The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1/27/2015 - RegularINVOCATION: Associate Pastor Rick Brown Shenandoah Baptist Church Roanoke County Board of Supervisors January 27, 2015 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 January 27, 2015 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for January 27, 2015. 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 -ca ptio ned, 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 D. BRIEFINGS Briefing by the Roanoke Regional Partnership (Beth Doughty, Executive Director; John Hull, Director of Market Intelligence) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution proceeding to the detailed design phase for the construction of the Murray Run Stream Restoration Project under the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) of 2002 (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Richard L. Caywood, Assistant County Administrator) Page 2 of 5 F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCE -CONSENT AGENDA- Approval of these items does not indicate support for, orjudge 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 Sheldon Henderson to rezone approximately ninety (90) acres from R-1, Low Density Residential, District to AG -3, Agricultural/Rural Preserve, District on property located at 3320 Harborwood Road, Catawba Magisterial District G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1 . Ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $2,990,760 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 for the West Roanoke River Greenway (Doug Blount, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism-, Lindsay Blankenship, Greenway Planner) 2. Ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $5,857,840 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program for fiscal years 2014, 2016, and 2017 to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism (Doug Blount, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism-, Lindsay Blankenship, Greenway Planner) 3. Ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $200,000 from the Virginia Department of Transportation for fiscal year 2013-2014 MAP -21 Transportation Alternatives Program for fiscal year 2014 and $50,000 of local matching funds to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for the East Roanoke River Greenway (Doug Blount, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; Lindsay Blankenship, Greenway Planner) H. 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) Page 3 of 5 CONSENTAGENDA 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 — November 18, 2014 2. Resolution of appreciation from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to Polly Yeager, Recreation Programmer, upon her retirement after more than twenty-nine (29) years of service 3. Resolution of appreciation from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to Donald "Eddie" Ford, Parks Manager, upon his retirement after more than thirty-three (33) years of service 4. Request to accept and allocate $18,322.50 to the Clerk of the Circuit Court from the Commonwealth of Virginia for fiscal year 2014/2015 5. Request to accept two (2) donated K-9 ballistic vests valued at $1,900 from Vested Interest in K9s, Inc. for use by Police Department K -9s J. CITIZENS'COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS K. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Outstanding Debt 5. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of December 31,2014 6. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and Encumbrances as of December 31, 2014 7. Accounts Paid — December 31, 2014 8. Quarterly Report of 2015 fiscal year— Community Development Activities Page 4 of 5 EVENING SESSION L. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 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 (Postponed at the request of the petitioner) 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 (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) M. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. Al Bedrosian 2. Joseph B. "Butch" Church 3. Joseph P. McNamara 4. Charlotte A. Moore 5. P. Jason Peters 0. ADJOURNMENT Page 5 of 5 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: APPROVED BY: January 27, 2015 Briefing by the Roanoke Regional Partnership Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for Beth Doughty, Executive Director of the Roanoke Regional Partnership, and John Hull, Directorof Market Intelligence, to provide a briefing to the Board on Economic Development Performance Metrics. Page 1 of 1 z C)m Z3 (n LLI W w UJ LLI Z ZIM �4 Q 0 cu I 4-A v zi — W m V) 0 0 LO In 6- z Qj au OL 6. L) aj Ed m Eu �:[ 0 -7 Eo R M 1p cc EV o TO 0 r– tu m -3:- LE 0 z 0 0.0 0 CL la a� 0 > 0 LO 0 0c) r- 0 Le) ui X0 Ln ro Q LD "Z 03 LLJ -90 0 VIP L) eu UL Eu 0 rr cu c 00 Fla 0 0 a; It 0 0 z 0 X C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z z 9< w CL CD CD ca CID CD CID -tot; (1) 09 a. Lu LU LLI r C/3 LLJ LLI SeO Z 0 05--- < 0 �Tw i "1419 !dO a LU -j 0 CO z 0 0 z M m m C-) rr 0 a; It 0 0 CID COD COD CD ca z OX C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z z 9< w CL W E2 P O.z E� M LU -Z 0 in z CL cn LU �e 0 z d< 0 w LU (D 0 0 LU r C/) LU -i q< CO :2� 0 CO z FMOP,d :9 ®r 0 a; It 0 0 z OX C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z z 9< w CL CD ca Lbil NMI COD CD lam COD CD m C� 41" T rz c LU > LU -C .j (1) �2 LUC 2 -r, 0 C: I�c z Lu z 0 0 0 L) Z z Z .j o LL L n w 0 CO) z ��E I slid � 1 4511, LU LU U) 0 a; It 0 0 z 0 C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z CD CD PM Lbil NMI lam CD Lbil lam CID lam 42 Z Q) Z LU 10 E b .J Ll.. CL 0 Q) Lu m CD w < w LLI w Z fy_ Z) -j (D �e -J M 0 0 z 0 z > 0 Z 4 LLI 0 X: 0 CL z LL C/) 3: Q 0 a; It 0 0 —14� mom— lam COD CD lam z OX C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z z 9< w CL LU > 0 a. Qr- LU �e 0 z 0 cr- z 64 CD co z CL 9) LU Cl) I z 0 I -- Cl) z �E LU CD LU Z C) .j C) .j z LU cn C) LL CD co z CL 9) LU Cl) I z 0 I -- Cl) z �E 0 a; It 0 0 —q� mom— ca Lbil COD z OX C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z z 9< w CL LU LU L) Cf) CL 0 uj LU 0 0 0 LLI uj 29 8 IJ Z71 CO (b u 0 a; It 0 0 z OX C5 (n LLI W Ix LIJ LLI Z z CD NX ca lam lam ax ru COD ax Lu ci CL Cl) -e! =D a-) C) LI. --1 M: PL LU LLI 17 5 -- LU Cl) �i 0 z f -- LU z C-9 ce. L) 0 a; It 0 0 m 9 CD CID z OX C5 LLI Ix LLJ LLI Z z 9< w CL CD CID CL a) TF PP -.d 9E LU LU (-i < 0 C) C\4 0 N- 0-4 Uj LU LU LL. CIL LL Q- C—) rr L6- 0 a; It 0 0 z Lu Ce LLJ LAJ Z ol__ z 4 A Ix CL , r "I pr N T- T- Re N W W M W N TM W Re I'%- 06 (6 (6 6 4 ci C4 TOM TOM TOM TOM TOM TOM TOM if 41 -AM E 0 Cn 0 0 w j z U. if 41 -AM 0 a; It 0 0 .Am 4c . z 0 LLI Ix LLJ LLI �e Z 0 z 9< w CL ca CID ca P -M -.m i9c NMI ca am rf) r--.4 uj �e 0 z LU 0 LU > z 0 < LU CD LU z LU 0 0 m C13 z z 0 z W 0 F- 0 LL a- Cl) z 3:: uj �e 0 z 0 a; It 0 0 .j z C)m w ��LLI Ix LLJ LLI �e Z 0 z 09 Lbil ca CD ME CD Lu �e CD o CD 49t 0 CEO cr) w Lad m 2019 N� �-q 4� CD C%4 qr� cl w F - :z COD CA Ud ca ca COD CID CA rpt p COD. K1, Wool' PIL� LO A ca CL cu >N 4-0 or OL -1 10 LU M 49P 4-0 4-0 a) cu > Ak* IOU A. -O LA 4-0 cmu CU 32e CL CIO .14 0 a; It 0 0 z ,C) (DWI Lij 99 W LLJ LLI �e Z 0 z 9< 64, fA L .40� -k 10 IF a) A. -O 0 Aj A. -O C/) CU A. -O C/) a) C/) Jc: a) C/) =3 0 C/) 7tf 0 a) CL =3 CL A. -O C/) C: 0 A. -O m C) Jc: A. -O 0 a; It 0 0 Lim cm z C)m (DWI LLI 99 I= LLJ Z z 9< 1= CL F -q L I COD q '1 4 r - -. - J7 A. -O CU cn cn ME a) cn cn cn FYI... MIMMEME 0 cn cn ilLL A. -O CU CU CU m 0 0 Jc: 0 4- 0 a; It 0 0 z C)m o W I LLI W I= LLJ LLI Z z 4c 04C Ak�- It 14--t ow IV C: WWW 4_9 0 CU 0) A. -O 0 c L) C: -a 0 CU 0) A. -O 0 c L) 0 Aj 0 Jc: C/) >N a) Jc: 4.5 0 4.5 C/) a) C/) m N a) CD a) Jc: cn 0 a) z C)m Z3 (n LLI W w UJ LLI Z ZIM �4 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: January 27, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution proceeding to the detailed design phase for the construction of the Murray Run Stream Restoration Project under the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) of 2002 SUBMITTED BY: Tarek Moneir Deputy Director of Development Services APPROVED BY: Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On September 9, 2014, HHHunt submitted an unsolicited proposal for the Murray Run Stream Restoration Project. The project consists of restoring approximately 1,460 linear feet of Murray Run by cutting back steep channel slopes, lowering overbank elevations, placing natural (stone, wood, vegetation) erosion control devices and providing rock control structures in the stream. This PPEA proposal is unusual in that the proposal is to partner with Roanoke County to address an environmental problem with the assistance of a grant from the Commonwealth of Virginia. Grant funding is available from the Virginia Stormwater Local Assistance Fund (SLAF), administered by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), to construct Best Management Practices (BMPs) to assist localities in addressing their water quality issues. The projects must be for the purpose of lowering stream pollutants, must be administered through a locality and has a fifty percent (50%) local match. A condition of this grant program is that any BMP constructed under this grant program must be maintained to reduce pollutants by the locality in perpetuity. Failure to maintain the BMP could result in DEQ requiring the County to repay the State the grant funding. With Board of Supervisor approval on September 23, 2014, staff advertised for competing proposals as required by the PPEA legislation and HHHunt submitted the required review fee. No competing proposals were received by the advertised deadline of December 16, Page 1 of 2 2014. Under the PPEA legislation, the Board of Supervisors may now vote to move the proposal to the Part 11 Detailed Design phase in order to determine if the project should proceed to the negotiation of a Comprehensive Agreement. Moving the project to the detailed design phase causes no financial obligation on the part of the County. The Board of Supervisors will have the abilityto determine if the project isto be pursued after a tentative Comprehensive Agreement is negotiated. PPEA legislation requires that any tentative Comprehensive Agreement be available for public review at least thirty (30) days prior to the Board of Supervisors considering it for approval. The Board of Supervisors shall also hold a public hearing before entering into a Comprehensive Agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: At this point in the process, there is no obligation made on the part of the County to fund any cost for the project. HHHunt has submitted a $5,000 proposal fee to the County. These funds will be used to defray any County costs for reviewing the proposal and negotiating a tentative Comprehensive Agreement. If the project does move forward to development, funds for construction will come from HHHunt and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) grant fund already approved for Roanoke County. DEQ approved the grant for funding the project. Estimated project cost is $557,900 with $278,950 provided under the DEQ grant and the $278,950 local match provided by HHHunt as part of its unsolicited proposal. HHHunt will be responsible to design the project; obtain all permits-, provide information to the County to satisfy DEQ grant reporting requirements; construct the work, and, repair any damage that occurs in the warranty period at their cost. At the conclusion of the warrantee period, HHHunt will continue general maintenance responsibilities as the property owner. