total of four. Types(s) of Antenna or Other Devices Attached to Tower ❑ Omni -Directional Antenna ® Directional Panel ❑ Parabolic Antenna ❑ Whip Antenna ❑ Other Material and finish of the proposed antcnna(s). Dimensions of Antenna(s)-height/width/depth Material: plastic & steel Finish: White 7 2. 7 " / 7. 1" / 11.9" 1 These 9 questions are more fully answered on EXHIBIT "A" The following information must he submitted separately in either a written or mapped format. Q Information on how the proposed site relates to the applicant's existing communication system including number of other sites within the Roanoke Valley, and the location of the antenna at each sites see Exh ib -it A, # ® A map designating the specific coverage area(s) desired with any overflow areas denoted separately. (See Exhibit "C") A list, with a map, of all the alternative sites considered or evaluated to serve the area of this proposed tower, including other existing tower sites in the vicinity. This should include any co -locations considered and the specific technical, legal or other reasons the other site(s) were rejected. (See Exhibit "D" sites evalulated and rejected.) 0 Provide conceptual site plan drawn to scale, depicting the location of support structures, equipment enclosures, landscaped areas, fences, lighting, access, limits of disturbed land, average slope of the site, ownership and use of adjoining properties, etc. (Please see the attached EXHIBIT "B" Site Plan drawing) ❑" Provide accurate, to scale, photographic simulations showing the relationship of the proposed broadcast tower and associated antenna to the surroundings. Photographic simulations should include the relationships of any new or modified road or utility corridors necessary to serve the proposed broadcast tower site.. (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "E", Photographic simulations) Provide computerized terrain analysis showing the visibility of the proposed broadcast tower and antenna at the requested height and location. If new or modified road, access or utility corridors are proposed, the terrain analysis shall also show the visibility of these new or modified features. (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "F", Terrain Analysis) pages 1-34.) Nous: These 9 questions are more fully answered on EXHIBIT "A" t hereby certify that: • A11 required submittals to the FAA, as required by Zoning Ordinance Section 30-87-2D.6, have been submitted. • A required on-site balloon or comparable test will be performed on the dates of for the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for , and on the dates of or the Board of Supervisors public hearing scheduled far • 1, the applicant, shall be responsible for all fees associated with the f ling of the application, including the reasonable cost of any independent analysis deemed necessary by the County to verify the need for the new broadcast tower. (Dates o be determined) Signature: Date: 10/22/14 2 RESPONSES ARE BELOW IN RED TO ROANOKE COUNT ORDINANCE See. 30-87-2. Roanoke County • It is the official policy of the county to encourage and promote the collocation of antennas on existing public and private structures within the county. • Permits for new broadcasting towers should only be requested when no other reasonable alternative exists for locating needed antennas. • Tower location, height and design should be at elevations lower than suirounding ridge lines are preferred. The use of stealth designs should be considered for any new broadcasting tower. • Towers and associated antenna not exceeding thirty (30) feet in height and located within any commercial or industrial zoning district shall be permitted by right, subject to certain conditions. Roanoke County Sec. 30-87-2. Broadcasting Tower. (A) Intent: The intent of these provisions is to regulate the placement of new and replacement broadcasting towers within Roanoke County. These provisions provide broadcasting tower applicants, property owners, and all other Roanoke County citizens clear guidance on the official policies and standards of the County. These policies and standards shall be used by applicants as a guide when selecting alternative broadcasting tower sites and broadcasting tower designs within the county. In addition, the county staff, planning commission and board of supervisors shall use these policies and standards, the Roanoke County community plan and the general special use permit criteria found in section 30-19 as a guide for evaluating any future requests for broadcasting towers. In the interest of preserving and enhancing the scenic and natural beauty of Roanoke County it is the goal of the county to achieve a long terra reduction in the number of broadcasting towers within the county, and where possible, to achieve a reduction in the height of existing broadcasting towers throughout the county, with special emphasis on towers located along or near the ridgetops of major mountains and land forms. In addition, it is the goal of the county, where possible, to achieve the relocation of existing broadcasting towers and associated utility and access corridors which have a high visual impact on scenic resources. To this end, the county will work cooperatively with broadcasting tower owners and applicants and land owners to achieve these goals. It is the official policy of the county to encourage and promote the collocation of antennas on existing public and private structures within the county. To achieve this end, the county encourages all wireless communication providers to locate new antennas on existing structures. Permits for new broadcasting towers should only be requested when no other reasonable alternative exists for locating needed antennas. When new broadcasting towers are proposed as a last alternative, the requested broadcasting tower location, height and design should be chosen to protect and enhance the scenic and natural beauty of Roanoke County. Broadcasting tower locations at elevations lower than surrounding ridge lines are preferred. The use of stealth designs should be considered for any new broadcasting tower. It is the intent of the county to fully comply with all of the applicable provisions of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 and other applicable federal and state laws as said laws address and preserve Roanoke County's zoning authority and provide to the communication industry the right and responsibility to provide communication services within their service areas. (B) Applicability: 1. These standards shall apply to all new and replacement broadcasting towers within Roanoke County with the exception that new and replacement broadcasting towers and associated antenna not exceeding thirty (30) feet in height and located within any commercial or industrial zoning district shall be permitted by right provided: a. The proposed tower is a monopole type design; b. The general area of the proposed tower is currently served by above ground utilities including electric power and telephone poles; and c. All other use and design standards for the construction of the broadcasting tower and associated facilities are met. 2. No modification to increase the height, size, type or location of any existing broadcasting tower or associated facilities, excluding antennas, shall be made unless such modification results in the full compliance of the broadcasting tower and facilities with all of the requirements of this ordinance. 3. Antennas may be installed on any existing structure within the county, without the necessity of obtaining a special use permit, provided said antenna docs not meet the definition of a broadcasting tower, does not increase the height of the existing structure more than ten (10) feet, and does not result in the structure and antenna exceeding the maximum structure height for that zoning district. 4. These provisions shall not apply to any temporary broadcasting tower erected for the purpose of system design or testing provided the temporary broadcasting tower is erected for a period not to exceed twenty-one (21) days. In addition, in declared local emergency situations, the county administrator shall be authorized to allow the temporary installation of a broadcasting tower for the duration of the local emergency. A zoning permit pursuant to section 30-9 of this ordinance shall be applied for and approved prior to erecting any temporary or emergency tower. (C) Application requirements: 1. All potential applicants for broadcasting towers shall consult with county planning staff at least thirty (30) days prior to submitting an application for a proposed broadcasting tower. During this consultation the applicant shall present information to the staff on system objectives, proposed coverage areas, and alternative sites considered and rejected. The staff shall provide the potential applicant information on Roanoke County policies and standards for broadcasting towers, and shall discuss with the applicant possible alternatives to broadcasting tower construction. (Meeting was May 29, 2014) 2. In addition to the application requirements contained in section 30-19-2 of this ordinance, all applicants for broadcasting towers shall provide the following at the time of application: a. The location of all other proposed broadcasting tower sites considered and rejected,. and the specific technical, legal or other reasons for the rejection. (No know ledge of any proposed towers.) b. The location of all other possible collocation sites considered and rejected, and the specific technical, legal or other reasons for the rejection.(Sce Exhibit "D", locations considered and rejected before the proposed site was evaluated and approved.) c. Accurate, to scale, photographic simulations showing the relationship of the proposed broadcasting tower and associated antenna to the surroundings. Photographic simulations shall also be prepared showing the relationship of any new or modified road, access or utility corridors constructed or modified to serve the proposed broadcasting tower site. The number of simulations and the perspectives from which they are prepared, shall be established with the staff at the consultation required in section C.I. above. (See Exhibit "E" Photographic Simulation, including locations discussed in C.1. above.) d. A computerized terrain analysis showing the visibility of the proposed broadcasting tower and antenna at the requested height and location. If new or modified road, access or utility corridors are proposed, the terrain analysis shall also show the visibility of these new or modified features. (See Exhibit "F" terrain analysis and Exhibit "E" Photographic Simulation accurate to scale.) e. Information on how the proposed site relates to the applicants existing communication system, including number of other sites within the Roanoke Valley, and the location of the antenna at each site. (See Exhibit "M" which shows how the proposed site relates to existing on air sites, including a list of all the sites in the Roanoke Valley.) f All broadcasting tower applicants shall be required, at their expense to conduct an on- site "balloon" or comparable test prior to the planning commission and board of supervisors hearings on the special use permit. The purpose of this test shall be to demonstrate the potential visual impact of the proposed tower. The dates and periods of these tests shall be established with the applicant at the pre -application consultation. (ane balloon test was performed for the photos for the Photographic Simulation and we will be happy to do additional balloon tests on whatever dates the County selects.) g. Written verification that all required submittals to the FAA as required by section 30- 87-2(D)6 of this ordinance have been submitted. (See Exhibit "J" for verification of FAA filing.) 3. The applicant shall be responsible for all fees associated with the filing of the application including the reasonable cost of any independent analysis deemed necessary by the county to verify the need for the new broadcasting tower. The board of supervisors shall establish these fees, which shall be discussed with the applicant at the pre- application conference. (The applicant understands the possible need for additional services and agrees to pay the cost of such services in a timely manner.) (D) General standards: 1. The maximum height of any proposed broadcasting tower and associated antenna shall be made as a condition of the special use permit, but in no case shall any broadcasting tower and antenna exceed one hundred ninety-nine (199) feet in height. Applicants shall request the lowest broadcasting tower and antenna height necessary to accomplish their specific communication objectives. (The proposed height of 195' is the lowest height required in order to accomplish the specific communications coverage objective. The height of the antennas on the proposed tower is 36 feet lower in elevation to the antennas on the site to the Southwest (site R0406) that it is designed to handoff to; and the proposed site is 56 feet lower than the antennas on the site to the Northeast (site 80422) that it is also designed to liandoff calls to. The difference in elevation is the reason that the 195' height is required. See Exhibit 11K" which shows the ground elevation and how the proposed site relates to the two existing antenna sites. 2. The setback for any proposed broadcasting tower shall, at a minimum, conform to the requirements for principal structures for the proposed zoning district. However, in no case shall the minimum setback from the base of the broadcasting tower to any residential structure on an adjoining lot be less than forty (40) percent of the height of the tower, measured from the closest structural member of the broadcasting tower (excluding guy lines). Guy lines shall be exempt from the minimum setback requirements in side and rear yards for the respective zoning district, but shall comply with the setback requirements for the front yard. (All of the mentioned setbacks have been met and is shown Oil the submitted Site Plaw) 3. The minimum setback fi-om any property line abutting a road right-of-way for any other building or structure associated with a broadcasting tower shall be fifty (50) feet. Such buildings or structures shall be located a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from any other property line. (All of the mentioned setbacks have been met and is shown on the submitted Site Plan.) 4. More than one (1) broadcasting tower shall be permitted on a Iot provided all applicable requirements have been met including setback requirements. (The proposed tower at 195' should be adequate to service this area without the need for any additional towers.) 5. Broadcasting towers shall not be illuminated with any type of lighting apparatus, unless such lighting is a requirement of the FAA or FCC. When lighting is proposed to conform to federal requirement, the county shall contact the federal agency to verify the necessity of lighting, and to determine the minimal amount and type of lighting necessary to comply with federal guidelines. Security lighting, or a "down lighting" design may be installed on buildings and structures associated with a broadcasting tower. In no case shall any lighting violate section 30-94 of this ordinance. (No lighting is needed or proposed, see Exhibit "J" FAA letter and information.) 6. Any proposed broadcasting tower within two (2) miles from any general or commercial airport or located at a ground elevation at or above two thousand (2,000) feet, average mean sea level, shall be referred to the appropriate regional office of the FAA for review and comment prior to filing an application for a special use permit. (Refer to Exhibit "J" FAA letter when reviewing this site.) 7. All broadcasting towers shall comply with any additional requirements established in the airport overlay district in section 30-72 of this ordinance, and the emergency communications overlay district in section 30-73. (All guide lines have been followed and Mr. Rodney Thompson of the Roanoke Public Safety system has determined that this site has no impact on the system. See Exhibit "L" to see comments related to this.) 8. Any broadcasting tower approved shall be structurally designed to carry sufficient loading, and the site approved shall be sized to accommodate the additional equipment necessary for at least three (3) other vendors/providers of communications services in order to minimize the proliferation of new broadcasting towers in the vicinity of the requested site. In addition, by applying and being granted the special use permit, the applicant and the owner of the land agree to make the broadcasting tower and tower site available for additional leases within the structural capacity of the broadcasting tower and at reasonable costs adequate to recover the capital, operating and maintenance costs of the broadcasting tower location required for the additional capacity. (The tower has been designed to support up to three additional providers of communications services, which equals a total of four providers/carriers.) 9. A monopole broadcasting tower design is recommended. The board may approve an alternative broadcasting tower design if it finds that an alternative type of structure has less of a visual impact on the surrounding community and Roanoke County, and/or based upon accepted technical and engineering data a monopole design is not technically feasible. Cost shall not be a criteria for determining broadcasting tower design. (The proposed site consists of a lattice tower because we feel it will have a less visual impact on the surrounding community and the County. The nearby towers are also of a lattice design and the majority of the towers within four miles are also lattice towers. Therefore we feel that the lattice design is consistent with the surrounding area and will blend in best.) 1.0. No broadcasting towers shall be permitted within the critical viewsheds of the Blue Ridge Parkway or Appalachian Trail as shown on any official map designating these viewsheds and pre -approved by the board of supervisors. In addition, no towers shall be proposed within any other designated area of local scenic, historical, ecological and cultural importance as designated and approved by the board of supervisors prior to the filing of a tower application. (The applicant understands that approval will be required by the Blue Ridge Parkway in order to move forward. Applicant will make sure that a representative from the Blue Ridge Parkway can attend a balloon test in order for them to render an informed opinion on the subject site.) 11. By applying and being granted the special use permit, the applicant and the owner of the land agree to dismantle and remove the broadcasting tower and associated facilities from the site within ninety days of the broadcasting tower no longer being use for wireless communications. Dismantling and removal from the site shall only be required after notice by the County. If antennas on any approved tower are relocated to a lower elevation, the tower shall be shortened to the height of the highest antenna. A bond or similar performance guarantee may be required as part of the special use permit approval. Said guarantee will be in an amount sufficient to ensure removal of the tower and all associated facilities and the reclamation of the property and road, access and utility corridors to a condition that existed prior to tower construction. (The applicant acknowledges the requirements of the terms stated here and agrees to comply.) 12. All broadcasting tower structures and associated hardware, antennas, and facilities shall be a flat matted finish so as to reduce visibility and light reflection unless otherwise required by the FCC or FAA. (The tower wi I I be a flat matted finish and has been designed to this specification.) 13. No business signs shall be allowed on the property identifying the name of, or services offered by, any business associated with the broadcasting tower. (Tile applicant agrees to comply with this and will not have any business signs at this site. The only signs will be those required and mandatory by State and Federal agencies, along with a site name and phone number for emergency notice.) (E) General review policies: All special use permit requests for new broadcasting towers, including the replacement or modification of existing broadcasting towers shall be reviewed by the staff, planning commission and board of supervisors on the basis of the following criteria: 1. The extent to which the broadcasting tower proposal conforms to the general special use permit criteria in section 30-19 of this ordinance, and the intent, application requirements, and general standards for broadcasting towers found in these provisions. (The applicant understands and acknowledges these requirements,) 2. The demonstrated willingness of the applicant to evaluate collocation opportunities within the proposed communication service area, and the demonstrated history of the applicant choosing collocation sites within the Roanoke Valley. (The applicant exhausted all options for collocation and only found the owner of the subject property willing to lease enough ground space for a communications site.) 3. The base and top elevation of the proposed broadcasting tower relative to surrounding natural land forms. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, broadcasting tower locations below surrounding ridge lines are preferred. (The elevation of the tower is below the surrounding ridge lines.) 4. Broadcasting tower locations already served by existing roads and utilities are preferred due to the potential detrimental environmental and visual impacts resulting from the construction of new road and utility corridors. (The site is designed to access the from the existing Bonsack Road and will only require a gravel road approximately 160 feet from the existing blacktop.) S. Within the needed service area, the availability of other existing structures that are, based upon independent analysis, of suitable height, design, and location for the needed antenna. (No existing structures in the area were acceptable due to the fact that there is nothing taller than sixty feet.) 6. The visibility of the broadcasting tower from the surrounding community and neighborhood compatibility of the tower as determined by the submitted computer simulations, terrain analysis and balloon or comparable test. (The applicant acknowlccige5 this criteria.) 7. The degree to which the proposed tower location, site design and facilities including fencing, buildings and other ground mounted equipment and new or modified road, access or utility corridors are located, designed and constructed to be compatible with the neighborhood. (Tile applicant acknowledges this criteria.) (Ord. No. 82493-8, § 4, 8-24-93; Ord. No. 102798-12, § 1, 10-27-98) EXHIBIT A RESPONSES TO PRE-APLICATION CHECKLIST QUESTIONS 1 thru 9; 1. The proposed site is a 195' tower with a ground elevation of 1,023.5 feet and relates to the existing on air AT&T sites by filling a void and offering continuity in the coverage along US460 and the surrounding residential neighborhoods and commercial businesses.(see attached map Exhibit B, that shows how this site relates to adjacent and nearby existing sites.) The adjacent handoff site to the southwest is approximately 1.72 miles. This is an American Tower Corporation site consisting of a Lattice Tower 200 feet in height with a ground elevation of 1,058 feet. AT&T is located on this tower at a height of 196 feet, site number is R0406. The handoff site to the Northeast 1.27 miles, is an existing AT&T site known as R0422. This site is an AEP Transmission Tower and AT&T is located at a RAD of 130 feet with a ground elevation of 1,142 feet. 2. See EXHIBIT C, this is a propagation map that shows the specific area that this site is designed to cover. Page 2 of Exhibit "C" shows the specific coverage of the proposed site. Page 3 of Exhibit "C" shows the coverage of the proposed site along with the coverage of the two adjacent sites, which shows the seamless coverage of the three sites. 3. See Exhibit "D" sites evaluated, which consists of a list and map of the alternative sites considered and evaluated to serve the objective of this site. No existing structures in the area could offer anywhere near the height or location to meet the coverage objective. Two existing sites are shown and AT&T is located on one and the other is too close to the first. 4. Please see the attached EXHIBIT "L" Site Plan Drawings (6 pages) which include all the requested information on the site plan page and additional pages of the exhibit. S. Please see the attached EXHIBIT "E", Photographic Simulation. 6. Please see the attached EXHIBIT "F", Computerized Terrain Analysis. 7. Please see the attached EXHIBIT "G", Tower Structure Details. 8. Please see the attached EXHIBIT "H" which includes two photos, one of the tower, a second of the tower and antennas. See EXHIBIT "G" for details and description of the tower. 9. Please seethe attached EXHIBIT "I" which includes antenna and all other equipment specifications. -einZ - L niN - o � am j a - r r N g w O e wpr W aJzmwP'� w z pg'- czz5 W9-9 z 3 o v= U d -einZ - L niN - i -, �i 9 91 I R ag66 Ny. I V a v w G F _ u � ro v IHn-gl NINCVN bL-87-M am j a - �? xw Ea to w `T. O cn a= O cel p�2 2 z �v mtz es G ;Cd✓ - A. - - i -, �i 9 91 I R ag66 Ny. I V a v w G F _ u � ro v IHn-gl NINCVN bL-87-M � t H O \5111 J a T LL�W '> =0 oyw xo - �W'"qZh WhMW'."qZhWhNqliN3aWh�� qliN3- h3�2 ` "BII'IS �i C- qnF.II� :7eq638'°•:j_lj?oLygdpCi g'• '- II� � � �"QYl$Oxt�ie�W� I _ m 'VWMLLiaai F (d m> 03 Al NI `i it ja Iem I �k iC �asa �E m ov `aiIiIIIiiIIII 31 � &$s`go�$aha,& o s Waw —S a o_ a N 3 p3$w:yky: °¢°�E eeggr� PN2 E€}yf�_By o a snoWW ``L8o"+� S°r LAB �iWEoBd.� n a s z G �q^��, •° �B�hMB �n 11F z cn - s� §� o o as J ^ �o& ug3dEC Q R Hd S: u�c�s3°$M3'a"oih§ z 5& n zsa $o?Y = rc N H CDCD z W zj H O:f ZF ' I, O U S� N U� 0 U�. F E. rn 71M8 n � I m�RzvSo m�az�� g Hal - GoVa DRNE �y io T — CS agis 1 aesLi 1 � I � e M nm 12 � w owa 1 aN gip af" LnN� Awa Stx a =� g�w =w Ed Z N S W. - e / nNo a �o nHo / o wm �� Ga ag66 W O g O w sy�a z h V1 O + H � U a a a � a N F u � 0 ro a 6Mp'Qy/bZ-OL-VLOZ - L A3N - 6DID07-/O9SON/sa,nlu8A u0610H - saootl5 I001118A/VLOZ - a6u'MDIO/:A SS:OC:gL IHOVH53 NINSVN VL -6Z -OL �O ,0-0£ ,0-,0£ ,0-,09 'D -,OL /MP'LV/bZ-NL-bLOZ - L AiN - —07 A �/ 1 r� &e p �w rc N Q Cd �> W W < IIII .in �p� oN y NN g Um as b 0 �xry x"e�X K XKX MR I �WH p �1I - z N �I S o H G, F � 4 � � 0 dA uP 10. - .—dq IP]i.L�dA /b L(IT - 5 umP�[�/:A S]:(14:(1L i(INiATA ro 4 NtlTI bL-bT-(IL �O ,0-0£ ,0-,0£ ,0-,09 'D -,OL /MP'LV/bZ-NL-bLOZ - L AiN - —07 A �/ 1 p �w rc N Q Cd �> W W < LU § > - I oN y NN W b 0 MR U - z N � W S o H G, F � 4 � � 0 dA uP 10. - .—dq IP]i.L�dA /b L(IT - 5 umP�[�/:A S]:(14:(1L i(INiATA ro 4 NtlTI bL-bT-(IL ro,�� Cpo W c�.l c o p w zoz- o co - �_ i - 3 - - O Z W �F tY � a p �w LLs ZN Cd W W zo II LU § > - I oN y NN I f v 0 MR ag66 - z N � W S o H G, F � 4 � � 0 dA uP 10. - .—dq IP]i.L�dA /b L(IT - 5 umP�[�/:A S]:(14:(1L i(INiATA ro 4 NtlTI bL-bT-(IL _ Mme -.m-_ _ __-_a_eA/, e -_tea e.AIVA _ ,gym ■ § F§ \ _ §� . g | 0 Q)) ° !§ �� ¥ 2 6 � ~® LL . . �■ kzol \ \ # •o& J\ F - § ! ),_!§2 / - ° • . FO-1���� ° �() � § 7 11 §§ ) / . S!§ (� §) \- !2 � § §(k Lil � � Of �k§ N - \ . ]; ) 3 ■■ \ !§2 § I /.. /a a 2 §� «; o� )) 2 1 _ Mme -.m-_ _ __-_a_eA/, e -_tea e.AIVA _ ,gym aek!> ©-_- \ \ � ƒ§\ §i\ ---------- � _ §§§ ;u§!/ &!!2! §§ §# \ §§2 W 23 2 �f k � § _ §) 1 1 1 1 1-1 §§ § §§2 W § �f k � § _ X- .t " 0 lj� A A A LU LU LL c c c QI CN Cil S M CO CO CO LU rN r4 A A A E E E fn C13 R R lz W1 kn 61 00 to 00 VAEM ir � ��� s -ri, wy. i y �, �' Mir I AE'L VAEM ir C z a c O O w w w w w a uuuuMO Mtun O h M tn a a a ,n w ,n n 0 T u o2f O z_ -0 -0 cc Q o 0-0a CL` 7 7 7 0 n zo = 3= 0 0 0 0 0 0 twtotw6torL 0 m 0 twtotwto�� o� '� 'L '4 "tn 'Ln CO — z W Q 47 Q7 47 Q7 d N vl E E CW Z — — — — — to rn G y., �. }, C C C C C +��+ O 0 > tw d0 tw -0 -0 'O 'O 'O 0 w w u+ v '@ �, w °' '' w aiUA 3 w 3 m 2 c c c v. v d v C 0 cr m a 0 O A) a7 w 41 4-1 +�. +�. +�. O O u [Y u F OLu O (� ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ O O J J z O Q • 0 in c c c O m as C as W C, CC 4- 4F 4- L L L L L w w 0 0 o C .4A t Q z� w w w w w- c V) Ln V) LU c c 0 0 0 0 o o w cc to to qu N .1 rn 0 m m a1 0 r� 00 0 ;t W -i m 00 n n rl cn rn r -i It Ln .-10)0)w0mmmm N Ln H m o m N 0 0 0 0 cD a m 0 rn rn o0 00 0o 00 n m 00 ao Oo 00 Oo 00 Oo Ln m n rn rn z Q1 tr t7i tr Q1 Q1 t7i tT t7i ,. I I I I I I I I CC N 0 rn m rn rn m m In m LD 06 O O LD N m O m CO 00 UD ,-I 0 V N rn rl Or -i In Ln w m N 00 m In -i oo oo In uD r ���� W 00 mNH.00. mmmmmmtnmm r. P- r, r, r, r, rl r� rl r� rl m m m m m m m m co co to Z Z w m ❑ m } w w j > -0 fl0 u �¢ +' w N .? ? Q to D w w LU C a-. i ❑ ❑ @ L DC Q + Oc0 m E txa LA In im OL > a3i u L T L L @ u w O T a 00 tw Ln c0 _r_ c O@ ca +� r u u 7 u C d u m u Z ro C7 v- 4- — ` 0 0 0 O N O 1� O O O� v� 0�t �t m '++ 4A tA C a v r w LM< Q h c m m L m ru a 3 3 L W t0 w +A C 3 w h Ln to = cu Q U W u to T d VI w m V 0 L 2 io d O J C L } @ a u at j u F- O r u J u O , `Ju c � u L ui 14 ' 4A u1 T= C w to d W LU M t� N a d a- a L w O m O-0 0 +a_+ N1 in 00 u V L c w C L N w �[ Y Y a a a ar 1 3 cr m tco o m f0 u o '+ ~ O= 6 E O u m tO m f9 uo d 02) 0 to a+ C u C 11 a_ to 0 E ¢ m u W LL C7 2— X W L u Q www.delorme.com 1 1" = 2,604.2 ft Data Zoom 12-6 Topo North AtnericaTA° 10 2 t r r .Cloverdale 84436 m. \ R4 I I i =a \ ! v v1 ItNn Citi P2 O r j i QB3 ,- ILL R00o7' ,ceR6e S/) `' ` -COU A � ) 4 r 2 ". ] !p f "__ pR� Z r A G ViSTADR cf .-�/} &R5� — S11 a(1� �� ,+ bCCyr .. �'�e4-.towrf :2 f f;4 ♦ -� v 43 DRAkFsrRElk 11' ,.XB)I, hWoodsy� \ r4 >F-gO o ,Y�; R�urlawayVillage �T ,SUMMERFI1 L'1✓CT` %p• \ �P. Rainh4w�Forest ��' ; ®Q`r�! / w APPIe Tree V ageatherston4 o lNts � P� ..AFriD O-rWaterla11 Lake' tiro -,� " .7[ f(nollwaod 220A PACKARD PL .1 o. �Ar ! Bellview Gardens a'�� r G,kti `^ • 0. StePPing?gone J Bryalnt Helghis H _ / 6ECf1 m S0N•1 LN 1 7P , 5 J + SCF' w ead Er-HIB1rTC B / -' 1 ( i hleadew � d al t?leu rain / • ` 22 T • Coyner Mounlaln O'verlaok a f 4 y' 4 p +�' 1SQ00.'