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the resolution authorizing the development and submittal of a Detailed Design Phase proposal from HHHunt for the Murray Run Stream Restoration. 2) Do not approve the resolution STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the adoption of the attached resolution (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, JANUARY 27, 2015 RESOLUTION PROCEEDING TO THE DETAILED DESIGN PHASE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MURRAY RUN STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT UNDER THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT (PPEA) OF 2002 WHEREAS, the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (PPEA) allows the Roanoke County to create a public-private partnership to develop projects for public use-, and WHEREAS, by Resolution 051304-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted procedures for the implementation of the PPEA by Roanoke County-, and WHEREAS, by Resolutions 042506-3b and 092606-2.c the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County amended and readopted guidelines and procedures for the implementation of the PPEA by Roanoke County-, and WHEREAS, HHHUNT had submitted an unsolicited proposal under the provisions of the PPEA to construct the Murray Run Stream Restoration Project-, and WHEREAS, by Resolution 092314-1 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County accepted the HHHunt unsolicited proposal for publication and conceptual phase consideration and it invited the submission of competing preliminary proposals; and WHEREAS, no other person has submitted a proposal pursuant to these procedures-, and Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, the County Administrator has reviewed this proposal and has recommended to the Board of Supervisors that it proceed to review this proposal at the detailed design phase. 1 . That there is a public need for the Murray Run Stream Restoration Project. 2. That it chooses to accept the HHHunt proposal for detailed Phase 2 proposal review pursuant to Section VI. B. of the County's procedures. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. F-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: APPROVED BY: January 27, 2015 Requests for public hearing and first reading for rezoning ordinances-, consent agenda Philip Thompson Deputy Director of Planning Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading on this ordinance is accomplished by adoption of this ordinance in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of this item 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 this ordinance. The second reading and public hearing on this ordinance is scheduled for February 24, 2015. The title of this ordinance is as follows: 1. The petition of Sheldon Henderson to rezone approximately ninety (90) acres from R-1, Low Density Residential, District to AG -3, Agricultural/Rural Preserve, District on property located at 3320 Harborwood Road, Catawba Magisterial District. Maps are attached. More detailed information is available in the Clerk's Office. Page 1 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of this rezoning ordinance for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for February 24, 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 1, 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 De-velopment Planning & Zoning S204 Bernard Drive P 0 Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 For Staff se OnI Date received: Received by: klR,-VD012�5 ow Work: 05PO-382- 5-65-'? 1,�)(Xb6f2.ujWb A-0, Cell #: --5 ve - 5- -;s 7 - 6. Npplication fee: PC/BZA date� ,;� -,) I �s , o 0 Q I C� /),S -- Placards issued: - I BOS date: Tax Map No.: 00 —0 Existin Zoning: R-1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: -4�61 Existing Land Use: R65 j im:wrlk— Case Nwnber ALL APPLICANTS ,Che k type of application filed (check all that apply) 191zoning 0 Special Use U Variance 0 Waiver E Administrative Appeal 0 Comp Plan (15a-2232) Review Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: klR,-VD012�5 ow Work: 05PO-382- 5-65-'? 1,�)(Xb6f2.ujWb A-0, Cell #: --5 ve - 5- -;s 7 - 6. C:514L1tF-M-k1A-- 117-V16-5 Fax No.: -59'0 -320) �339-4 Owner's name/address w/zip Phone #: Work: Fax No. Property Locah" Magisterial District: CAM U) Blj� 33c�ol s-5--4 &i5z" 44 65 3 Community Planning area: CL-,51V41AA- Tax Map No.: 00 —0 Existin Zoning: R-1 Size of parcel(s): Acres: -4�61 Existing Land Use: R65 j im:wrlk— PXZONING, SPECIAL USE PEKWT, WAfVER AND COMP PLAN (15 2-2232) RE"EW APPLICANTS (R/SfW/CP) Proposed Zoning: A6-3 erty or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and Proposed Land Use: A &Ale consent f the owner. Does the sarcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontagerequirements of the requested district? Yes P'- No F1 IFNO, AVARIIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FILRST If rezowng request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No VARLINCE WAIVER AND ADM17VISTRATIVE APPEAL APPLICAZVTS (VIWIAA) Variance[Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning anco in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to ) Appeal of Interpretation of Section�s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordiffl4ce 7 Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to - - - - - - Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE A�KPTED IF ANY OFLqVESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R/S/WICP V/A-A RISIWCP V/AA Consultation RJSWCP V/AA 8 1/2 " y I t " concept plan Application fee Application Metes aad bounds description Proffers, ifappticable Justification Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the c)� erty or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and arn acting with the knowledge and consent f the owner. Owner's Signature ITUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT WAIVER OR COMP PLAN (15.2-2232) RJF-VrIEW REQUESTS I Applicant The Planning Commission will study rezoning, specialuse permit waiver or community plan (15.2-2232) review reqlests to determine the need and justification for the vhange in terms of public health, safety, and general. welfare. Please 20aswer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinancv. The property was formerly farmland prior to Wold War 11 and by changing the zoning back to agricultural it would allow me to use the property per the rights as stated in Article III of the zoning ordinance. My intentions are to develop the property into a hobby farm for retirement. The property is not suitable for R-1 development due to steep terrain and public utilities being so far way. In my opinion, it would not be cost effective. This further enhances the rezoning, as AG -3 requires larger lots and setbacks. The road frontage is deceiving due to the topography of land. There is only about 100 feet of usable road frontage. Please explain how (he project conforms to the, general guidelines and policies contained in the RoarkokQ County Conimunity Plan. Chapter -5 of the 2005 community plans states that rural acres in Roanoke County have been declining. This rezoning would, in a small way, help preserve acreage, as most of the property would be forestry related. 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 waterbsewer, roads, schools, parks/reoreation and fire arid rescue. Minimal impact can be expected on this property. The north boundary R-1 properties are currently fenced along with the AG -3. Also, this area is very steep and does not lend itself for any use but forestry. The East boundary is totally AG -3 and has been fenced previously. The West and South boundary may see some fencing. There would be no impact on public services. CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST A concept plan of the proposed project must be subrnitted 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 rczonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations arid may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use pern-dt 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 shoWd be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS a. Applicant name and name of development b. Date, scale and north arrow c. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. f. The zoning and land -use of all adjacent properties /' g, All property lines and easements ,I.,— h, All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights 4— i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to thedeveLopment L-- j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional infoi7nation requiredfor REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify that all items required in the checklist above are complete. Date Signature of applicant rel WV) U C.3 in X < Ld C14 Lrj Z Z -n LLJ 0 m �cw V� �2 0 (D �c 0 C04 (-) - V) (if 0— I F > 0 < m C14 > z C�'(3 Z 0 0 IS S. 0 W ui W- LLI 0 (wy) 1-� z ct� LLI cq C-4 F'- �c z "I . goo j 7: CD IOU C, 0 :< W rq W t4 -j < z I < 'o LL, Li 00 0 < 3: 3 o co 0 0 .6 pd Ln cy- 0 ul ci ui 4 -< ( Zmmi Pio z r, !�j no C) LJ x < Lj ll ZE C; w -1 :1 m 5 0 LLJ 0 ��z < 135 TT- -0 z P: V) Ix 2�,a W-- z w � OLL7w,(jf) 01 > WO ON- q -C ,M� -'d 0 < z 10!4� 10 N eq 0 n;F C;8 z Z 12-- 2 loo -4 4 V L2 w 0 0 c LO C3 1) co 0 9 -�j 2 2 tr� wo C14 C�Lccq E. 0 of to ci Ln 0 z Iz, ul 0 I Zn 'm o x 0 C', ;� p 9 g .0� vi '60" Ln z IA En �69 0 OW L12 N 0 0 -i FZ en < CO, a 6 Q , 6 > w 0 in — -,� t-) oo� 00 M , o = Cq z ;n 6mm j�F 0 ck: 0 0 .0d .6 En 0 w In z a Ix O"N !�No 0 C3 C! Mw 00 Ln Q .6 6 m o C) OR In 0 0 C; 90 I (n in W') C) 0 oj�j cq Lri Z 7- O.,� < -------------- - 0 0) 7v 0 LA C) 0 C-4 cy ty !n z mm > z In 0 11 � F, � 4 ;', b N F, b _j HE ; 4 �! w 21 Ol n � . 0 Mn'-6-bD&DF�;,Mmomw It " M z La WX 7�( LLJ 0 14 �=.Ow�wm_ ul z z Z Z z .r z d 00 z zzzzzzz u < z cq w wn z C) 0 cq La Z 0 �-�arro -,0 m - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 00 t5 o 0 00 10 < 3:: uj c! "I q IR 9 IQ 0 z 0 z z V) (D � no 0 a. M. qq 0 LLJ 00 CD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C; �,�i -cc U M -J z 0 Lj �1� -J X -ct V) 0 < 0 C) 0 V) r �M0 Z8 W 0 3e 0 tn" A nK 2: z 0 C9 -t lz� U 0 Im -W V)w 'O'gig �z 0� RZ N w 0 0 �2 Ai 0 W? ua,� Zq 0 C� 0 O< 4 l< 0 Lr, 0 to C, On — - - - - - - - 6 3� z W) ca In m X �d C-4 8 N CA 0 C� ff; (q CAIK z C3 L12 0 0 w 0 PO 0 t) N n 0 uj Vq -02 0 > 0 C! 