��-•a Gc� 3 �� Peachtree �- BRAD LEY LN .o FAW�•E'f w BurnetteiHeaghls j I q n r'Y �y t iyner45pnngs 0� mz h`, COr ; Qy� Jv 584428 The orchartlai } 80422CL VC �V �JGR00`�/ > Apple ood 2 Q �GnoM �yDL O b Bel R 6 �a gelfevue 1 UP Sr ) sleepy Hollow t"rE5VA� ,Ni� as / jl c� Hirntrldge�`fi�fi. 6%( A � ]ffff i4leadovrviety Jy QQ PQq- /r, �`fANGL 'CN NEWFgAR 521 \h Oo �r N8t 'Slt� L co aclon-RC5801 NE 2�� res]o ct Nq- r '1 r • - r Monterey Hills %%R - Pal er Park o R %qQPalmerR dale��f'O r1 ��*�r Galnnla yeti ,� Iry $ J 1r% ch\rA0 4 �tiR¢L-p./� / S evrart Nam Ehfi ld } Q A�L(� nob Crown Castle-2S5''ILattice. Xower Mapleton Felgfith0499 CYNk@ S % NF RWk {FPC (s` -4 H i, err Ca er Helgtric 80406 1q j !R NC �' @ D �,OR I �Bluealone - _ _ 4 O 1 aye SX•o n6fttree Rcar.. r qtr ,.r+i1�55S-S1.SlPPJ. 61 a Hills ckdry Woods aFal- 14hg" Creak ' [• S �+ -ciltton Heights a i •`, -Bratton Lawn Avendaie. � sunrise Heights C Cl�aurel'Terrac� ! zzv iLA(7c'19 �f'�Y ^rFClgf ~_iE se East•Gato Airin tan.court-- SSq rt .I r { fcr a f/ $ S-" I�` �J? �[ \ �! o . r y4 C?VERLOOY RD QoakladdTerrace�lFrti/Tf` > /. - Y30" $,Yr '. Be`I•I,H�e+�i'•� I der. �, y SIISy681 did Wilkins' �f7'02,74y� i`Idlewaod 1' a % ti Ci' stnnebridge Falrn' ilaaksan Peak F �O '-• /, ,_ Henwood 195 , view/ a .. 24 - Y ff p RUDDELL RD m� Ew 4 J Sp rin Grme tL' y2 n, t-• - o-0. ' •,..:, -�D..F. Cj�• x ounfan BIue,Rldge,Helghts f 91& m,ounra Mrl,n g W-C�L'E-VEIAND`AVE 9CF� a� ay NS,S5T on,roo`ir W'Vl iA AVE 02 2 fyRtiR _.q f4 Rp i. .� _r �m tr In 24 �F R0425we11CFp c� n ro_rn - H � w G-'Lindenwood itvio rn h HARDY RD, '4 RDY RD�` Q~/'• u ParkviewfCourt _ Craflon c' k m� �'4. 'm ay T ber``idgeAcres GR 1012 I r <a Waverly 9 Ce g 1a L� Dillon LYaads 1 h P Rr?-212` 2,234.0 ktGt00% C Rerreali npI Center _ / 1QOOe t - \�/ S� h aaa\\ 1. 3P r2,238.e lta to , BriarollH , ' Lt s f -X %'1 C'candldofa002 WYNDHAi•1 iJR' au DaT XL 1AVL� AR�CY I h1� pR pl RD l as9 4by 0� y,�SiOpo 1040y f�050't / SHELI30tIR1V AVF`" S Mont CgR�,fSUNDFRFiRame L AVE T L' \ �� g rY village Heights �Rry ont �.4 Morngsida Sir C r -'J Rlver.Edge - s• Data use subject to license. TN acare i : arr,wu * x x x 0 DeLolme. Topo North America— 10. Nw parvo � n K www.delorme.com 1" 4,166.7 ft Data Zoom 12-0 Mail Processing Center Federal Aviation Administration Southwest Regional Office Obstruction Evaluation Group 2601 Meacham Boulevard Fort Worth, TX 75193 Issued Date: 08/05/2014 David Losoncy Morgan Ventures, LLC 2435 N. Central Expressway 12th Floor Richardson, TX 75080 EXHIBIT "J" Aeronautical Study No. 2014 -AEA -4918 -OE ** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION ** The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning: Structure: Antenna Tower R0580 Location: Roanoke, VA Latitude: 37-19-00.12N NAD 83 Longitude: 79-52-37.36W Heights: 1023 feet site elevation (SE) 199 feet above ground level (AGL) 1222 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s), if any, is(are) met: It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be e -filed any time the project is abandoned or: At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part 1) X Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Park 2) Based on this evaluation, marking and lighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking/ lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, we recommend it be installed and maintained in accordance with FAA Advisory circular 7017460-1 K Change 2. This determination expires on 02/05/2016 unless: (a) the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, is received by this office. (b) extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office. (c) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and an application for a constriction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within 6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application. Pagel of 3 NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST BE E -FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates , heights, fi•equency(ies) and power, Any changes iii coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power will void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights, power, or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body. Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored, notify the same number. A copy of this determination will be forwarded to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) because the structure is subject to their licensing authority. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at (817) 321-7755. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2014 -AEA -4918 -OE. Signature Control No: 224977943-225959870 Debbie Cardenas Technician Attachment(s) Frequency Data cc: FCC Page 2 of 3 (DNE) Frequency Data for ASN 2014 -AEA -4918 -OE LOW HIGH FREQUENCY ERP FREQUENCY FREQUENCY UNIT ERP UNIT 698 806 MHz 1000 W 806 824 MHz 500 W 824 849 MHz 500 W 851 866 MHz 500 W 869 894 MHz 500 W 896 901 MHz 500 W 901 902 MHz 7 W 930 931 MHz 3500 W 931 932 MHz 3500 W 932 932.5 MHz 17 dBW 935 940 MHz 1000 W 940 941 MHz 3500 W 1850 1910 MHz 1640 W 1930 1990 MHz 1640 W 2305 2310 MHz 2000 W 2345 2360 MHz 2000 W Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT "J" OPINION LETTER July 31, 2014 Nathan Byrd BC Architects Engineers, PLC 5661 Columbia Pike, Suite 200 Falls Church, VA 22041-2882 RE: R0580, VA Airspace Analysis Latitude (NAD -83): 370 19' 00.12" N Longitude (NAD -83): 790 52' 37.36" W Ground Elevation: 1023.0 ft AMSL Tower tip height: 199.0 ft AGL Overall height: 1222.0 ft AMSL Clear Mr. Byrd, Our airspace analysis results for the R0580, VA site are as follows: VVIREL.ESS APPLICATIONS, CORP: 1. Filing an FAA Form 7460-1 is not required for the proposed height of 199.0 ft AGL (1222.0 ft AMSL), The maximum allowable height for not filing an FAA Form 7460--1 is 200 ft. 2. FCC's TOWAIR Determination indicates that this structure does not require FCC registration. 3. Wireless Applications Corp. generally recommends filing an FAA Form 7460-1 for tower heights of 180 ft to 200 ft at this location that are within 5 nm of the nearest public -use airport. 4. The FAA time frame for the proposed 1222.0 ft AMSL overall height will be 45 days. 5. The proposed site is 4.393 nm East from the nearest public landing facility - Roanoke Rgnl/Woodrum Field (ROA). At an overall height of 1222.0 ft AMSL, it does not exceed FAR 77.9 (a) or FAR 77.9 (b) Notice Criteria for ROA airport. This airport has both Circling and Straight -In Instrument approach procedures. It does not exceed any glide slopes of ROA airport. Roanoke Rgnl/Woodrum Field (ROA) is an airport type landing facility and it is associated with the city of Roanoke, VA. 6. The proposed site does not exceed any of the instrument approach procedures of ROA airport. 7. The nearest private landing facility is Summit (2WV5), which is a heliport type landing facility not eligible for study under FAR Part 77 sub -Part C. It is 3.11 nm NW from the proposed site. 8. The proposed 199,0 ft AGL towerwould not adversely affect low altitude en route airways and/ or VFR routes in the area. 9. The nearest AM tower is WKBA, which is 3,12 mi (5027 meters) away bearing 233.92. WKBA AM is operating a directional type antenna system. As noted per the FCC AM Tower Locator and per FCC regulation 13-115, Section 1.300O2, the structure will not require a "Proof of Performance" measurement study before and after construction. 10. Marking and lighting are not required for the proposed tower height of 199.0 ft AGL. 11, The FAA Form 74601 for R0580, VA at 199.0 ft AGL was filed on July 25, 2014 with the FAA and assigned ASN 2014 -AEA -4918 -OE. 12. All Wireless Applications Corp. analyses are based on the latest Airspace program. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Ronald W. Logeson, Jr. 425-643-5000 (office) 425-649-5675 (fax) rofrmm FWPW%( 1!7 rr..A— TA v —loto sVflr r+Brrorm ; I (•). r. YA iC1.� C Is 1. . .. _ ,t... IIIb II%irelearApplirntio,rr Corp. III 108tkAtie NE Smite 160, Belle rue, IVA 98004, 425-643-5000 nvn.arir./rir,rjh/irufi++N�.ru� 613/2014 TOWAIR Search Results TOWAIR Determination Results *** NOTICE *** TOWAIR's findings are not definitive or binding, and we cannot guarantee that the data in TOWAIR are fully current and accurate. In some instances, TOWAIR may yield results that differ from application of the criteria set out in 47 C.F.R. Section 17.7 and 14 C.F.R. Section 77.13. A positive finding by TOWAIR recommending notification should be given considerable weight. On the other hand, a finding by TOWAIR recommending either for or against notification is not conclusive. It is the responsibility of each ASR participant to exercise due diligence to determine if it must coordinate its structure with the FAA. TOWAIR is only one tool designed to assist ASR participants in exercising this due diligence, and further investigation may be necessary to determine if FAA coordination is appropriate. 0i7TFb V/1J.NAT10N Results Structure does not require registration. There are no airports within a kilometers (5 miles) of the coordinates you provided. Yom- Sprn.rifir-ation�7 NAD83 Coordinates Latitude 37-19-00.1 north Longitude 079-52-37.4 west Measurements (Meters) Overall Structure Height (AGL) 60.7 Support Structure Height (AGL) 59.4 Site Elevation (AMSL) 312 Structure Type LTOWER - Lattice Tower Tower Construction Notifications Notify Tribes and Historic Preservation Officers of your plans to build a tower. CLOSE WINDOW http:l/W reless2.fcc.govAllsApp/AsrSearctVtowa!rResuit.jsp?printable 111 o - _ -1 Ecoy u r, 7i ) C .i M EOM O A ii...� .� -{--r - - O-< I�_� SP1 . J CL t� r 73 s 'Y1 tm lu co rt:j_n Z x� o gAVIS,Rt) ! c 1 L o [TAVSDLN 'PALMER 0 � Y w �j Cr o y 4 Off• `fir `(I `4\ ib' TDGDSBl7R1'CIR `•. ,� E �. �•`_ X11 in�vdrJ �i0co �J W OD w 4J4 G 2 L n 1.� i yid: o rid (A O w O w. P� 7�g 0 OD � _ ssCC LU 1 41Q L w CL Q EOR QQw ca �'��.. H ILSiSI~ l lL4 - { S1yy ` ���,. %en 'p@�. g to H � � •yam o.�1 _ ao as a p~ cow Cl UJ Ct] p �,�, '- � �d•6i'r I q� *� � ��, S�yNE ��� ai � aNi X LL w •p s x qccolo cD m aClL' hi31q TINS N RD U +f "F�'10,uy 1'E {o.m iALSOLn +44 L. O'qVLS 1!S W d c cCp m, N w Ca m /�c.q rte+ o U U o E J �w ro �x u c m l /] o aUi o 0 . y,10 a--O O 4 O O ja a D> jjj ! 1 t E ai E A�g @ fm; ` �3a �� o yam+ o 0 C � 0) m € o oAKLANt7 oiVD/ LVC1, W 1. ' S� �a r m — r v `` o '`�'j 6AK4 A►?p B �iG{R o'j� �I CJS @ d EXHIBIT "L" Public Safety System Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 11:28:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time Subject: Morgan Ventures SUP Application Date: Friday, June 13, 2014 at 3:01:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Tammi Wood To: gerrysharpejr@gmail.com CC: John Murphy, Rodney Thompson, Susan McCoy Mr. Sharpe, The Communications Coordinator, Mr. Rodney Thompson was able to look at the site plan package that you previously submitted. He commented as follows: "I dont see any impact from this on Roanoke's Public Safety system" Please note that this pre -review is only one piece of the total review process for the application. This department will review the application again for completeness and is only one of the many entities that will formally review the application. The formal review can only be initiated after the application has been formally submitted and accepted for processing. Just as a reminder, the next Planning Commission application deadline date is Friday, June, 20, 2014. The entire completed application package must be submitted by close of business that day. As previously discussed, you are welcome to forward this package to staff for a pre -review to ensure that all the required pieces are in the package prior to that date. Please allow a couple of days for review prior to Friday. Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions along the way. Sincerely, Tammi L. Wood Planner II County of Roanoke Department of Community Development 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2068 ext. 226 Page 1 of 1 Nov 21 14 09:53a The Tyler Rose Inc. County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 540-380-3076 p.3 For Staff Use Only Date, rcce;yed TteceivedIT;> n Q � Appiicafolntr ; P Z dale: 1LZ 3n L .3 Z FaxNo.: ��—�o� 1 Owner's name/address w/zip Phone 4: Plaeardsissucd: B05dazcl Property Location Magisterial District; 6 CaseNu,nber 19 ALL APPLICANTS Chemo type of application filed (check all that apply) E�Rezonjug ❑ Special Use ❑ Variance ❑ Waiver ❑ Administrative Appeal ❑ Comp flan (15.2-2232) Review Appllicarns name/address w/zip Phone: 5 11-33 -1a ] t 59-1r' 4" � c- �►^• Work; F� �e Cel] #. — ..•l 1as�t� G-.vo 9j, 1LZ 3n L .3 Z FaxNo.: ��—�o� 1 Owner's name/address w/zip Phone 4: Work: i�mti C Fax No. 0: Property Location Magisterial District; 6 d Y`bczr �atittl ayr��R-0.n Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: 2- 3Z Y Existing Zoning: _ f. . Size of parcei(s): Acres: Existing Land Use: 0-c- an � REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WAIVER AND COMP PLAN (15. 2-2232) REVIEW APPLICANTS(RISIW/CP) Proposed Zoning:''f'�'� Proposed Lana Use: Does th^e p� rcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? � Yes &� No ❑ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Usc Type? Yes Fier. No ❑ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST Ifrezoning request, are: conditions being proffered with this request? Yes Vf--) No ❑ YARIAYCC, i3'AIVERArVDADMINISTRATIVEAPPE4LAPPLIC.4NT.S(VIW/.4A) Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal ofZoning Adminiscrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s)- ofthe Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of1mcrpretation of Zoning Map to Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE, ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R:SIvt'.CP AN, V'IA.A FUS!WK- V4A Consultation $ V2" x 11" concept plan Application lee Application Metes and bounds description troffers, i I' applicable Justification Water and sewer application _ Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am eiilicr the owner of the property or Eie owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consentRhe pvrler. p�a� �� ,,, Qcmer's Signature 2 Nov 21 14 09:53a The Tyler Rose Ino. 540-380-3076 p.5 JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT WAIVER OR COMP PLAN (15.2-22r-) REVILVV REQUESTS Applicant 7KoQer The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or community plan (15.2-2232) review requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and generai welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if. necessary. Please explain ]tow the request furthers the purposes oftHe, Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. Please explain how the projectconfortns to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke Cnunty Community v Q'r �\ 5o Vtre roper .� �s j is Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properies, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parksrrecreation and fire and rescue. -tq pps-o✓w fh? s r .���rt rj w k 1 QM -�ae, e .1c1S��n�u�o[E�'15jc�n�a'�v-c��,eC� �h e r, ar'y�-o t � L C- 5-;>-c V & &Let t� l Q -S , t n cls ► r, UJ t PC V6 CA- A:5, J\'>->�S t �a�k� �'ec, �� res�> GV rAJ ---P-T� I Nov 21 14 09;53a The Tyler Rose Ino. JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE REQUEST efr An I Applicant kwi 540-380-3076 p,6 The of Zoning Appeals is required by Section 15.2-2309 of the Code of Virginia to consider the following factors before a variance can be granted, Please read the factors listed below carefully and in your own words, describe how the request meets each factor, if additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper - 7 . The variance shall not be contrary to the public interest and shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. 1 ] l J ►1-E jDC 4 c� l 1�1? t l �e �(1� C� C 7 r QiZar,"ln9 L1FiLs rdQ e.i \Q'Lfl 4� 1/ J i1 dt slf l,' 2. The strict application ofthe zoning ordinance would produce undue hardship (as distinguished from a special privilege or convenience) and would prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property_ �VLQ r`P�tC �iYti1�C L i 1� k ], NSR`c� G�u�� 6, 3_ The hardship is not shared by other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. Such hardships should be addressed by the Board of Supervisors as amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. 4- The variance will not be of a substantial detriment to the adjacent properties or the character of the district. Cure- 4 Nov 21 1409:54a The Tyler Rose Inc, M5TITICATIM FOR ADM11NNSTAATWE APPEAL.REQUEST. 540-380-3076 p.7 Applicant PIease respond to the following as thoroughly as possible. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. 1. Reasons for appeal: -sem- -�v--.) 0 -3P --r, c-L� r�� \!�o Q-, —4-Cw-, eA J�' 2. Evidence supporting claim: r r ki Nov 21 14 09;54a The Tyler Rose Inc. CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST 540-380-3076 p.8 A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with tate site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless litniting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver, community plan (15.2-2232) review and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning DiAsion staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered ntin1murn: AL APPMCANTS ✓a. Applicant name and name of development b/Date, scale and north arrow Y Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. ✓ f, The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties ✓All property lines and easements ✓ h All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights potation, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Addidonal information required for REZONING and SPECDIL USE PERM1TAFPL1CA,N7S ✓ lc Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site t/ I. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants P.. Any proffered conditions at the site and hew they are addressed i h q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule 7 certify that all items required in the checklist above are complete. f' Signature of applicant Date IN rel Zl4 i�'. \ 'may 1 � I t�'d 9L09-089-Oti9 -auk asap AGIAi qul B99:60tiL LZ AON Nov 21 14 09;54a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.9 2014 RARDIN CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST 1. Applicant name and name of development- * Roger and Deborah Rardin —Chimney Hills 2. Date, scale and north arrow. . 11/20/14, See attached reap. 3. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions. • 5.00 acres. 348,374 square ft., 513.05 x 639.23 x 511.65 x 731.02. 4. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties. » 5057 Poor Mountain Rd., Salem, VA 24153 Wright, Dallas J. 064M-02-56_00-0000 » 0 Technology Dr., Salem, VA 24153 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 064,02-02-50,06-0000 5. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. This parcel is wooded with water drainage over entire 8 acres, creating wetlands. There is a wet weather stream between our parcel and Board of Supervisors parcel- 064.02- 02-50.0"000. 6. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties. • 064.02-02-56.00-0000 _ 1-2 • 064.02-02-50.06-0000 — 1-2 7. All property lines and easements. » See attached map. There -are 8. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights. • No buildings existing or proposed. 9. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development. » No streets or other public ways adjacent to the development. 10, Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces. » No driveways, parking spaces or loading spaces. 11. 6'xi5ting utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site. » No existing utilities at this parcel. 12. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers. » No driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings or crossovers. 13. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals. » See attached map. 14. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections. » No streets or intersections. 15. Locations of all adjacentfire hydrants, » No fire hydrants. Nov 21 1409:55a The Tyler Rose Ino, 540-380-3076 p,10 16. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed. No proffered conditions at the site_ 17. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule. o Project not to be phased. Nov 21 14 09:55a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.11 10�;�-� `� gg �a 2() ; l m- n Strec;t. Si. to l �p , New .Castle, VA 24127 ASSOCIATES 540-864-6900 Fax: 540-864-6903 AMEND NIENT/ADDENDLFM TO CONTRACT OF PURCHASE ThisAmendment ( ) Addendum aif tbat certain Comma dated ,/' .q --- -, 20 , between the undcrsigned, in consideration of the pxemises and. of tkie following niutaikl promises acid agreements relating to the purchase of -real proper l no -w as '7,-q- � Z f 56V,L'� - 2.-6,a-56 --eta-6,r provides t'ae following: OF &Ulo& 4 AA W- roeej�� u� 4-A 4�k cout �e ,��c�d� o�' J® � cr s'��t.�.r3 r � �r�,�t co.►�►�df�ri � �cr�.rn� C) 4i—�,n aty rp vaZ, a: "Vitness the following signatures and seals this F day of�r ?,o Listing Agent Selling Agent • ed Seller 1� 1 Purchaser Purchaser Nov 21 14 09:55a The Tyler Rose Inc. 640-380-3076 p.12 1111812.014 Gmail - Rardin to Repa contract 11 -42014 -Rezoning or Tax ID#064.02-02-55,00-0000 from split zoning currently R1 and 12te ALL R1. David Pollock <pollockdkjl@gmail.corn> Rardin to Repa contract 11 -4 -2014 -Rezoning of Tax ID#004.02-02-55.00-0000 from split zoning currently R1 and 12 to ALL RI. 1 message DEHARTREALTORS <dehartrealtars@tds.net> Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 8:33 PM To: pollockdkjl@gmail.com Cc: g_repa@yahoo.com Hey David, Thank you very much for dropping the surveys off at my office. They are most helpful. Mr. Repa has spent countless hours working diligently in accomplishing steps necessary in the purchase of the Rardin's land. He has already made application and paid for the septic permit with the Roanoke Co health department. He has met with one surveyor at the property to get an estimate for the survey and has spoken wO the surveyor(LMW PC Engineering)that prepared the survey you dropped off to my office. He has also met his architectural engineer out at the property site to look at the location of the house they plan to build. Mr. Repa has also been in close contact with his personal banker of many years(Adam Shores-Hornetrust), he has assured him that there should be no problem with nim obtaining financing to purchase the land once the land is rezoned all R-1. They love the property and have every intention of buying it. The only hold up for thorn is this split zoning issue. Mr. Repa has spoken several times with Rebecca James at Roanoke County -Planning and Zoning. She has advised Mr. Repa that the current owners(The Rardins) can submit a land use application to rezone the entire parcel to R-1. Rebecca said they would be happy to advise how to do so if the Rardins choose to do this. This rezoning of the entire parcel to RE would solve this zoning dilemma which is holding up this entire process. Due to the holdup with the zoning, we will need to readjust our dates for the release of the subject to's , loan approval and closing dates, l have attached an amendment pertaining to this. Obviously, the sooner we can get the larger tract rezoned 20 R1 -the quicker we can proceed ahead with the purchase and closing -so these dates for everything cart be moved up -should we be able to get the zoning change accomplished quicker than the amendment calls for. Please feel free to call me at any time with questions, comments or to discuss, Thanks so much. Sheila Sheila A DeHart, Associate Broker httpF,WMaI,9o%Ie,comfmail!?ui=2&Ii 315c068b3b&view=pt&search=inbax&th=149c0890cbc0cac8&simi= 149c0a90cbc0cac8 V2 Nov 21 14 09:56a The Tyler Rose Inc. 640-380-3076 p.13 15118{2.014 Gm ail--RardintoRepa contract 11-4-2014-RezoningorTaxID#064.02-02-55.00-0000fromsplitzoningcurrerftly R1 and 12 to ALL R1. Chariton Associates New Castle, VA 24127 540 864-6689 d eh artrealt ars @td s _ ret Licensed in Virginia New Doc 103_1.jpg 630K .w Rardin to Repa nov 4th contract amendment.pdf 330K rdps:flm ail. google.com/rnaiJ/?ui=2&j k= 315c086b3b&vi ew= pt&sear ch=i nbox&h=149cO&90cbcOcacB&s i m 1= 149cO890clxOcac8 212 Nov 21 14 09:56a The Tyler Rase Inc. 540-380-3076 p.14 Nov 21 14 09:58a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.15 Fwd: dual zoning proNern Fwd: dual zoning problem Actions David Pollock 11/18/1.4 To: Deborah Rardin Roger and Deborah The first of three emails that outline the situation. I have a call in to meet with Rebecca James in Roanoke County Zoning, I prefer a face to face to get all the details first nand. Frorr: David Pollock (pollockdkjl@gmail.corn) You moved this message to its current location. Sent: Tue 11/18/1.4 1.0:02 AM To: Deborah Rardin �deborahrardin@msn.com) Roger and Deborah The first of three emails that outline the situation. I have a call in to meet with Rebecca James in Roanoke County Zoning. I prefer a face to face to get all the details first hand. The emails imply to this issue can be solved. I would like "one" of you with me to help ask questions and understand all "directions". Thanks, David Pollock ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: DEHARTREALTORS <dehartrealtors@tds.net> Date: Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:32 PM Subject: dual zoning problem To: pal lockcfkji@gmaiLcom Cc: g_repa@yahoo.com David, Nov 21 14 09:59a The Tyler Rose Inc. Please read the email I received last night From the buyers: 540-380-3076 P.16 They have advised me to tell you that this deal is DEAD IN THE WATER unless the seller remedies the split zoning issue by one of the 2 options they discussed in my email to you on Friday the 14th. They have been advised by their attorney Compton Biddle and Adam Shores(Home Trust Bank) that this split zoning issue could present problems in financing, etc. The email is as follows: Sheila, to be clear, our goal is not just to buy the raw land. Our goal is to undertake construction and then to put a competitive traditional mortgage on the home once it is completed. The financing complications and challenges especially begin in the construction and post construction phases with the larger parcel being dual zoned at this time. The dual zoning precludes us from qualifying for a competitive and traditional loan through sources such as Freddie Mac and Sallie Viae. This is the complication, leaving only higher priced financing options to consider. This doesn't work for us_ Farm Credit does_not offer competitive loans compared to options opened to ins if the parcel met Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac criteria, according to Adam Sbores, Market President, Home Trust, and we are not going to accept just any loan at any terms and at any interest rates. That would be foolish and irresponsible. At the time we looked at the SW River road property, I spoke with Joey Cornwell, Branch Manager at Farm Credit. The best rates he would extend were 1, 118 to 2- 1/8 percentage points higher than if the property did not have the defect of the dual zoning attached to it. Not very competitive, From our perspective, the dual zoning defect needs to be remedied, or this property will not work for us. We also are not willing to buy the raw land as is, cross our fingers, and hope to resolve the dual zoning nmatter at a later date. The best time to resolve this zoning defect is now. Nov 21 14 09;59a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.17 ---George and Donna Repa I do have an update on the zoning which I will email you next. Mr. Repa has spoken with Roanoke County Zoning and found out what needs to be done to get both parcels zoned residential. Please watch for my next email. I really hope the sellers will work with the buyers in the regard of having this zoning changed. Thanks, Sheila Nov 21 14 09:59a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.18 F1 From: David Pollock (pollockdkjl@grnail.com) You moved this message to its current location. Sent: Tue 11J18/14 10:02 AM To: Deborah Rardin (deborahrardin@msn.com) ## 2 Forwarded message---------- Frorn: DEHARTREALTORS<dehaitrealtors@tds.net> Date: Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:37 PM Subject: correction ofsplit(dual) zoning -per Roanoke County To: pollockdkjl@gmail.com Ce: g_repa@yahoo.com David, Here is what Mr. Repa found out today from Roanoke County as to how the split zoning can be corrected to all of the tract being R-1. It sounds like the second option would be the way to go. r Sheila, here is Rebecca James' comment and suggestion following her conversation with John Murphy at the planning and zoning department this morning. Essentially, the {portion currently zoned industrial or cammerciai cannot be subdivided, so the first option I proposed the current owners can do is not feasible. This is because there is no road frontage. BUT if the Rardins own any commercial land that adjoins that 8 acre portion that is zoned 1-2, it can be added to that adjoining parcel. IF they choose to do this, we would have to be satisfied in how the land would be used in the future, and the price would have to be adjusted downward in an appropriate manner to recognize the spinning off of those approximately 8 acres, The other suggestion Rebecca James made was that the current owners do have the option of submitting a land -use application to rezone the entire parcel to R-1. Their office can advise the Rardins on how to proceed if they choose to do this. Nov 21 14 10:00a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 PA 9 So, there we have it. We believe that this now is up to current owners to consider, and determine what, if anything, they will do with respect to these two options. Please