'i v . &n b th C'I 00� W) N 11) M N omc,; z IA Z 0 no- n �Om 10 19 nL, m 3z 01 cq trO4 z C� ed "I w q I Xw Ootqo" - N.R4 w 0 �:= zo*oo 4k WR 14 V _,-jl yot DODSON, PENCE. VIAR, YOUNG a: WOODRUM ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROANOKE. VA. SALEM, VA. EXHIBIT' A '/BEGINNING at a point in the center of Va. See . Rte. 639 on the northerly line of the property owned by John L. Reynolds Estate; thence leaving the road and with the southerly line of J. G. Gladden property S. 83' 241 22" E. 144.57 -feet to an old pin; thence with the southerly line og Charlotte k . Helms Estate S. 83' 55' 52" E. 1202.10 feet to an old pipe; thence with the southerly line of Clare -nee Gordon property (D.B. 973, pg. 73) and the so-utherly line of the D. M. Wright property (D.B. 243, pg. 442) S. 840 411 15" E. 1325.58 feet to a 48" Spani-sh Oak; thence with the westerly line of David E. Thomas property (D.B.'844, pg. 501) S. 20Q' 05" 3711 E. 2272.70 f to an old iron; thence with the northerly line of Robert E. Scott property (D.B. 210, pg. 92) N. 82* 281 0211 W. 1142.63 feet to a point; thence with new division lines through the property of John L. Reynolds Estate N. 230 02' 39" W.; thence passing a 30" Spanish Oak on line at 9.52 feet, in all 143.91 feet to a 18" Beech; thence N. 20 17' 12" W. 78.90 feet to an iron pin at the easterly end of a 50 foot roadway leading through Tract "A" to Va. Sec. Rte. 639; thence still with another new division line through the John L. Reynolds Estate property crossing the end of said 50 foot roadway N. 08' 13' 07" W. in all 164.97 feet to a pin; thence N. 51' 10' 35" W. 146.36 feet to a pin; thence N. 68' 15' 58" W. 102.08 feet to a pin; thence N. 71' 40' 1911 W. 175.89 feet to a pin; thence N. 68' 17' 06" W. 228.96 feet to a pin; thence N. 760 16' 30" W. 288.52 feet to a pin; thence N. 670 41' 03" W. 158.81 feet to a pin; thence N. 33* 48' 4911 W. 74.81 feet to a pin; thence N. 270 121 0311 W. 157.31' feet to a pin; thence N. 01" 26' 4211 W. 68.29 feet to a pin; thence N. 14' 28' 05" W. 234.50 feet to a pin; thence still with a new division line through the property of John L. Reynolds Estate S. E�p --JL- nPD, 23 20' 21" W . pa I s sing a 6" Walnut on line at 1-46. 19 - " &C 1458 "All at 156.6��b feet, feet, passing the corner to tract in all 173.22 feet to a point in the center of Va. Sec. Rte. 639; thence with the center of Va. S(z�c. Rte. 639 N. 60 23' 20" W. 18.5 feet to a point� thence along the are of a circle to the left w�iose radius is 206.68 feet, whose chord is N. 21' 5_�51 5011 w. 110.76 feet an arc distance of 112.13 feet t -o a point; thence with the arc of another circle t4D the left whose radius is 227.38 feet, whose chord 1s. N. 500 08' 35" W. 99.75 feet, an arc distance of 100.57 feet to a point; thence with the are of a circ -le to the right whose radius is 458.24 feet, whose cliord is N. 470 35' 38" W. 240.60 feet, an are dista-nce of 243.45 feet to a point; thence still with the center of Va, Sec. Rte. 639 N. 320 221 2611 W. 353.67 feet to a point; thence with the are of a circle to 0-te left whose radius is 155.73 feet, whose chord is N. 500 10' 28" W. 95.24 feet, an arc distance of 96.80 feet: to a point; thence N. 67' 581 30" W. 81.05 feet to a point; thence along the arc of a circle to the -right whose radius is 203.31 feet, whose chord is N. 540 091 28" W, 97.11 feet, an arc distance of 98.06 feet to a point; thence N. 400 20' 27" W. 98.53 fee -t to a point; thence along the arc of a circle to the right whose radius is 371.70 feet, whose chord is N. 320 40' 43" W. 99.12 feet, an arc distance of 99.41 feet to a point; thence still with the center of Va. Sec. Rte. 639 (30 feet wide) N. 25' 01' W, 131.17 feet to the beginning and containing 90.104 acres of which 0.499 acresis in Va. Sec. Rte. 639,.leaving a net area of '89.605 acres being conveyed to rhen_-,parties of ' the second and third parts and being designated as tract "B" on map made by T. p. Parker & Son, Engineers and Surveyors, dated July .13, 1978; and BEING a portion of the property acquired by John L. Reynolds by deed from Maggie Reynolds, et al, da -ted November 27, 1928, recorded in the clerk's office of the Circuit court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 182, page.238. ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS Owner: James S. Reynolds, Jr. Address: 605 Page Cr Salem, VA 24153 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-35,00-0000 065.00-01-34.00-0000 Zoning: R-1 Owner: Dale M. Israel and Angela D. Israel Address: 3456 Harborwood Rd. Salem, VA 24153 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-31.03-0000 Zoning: R-1 Owner: David E. Thomas and Martha M. Thomas Address: 5236 32 Id Terrace North St. Petersburg, FL 33710 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-02.00-0000 Zoning: AG -3 Owner: Robert John King Address: 5918 Maywood Avenue Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-42.00-0000 Zoning: AG -3 Owner: Robert E. Hartless Address., P.O. Box 1363 Salem, VA 24153 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-53.00-0000 Zoning: R-1 Owner: Deborah Gladden Address: 3208 Harborwood Rd. Salem, VA 24153 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-55.00-0000 Zoning: R-1 Owner: Ernest C. King Address: 2532 Edinburgh Dr NW Roanoke, VA 24012 Parcel ID#: 065,00-01-38.00-0000 Zoning: R-1 Owner: Jeffrey R. and Ivonne Corekin Address: 3351 -Lapping Lane Salem,VA24153 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-37.00-0000 Zoning: R-1 Owner: Betty Jones Rice Address: 4046 High Point Rd. Elliott City, Maryland 21402 Parcel ID#: 065.00-01-57.00-0000 Zoning: R-1 4 fo, 7. cu z�, lo 0 o gi 2. jpe, _0 tz lo 3-r -L-�4 -A, A fo, 7. cu lo 0 o gi 2. jpe, _0 lo cu lo 0 o gi _0 lo o. cu 'E E (o 4(� j5 o m z 0 U) 0 C) 4it m N 0) CLO 0) m 6 00 co) ug C14 s 4(� 0 0 20 all" C) U) co CL CL CL 2 CL 2 X (0 2 m �M. co < LU IL IL P 0 < 2 c1r) (Y) c1r) c1r) T— (D T— < c1r) (D < oo (Y) < _0 C2 cu ID -0 E L, �'i OK c 0 < o C? -. -i6 0 C) U) U) 0 ONI 0 0 U) _0 0 0 'o 0 -.00 u) -00 2 cu uD) E (6 5 i5 D =; (? z C) U) U) — CLO m 6 0) 00 C14 0 0 20 . . (n '6) co CL CL 2 CL 2 x 0 M 2 m co CL < LU IL IL (0 P 0 < 2 C2 ID -0 E L, �'i OK c < o C? -. -i6 0 C) U) U) 0 ONI 0 0 U) CL LU CL 0. LU LU LU o cu o -E 0 o� 0 0 i6 00 E < -C: o o I. S� - - -00 4(� - �2 go D cu 'E 0 U) E (0 i5 o N N I _0 . m z —, (o m U) 0 C) 0) U) a) U) CL9 M 0 6 00 =- co) ug all" C) U) C14 co CL U) 0 CL 0 CL 20 X m CL 2 2 (0 2 m co < LU 0- 0- P 0 < 2 ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER G-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: APPROVED BY: January 27, 2015 Ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $2,990,760 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 for the West Roanoke River Greenway Doug Blount Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke River Greenway will be a thirty-one (31) -mile bicycle/pedestrian trail through the Roanoke Valley, linking Roanoke County, the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Town of Vinton. The greenway system has been strongly supported by citizens, businesses, civic organizations, and local governments. As such, the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission made the Roanoke River Greenway its number one priority in the 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Greenways were also strongly supported by Roanoke County citizens during development of the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Parks Master Plan completed in 2007. The residents of Roanoke County have identified greenways as a high priority need for recreational facilities and amenities desired in our community. The scope of the project includes a 1.6 -mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway proposed along the north and south sides of the Roanoke River between Green Hill Park in Roanoke County and Riverside Park in the City of Salem. The cost estimate for completing the West Roanoke River Greenway project is Page 1 of 4 $7,241,031, including $1.25 million in contingency funds. Funding for the project is as follows.. Amount Source of funds Board Action $ 2,990,760 Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Request for appropriation this report 3,499,166 Federal Open Container funds Appropriated 3/23/2010 751,105 Unfunded at this time To be determined $ 7,241,031 Total On March 3, 2014, Roanoke County entered a professional engineering services agreement with Anderson & Associates of Virginia, Inc. (A&A) for Phases 11 and III of the West Roanoke River Greenway Project. The RSTP funding will be utilized for final engineering, environmental permitting, right-of-way acquisition, and construction of the greenway that includes two (2) bridge crossings of the Roanoke River. VDOT has recently conducted a Value Engineering (VE) Study with project recommendations, and the project team is currently working with A&A on preparation of final design and engineering documents. Over the next twelve to eighteen (12-18) months, Roanoke County anticipates completing final design and engineering, obtaining the environmental permits, completing right-of-way acquisition, and beginning construction. Fiscal year 2014-2019 Regional Surface Transportation Program On April 19, 2013, Roanoke County submitted a grant application to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funding for the western section of the Roanoke River Greenway. The regional application was sponsored by the City of Roanoke, City of Salem, County of Roanoke and Town of Vinton in cooperation with the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. In its entirety, the regional application requested $12,775,000 for completion of the Roanoke River Greenway from Green Hill Park to the Blue Ridge Parkway for a 21.2 - mile continuous bicycle and pedestrian trail across the Roanoke Valley. As of the date of the RSTP application, 12.2 miles of this greenway were completed and open, 1.7 miles funded and 7.3 miles partially funded. As depicted on the map below, the four (4) sections of the greenway that needed additional funding, were- 1) Green Hill Park to Woodbridge and Mill Lane to Riverside Park, 2) Eddy Avenue and Apperson Drive bridges, 3) Roanoke/Salem line to Bridge Street, and 4) Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) to Blue Ridge Parkway. Page 2 of 4 • RSTP Funding Received El Completed P • Funded For Construction El Future Planning ROANOKE On May 23, 2013, the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization endorsed the Regional Surface Transportation Program project priorities and six (6) - year financial plan, which included $2,990,760 in funds to Roanoke County for the West Roanoke River Greenway project proposed between Green Hill Park in Roanoke County and Riverside Park in the City of Salem. On June 19, 2013, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted the fiscal year 2014-2019 Six -Year Improvement Program, which allocated the Regional Surface Transportation Program funds. Regional Surface Transportation Program funds are apportioned by the Commonwealth of Virginia to Metropolitan Planning Areas that have been designated "Transportation Management Areas" by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The urbanized area in and around the Roanoke Valley was recently designated a Transportation Management Area, based on 2010 census data. FISCAL IMPACT: The grant amount of $2,990,760 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation program includes a twenty percent (20%) match from the Commonwealth of Virginia-, therefore, no local match is required. The funds are scheduled for allocation as follows: Page 3 of 4 ,I k City of City of Roanoke Salem a en Nil r, Town of Pr ark Tinter Vintcn 2 Park Creek Wasena Mill 4 ,lountain Roanoke County Pa A --------- — • RSTP Funding Received El Completed P • Funded For Construction El Future Planning ROANOKE On May 23, 2013, the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization endorsed the Regional Surface Transportation Program project priorities and six (6) - year financial plan, which included $2,990,760 in funds to Roanoke County for the West Roanoke River Greenway project proposed between Green Hill Park in Roanoke County and Riverside Park in the City of Salem. On June 19, 2013, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted the fiscal year 2014-2019 Six -Year Improvement Program, which allocated the Regional Surface Transportation Program funds. Regional Surface Transportation Program funds are apportioned by the Commonwealth of Virginia to Metropolitan Planning Areas that have been designated "Transportation Management Areas" by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The urbanized area in and around the Roanoke Valley was recently designated a Transportation Management Area, based on 2010 census data. FISCAL IMPACT: The grant amount of $2,990,760 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation program includes a twenty percent (20%) match from the Commonwealth of Virginia-, therefore, no local match is required. The funds are scheduled for allocation as follows: Page 3 of 4 Funding Source/Year Funding Amount Obligation Deadline Expenditure Deadline RSTP FY 2014 $218,600 July 1, 2015 July 1, 2018 RSTP FY 2015 $2,772,160 July 1, 2016 July 1, 2019 TOTAL: $2,990,760 In accordance with Roanoke County's Grant Policies and Procedures, a budget appropriation must be established through Board of Supervisors action for expenditures to be processed against a grant. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $2,990,760 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 for the West Roanoke River Greenway proposed between Green Hill Park in Roanoke County and Riverside Park in the City of Salem. 2. Take no action at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1, approval of the first reading of this ordinance, and scheduling the second reading on February 10, 2015. Page 4 of 4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON JANUARY 27, 2015 ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,990,760 FROM THE FEDERAL REGIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, RECREATION AND TOURISM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2014 AND 2015 FOR THE WEST ROANOKE RIVER GREENWAY WHEREAS, on April 19, 2013, Roanoke County in collaboration with the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, City of Roanoke, City of Salem, and Town of Vinton submitted a request to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for Regional Surface Transportation Program funds for the Western Section of the Roanoke River Greenway Project proposed between Green Hill Park in the County of Roanoke and Riverside Park in the City of Salem ; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2013, the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization endorsed the Regional Surface Transportation Program project priorities and six (6) -year financial plan, which included $2,990,760 in funds to Roanoke County for the West Roanoke River Greenway Project-, and WHEREAS, on June 19, 2013, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted the fiscal year 2014-2019 Six-year Improvement Program, which allocated the Regional Surface Transportation Program funds-, and WHEREAS, these funds are scheduled to be allocated over fiscal years 2014 and 2015-1 and WHEREAS, the grant award does not require matching funds from Roanoke County-, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be Page 1 of 2 appropriated by ordinance-, and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 2015, and the second reading was held on February 10, 2015. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows.. 1. That the sum of $2,990,760 is hereby appropriated from the Regional Surface Transportation Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014 and 2015-1 and 2. The funds are to be allocated to the West Roanoke River Greenway Project proposed between Green Hill Park in Roanoke County and Riverside Park in the City of Salem -I and 3. That appropriations designated for the West Roanoke River Greenway Project will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year, but shall remain appropriated until the completion of the project. RSTP funds are subject to deallocation if not expended within four (4) years of allocation-, and 4. That if Roanoke County subsequently elects to cancel this project the County agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is notified of such cancellation-, and 5. That Roanoke County will be responsible for maintenance, upkeep and operating costs of any facility constructed with Regional Surface Transportation Program funds-, and 6. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER G-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: January 27, 2015 Ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $5,857,840 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program for fiscal years 2014, 2016 and 2017 to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for the East Roanoke River Greenway Doug Blount Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke River Greenway will be a thirty-one (31) -mile bicycle/pedestrian trail through the Roanoke Valley, linking Roanoke County, the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Town of Vinton. The greenway system has been strongly supported by citizens, businesses, civic organizations and local governments. As such, the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission made the Roanoke River Greenway its number one (1) priority in the 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Greenways were also strongly supported by Roanoke County citizens during development of the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Parks Master Plan completed in 2007. The residents of Roanoke County have identified greenways as a high priority need for recreational facilities and amenities desired in our community. The scope of the East Roanoke River Greenway project includes a 2.7 -mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway proposed along the south side of the Roanoke River from the waste water treatment plant in the City of Roanoke to the Blue Ridge Parkway. The cost estimate for completing the East Roanoke River Greenway project is $6,574,079. In addition to Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funding awarded for the Page 1 of 4 East Roanoke River Greenway project, Roanoke County has previously received $716,250 in Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Transportation Enhancement funding. A portion of this funding has been used to complete Phase I of the project that included preliminary design and engineering that commenced in April 2012. The total funding allocated for the project to date is $6,824,090. On December 4, 2014, Roanoke County entered a professional engineering services contract with Anderson & Associates of Virginia, Inc. for Phase 11 of the East Roanoke River Greenway Project. The RSTP funding will be utilized for final engineering, environmental permitting, right-of-way acquisition, bidding and construction contract administration for the greenway. Fiscal year 2014-2019 Regional Surface Transportation Program On April 19, 2013, Roanoke County submitted a grant application to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funding for the western section of the Roanoke River Greenway. The regional application was sponsored by the City of Roanoke, City of Salem, County of Roanoke, and Town of Vinton in cooperation with the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. In its entirety, the regional application requested $12,775,000 for completion of the Roanoke River Greenway from Green Hill Park to the Blue Ridge Parkway for a 21.2 - mile continuous bicycle and pedestrian trail across the Roanoke Valley. City of City of Roanoke Salern Z Townof 11�jk Vinton **AF D 3 PRA RUA 220 Roanoke Coimty Pa,k --'/-\�3 El RSTP Funding Received El Completed fflow AOL E Fundecl For Construction El Future Planning ROANOKE Wo 0 Page 2 of 4 As of the date of the RSTP application, 12.2 miles of this greenway were completed and open, 1.7 miles funded and 7.3 miles partially funded. As depicted on the map above, the four (4) sections of the greenway that needed additional funding, were- 1) Green Hill Park to Woodbridge and Mill Lane to Riverside Park, 2) Eddy Avenue and Apperson Drive bridges, 3) Roanoke/Salem line to Bridge Street, and 4) City of Roanoke to the Blue Ridge Parkway. On May 23, 2013, the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization endorsed the Regional Surface Transportation Program project priorities and Six (6) - Year financial plan, which included $5,857,840 in funds to Roanoke County for the East Roanoke River Greenway project proposed between the City of Roanoke and the Blue Ridge Parkway. On June 19, 2013, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted the fiscal year 2014-2019 Six-year Improvement Program, which allocated the RSTP funds. These funds are apportioned by the Commonwealth of Virginia to Metropolitan Planning Areas that have been designated "Transportation Management Areas" by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The urbanized area in and around the Roanoke Valley was recently designated a Transportation Management Area, based on 2010 census data. FISCAL IMPACT: The grant amount of $5,857,840 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation program does not require matching funds from the County. These funds include a twenty percent (20%) match from the Commonwealth of Virginia. The RSTP funds are scheduled to be allocated over the following fiscal years: Funding Fiscal Year Federal Funding Local Match Obligation Expenditure Source Amount (20%) Deadline Deadline FY 2014 RSTP $1,085,650 $0 July 1, 2015 July 1, 2018 FY 2016 RSTP $3,164,400 $0 July 1, 2017 July 1, 2020 RSTP $1,607,790 $0 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2021 TOTAL: $5,857,840 $0 In accordance with Roanoke County's Grant Policies and Procedures, a budget appropriation must be established through Board of Supervisors action for expenditures to be processed against a grant. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of Page 3 of 4 $5,857,840 from the Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014, 2016, and 2017 for the East Roanoke River Greenway proposed between the City of Roanoke and the Blue Ridge Parkway. 2. Take no action at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1, approval of the first reading of this ordinance, and scheduling of the second reading on February 10, 2015. Page 4 of 4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON JANUARY 27, 2015 ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,857,840 FROM THE FEDERAL REGIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, RECREATION AND TOURISM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2014, 2016, AND 2017 FOR THE EAST ROANOKE RIVER GREENWAY WHEREAS, on April 19, 2013, Roanoke County, the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, and the Town of Vinton in coordination with the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, submitted a request to the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization for Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds for the Eastern Section of the Roanoke River Greenway Project proposed between the City of Roanoke and the Blue Ridge Parkway-, and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2013, the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization endorsed the Regional Surface Transportation Program project priorities and six-year financial plan, which included $5,857,840 in funds to Roanoke County for the East Roanoke River Greenway Project-, and WHEREAS, on June 19, 2013, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted the fiscal year 2014-2019 Six-year Improvement Program, which allocated the funds for the Regional Surface Transportation Program and the Transportation Alternatives Program; and WHEREAS, these funds are scheduled to be allocated over Fiscal Years 2014, 2016, and 2017; and WHEREAS, the grant award does not require matching funds from Roanoke County; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance-, and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 2015, and the second reading was held on February 10, 2015. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows.. 1. That the sum of $5,857,840 is hereby appropriated from the Regional Surface Transportation Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014, 2016, and 2017-1 and 2. The funds are to be allocated to the East Roanoke River Greenway Project for final engineering, environmental permitting, right-of-way acquisition, and construction-, and 3. That appropriations designated for the East Roanoke River Greenway Project will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year, but shall remain appropriated until the completion of the project. RSTP funds are subject to deallocation if not expended within four years of allocation-, and 4. That if Roanoke County subsequently elects to cancel this project the County agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is notified of such cancellation-, and 5. That Roanoke County will be responsible for maintenance, upkeep and operating costs of any facility constructed with Regional Surface Transportation Program funds-, and Page 2 of 3 6. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. Page 3 of 3 ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER G-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 27, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY Ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $200,000 from the Virginia Department of Transportation for fiscal year 2013-2014, MAP -21 Transportation Alternatives Program for fiscal year 2014, and $50,000 of local matching funds to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for the East Roanoke River Greenway Doug Blount Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism APPROVED BY: Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke River Greenway will be a thirty-one (31) -mile bicycle/pedestrian trail through the Roanoke Valley, linking Roanoke County, the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Town of Vinton. The greenway system has been strongly supported by citizens, businesses, civic organizations, and local governments. As such, the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission made the Roanoke River Greenway its number one priority in the 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Greenways were also strongly supported by Roanoke County citizens during development of the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Parks Master Plan completed in 2007. The residents of Roanoke County have identified greenways as a high priority need for recreational facilities and amenities desired in our community. The scope of the East Roanoke River Greenway project includes a 2.7 -mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway proposed along the south side of the Roanoke River from the waste water treatment plant in the City of Roanoke to the Blue Ridge Parkway. The cost estimate for completing the East Roanoke River Greenway project is $6,574,079. Page 1 of 3 Funding for the project includes $200,000 MAP2 1 /Transportation Alternatives, $50,000 in local match and $716,250 in Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Transportation Enhancement funding. A portion of this funding has been used to complete Phase I of the project that included preliminary design and engineering that commenced in April 2012. The total funding allocated for the project to date is $6,824,090. On December 4, 2014, Roanoke County entered a professional engineering services contract with Anderson & Associates of Virginia, Inc. for Phase 11 of the East Roanoke River Greenway Project. The MAP -21 /Transportation Alternatives funding will be utilized for final engineering, environmental permitting, right-of-way acquisition, bidding, and construction contract administration for the greenway. Fiscal year 2013-2014 MAP -21/ Transportation Alternative Program Under the MAP -21 federal transportation bill, the Transportation Enhancement Program (EN) is now part of the Transportation Alternatives (TA) Program. MAP -21 includes many program changes- 1) a portion of TA Program funds shall be allocated based on population and 2) Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO's) in Transportation Management Areas (TMAs), which are urbanized areas with a population over 200,000, shall select projects to be carried out within the TMAs. Roanoke County has received previous funding for the Transportation Enhancement and Alternatives Programs as shown below: FISCAL IMPACT: The grant amount of $250,000 from the MAP -21 /Transportation Alternatives program does require twenty percent (20%) local matching funds from Roanoke County in the amount of $50,000. The local match will come from the Greenway Reserve Fund, Account 589130-8929. In accordance with Roanoke County's Grant Policies and Procedures, a budget appropriation must be established through Board of Supervisors action for expenditures to be processed against a grant. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $200,000 from the Federal MAP -21 Transportation Alternatives Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014 and a local match of $50,000 for the East Roanoke River Greenway proposed between the City Page 2 of 3 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 TOTALS Amount Requested $ 372,480 $ 276,800 $ 623,700 $ 472,435 $ 302,420 $2,047,835 Amount Received (80% of total project costs) $ 104,000 $ 80,000 $ - $ 237,000 $ 152,000 $ 573,000 ,County Match (20% of total projects costs) $ 26,000 , $ 20,000 $ 59,250 , $ 38,000 $ 143,250 The grant amount of $250,000 from the MAP -21 /Transportation Alternatives program does require twenty percent (20%) local matching funds from Roanoke County in the amount of $50,000. The local match will come from the Greenway Reserve Fund, Account 589130-8929. In accordance with Roanoke County's Grant Policies and Procedures, a budget appropriation must be established through Board of Supervisors action for expenditures to be processed against a grant. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt the ordinance accepting and appropriating grant funds in the amount of $200,000 from the Federal MAP -21 Transportation Alternatives Program to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal years 2014 and a local match of $50,000 for the East Roanoke River Greenway proposed between the City Page 2 of 3 of Roanoke and the Blue Ridge Parkway. 2. Take no action at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1, approval of the first reading of this ordinance, and scheduling of the second reading on February 10, 2015. Page 3 of 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON JANUARY 27, 2015 ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 FROM THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014, MAP -21 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014, AND $50,000 OF LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS, RECREATION AND TOURISM FOR THE EAST ROANOKE RIVER GREENWAY WHEREAS, the federal Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP - 21) provides for a statewide Transportation Alternatives Program, using federal transportation funds and state or local matching funds-, and WHEREAS, the Commonwealth Transportation Board shall approve the selection of projects on an annual basis and in accordance with §33.1-12(5) of the Code of Virginia and MAP -21 from funds appropriated to the Transportation Alternatives Program-, and WHEREAS, on January 22, 2013, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors endorsed a resolution supporting the Transportation Alternatives Program application for the Eastern Section of the Roanoke River Greenway Project in order that the Virginia Department of Transportation establish a Transportation Alternatives project in Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, on January 31, 2013, the County of Roanoke in coordination with the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission submitted an application to the Virginia Department of Transportation for fiscal year 2013-2014 Transportation Alternative Program funds for the Eastern Section of the Roanoke River Greenway -1 and WHEREAS, on June 19, 2013, the Commonwealth Transportation Board Page 1 of 3 adopted the fiscal year 2014-2019 Six (6) -year Improvement Program, which allocated the funds for the Transportation Alternatives Program ; and WHEREAS, these funds were scheduled to be allocated in fiscal year 2014-1 and WHEREAS, a grant in the amount of $250,000 was awarded from the Virginia Department of Transportation to the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism for the East Roanoke River Greenway; and WHEREAS, the grant requires twenty percent (20%) matching funds from Roanoke County in the amount of $50,000; WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 2015, and the second reading was held on February 10, 2015. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows.. 1. That the sum of $200,000 of federal funds from the Transportation Alternatives Program are appropriated to the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism for fiscal year 2014-1 and 2. That the sum of $50,000 for matching funds will be in the form of cash from Greenways Reserve Funds, Account 589130-8929; and the funds are to be allocated to the East Roanoke River Greenway Project proposed between the City of Roanoke and the Blue Ridge Parkway-, and 3. That Roanoke County will be responsible for maintenance, upkeep and operating costs of any facility constructed with Transportation Alternatives Page 2 of 3 Program funds-, and 4. That appropriations designated for the East Roanoke River Greenway Project will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year but shall remain appropriated until the completion of the project-, and 5. That if Roanoke County subsequently elects to cancel this project the County agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is notified of such cancellation-, and 6. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. Page 3 of 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. H-1 -3 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: January 27, 2015 Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board Thomas C. Gates 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. 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, JANUARY 27, 2015 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM - 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 January 27, 2015, designated as Item I - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5 inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes — November 18, 2014 2. Resolution of appreciation from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to Polly Yeager, Recreation Programmer, upon her retirement after more than twenty-nine (29) years of service 3. Resolution of appreciation from the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to Donald "Eddie" Ford, Parks Manager, upon his retirement after more than thirty- three (33) years of service 4. Request to accept and allocate $18,322.50 to the Clerk of the Circuit Court from the Commonwealth of Virginia for fiscal year 2014/2015 5. Request to accept two (2) donated K-9 ballistic vests valued at $1,900 from Vested Interest in K9s, Inc. for use by Police Department K -9s Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. 