discuss with your sellers and see if they would be willing to talk with Rebecca James in: the Planning and zoning department about having the entire tract rezoned R-1. Thanks, Sheila r Nov 21 1410:00a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.20 Community Development �� Planning & Zoning Division POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND/DR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The following is a list of potentially high traffic -generating land uses and road network situations that could elicit a more detailed analysis of the existing and proposed traffic pertinent to your rezoning, subdivision waiver, public street waiver, or special use permit request. If your request involves one of the items on the ensuing list, we recommend that you meet with a County planner, the County traffic engineer, and/or Virginia Department of Transportation staff to discuss the potential additional traffic related information that may need to be submitted with the application in order to expedite your application process. (Note this list is not inclusive and the County staff and VDDT reserve the right to request a traffic study at any time, as deemed necessary.) High Traffic -Generating Land Uses: • Single-family residential subdivisions, Multi -family residential units, or Apartments with more than 75 dwelling units • Restaurant (with or without drive-through windows) • Gas station/Convenience store/Car wash • Retail shop/Shopping center • Offices (including: financial institutions, general, medical, etc.) • Regional public facilities • Educational/Recreational facilities • Religious assemblies • Hotel/Motel • Golf course • Hospital/Nursing home/Clinic Industrial site/Factory • Day care center • Bank • Non-specific—use requests Road Network Situations: • Development adjacent to/with access onto/within 500 -ft of intersection of a roadway classified as an arterial road (e.g., Rte 11, 24,115, 1.17, 460, 11/460, 220, 221, 419, etc) • For new phases or changes to a development where a previously submitted traffic study is more than two (2) years old and/or roadway conditions have changed significantly • When required to evaluate access issues • Development with ingress/egress on rcads planned or scheduled for expansion, widening, improvements, etc. (i.e. on Long Range Transportation Plan, Six -Yr Road Plan, etc.) • Development in an area where there is a known existing traffic and/or safety problem • Development would potentially negatively impact existing/planned traffic signal(s) • Substantial departure from the Community Plan • Any site that is expected to generate over one hundred (1.00) trips during the peak hour of the traffic generator or the peak hour on the adjacent streets, or over seven hundred Fifty (750) trips in an average day Effective date. ApM 19, 2005 7 Nov 21 1410:00a The Tyler Rose Inc, 540-380-3076 p,21 O� �DA1yD� Community Development Planning & Zoning Division f8 6 NOTICE TO APPLICANTS FOR REZONING, SUBDIVISION ANTAIVER, PUBLIC STREET NVAMER, OR SPECIAL USE PERNHT PETITION PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION ACCEPTANCEPROCEDTJRE The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver or Special Use Permit petition if new or additional information is presented at the public hearing. If it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public hearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff and/or an outside refenal agency to adequately evaluate and provide written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public hearing then the Planning Commission may vote to continue the petition. This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the new or additional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be included in a written memorandum by planning staff to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted. POTENTIAL OF DEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Coram ission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Wainer, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Traffic Engineer or staff from the Virginia Department of Transporration requests further traffic analyses and/or a traffic impact study that would be beneficial in making a land use: decision (Note: a list of potential land uses and situations that would necessitate further study isprovided as part of this application package). This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the required traffic analyses and/or traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions to the planning staff and the Planning Commission. If a continuance is warranted, the applicant will be netified of the continuance and the newly scheduled public hearing date, Effective date. April 49, ZOOS Manna of -'a ion Petitionee's Signature Nov 21 14 10:00a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.22 REZONING AND LAND USE PERMITS REVIEW COMMENTS William & Tonia Goodrich Econ. Devel. --Joe Zielinski �> Roanoke County Planning Department + P 29300 Roanoke, • i PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM PROJECT DEPARTMENT SENT FOR COMMENTS PLEASE REVIEW AND RETURN COMMENTS BY Friday May 17. 2002 FAX (540): 772-2108 E-MAIL: planning@co.roanoke.va.us May 8, 2002 The Department of Economic Development's position normally is to preserve industrial land, HoweNrer, we do not object to the rezoning request from William and Tonja Goodrich to rezone a portion of an industrially zoned 20 -acre parcel from 1-2 to R-1. The property proposed for rezoning is not .ideal for industrial use due to its lacy of industrial access and challenging topography. Joe Zielinski Economic Development Specialist Thank you. Tammi Wood Prograrn Support Specialist, P & Z i l - 0 6/x')0 - TI 1 if ER RM YBY G DATEZs `'Z DART 1 GzoQ- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 25, 2002 ORDINANCE 062502-4 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 11.44 -ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON POOR MOUNTAIN ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 64.02-2-55) IN THE CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF I-2 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-1 WITH A CONDITION UPON THE APPLICATION OF WILLIAM AND TONJA GOODRICH WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 28, 2002, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 25, 2002; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 4, 2002; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 11.44 acres, as described herein, and located on Poor Mountain Road (Tax Map Number 64.02- 2-55) in the Catawba Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of 1-2, Industrial District, to the zoning classification of R-1, Low Density Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of William and Tonja Goodrich. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following condition which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) One dwelling shall be allowed on the property and when the property line is adjusted, then the property line shall follow the metes and bounds of the zoning line. 1 4. That said real estate is more folly described as follows: BEGINNING at a large chestnut oak on the northern right-of-way line of Bydawyle Road, this point is located N. 69,deg. 43'04" W. 167.00 feet from a small maple, thence N. 13 deg. 45'07" E. 1196.12 feet to an iron pin found, thence N. 69 deg. 55'23" E. 894.47 feet to an iron pin found on the westerly right-of-way line of the Norfolk and Southern Railroad, thence with said right- of-way lines S. 10 deg. 22' 31" E. 731.02 feet to an iron pin set, thence'S. 80 deg. 13'29" W. 539.98 feet to an iron pin found, thence S. 29 deg. 07'29" W. 277.80 feet to an iron pin found, thence S. 54 deg. 4729" W. 720.59 feet to the Place of Beginning. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: A - a644 ) Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner William E. Driver, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 C) L6 (N O N O d' CD O N U) C i m Of r O N O N i N .Q E N O PAI ACTION NO. ITEM NO. G-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance appropriating $542,611 for the Department of Social Services Building Renovation Project SUBMITTED BY: Richard Caywood Assistant County Administrator Rebecca Owens Director of Finance r\ APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: During a work session on October 28, 2014, staff provided an update on the Social Services Building project and recommendations for funding the project. Renovations to the Social Services Building in Salem are underway and the construction phase of the project has begun. The current scope of the construction contract with Martin Brothers is to replace the roof, reconfigure the cell providers on the roof and fifth (5th) floor, replace the HVAC system, provide increased fire protection via a sprinkler system, rebuild the parking lot, renovate the fifth (5th) floor office spaces, and replace the ceiling the and grid throughout the building. To complete this work currently underway, additional funding of $542,611 is required as previously presented to the Board. Also based on feedback from the Board at its November meeting, staff recommends completion of design work for future renovations of floors one through four. To complete the plans, staff will need to modify existing contracts with Thompson and Litton for design since the added work will increase this contract by more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the existing contracts, all as required by Section 2.2-4309 of the Code of Virginia. Since this is a negotiated contract, this extension of the contract should not Page 1 of 2 disadvantage the County in terms of fee and should save considerable resources in performing a future procurement for these services. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding previously appropriated to the project to date is $3,126,929. Additional funds needed for the first phase of the project totals $542,611 and are as follows: $292,611 appropriation from the Social Services Department June 30, 2014, year- end rollover (This was reviewed with the Board during work session September 23, 2014 when the year-end information was presented and is consistent with our prior practice of allowing departments to carryover operating balances for construction projects); • $250,000 appropriation from the Social Service Building Fund Operating Account (These are operating funds that have accumulated in the building fund from various rents and leases less expenses of the building and debt service and require appropriation to the project account to be used for the renovation) Also, all remaining funds generated from the operating account will be designated to the project and used for additional renovations to the Social Services building. Attachment A summarizes the Social Services Building Renovation budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATON Staff recommends approving the ordinance appropriating $542,611 from various sources for the Department of Social Services building project, authorizing the funds in the building fund to be used for additional renovations to the building as they become available, and authorizing the County Administrator or designee to execute any documents or take such action as may be necessary to execute modification of the A&E contract associated with the project. Page 2 of 2 Attachment A Social Service Building Renovation Budget Construction $ 2,587,500 Architect and Construction Management Expenses 452,800 Technology and Furnishings 222,202 Owner Additional Expenses and Services 224,450 Contingency 182,588 Total $ 3,669,540 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $542,611 FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES BUILDING RENOVATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the renovations to portions of the Department of Social Services building in Salem is underway and the construction phase has begun under a contract with Martin Brothers; and WHEREAS, these renovations include roof replacement, HVAC system replacement, parking lot repairs, addition of a sprinkler system and renovations to the Fifth Floor of this building, and replacement of the ceiling tile and grid throughout the building (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, additional funding of $542,611 is required to complete the renovations outlined above; and WHEREAS, completion of design work for future renovations of floors one through four will require modification and an increase to the contract with Thompson & Litton for design since this work will increase this contract by more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the existing contract, as required by Section 2.2-4309 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $250,000 are available in the operating accounts of the Social Services building fund and recommended to be used towards the Project; and WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $292,611 are available from the year end expenditure savings from the Department of Social Services operating budget and recommended to be used towards the Project; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, account balances remaining in fund 175 (Salem Bank and Trust/Social Services Fund) will carry over one hundred percent (100%) and be re - appropriated to the Social Services Building fund for additional renovations; and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance; and WHEREAS, first reading of this ordinance was held on December 9, 2014, and the second reading was held on January 13, 2015. BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows.. 1. That the sum of $292,611 is appropriated from the 2013-2014 annual budget rollover amounts to the Social Services Building fund for the purpose of completing the renovations to the Department of Social Services Building. 2. That the sum of $250,000 is appropriated from the Department of Social Services Building Account to the Social Services Building fund for the purpose of completing the renovations to the Department of Social Services Building. 3. That account balances remaining in fund 175 (Salem Bank and Trust/Social Services Fund) will carry over one hundred percent (100%) and be re - appropriated to the Social Services Building fund. 4. That the County Administrator or Assistant County administrator is authorized to execute such documents or to take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Ordinance. In addition the County Administrator or Assistant County Administrator is authorized to execute modifications of existing contracts with Thompson & Litton for design in excess of twenty-five percent (25%) above the original contract award amount in order complete the renovations described Page 2 of 3 in this Ordinance contingent upon the architect providing competitive pricing for the additional work. 5. That this ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption. Page 3 of 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. H-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizing the granting of a non-exclusive easement, which varies between twenty (20) and thirty (30) feet in width, to Verizon Virginia LLC on property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors (Tax Map No. 027.13- 04-01.0000) for the purpose of an underground communication system SUBMITTED BY: Anne Marie Green Director of General Services APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell VLAw- Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County leases space at the Hollins Fire Station to Ntelos Wireless for a telecommunications tower and assorted equipment. In the lease, the County has agreed to assist Ntelos whenever necessary in obtaining easements for utility services to the compound. Verizon Virginia LLC has requested an underground utility easement at Hollins Fire and Rescue Station to install fiber for a co -location on the Ntelos tower. The co -location will provide additional revenue to the County from this site and will not affect the operation of Roanoke County Communications equipment located on the tower. This is the second reading and public hearing for this ordinance. The first reading of this ordinance was held on November 18, 2014. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. Page 1 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving the attached ordinance granting the non-exclusive easement to Verizon Virginia, LLC along the property line at 7401 Barrens Road. 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, DECEMBER 9, 2014 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT, WHICH VARIES BETWEEN TWENTY (20) AND THIRTY (30) FEET IN WIDTH, TO VERIZON VIRGINIA, LLC ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (TAX MAP NO. 027.13-04-01.0000) FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM WHEREAS, Verizon Virginia LLC has requested an easement which varies between twenty (20) and thirty (30) feet in width, for the purpose of installing underground communications systems cables, wires and terminals across property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors (Tax Map Parcel No. 027.13-04- 01.0000) known as 7401 Barrens Road, Roanoke, Virginia; and WHEREAS, granting this non-exclusive, utility easement will serve the interests of the public by supporting the purposes of Ordinance No. 102604-7 by which Roanoke County authorized a lease agreement with Virginia PCS Alliance, L.C. d/b/a INTELOS for a 3,400 sq. ft. tower site and tower, which authorized sub -leases and co -location of antennas on said tower located at the Hollins Fire Station; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition only by ordinance, and that the first reading of this ordinance was held on November 18, 2014, and that the second reading and public hearing was held on December 9, 2014; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provision of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County Charter this interest in real estate is declared to be surplus, and is hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to Verizon Virginia, LLC for a non- exclusive utility easement. Page 1 of 3 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, as follows: 1. That the conveyance of a variable width (between 20 to 30 feet) non-exclusive, utility easement to Verizon Virginia, LLC for the purpose of constructing, operating, maintaining, replacing and removing a communication system consisting of underground cables, wires and terminals as shown on a plan prepared for Verizon Virginia, LLC dated 5/1/12, titled "AT&T" by GEB is hereby authorized and approved. 2. That the County Administrator or his designee is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as are necessary to accomplish this transaction, all of which shall be upon form and subject to the conditions approved by the County Attorney. 3. That this ordinance is effective from and after the date of its adoption. Page 2 of 3 11 r,5 PL . � ®� fm�� & , .................... �`� �� \ � ~ `�~-..��_ �© �� \ �< Page 3 of 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. H-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY. VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizing the vacation of an unimproved right-of- way shown as Nelms Lane on the Map of Airlee Court Annex in Plat Book 2, page 103, of the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office, said right-of-way located in the Hollins Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Wilbur L. Tucker III and Jennifer D. Tucker, Petitioners, have requested the vacation of right-of-way shown as Nelms Lane on the Map of Airlee Court Annex that was dedicated by the plat of record in Plat Book 2, Page 103 to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. The right-of-way is located off Woodbury Street (Rte. 898) adjacent to the parcel owned by the said petitioners. The portion of Nelms Lane that is proposed to be vacated is a "paper street" and it has not been improved. The petitioners desire to use their portion of the aforementioned right -of -away for improvements to their property. Once this right-of-way is vacated, the property will vest in the abutting landowner, Donna C. Wills, as provided in Section 15.2-2274 of the 1950 Code of Virginia. The petitioners have indicated that Ms. Wills intends to execute a deed conveying the vacated property to them. This transaction is a private legal matter between Ms. Wills and the petitioners. There are no adjoining landowners or other persons that will be affected by this action. County Departments and local utility companies were contacted concerning the vacation. A variable width public utility easement is being retained for utilities present in the existing right-of-way. Other utility companies contacted had no objection to the paper street being vacated. Pertinent information shown on Exhibit "A" and attached hereto and titled "Exhibit showing Page 1 of 2 portion of Private Lane to be vacated by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County". The first reading of this ordinance was held on November 18, 2014. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost and expenses associated with this action, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the petitioners. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the proposed ordinance authorizing the vacation of the right-of-way and retaining a public utility easement in its location. 2. Do not adopt the proposed ordinance authorizing the vacation of the right-of-way. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. 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, DECEMBER 9, 2014 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF AN UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY SHOWN AS NELMS LANE ON THE MAP OF AIRLEE COURT ANNEX IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 103 OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE, SAID RIGHT -OF WAY LOCATED IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Map of Airlee Court Annex recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 2, page 103, established a street designated as Nelms Lane of variable width and located along the northern boundary of Airlee Court Annex adjacent to Lots 5, 10, 15, and 20 of said subdivision; and WHEREAS, the area designated and set aside for public use as Nelms Lane on Map of Airlee Court Annex has never been improved or accepted into the Virginia State Secondary Road System; and WHEREAS, the Petitioners, the property owners of Lot 1 and 2, Block 1 of Map of No 1 of Woodbury Gardens, adjoining the unimproved section of Nelms Lane, extending approximately one hundred ten (110) feet from the northern edge of Woodbury Street, have requested the vacation of this unimproved portion of the variable width right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the above described street or road is more clearly indicated as "Private Lane" on "Exhibit showing portion of private lane to be vacated by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia" dated 11-11-2014, prepared by Roanoke County Department of Community Development and attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, no other property owner will be affected by the vacation of this undeveloped portion of said Nelms Lane and that its current existence imposes an Page 1 of 3 impediment to the adjoining property owners making improvements to their properties adjoining this previously dedicated but unimproved street; and WHEREAS, the Petitioners have requested that, pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate that portion of this right-of-way which adjoins their property and is designated as "Nelms Lane" on the plat of Airlee Court Annex, Plat Book 2, page 103; and WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected County departments have raised no objection; and WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and 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 November 18, 2014, and a second reading and public hearing of this ordinance was held on December 9, 2014. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County Charter, the subject real estate (a portion of Nelms Lane, a variable width street and approximately one hundred and ten (110) feet in length) is hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interests in real estate renders it unavailable for other public use. 3. That a portion of this street known as Nelms Lane and being designated and shown as "Private Lane" on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, said street being located along the northern property line of Lot 15 Map ofAirlee Court Annex in the Hollins Magisterial District Page 2 of 3 of the County of Roanoke, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. 4. That a variable width public utility easement is accepted, reserved and maintained for public purposes in the area previously designated as "Nelms Lane" as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 5. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioners. 6. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 7. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended). Page 3 of 3 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. 1 10.34541 00W � KI-2N54*30'00"E: N O I TAX 38.14-01-34.00 c 0 39~per KISStTO VILLAGE OF :3° W 1 m .o s LINE TABLE ROANOKE INC. 1 CO) 5.0300 Ac. N 54°30'00"E 150.04' w FOR NEW P.U.E. INSTR # 201312617 O w Y 0 O 15' O,gt] ` `w O C 101 (Upl � O ° U in ` NPROVED Ith1 O m 6320. i `` ��2@. g o d I Z S34-&-E-3'(30"E ` N` 1 \ Z 12.70, 73.93 70.00' 70.00' 3�a"w 128 TAX 219032 0 01 �� 1 3.49' DONNA C. WILLS 1 0 1 `O 2 LOT 15 LOT 14 m LOT 13 o 0.2483 Ac. N TAX 38.14-01-33.00 PB. 2 PG. 103 I LOT 3 m WILBUR L.111 & MAP 1 JENNIFER D. TUCKER 1 3 AIRLEE COURRTT ANNEX LOT 1 PB.2 PG. 103 0.360 Ac. It O INSTR # 200715179 ';O. 0 0 N �1 N ^ 1 #5229 � ... #5309 #5303 I o 0 #5331 w W 3 3 m Im o 0 0 MAP No. 1 d w 0 I O 1 01 WOODBURYIGARDENS VII' I`' O 10 I O PB.3 P 114 1 Z y d %o _ a Ln— m 0. Z 4 N S34°00'00"E 60.00' 12:2.25' N34°00=00W N 70.00 70.00 ' _ 70.00' ' ��� SPPQ Qpp PP 12.74 N WOODBURY STREET m o RT. 898 � d 'P4 d 534°EO0O S 34°00'00"E __ _ 70.00' --�-- 70.00' (TOTAL= 123.67) 1 05.56' 1 e.1 t OI 60.00' I aT+ S 54°30'00 W N N 1 5.0 0' 1(� _ OF 1 Ip MANo. 1 0 AIRLEE COURT ANNEX WOODBU Y GARDENS P8.2 PG. 103 PP PB. 3 I PG. 1 14 I Y 1 10 15232 1 15228 1 ...: 0? #5310 I I #5304 I , TAX 2190222 W w I F ASHLEY L. WES o N I Z LOT 20 10 1 1 o � TAX 38.14-01-24.00 13 7 c 0.2685 Ac. 1 I LOT 19 LOT 18 LOT 3 I � m CHERYL D. NICELY I w N °o lz N w In & KIMBERLEY J. PITTS -1Q w HELMS LANE 0 Z LOT 1 & PT LT 2 I ] w VACATED BY ORDINANACE 0 1 0.473 Ac. a 0 #082807-15 RECORDED I OO I PB. 3 PG. 114 I IN INST. # 200715832 lip I INSTR. #1201209538 I' PLAT IN INST. # 200803123 Z U PLAT IN INST. # 201209538 1 II_rJ❑I TAX MAP NO. 38.14 EXHIBIT ilAi1 SCALE: EXHIBIT SHOWING LEGEND PORTION OF PRIVATE LANE - TO BE VACATED PORTION OF PRIVATE BY LANE TO BE VACATEDG7 &RESERVED ASA P.U.E. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS coNTAINwGo.oslsAC. ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA PREPARED BY.' ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 1 1- 1 1-2014 1 10.34541 00W 13.49430'00 KI-2N54*30'00"E: E 106.1O4 0000 W 1 2.70' ` NPROVED Ith1 O m 6320. i `` ��2@. g o d I Z S34-&-E-3'(30"E ` N` 1 \ Z 12.70, 73.93 70.00' 70.00' 3�a"w 128 TAX 219032 0 01 �� 1 3.49' DONNA C. WILLS 1 0 1 `O 2 LOT 15 LOT 14 m LOT 13 o 0.2483 Ac. N TAX 38.14-01-33.00 PB. 2 PG. 103 I LOT 3 m WILBUR L.111 & MAP 1 JENNIFER D. TUCKER 1 3 AIRLEE COURRTT ANNEX LOT 1 PB.2 PG. 103 0.360 Ac. It O INSTR # 200715179 ';O. 0 0 N �1 N ^ 1 #5229 � ... #5309 #5303 I o 0 #5331 w W 3 3 m Im o 0 0 MAP No. 1 d w 0 I O 1 01 WOODBURYIGARDENS VII' I`' O 10 I O PB.3 P 114 1 Z y d %o _ a Ln— m 0. Z 4 N S34°00'00"E 60.00' 12:2.25' N34°00=00W N 70.00 70.00 ' _ 70.00' ' ��� SPPQ Qpp PP 12.74 N WOODBURY STREET m o RT. 898 � d 'P4 d 534°EO0O S 34°00'00"E __ _ 70.00' --�-- 70.00' (TOTAL= 123.67) 1 05.56' 1 e.1 t OI 60.00' I aT+ S 54°30'00 W N N 1 5.0 0' 1(� _ OF 1 Ip MANo. 1 0 AIRLEE COURT ANNEX WOODBU Y GARDENS P8.2 PG. 103 PP PB. 3 I PG. 1 14 I Y 1 10 15232 1 15228 1 ...: 0? #5310 I I #5304 I , TAX 2190222 W w I F ASHLEY L. WES o N I Z LOT 20 10 1 1 o � TAX 38.14-01-24.00 13 7 c 0.2685 Ac. 1 I LOT 19 LOT 18 LOT 3 I � m CHERYL D. NICELY I w N °o lz N w In & KIMBERLEY J. PITTS -1Q w HELMS LANE 0 Z LOT 1 & PT LT 2 I ] w VACATED BY ORDINANACE 0 1 0.473 Ac. a 0 #082807-15 RECORDED I OO I PB. 3 PG. 114 I IN INST. # 200715832 lip I INSTR. #1201209538 I' PLAT IN INST. # 200803123 Z U PLAT IN INST. # 201209538 1 II_rJ❑I TAX MAP NO. 38.14 EXHIBIT ilAi1 SCALE: EXHIBIT SHOWING LEGEND PORTION OF PRIVATE LANE - TO BE VACATED PORTION OF PRIVATE BY LANE TO BE VACATEDG7 &RESERVED ASA P.U.E. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS coNTAINwGo.oslsAC. ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA PREPARED BY.' ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: 1 1- 1 1-2014 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. 1.1-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards SUBMITTED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell' Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee (appointed by District): The following one-year term expired on August 31, 2012: a) Becky Walter, representing the Hollins Magisterial District; Ms. Walter has served three consecutive terms and therefore cannot be reappointed. The following one-year terms expired on August 31, 2014: a) Jason B. Moretz, representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; Mr. Moretz is eligible for reappointment b) Barry Beckner, representing the Cave Spring Magisterial District; Mr. Becker has advised that he cannot serve an additional term 2. Economic Development Authority (appointed by District) The following four-year term expired on September 26, 2014: b) Paul Henkel, representing the Hollins Magisterial District; Mr. Henkel is eligible for reappointment Page 1 of 2 3. Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Commission (appointed by District) Troy Kincer, representing the Hollins Magisterial District has resigned his appointment effective August 27, 2014. His appointment was a three (3) -year term that expires on June 30, 2016. Atul Patel, representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District has resigned his appointment effective August 27, 2014. His appointment was a three (3) -year term that expires on June 30, 2015. 4. Social Services Advisory Board (appointed by District) Janice Tawney, representing the Catawba Magisterial District has resigned her appointment effective November 14, 2014. Her appointment was a four (4) -year term that expires on July 31, 2017. Page 2 of 2 ul AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J- CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for December 9, 2014, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5 inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes — October 14, 2014 2. Resolution establishing the meeting schedule for the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for calendar year 2015 3. Confirmation of appointments to the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority 4. Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $4,828 from the Virginia Department of Fire Programs to the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department for the repair of the existing burn building 5. Request to approve the loan of a 1990 Chevrolet Police vehicle for display at the Virginia Museum of Transportation Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. J-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution establishing a meeting schedule for the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for calendar year 2015 SUBMITTED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell C� `1" Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County annually establishes a schedule for its meetings. It has been the custom of this Board to schedule its meetings on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month. The attached resolution continues this tradition, except for the months of November and December, which schedules one meeting on November 10, 2015, and one meeting on December 8, 2015. Additionally, a special meeting has been scheduled on January 17, 2015, to hold a Board retreat to discuss strategic planning and budget issues. Finally, the Board must schedule an organizational meeting for January 2016. Staff recommends that the Board schedule its organizational meeting for Tuesday, January 12, 2016, at 2:00 p.m. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of the attached resolution. Page 1 of 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A MEETING SCHEDULE FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2015 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That for calendar year 2015, the regular meetings of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, are set forth below with public hearings scheduled for 7:00 p.m. unless otherwise advertised. Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 3 pm Saturday, January 17, 2015 (time to be determined) Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, March 10, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, May 12, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, June 9, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, June 23, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Page 1 of 2 Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 3 pm Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 3 pm and 7 pm Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 3 pm 2. That the organizational meeting for 2015 shall be held on Tuesday, January 12, 2016, at 2:00 p.m. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. J-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of appointments to the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority (At -Large) SUBMITTED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell Ct'� Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority: During the closed session held on November 18, 2014, it was the consensus of the Board to reappoint the following to an additional one (1) -year term to expire December 31, 2015: Rebecca Owens as the Administrative Official Daniel R. O'Donnell as the Alternate Administrative Official Charlotte A. Moore as the Elected Official Joseph B. "Butch" Church as the Alternate Elected Official Charles Poff, Sheriff Michael Warner, Deputy Sheriff Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. J-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: December 9, 2014 Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $4,828 from the Virginia Department of Fire Programs to the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department for the repair of the existing burn building Richard E. Burch, Jr. Chief of Fire and Rescue Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In 2008, Roanoke County, Roanoke City, City of Salem and the Town of Vinton were jointly approved for a Department of Fire Programs burn building construction grant that partially funded a replacement facility. These same localities shared in the additional construction costs to replace the twenty (20) -year-old burn building previously used for fire training on the site of the Roanoke Valley Regional Fire/EMS Training Center. This replacement facility was dedicated on September 11, 2009, and has seen numerous live burns in the simulated environment since that time. In July 2013, the Structures Group performed an inspection on the Roanoke Valley Training Center Burn Building located at 1220 Kessler Mill Road, Salem, Virginia. We received the report and reviewed the findings, which showed major roof leakage and rotten underlying wood sheathing among other smaller problems. Roanoke County Fire and Rescue applied for a Department of Fire Programs burn building repair grant in the amount of $9,731 to complete the needed repairs. We were fortunate to be awarded a grant for a portion of this request in the amount of $4,828 to complete repairs to the roof that will bring the facility in compliance with NFPA code section 14035.35/1402 10.1.2 and prohibit further leaking. Page 1 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT: Ordinance #052714-4 appropriated grant funds for grants that are routine and usual in nature forthe 2014-15 fiscal year. Funds in the amount of $4,828 will need to be allocated from the grant account to the Burn Building Repair Grant. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $4,828.00 from the Virginia Department of Fire Programs to the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department for the repair of the existing burn building. 2. Do not accept the grant. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends alternative 1. Page 2 of 2 'MCI NIMMI-1 4191 - EXEC TIVE DIShelton, Jr. Virginia Department of Fire Programs EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR January 16, 2014 Battalion Chief Brian Witt Roanoke County Fire 5925 Cove Road Roanoke VA 24019 Dear Bat. Chief Witt: Finance Branch 1005 Technology Park Drive Glen Allen, VA 23059-4500 Phone: 8041371-0220 Fax: 8041 371-3358 On behalf of the Virginia Fire Services Board (VFSB), we are pleased to advise the County of Roanoke, Virginia of a grant award of up to $4,828 for the repair of their burn building as a prop to assist in training the fire service for their jurisdiction. The grant award is allocated as follows. • Up to $4,828 for qualifying expenses for the repairs to the roof as specified in the grant application Although the County requested $9,731 in repair funds, according to the VFSB's Burn Building Grant Policy, renovations and repairs are apportioned based upon the size of the burn building relative to prototype specifications. Prototype specifications supported by Burn Building Grant funds provide for 1,880 square feet; therefore, any approved grant award will be restricted to the prorated square footage to the Prototype specifications (1,880/2,900 = 65%). Accordingly, the County's award is restricted to $9,731 * 0.65 = $6,308. Furthermore the County previously applied for a repair grant in FY2014 and was awarded $5,172. The Burn Building Policy in Section L, Clause 3 states, "the maximum amount of a repair project award shall not exceed $10,000 per project and no burn building will be funded over $10,000 per fiscal period (July 1 — June 30)." Therefore the County is awarded $4,828 representing the remaining balance of their $10,000 in repairs ($10,000 - $5,172). Also, be aware that any costs incurred prior to the grant award are ineligible for reimbursement under the current grant award. The performance period of the grant is from the date of award notification by conveyance of this correspondence through January 31, 2015. This award is effective: FY2014 www.vafirexom The County has until January 31, 2015 to collect the award consistent with the terms and conditions of the mutually executed Agreement. Two originals of the Disbursement Agreement are included. The County Administrator must sign both originals and have them sent to my attention. Both originals will be counter signed by the Virginia Department of Fire Programs. One original will be returned to the locality for file retention. No funds disbursements will be authorized or released without the executed disbursement Agreement. Funds disbursement for repair projects will be made in one (1) payment upon notification by the jurisdiction to the Agency at 100% completion measured in terms of expenses paid. In order to be eligible for payment, the prop must be placed in operation. It is the responsibility of the jurisdiction to maintain all such records subject to audit by this Agency or its assignees for a period of five (5) years following the date of the last transfer of award funds to the grant recipient. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at my office at 804-249-1958 or via email at Joe.Thompsonkvdfp.vir ig nia.gov. Respectfully, Joseph Thompson Grant & Local Aid Manager Enclosure c: B. Clayton Goodman, III, County Administrator, Roanoke Richard E. Burch, Chair, Virginia Fire Services Board W.G. Shelton, Jr, Executive Director, Virginia Department of Fire Programs Christine Lopilato, Director of Finance, Virginia Department of Fire Programs Dennis Price, Division Manager, Virginia Department of Fire Programs www.vafire.com F�f . VIRGINU FAME SERVICE GRAFT PROGRAM AGREEE NIf ; y X,/ Grant for Constructing or Repairing Burn %� Building or Fire Service Training Facilities. Statutory Authority: §38.2-401 of the Code of Virginia X� This Grant Agreement, made as of the I�31`` day of JJW rU-V\ , by and among the VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF FIRE PROGRAMS (the "Department"), acting as authorized on behalf of the Virginia Fire Services Board (the "Board"), and ROMMU, , (the "Grantee"), governs the distribution and use of Fire Services Grant Progr m moneys, as provided for in §38.2-401 (D) of the Code of Virginia. WHEREAS, §38.2-401 (D) of the Code of Virginia, authorizes the Board to determine the distribution of grants to provide regional fire services training facilities; to finance the Virginia Fire Incident Reporting System; and to build or repair Burn Buildings; and WHEREAS, the Grantee has submitted an application for a grant from the Fire Services Grant Fund Program to assist in funding the construction of or repair to a burn building, or funding the construction of or repair to a regional fire service training facility... _V -ng vY.� (bWa-,LJsw.- B,�� � !W together with plans, specifications and project narrative r such project narrative f r such project, more specs ically described in Attachment A hereto (the "Project"); and VVHEREAS, the Board has approved the Project and has authorized the Department to act on its behalf in the distribution and administration of grants; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted to the Board and Department by §38.2-401 (D) of the Code of Virginia, and in consideration of the Grantee's adoption and ratification of the representations, terms and conditions as herein provided, and benefits to accrue to the Commonwealth and public fi•om the accomplishment of this Project, the department offers a grant of e $ LJT21F. bQ to pay eligible Project cost subject to the terms and conditions listed below: These fiords shall be disbursed by the Department to the Grantee after the Agreement has been signed. These funds shall be deposited in an interest-bearing account or normal risk and with a demand restriction, if any, not exceeding 30 calendar days until there needed. The Grantee must be able to account for both the principle and the interest amounts. Any unused funds, including interest, shall be returned to the ,Department. Unless an extension has been granted by the Department, the construction and/or repair tasks shall be completed, and all documentation pertaining to such activities shall be submitted to the Department on or before 12 months after the grant funds have been disbursed. 4 The Department may grant an extension of up to three months beyond the 12 month period to complete the construction and/or repairs, and to submit documentation. Any extension beyond three months must be submitted to the Virginia Fire Services Board for approval. 12/2005 Page 1 of 4 The Grantee agrees to carry out and complete all phases of the Project strictly in accordance with the plans, specifications and project narrative. The plans, specifications and project narrative may only be revised or modified with the Board or Department's prior written approval. The Grantee agrees to allow the Board representative access to the Project at all reasonable times to verify compliance with the approved plans, specifications and project narrative. 