1-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 27, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Polly Yeager, Recreation Programmer, upon her retirement after more than twenty-nine (29) years of service SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Ms. Polly Yeager, Recreation Programmer, retired on January 1, 2015, after twenty-nine (29) years and one (1) month of service with Roanoke County. Ms. Yeager is unable to attend the Board meeting and her resolution and quilt will be mailed to Ms. Yeager's home. 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, JANUARY 27, 2015 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO POLLY L. YEAGER, RECREATION PROGRAMMER, AFTER MORE THAN TWENTY NINE (29) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Polly Yeagerwas hired on June 1, 1981 and served four (4) years as a part-time Center Leader with the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism -I and WHEREAS, Ms. Yeager was promoted to full time Recreation Programmer on December 3, 1985 and served twenty nine (29) years at the Ogden Senior Citizens Center, Walrond Park Senior Center and Brambleton Center; and WHEREAS, Ms. Yeager retired on December 31, 2014 after more than twenty nine (29) years and two (2) months of devoted, faithful and expert service with the County-, and WHEREAS, during her time serving the citizens of Roanoke County, Ms. Yeager consistently focused her attention on providing the highest level of customer service possible to those she served-, and WHEREAS, Ms. Yeager is to be commended for the positive impact her work had, and continues to have, on the lives of countless citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to POLLY L. YEAGER for more than twenty nine (29) years and two (2) months of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County-, and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. 1-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 27, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Donald E. Ford, Parks Manager, upon his retirement after more than thirty-three (33) years of service SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Deborah C. Jacks Deputy Clerk to the Board Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Mr. Donald E. Ford, Parks Manager, retired on December 31, 2014, after thirty-three (33) years and four (4) months of service with Roanoke County. Mr. Ford is unable to attend the Board meeting and his resolution and quiltwill be mailed to Mr. Ford's home. 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, JANUARY 27, 2015 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO DONALD "EDDIE" FORD, PARKS MANAGER, UPON HIS RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTY-THREE (33) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Mr. Ford was hired on August 24, 1981 and has worked for the Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Department during his tenure with Roanoke County-, and WHEREAS, Mr. Ford retired on December3l, 2014, after thirty-three (33)years and four (4) months of devoted, faithful, and exceptional service with the Roanoke County-, and WHEREAS, during his time serving County, Mr. Ford worked as a Recreation Program Supervisor for the Craig Recreation Center developing and supervising programs, activities and special events for citizens of all ages and WHEREAS, Mr. Ford also served the County as Park Manager overseeing the grounds maintenance for county buildings and parks, support for tournaments and special events, and organized Parks response to County -wide emergencies and snow removal at County facilities to ensure they remained safe and aesthetically pleasing for the use and enjoyment by the citizens of Roanoke County and its visitors, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to Donald "Eddie" Ford for thirty-three (33) years and four (4) months of capable, loyal, and dedicated service to Roanoke County-, and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. 1-4 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: January 27, 2015 Request to accept and allocate $18,322.50 to the Clerk of the Circuit Court from the Commonwealth of Virginia for fiscal year 2014/2015 Steven A. McGraw Clerk of Circuit Court Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Technology Trust Funds, representing fees collected bythe Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office, have been received from the State in the amount of $18,322.50. These funds have been earmarked for the purpose of technology system maintenance. FISCAL IMPACT: Ordinance #052714-4 appropriated various grants, donations, and other miscellaneous revenues for various functions and purposes for the 2014-2015 fiscal year. Funds in the amount of $18,322.50 will need to be allocated to the Technology Trust Fund account number 102817-5850. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends allocating $18,322.50 to the Clerk of Circuit Court for the fiscal year 2014/2015. Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. 1-5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 27, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Req u est to acce pt two (2) d o n ated K-9 ba I I ist ic vests va I u ed at $1,900 from Vested Interest in K9s, Inc. for use by Police Department K -9s SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Howard B. Hall Chief of Police Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Vested Interest in K9s, Inc. is offering to donate two (2) ballistic vests funded through their GROUPON Campaign. The vest to be donated is an Armor Express Gemini 11, which is both bullet and stab resistant (Ballistic Level 11 /Spike 11). The vest is valued at their cost of $950 (full retail is $2,500). One vest will be assigned to Police K-9 Bruno, who performs patrol, tracking, and narcotics detection duties for his handler, Officer Shaun Chuyka. The other vest will be assigned to Police K-9 Jabbo, who performs patrol, tracking and explosive detection duties for his handler, Officer Kirk Stickley. The vests will help protect K-9 Bruno and K-9 Jabbo should they be attacked. The Police Department should receive the vest approximately fourteen (14) weeks after Vested Interested in K9s, Inc. is notified of the acceptance of the donation. The Police Department may be eligible to receive additional K-9 ballistic vests from this organization in the future. FISCAL IMPACT: 0 '1= OW STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of this donation. Page 1 of 1 K-1 GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA % of General Amount Fund Revenue Audited balance at June 30, 2014 $ 21,266,557 11.00% Addition of 2013-14 operations 532,638 Balance at January 27, 2015 $ 21,799,195 11.00% Note: On December 21, 2004, the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy to increase the General 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 Approved By Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CAPITAL RESERVES Minor County Capital Reserve (Projects not in the CIP, architecturallengineefing 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 January 27, 2015 K-2 Amount $3,407,630.00 $605,096.00 $300,000.00 ($1,500,000-00) (200,000.00) $2,612,726.00 Maior County Capital Reserve (Projects in the C/P, debt payments to expedite projects identified in CIP and land purchase opportunities.) Audited balance at June 30, 2014 $1,284,715.00 Addition of 2013-14 operations Balance at January 27, 2015 Technoloav CaWtal Reserve 1,305,748.00 $2,590,463.00 (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 Balance at January 27, 2015 $314,058.00 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By Thomas C. Gates County Administrator K-3 RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Submitted By Approved By Balance at January 27, 2015 $ 67,600.00 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Thomas C. Gates County Administrator 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) Submitted By Approved By Balance at January 27, 2015 $ 67,600.00 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CHANGES IN OUTSTANDING DEBT Changes in outstanding debt for the fiscal year to date were as follows: Outstanding June 30. 2014 Additions Deletions General Obligation Bonds VPSA School Bonds State Literary Loans Lease Revenue Bonds Capital Lease obligation Submitted By Approved By $ 6,150,390 92,638,652 2,273,592 79,182,582 849,437 $ 181,094,653 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Thomas C. Gates County Administrator 19,973,906 $ 19,973,906 8,301,435 167,000 2,133,799 107,921 $ 10,710,155 - $ K-4 Outstanding January 27, 2015 6,150,390 104,311,123 2,106,592 77,048,783 741,516 190,358,404 U) LU 0 4— .2 w 0 4- CL 0 a a) E 0 a) 0 U- E 0 0 CL U) C U) - 0 0 > U) m U) 0 0 0 -D 0 0 U- M It Q 00 00 0 't (D CD N m LO LO It N Lor) 0 IL -0- 4) 0 C �; �: > 0 U) m U) LU 0 4— .2 w 0 4- CL 0 a a) E 0 a) 0 U- E 0 0 CL U) C U) - 0 0 > U) m U) 0 It (D 00 0 (D 0 0 ONMI-001-M 0 N m m m 0 N 0 N (D m (D LO 00 0 N 00 (D M M 00 LO 0 00 0 0 m d d - d - d 00 - -t m -i — — C14 (D 't (D - M M CD N 0 0 - 0 (D M P- It - 00 Ln N - - 00 LO N m oo 00 m rl- w M LO r- M - 00 It 0 1- It (D " m m 00 N (D 0 It m 0 rl_ r-_ M (D N M It 1- 1- 00 - (D 0 W M rl- - It 0 (D - m - m - It - N L6 r-_: —: 6 (d (3i I (3i 6 N 1-: C5 N C5 00 0 m 1-- (.0 Cl) (1) C14 (Y) . C14 C*4 (Y) Lr) LC ) . IT 0 0 0 -D 0 0 U- M It Q 00 00 0 't (D CD N 0 It (D 00 0 (D 0 0 ONMI-001-M 0 N m m m 0 N 0 N (D m (D LO 00 0 N 00 (D M M 00 LO 0 00 0 0 m d d - d - d 00 - -t m -i — — C14 (D 't (D - M M CD N 0 0 - 0 (D M P- It - 00 Ln N - - 00 LO N m oo 00 m rl- w M LO r- M - 00 It 0 1- It (D " m m 00 N (D 0 It m 0 rl_ r-_ M (D N M It 1- 1- 00 - (D 0 W M rl- - It 0 (D - m - m - It - N L6 r-_: —: 6 (d (3i I (3i 6 N 1-: C5 N C5 00 0 m 1-- (.0 Cl) (1) C14 (Y) . C14 C*4 (Y) Lr) LC ) . IT 0 0 0 0 0 -D 0 0 N M It Q 00 00 0 't (D CD N m LO 0 It N Lor) 0 IL -0- 0 C �; �: r-- 0 LO M 0 N 't M (D CD (D LO 00 0 m (D (,� 6 -i 0 C; — o 00 0- 00 (o 0 N (D d 00 CD 00 m -t 0 r- C5 L6 0 LO 0- m m o LD o L6 L6 M N M 't M m — (1) LO U) a) a) LL 0 C) — E -E N N 0 lzl- 0 00 0) 04 (.0 LO (D LO N 0 P- LO LO CY) M - cq LO 00 N C! (0 (0 00 M (D LO 0 r— r— 0 0 't (D w 00 N (0 0) cq N 00 m co 0 M r- m 0 (0 (Y; 0 0 (D M M N M M w 0 0 0 0 N LO (Q 0 LQ CQ 0 rl-� CQ q 'Ili LQ (Yi (Yi CQ (Yi P.%, G� rl� r- co (D N N cm LD 0 00 00 N LO 0 — r- (0 (0 r-_ m N 0 0 (D LO m 00 -e 0 — (D N M 0 0 N M It M LO C14 00 LQ q G� (Q q 'Ili M . M LD — (y) (0 C14 C'4 — C'4 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 LO LO 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 r- r- (D — q (Yi q q q cl� q q q q q q q q q q q q Cri (Yi 0 0 0 00 M 0 0 LO 0 0 0 LO 0 0 0 It -e LO 00 C14 LO 0 0 m (D m (.0 0 r- 0 LO LO C14 It r- N CY) 0) C'� "I! G� r- — W� G� Cl r-� ":T� — It LO 0 0 R (0 0 C14 CD Cl) 0 m (D m 00 co cm — m C'4 r— LO 0) (D LO 00 (D 0 0 r- r- 0 CD r- LO 0 0) C14 (o Cq cy) — 0 (0 (0 1- 0 1- (.0 0 C14 r- C,4 (D LO r- 0) 0 N (D M N LO LO M m -t m m m 6 -t m — 0 m C� m m 00 d -t r-_ m m M M — M N M M M — It LO (Y) (0 't (0 0 0 0 0 M — 0 0 N 0 r- (0 M M m 0 N LO 0 r— 0 0 N 0 LO m 0 LO 00 00 It M LO M — LO 0 m r— 00 0 C"! cQ "I! q cc� I -i cl� G� (Q CY! C'� cy! cc� oc� ('� G� �t r- — It N 00 N 00 00 LO It 0) LO LO C4 0) 00 0) (.0 00 00 CT C14 LO It r— (0 00 LO m 00 r- LO (Q It G� LO 'Ili 0 00 N M — 0 N — 1- M 0 0 M m cc� C\l 0) Cl) 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 LO LO 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 r- r- - - 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0- 0- 0- 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0) (1) (1) N C5 L6 L6 0- 0- CD- m o LD o L6 L6 6 L6 L6 6 _: C� L6 6 C\f U) a) a) LL 0 C) — E -E ":f 0 lzl- 0 00 0) 04 (.0 LO (D LO N 0 P- LO LO CY) M - cq q oc� C! r- - r- 0) (D C\l LO 0) — m LO 0 0 It cq LO cq (D N 1- N 00 N 0) cq 0 F.- LO 00 co N m r- m (I; Gi (Y; (d 0 cq 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 00 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 2:1 (n OL U) F-- U) wx LU . 0 75 a) a) ly- 0- in Z3 0- 0 L C: 0 U) T w o6 U) = = w 0- U) (1) x 0 Z3 a) E 5, m 0- Q X m CL 0 " CL U) X m F-- C: 0 0 c E E 0 X U) -2 m -Fu 0 x m (D E , M 0 0 x m U) u) W C Fn Z3 co X F-- a) U) !E 0 C: m LL U) LL (1) U) —1 o6 C: 0 0 0 Of C: 0 n T x m (n E 0 0 o6 -�) (n -0 o 0 LL -0 (n w X — w U) 0 X 0 U) a) a) LL 0 C) — E -E cn (1) a) LL 0) C: Z3 m -0 m —i U) — E u) LL U) 0 0 — 0 -�5 C) U) a) 0) — C) OL 0 0 0 0- 0 F- 0) — 0 N Z� N N M cq It cq LO cq (D N 1- N 00 N 0) cq 0 F.- 0 (1) N m r- m 00 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) LU 0 4- .2 w 0 "0 4- CL 0 a a) E 0 a) 0 U- 0 0 CL U) - 0 0 U) 0 CD 0 0 CD (Y) U - Lr) 0 (D It CD 0 0 N m 0 0 It LO C14 0 CD 0 4) 0 CD 00 0) > 0 &! um) U) LU 0 4- .2 w 0 "0 4- CL 0 a a) E 0 a) 0 U- 0 0 CL U) - 0 0 U) C%4 N C14 [-- -e It 0 00 M M M - 0 r- r- 00 m 0 LO r-_ 0 (D 0 CD N 0) N It m 0 00 - M 00 0 N 00 0 0 0 w 0 (D 0? C? 0 C') C') C? m 0 m C; m 00 C� 0 0 m 0) 0) 0) 0) LO LO CD LO 00 m M (D - m N 1- P- M 0 0 00 - 0 r.- (D (o oo (o 0 0 - - 0 Ln - (D 00 00 It N C14 C� LQ G� Cri r-� LQ Pl%, C"! ll-� G� cl� 'Ili G� Lq N eq cq to N N W) N 1- N r- 00 M M 1- Lr) C-4 L? u? (D? (D (D 1- Cl) LO -e 0 CD 00 C'4 Lr) 't 't r.- M (D (D Ln I-- M 00 M M 0 0 W 0 Lr) 00 00 LO Cl) r.- 00 - Lr) M 0 (D -e 't N �D m 't 9 q w 0 Lo Lo C� C\, 00 C� b m (D m o m m 00 o o P.: d 00 Lr) 't 04 -e N LO It 0 0 Lr) C14 LO - CD (Y) m 0) P- (D C14 (N -e 00 00 M Ln 0 M ZE M M 0 It Ln 0 m N C14 0) LC) Lr) 00 0) r-_ 0 00 (D (D (D (1) (D r- 0 CD oc� (Q cc� (Q LQ cl� LQ r-� cl� 'Ili 'Ili q C� q -I (D ('� V� C\l C� cc r- 1�- It 0 Lr) (D 00 Lr) 1- 0 r- -e 00 (D r- LO LO CY) eq 1�- Lr) W) LO - to (D - 00 LC) r- 0) 04 1-- (1) 1- - (Y) C'4 m N eq LO W� m 0) 0) m m (9) 0 CD 0 0 CD (Y) U - Lr) 0 (D It CD 0 0 N m 0 C%4 N C14 [-- -e It 0 00 M M M - 0 r- r- 00 m 0 LO r-_ 0 (D 0 CD N 0) N It m 0 00 - M 00 0 N 00 0 0 0 w 0 (D 0? C? 0 C') C') C? m 0 m C; m 00 C� 0 0 m 0) 0) 0) 0) LO LO CD LO 00 m M (D - m N 1- P- M 0 0 00 - 0 r.- (D (o oo (o 0 0 - - 0 Ln - (D 00 00 It N C14 C� LQ G� Cri r-� LQ Pl%, C"! ll-� G� cl� 'Ili G� Lq N eq cq to N N W) N 1- N r- 00 M M 1- Lr) C-4 L? u? (D? (D (D 1- Cl) LO -e 0 CD 00 C'4 Lr) 't 't r.- M (D (D Ln I-- M 00 M M 0 0 W 0 Lr) 00 00 LO Cl) r.- 00 - Lr) M 0 (D -e 't N �D m 't 9 q w 0 Lo Lo C� C\, 00 C� b m (D m o m m 00 o o P.: d 00 Lr) 't 04 -e N LO It 0 0 Lr) C14 LO - CD (Y) m 0) P- (D C14 (N -e 00 00 M Ln 0 M ZE M M 0 It Ln 0 m N C14 0) LC) Lr) 00 0) r-_ 0 00 (D (D (D (1) (D r- 0 CD oc� (Q cc� (Q LQ cl� LQ r-� cl� 'Ili 'Ili q C� q -I (D ('� V� C\l C� cc r- 1�- It 0 Lr) (D 00 Lr) 1- 0 r- -e 00 (D r- LO LO CY) eq 1�- Lr) W) LO - to (D - 00 LC) r- 0) 04 1-- (1) 1- - (Y) C'4 m N eq LO W� m 0) 0) m m (9) 0 CD 0 0 CD (Y) C14 Lr) 0 (D It CD 0 0 N m 0 0 It -e (D C14 0 CD 0 0 CD 00 0) r-_ 0 m (D CD 0 N m (D 0 0 co LO C� LQ Lq q rl-� pl�, q ll-� oc� CQ LQ LQ C� q q q G� q < 0 0) C) C3 cl� C%� G� CD - - 0 Cl) m r- (D m LO 00 N to 00 LO (D 0 LO 0) -e 0) -e 00 co C14 0 F- C14 LO (D eq LO Cl) 00 rl- 1- 0 1- LO I-- (D C') C'4 LO Lr) (D (o - N 0) (D Pl%, LO - LO Ot - oc� "I! (J� C'� 0 0 oc� (Y� 0 0 0 0 0 C6 m ":f N -: C6 C14 C\l (D (o (.0 r- r.- 04 (Y) 00 LO (D M " LO 0 - - M 0 00 Ln 0 LO Lr) - 00 -e 0 - r-- N N 0 m - 1-- 00 0 (D 0 't (D 0 'i 4 00 -t 4 -1 - cl; 0 m m C� (D m r- N 6 6 - 6 ci r-- (1) m N m -e N r- N m 00 m LO LO LO 0 Lr) 1- - (1) m 't - (o [- 0 r-_ (D N 0 w N r- M 0 (D -e 0 Lr) 0) 0) LO It 0) 00 0 00 N I-- N - 1- 0 m [-- 00 q C� q cl� cl� q r-� Pl%, cl� rl-� (Q Pl%l C'� CY! (Q r-� —I cl� W) 0 CD LO (1) 00 0) Z� CD 0 N 0) 04 (D It m 00 (1) CD Lr) 00 co W) - -e �t 0 LO CD 0 0 0 LO N m (14 C-4 (D (C� 0 m 0 (D m 0 CD 0 0 CD (Y) 0 m 0 00 rl- Ln 0 It m m 0 0 0 w r-_ 0 CD 0 -e 00 0 00 0 00 - CD 0 m It 0 0 m 00 LO cc� 'Ili U) U) 4) Q LL Q CL q U) a) t 0 LL U) LL a) C: 0 0 D E 0 't U) a) Z3 > (If cl� ll-� C� CQ cl� G� C� q 'Ili cl� G� q < 0 0) C) C3 Cri Lq rl-� CD Q > LL U) CD 0 m 00 0) r- LO 0 m (D 00 00 0 LO N (D (.0 0) �D - - (.0 0 F- (D r- (.0 e LO C\l -t It le (14 - Lo N LO [-- (D N 0) - qe ()o co - N 0) (0 Pl%, LO LO cl� - I-- It M N 0 0 Lq ll-� 0 0 0 0 0 CY5 m ":f N -: C6 C14 LO N 2:1 E 0) U) U) 4) Q LL Q CL (n Ltz 0 LL _0 m U) LL U) a) t 0 LL U) LL a) C: 0 0 D E 0 't U) a) Z3 > (If Q- 0 0 a) (n D E 2 LL U) a) > (If >1 r- CL 0" CL -0 a m >1 a 0 0 U) (n co - 0 — U) a) 0) (n > a) co C-) -5 Z3 0- - 0 — U) a) 0) 0 0 u ?- 4) Co a U) CO (n E (I 0 L _0 a) C/) E Of > 0 Ir- U) Z) 0 w C: m W 0 C) - a) > 0 0 Of U) 0 0 a ;�z 0 0 0) a) 0 1 C: 0 z U) C: OL X LU w " m -C U) cn -Fu o C/) 06 < 0 0) C) C3 -Fu o C/) 06 LL 0 Z, Lu 0 0 0) o Q > LL U) U) 0 U) 0) 0 o '75 'Fa 'Fa 0 F- 0) (Y) 0 F- 0 ::� 0 F- C\l -t 00 -t 0 F- 0 Lo - Lo (D Lo 0 F- O-Itcooc,4(0 (D (D (D 1- 00 00 00 0 F- N 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LU 0 4— .2 w 0 "0 4- CL 0 a a) E 0 a) 0 U- E 0 .2 u CL U) - 0 0 Q CD r- r-_ -e CD 0) cn (D CD r- r-_ LQ C14 e CD r- r.- M Ul) co co r-_ C� LQ Lq 0) C\f C14 co W) r- 1�- cl� 00 co cc� e LO Cq to 4) 0 > &! um) LU 0 4— .2 w 0 "0 4- CL 0 a a) E 0 a) 0 U- E 0 .2 u CL U) - 0 0 Q CD r- r-_ -e CD 0) cn (D CD r- r-_ LQ C14 e CD r- r.- M Ul) co co r-_ C� LQ Lq 0) C\f C14 co W) r- 1�- cl� 00 co cc� e co Cq to (D r- r.- M Ul) co co r-_ C� LQ Lq 0) 00 00 W) r- 1�- cl� 00 co cc� e co Cq M CD ,I- q - 0 C? -e 00 co 0 co 00 w oc� w U) 0 co U) U) 0 Cl 0 RD C%4 LU 0 (L 0 LL M 0 0 U) .0 — — E 0 CL 0 x r_ Lu LU CL x LU LU 06 z E 0 = '. CL x Lu LU E CL X LU LU z 06 �i r- 0 I�t CD C) CD �t w C) 8 ;; tn CD r-- �t C) en tn 10 10 en CD �t w en kn �t Cl " 00 w CD C� t- CD �c m CD 00 10 tn t CD r- C) w CD 0� N 0� cl! (i I: s C� C� cl� rl- 10 m Cl 10 �c 00 00 0� Cl 't r- - CA 10 cc CD 00 10 r- 10 00 0� t-� C�, M C� rq r-� C� C� en 00 N tn 10 m C) C� C� 119� m ll� m C� r- C) m �t �c 119� " C� C� Ci CD 't ;; " C� 10 A = C� zt I: = CD c� 0 r-� 10 lr� - C� r-� llc� 9 �i (i r- cl� Cli r1i I- cl� t oc� �t lc� 00 n N lr� C� en r-� C� r- m CD C� 00 1- CD x x C� 00 m X N 10 CD tn CD w w CD dd lc� lr� cq 00 Cli lc� el C�l oo C, N C� 00 O� �j CD 't C, CD CD lc� en CD CD CA N en Cl en r- - I�t r- 4 (4 00 m en r- ;; -Cl CIS �i r- 0 I�t CD C) CD �t w C) 8 ;; tn CD r-- �t C) en tn 10 10 en CD �t w en kn �t Cl " 00 w CD C� t- CD �c m CD 00 10 tn t CD r- C) w CD 0� N 0� cl! (i I: s C� C� cl� rl- 10 m Cl 10 �c 00 00 0� Cl 't r- - CA 10 cc CD 00 10 r- 10 00 0� t-� C�, M C� rq r-� C� C� en 00 N tn r- cq 0 t 00 �c I- CD r- C� 0) C) ;; r- G C) 't ;; 00 Ci W� C� W� . ll� . lll� . rl� r� . 't el C� r-� rl� m r- kn CD r-- C� r- �t N m 0 w " eq N �t �t �t �t �t � � tn cq � cc tn 00 C, t cc m r- 471, 't cc 10 N 0 - C, �c x " CD t- �c �2 011 m C, m x 00 t- x w C-- I�t r- CD CD C� r-� 10 lr� - C� r-� llc� 9 �i (i r- cl� Cli r1i I- cl� t oc� �t lc� 00 n N lr� C� en r-� C� rq C) Cl C) CA CD x x C� �c - m 10 CD 00 CD m dd cl r- cq 00 �t C, kn kn oo C, N C� kn en CD 0" C, CD CD C� kn t- CD x r- x N en Cl z 4 4 (4 en -Cl CIS r- cq 0 t 00 �c I- CD r- C� 0) C) ;; r- G C) 't ;; 00 Ci W� C� W� . ll� . lll� . rl� r� . 't el C� r-� rl� m r- kn CD r-- C� r- �t N m 0 w " eq N �t �t �t �t �t � � tn cq � cc tn 00 C, C) �c r- 00 t- r- m 0 I- C, r- w r- N 'T kn �2 011 m C, 10 t- CD w C-- �t CD CD C4 r-� 10 lr� - C� r 9 �i (i r- cl� �2 rl� I- cl� N t �t C� 00 n CD C� rl- n CD C� en r-� C� rq C) 10 C) CA 00 CD r- r- - r- C) r- Cl dd 10 v oo C, N C� r- q C� cq Cl Cl 13� - -Cl CIS C:, �t 'r r- C, r- m r- I- �2 011 " C, 't t- w CD �t CD C4 r-� 10 lr� - C� oo 9 �i (i r- cl� �t r-� �2 I- N t �t 00 n CD C� rl- n CD C� en r-� C� rq - C, CD r- - �c Cl dd m rq 0) N Cl r- Cl -Cl CIS C, dd dd -Cl Cl CD Cl CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD cq C:, " CD C:, m CD m Cl m CD en 0 4 C:, 't 't CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD kn 0 CD Cl NO 0 RD 04 LU 0 (L 0 LL M 0 0 U) .0 — — E 0 CL 0 x r_ Lu LU CL x LU LU 06 a) = M — E 0 = '. CL X Lu LU E CL X LU LU z 06 17 C? r- CD CD CD 00 kn oc eq r- C) C) Cl 4 4 00 kn 't C-- C� cl C, en eq �t 10 CD 4 CD CD m N w CD 10 r- C) 1= CD kn �c en n C� ll� C�, C� C� cl C� I: u C� CD s C� C, C� Cl I Z 00 �c rq N CA r-- CD CD 'o C7, C� C, CA C� 12� 00 CD 00 w w r- CD en m r- r- C� CD CD C, 00 cl C) 00 C, C� Cl 't W� CD Cli r- q CD li en W� 2 't r- rl! �t ll� eq 00 r-� 't en ri t-�, 0) CA 10 - — CD u �4 - cc — r- 04 en 00 en 00 0� 00 CD CD en CD CD CD 17 C? r- CD CD CD 00 kn oc eq r- C) C) Cl 4 4 00 kn 't C-- C� cl C, en eq �t 10 CD 4 CD CD W� r- �c r- w CD 10 CD CD CD CD CD �c en kn �c en n C� ll� C�, C� C� cl C� I: u C� CD s C� C, C� Cl I Z 00 �c rq N CA r-- CD CD 'o C7, C� C, CA C� 12� 4 N C:, CA 2 t- I-- �! , :� C, C31) m N CD eq CA r- 2� eq 00 cl r4 00 eq m kn 10 eq rl� 06 u u �4 u �4 m 04 en 00 C� Cl cl cl, oe CD oe r- C� r-- C� CD CD W� r- �c r- CD CD r- r- CD CD CD CD CD CD kn m Cl eq en lc� ll� C� cl G u CD CD s C� ll:� 0� Cl I 'IT 00 r-- rq N r- r-- CD CD 'o C7, C) 0) 00 Iz 4 N 00 G, 00 ") �t I tn CD N CD 00 r- 00 cl C� �c 00 eq rl� 06 u u �4 u �4 F- 04 u en 00 en 00 � �t �t X X 5 W� , , �2 C) CD CD CD kn lr� C� &I rl� ll� . W� C� C� C� r- m 10 CD C� 00 cl Cl r- w CD 00 w r- m C� a, CD CD CD CD kn 10 10 10 eq en lc� ll� C� cl G u CD CD s C� ll:� 0� Cl I 'IT CD r, 00 CD 'o C7, C) 0) 00 Iz 4 CA eq C� C, C� CD m C, 0) tn cq C, en eq u u �4 u �4 F- 04 u en cc en 00 u r- CD l- w CD CD C4 - C� cl G u CD CD lc� ll:� 0� m r, CD CD 'o 00 4 CA eq C� 10 0) C� CD m m cc 00 C� kn u u �4 u �4 F- 04 u en cc 00 C� u u u u �4 u �4 F- 04 u CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD �c 10 CD CD C:, r-- CD r- CD r- CD w w C:, CD w CD CD w CD w CD C= 00 C= C, S C) 0� C= u ACTION NO. ITEM NO. K-7 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 27, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid—December 2014 SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors Payroll 12/05/14 Payroll 12/19/14 Manual Checks Grand Total Direct Deposit 1,124,075.75 1,249,552.84 Checks 62,500.63 61,666.32 10,305.78 Total $ 8,598,127.90 1,186,576.38 1,311,219.16 10,305.78 $ 11,106,229.22 A detailed listing of the payments to vendors is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. K-8 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: January 27, 2015 Quarterly Report of 2015 fiscal year — Community Development Activities Tarek Moneir Deputy Director of Development Services Thomas C. Gates County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Attached is a summary report of Community Development Activities for the second (2nd) quarter of 2014-2015. The monthly statistics in the attached spreadsheet represent monthly stats of various activities in community development. It compares the average of the second quarter of fiscal year 2015 with the total average of last year's inspections and plan reviews performed by Staff. We also included