6 The Grantee agrees that no construction or repair work shall commence until the following types of insurance are in place for entities performing any such work, including subcontractors, and these types of insurance shall be maintained at all times while construction or repair work is being performed: (a) an Alt Risk Builders. Risk Property insurance policy based on the completed value of all such work, with exclusions for design errors or defects removed by policy endorsement, and the locality shall be named 4dditional insured in such policy; (b) a Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability insurance policy covering all workers or employees engaged in such work, and, in case any such work is sublet, each subcontractor shall, similarly, provide Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance for all of the subcontractor's workers or employees who are engaged in the work, and in amounts not less than the minimums required by the Code of Virginia and other applicable laws and regulations; (c) a Comprehensive Commercial General Liability insurance policy that provides a minimum level of $500,004 combined single limit per occurrence, and the locality shall be named as an additional insured party in such policy; and (d) a Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance policy that will insure against claims for property damage that may arise from the operation of motor vehicles associated with the construction or repair work, with a minimum level of $500,004 combined single limit per occurrence, Before the commencement of any work, the locality must submit to the VDFP a Certificate of Coverage or Certificate of Insurance indicating that these types of insurance are in effect. All insurance shall be provided by insurers who are licensed to provide insurance in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 7 The Grantee agrees to operate and maintain the Project, now existing or built in whole or in part as a result of the Project, as a training facility for a period of 20 years from completion of this Project. 8 The Grantee agrees to operate, maintain and use the Project in accordance with the policies adopted by the Board, as amended from time to time. 9 Subject to lawful appropriation, the Grantee agrees to repay to the Department a sum which is equal to the pro - rata share (computed monthly) of all monies received under this Grant Agreement based on the period of operation and maintenance as specified in paragraph 7 above in the event that the Project ceases to be available for such specified training purposes prior to the expiration of such period, if such change in availability is due to an act or omission within the sole and direct control of the Grantee. 10 Grantee hereby agrees that the Project shall be maintained and operated at all times in a manner designed to prolong the useful life of the Project and that no condition will be allowed to exist that will, or is likely to, lead to a shorter than expected useful life for the Project. The Grantee further agrees to ensure appropriate encroachment factors of surrounding land for a period of 5 years from the completion date of the Project. 1212006 Page 2of 4 ���artr�or�f Of biro Pr09ram- 11 The Grantee represents to the Department that (a) its authorized representative whose signatttro appears below has read and understands the referenced provisions of the Code of Virginia and the Board6 policy .entitled "VFSB Burn Building Policy: Fire Service Grant Program, Grant Awards to Construct, Renovate,°br Repair, Brun Buildings throughout the Commonwealth", adopted thereunder, as amended from time to time, which are hereby incorporated into this Grant Agreement by reference in its entirety; (b) it agrees to comply with all applicable provisions of the Code of Virginia, including if appropriate, the Virginia Public Procurement Act that governs construction of public facilities by private entities. (c) It is duly authorized to enter into this Grant Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and has taken all necessary action to authorize such execution and performance. 1t4'4'. 12 This grant will be fully liquidatt-d in public tlettgl-4s LO^t�tlf' i itfyi 20 years fiom the completion date of the Project and the Grantee stall have ria lurl�46fi11tirtclsl NISI (1 l�j the Commonwealth under this Grant Agreement upon the expiration of such time. 13 To the extent permitted by law, the Grantee shall retain title to the Project and underlying land, and the Grantee shall not release or transfer title without first receiving written approval fitom the Board prior to such release, which approval shall not be unreasonably withlreld. 14 The Grantee agrees to retain all books, records and other documents relative to expenditures of Grant funds for five years from the completion date of the Project. The Board, the Department and/or State auditors shall have full access to and the right to audit any of these records during the above -referenced period. 15 The Department shall be bound hereunder only to the extent of the Fire Services Grant Funds available or which may hereafter become available for the purpose of this Grant Agreement. 15 This -writing constitutes the entire Grant agreement between the parties, supersedes any existing agreement among the parties hereto relative to the matters contained heroin, and may be modified only by written amendment executed by all parties. 17 This agreement.shall in all respects be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia without regard to the legislative or judicial conflict of laws rules of any state, 18 If any provision of this Grant Agreement is determined to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall not render the remaining portions of this Grant Agreement void or unenforceable. 19 This Grant Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 20 When any written notice or report is required or may be given hereunder, it will be deemed sufficient if the party giving such notice, request, or report delivers the same to the other party by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, or by other superior mailing, or by hand delivery, All notices, request, demands or reports delivered by mail or by hand will be deemed to have been given when received by any party hereto at the following addresses: Grantee: Such office or mailing address as stated on the Point of Contact Form attached hereto or to such other address of which the Grantee has notified the other parties hereto in writing. Agency and Board: Virginia Department of Fire Programs Attn: Burn Building Grant Administration 1005 Technology Park Drive Glen Allen VA 23059-4500 or to such other address of which the Department has notified the Grantee in writing. 1212006 Page Sof 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Grant Agreement as of the date first above written, intending to be bound thereby. DEPARTMENT OF FIRE PROGRAMS BY:,-. Signature of Authorized Representative 1A Name: Joseph ugpm Title: row and Locd rid Ma'am GRANTEE The Grantee, ?00-000 ck [p does hereby accept and ratify all teens, conditions and agreements contained in this Grant Algreetnen and does hereby accept the grant and by such acceptance agrees to all of the ton is and conditions hereof. — Q i �It Signature o . ulhorized Representative [late Title: F7 ufr L 1212006 Page 4of 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. J-5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve the loan of a 1990 Chevrolet Police vehicle for display at the Virginia Museum of Transportation SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke County Police Department is partnering with the Virginia Museum of Transportation to display a 1990 Chevrolet police vehicle at the Museum. The loan of this vehicle to the Museum will enhance the County Police Department celebration of its 25th Anniversary during the summer of 2015. A draft Memorandum of Understanding has been prepared outlining the conditions under which this vehicle will be on loan to the Museum. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the loan of this vehicle to the Virginia Museum of Transportation upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Memorandum of Understanding attached to this report. Page 1 of 1 AGREEMENT AS TO NON -WARRANTY, RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS, AND ASSUMPTION OF RISK WHEREAS, the Virginia Museum of Transportation (VMT) wishes to accept a loan of a 1990 Chevrolet police vehicle for display at the Museum, which police vehicle is more specifically described as (LIST AS MUCH INFO AS YOU HAVE ON IT); and WHEREAS, the loan of this vehicle to the Museum will enhance the County Police Department celebration of its 25th Anniversary during the summer of 2015; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County, its supervisors, employees and agents make no warranty, guarantee or representation, expressed or implied, of any type or nature, that the police vehicle is in good condition or merchantable or suitable for any purpose whatsoever; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County is willing to loan the police vehicle free of charge to Virginia Museum of Transportation "as is" and Virginia Museum of Transportation wishes to accept the Caboose "as is" acknowledging that the police vehicle may not be suitable for the original purpose for which it was intended or for any purpose whatsoever, and WHEREAS, in consideration of the County's loan of the police vehicle, VMT does hereby waive, release and forever discharge the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, their officers, directors, employees, agents and volunteers ("Roanoke County") from any and all claims, liabilities, losses, damages, expenses, and causes of action of every nature and kind arising out of or relating in any way to the use of the police vehicle; and WHEREAS, to the extent the law permits, VMT agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Roanoke County from any and all personal and bodily injuries, death and property damage, including cost of investigation, reasonable attorney's fees and cost of appeals, arising out of any claims or suits involving the use of the police vehicle by any person or entity; and WHEREAS, VMT, with full and complete understanding of all risks and dangers which use of the police vehicle involves, voluntarily assumes full responsibility and all risk, chance and hazard for any and all personal and bodily injuries, death, and property damage that may result to VMT, its employees and agents, and to third parties and their property from use of the police vehicle; as well as the risk that such injuries and damage may become permanent or more extensive than is known, anticipated or expected, and VMT assumes all risks inherent to use of the police vehicle. NOW, THEREFORE the Virginia Museum of Transportation, for its sole benefit, agrees to accept the police vehicle as a loan by Roanoke County upon the terms and conditions expressed herein, at no cost or obligation to Roanoke County. The undersigned has Page 1 of 2 authority to bind VMT to this Agreement, which authority is based on the following: SEEN AND AGREED to this day of .2014. VIRGINIA MUSEUM OF TRANSPORTATION ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA Ux Page 2 of 2 GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Audited balance at June 30, 2014 $ 21,266,557 Addition of 2013-14 operations 532,638 L-1 % of General Fund Revenue Balance at December 9, 2014 $ 21,799,195 Note: On December 21, 2004, the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy to increase the Genera Fund Unappropriated Balance incrementally over several years. * 2013-14 - Goal of 11 % of General Fund Revenues 2013-14 General Fund Revenues 11 % of General Fund Revenues ** 2014-15 - Goal of 11 % of General Fund Revenues 2014-15 General Fund Revenues 11 % of General Fund Revenues $193,332,334 $21,266,557 $198,174,499 $21,799,195 The Unappropriated Fund Balance of the County is currently maintained at the goal of 11.00%. Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance 1 Approved By Daniel R. O'Donnell P -M Interim County Administrator 11.00% * 11.00% ** COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CAPITAL RESERVES Minor County Capital Reserve (Projects not in the CIP, architectural/engineering services, and other one-time expenditures.) Audited balance at June 30, 2014 Addition of 2013-14 operations Fire Truck Loan Repayment for 2014-15 July 8, 2014 Appropriation for replacement of Financial System August 12, 2014 Appropriation for construction of Water Spheroid Water Tower Design Balance at December 9, 2014 Maior County Capital Reserve (Projects in the CIP, debt payments to expedite projects identified in CIP, and land purchase opportunities.) Audited balance at June 30, 2014 Addition of 2013-14 operations Balance at December 9, 2014 L-2 Amount $3,407,630.00 $605,096.00 $300,000.00 ($1,500,000.00) (200,000.00) $2,612,726.00 $1,284,715.00 1,305,748.00 $2,590,463.00 Technology Capital Reserve (Projects identified and prioritized by the Technology Governance Committee and approved by the County Administrator.) Audited balance at June 30, 2014 $121,137.00 Addition of 2013-14 operations $192,921.00 Submitted By Approved By Balance at December 9, 2014 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator $314,058.00 L-3 RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2014-2015 Original Budget $100,000.00 Addition from 2013-14 operations 28,231.00 June 10, 2014 Transfer funds for Special Assistant for Legislative Relations (32,400.00) October 14, 2014 Transfer funds to Hidden Valley High School for repairs to track (28,231.00) Balance at December 9, 2014 $ 67,600.00 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator L-4 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CHANGES IN OUTSTANDING DEBT Changes in outstanding debt for the fiscal year to date were as follows: Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator Outstanding Outstanding June 30, 2014 Additions Deletions December 9, 2014 General Obligation Bonds $ 6,150,390 $ - $ - $ 6,150,390 VPSA School Bonds 92,638,652 19,973,906 8,301,994 104,310,564 State Literary Loans 2,273,592 - 75,000 2,198,592 Lease Revenue Bonds 79,182,582 - 2,094,352 77,088,230 Capital Lease obligation 849,437 - 107,921 741,516 $ 181,094,653 $ 19,973,906 $ 10,579,267 - $ 190,489,292 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Daniel R. O'Donnell Interim County Administrator ACTION NO. ITEM NO. N-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 9, 2014 AGENDA ITEM: Work session to provide the National Incident Management System (NIMS) overview SUBMITTED BY: Richard E. Burch Chief of Fire and Rescue APPROVED BY: Daniel R. O'Donnell - r' Interim County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The National Incident Management System (NIMS) is the established guidance to which various governmental responses must conform whether at the local, state or federal level. While the majority of the document addresses the actual preparation and response aspect, this overview is to ensure elected officials are aware of the content in this mandated program. This work session will include an introduction to NIMS and the Incident Command System (ICS). Staff will cover as much of the program overview as possible in one hour and provide additional follow up as needed. FISCAL IMPACT: No direct funding is received for the delivery of this program though non-compliance could result in various funding streams and grants being compromised. ALTERNATIVES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends work session to discuss an overview of the National Incident Management System. Page 1 of 1 W AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2011 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each 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 identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Page 1 of 1