stats of zoning inspections, business licenses, complaints, other code compliance and Board of Zoning Appeals Activities. You will note that some of these stats are reported as "NA" for not available indicating that we cannot collect such data on a monthly basis due to the complexity of the process. This report is only for information and does not require any board action. Analysis of these figures can be provided upon request. Page 1 of 1 Ln rq r4 'A IV a E E t 2 M CL o (5 CL IM (V (v E CL m E 0 0 cr -@ 0 > u (v to E- 0, r - (V 0 CA N E m E 0 C (v E CL 0 W in x S -Z N a� -9 cL .4z cl cn It 0 z c� cL r lo lo oo 'o 0 Z 0 L" Ql IQ 0 m oo w 1 (71 N m to E LL N� co o N oo N m oo m oo o o co lo (n o m 0 N, co m m N in cc N to N o I o o lo N o co co N m o o Ln m w C LL aj < < < < < < cr m C R >0 < < < < < < C Z < < < < < < -7, 0 -7� 0 o .2 o t -Z, o -7, o o -P u u 0 LC < < o < < o o & 2 A o u u u o uo 1. u z cL u o > 7, o 'o cL o - E u u o u o 0 N o E N o -o o F It Ln m o u It o o 70, -o AR m 0 2 > w cc o. o u cc L-2 PETITIONER: Roger and Deborah Rardin CASE NUMBER: 2-1/2015 Board of Supervisors Consent 1st Reading Date: December 9, 2014 Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 6, 2015 Board of Supervisors Hearing & 2nd Reading Date: January 27, 2015 A. REQUEST 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 B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Rebecca James presented the staff report and the property owners spoke about the site and the issues with the prospective buyers not being able to obtain lending. Rick James discussed the previous 2002 rezoning and if there were any issues with rezoning the 11.44 acre portion from 1-2 to R-1. Staff indicated there were not and the same topographic issues remain on the entire 19.44 acre parcel. Mr. James expressed his concern with downzoning the remaining 8.00 acre portion from 1-2 to R-1. Gene Marrano asked how long the property was zoned 1-2 and if staff had any concerns with the Future Land Use Designation. Staff spoke to the industrial properties along the railroad and speculated why this parcel was also zoned 1-2, however is unaware of the specific timeframe of the zoning classification. Staff also reiterated the lack of public road access and topography of the portion that is zoned 1-2. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS -TO BE REMOVED 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. E. COMMISSION ACTION Ms. Hooker made a motion to approve the petition. The motion carried 3-1 with Mr. Bower being absent. L-2 F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE Mr. James expressed his concern with downzoning industrial zoned land designated Principal Industrial on the Future Land Use Map to residential use. G. ATTACHMENTS: X Concept Plan X Vicinity Map X Staff Report X Other Philip Thompson, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission STAFF REPORT Petitioner: Roger and Deborah Rardin Request: 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 Location: West of the Norfolk Southern Railroad near the 5000 block of Poor Mountain Road and north of Bydawyle Road Magisterial District: Catawba Existing Proffered 1. One dwelling shall be allowed on the property and when the property line is Conditions adjusted, then the property line shall follow the metes and bounds of the zoning (To Be Removed): line. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Roger and Deborah Rardin are requesting to rezone a portion of a 19.44 acre property located near the 5000 block of Poor Mountain Road, west of the Norfolk Southern Railroad and north of Bydawyle Road from 1-2 to R-1. The site is located in the Chimney Hills Subdivision. The parcel is currently split zoned between R-1 C (11.44 acres) and 1-2 (8.00 acres). The Rardins are planning to sell the entire parcel for the construction of single family dwelling. The Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Principal Industrial. Principal Industrial is a future land use area where a variety of industry types are encouraged to locate. Most of these areas are existing and planned regional employment centers and are distributed throughout the county, convenient to residential areas and suitable highway access. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A single family dwelling is permitted by right in the R-1 zoned district, however it is not permitted in the 1-2 zoned district. Roanoke County building permit review shall be required for the construction of a single-family dwelling. 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background - In June of 2002, an 11.44 acre portion of the 19.44 acre property was rezoned from 1-2 to R-1. The previous owner of the property proffered the following condition: "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." The future plan was for an adjacent parcel to be combined with the property that was requesting the split zoning. However, this combination was never done, nor was a structure ever erected on the property. Topography/Vegetation —The site has a rolling terrain and is covered with mature vegetation. A ridgeline runs from north to south through the property and on the western edge of the property line. The site is currently vacant. Surrounding Neighborhood ' —The adjoining properties are zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District and I- 2, High Intensity Industrial District. Adjacent land uses consist of a mixture of residential, vacant and industrial land uses. Across the railroad tracks to the east, are residential use types. Valley Tech Park adjoins the property to the north and northwest. The site is accessed from the Chimney Hills Subdivision, which is located off Hillcrest Road. All of the parcels are zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture — Future plans for the site is for the construction of a single family dwelling. The future buyers would like to place their home on the portion that is currently zoned 1-2. This location is ideal due to the topography of the entire 19.44 acre parcel. To comply with the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, the 1-2 portion of the parcel would need to be rezoned to R-1. The portion that is currently zoned 1-2 cannot be developed as an industrial development due to topography and lack of access concerns. In addition, the portion that is currently zoned 1-2 does not have any public road frontage. Access/Traffic Circulation — The subject parcel is accessed from Byclawyle Road, which is a private road with an existing entrance to Bohon Hollow Road (Route 734). VDOT has no objections to this request. Fire & Rescue/Utilities — The Fire Marshall's Office had no objections to the proposal. The Western Water Authority had no comments on the request. Economic Development — No comments were submitted. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The site is designated as Principal Industrial in the 2005 Community Plan. Principal Industrial is a future land use area where a variety of industry types are encouraged to locate. Most areas include existing and planned regional employment centers and are distributed throughout the county, convenient to major residential areas and suitable highway access. STAFF CONCLUSIONS This is a request to rezone an approximately 8.00 acre portion of an approximately 19.44 acre parcel from I- 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. Future plans are to construct a single family dwelling on the portion of the property that is currently zoned 1-2. A single family dwelling is not a permitted use in the 1-2 zoned districts. In addition, the petitioner is requesting the removal of the proffered condition: "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." If the rezoning request is approved, the proffered condition no longer applies. Finally, due to the topography of the portion of the property that is currently zoned 1-2, and lack of public road frontage, industrial development is not ideal. CASE NUMBER: PREPARED BY: HEARING DATES: ATTACHEMENTS: 2-1/2015 Rebecca M. James PC: 1/6/2015 Application Ordinance 062502-4 Aerial Map Zoning Map Land Use Map R-1 District Standards 1-2 District Standards BOS: 1/27/2015 Nov 21 14 09:53a The Tyler Rose Inc. County of Roanoke Community Development Planning & Zoning 5204 Bernard Drive P 0 Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 540-380-3076 p3 For Staff Use 0n1v Date, I-Cce; �ed� Received IT;> I I /�Q I ( I 4Z I G Ako— Appiicafon rk P7Z dalu. VA 3�L .5.3 FaxNo.: -'51! 0 - 38 c) Owner's name/address w/zip Phone 4: Plac:ards issuod: B05daic Property Location Magisterial District: 6dot- wip a - Case NUMber 19 ALL APPLICANTS Chs5l� type of application filed (check all that apply) E�Rezonjug 0 Special Use E Variance 11 Waiver 0 AdministrativeAppeal El Comp Plan (1-5.2-2232) Review Applicanis name/address w/zip 59-1r ---- , V"%- Work; —To It -r- 9j, Cell LZ VA 3�L .5.3 FaxNo.: -'51! 0 - 38 c) Owner's name/address w/zip Phone 4: Work: Fax No. 0: Property Location Magisterial District: 6dot- wip a - Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: Existing Zoning: M -? f, e Sim, of paycx-,I(s): Acres: Existing Land Use: 0-c- a REZONING, SPECIAL USE FERAItT, WAI VER A,?VD COMP PLAN �15� 2�2232) REVIEW APPLICANTS (R/S;NV1CP) Proposed Zoning: Proposed Land use: 1\6 Does tl-if-- pArcul meet the minimum lot area, width, and frwage requirements ofthe requested district? � Yes &�� No 0 IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested UscType?Yes. Fier. No F] IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST I f rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes Vf--) No E] PARIANCE, I-VAIVERAY'VDADMINISTRATIVEAPPF-4LAPPLI-C.4NTS(VIW14A) Varianco/Waiver of Section(s) ofthe Roanoke, County Zoning Ordinance in order tD: Appeal ofZoning Adminiscratoy's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Secflon(s)-. ofthe Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of1mcrprclation of Zoning Map to Is t4e applicatica complete? Neast check if cnolosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITENISARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. R!SAVIICP� A T N, WSAVCP Y/A.k FUS!WK- -)AA cousultation 3 V2" x I I " c ncept P�an ApplIcation fea App�ication Metes and bounds dEscription Proffers, i I' applicable JustificEtion Wnter and setver application Adjolning property ovmers I hereby uvrfify that I am eillicr thc owner of the property or Eie ownrr's agent or contract purchaser und am aDting vvith the knowledge and comcnt Rhe ovmrr. li� Ovmer's Signature Q'J�Z-� 2 Nov 21 14 09:53a The Tyler Rose I no. 540-380-3076 P.5 JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT WAIVER OR COMP PLAN (15.2-22-r-) REVILVV REQUESTS Applicant 7KoQer J 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-, healtb, safety, and genera�� welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Plea -se explain how the reque-st furthers the purposes of tHe, Roanoke County Ordinance as weH as the purpose found at Ific, beginning of tho applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. Please explain howthe projectconforrug to the general guidelines andpolicies contained in the Roanoke Cnunty Communivy va'r Vt r e Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property hself, the adjoining properies, and the surrounding area, as vve;ll as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parksirecreation and fire and rescue. -tq ppi- cwp, W'k QM -�-13 e, er, ox'y�-o "�VL C- ---;>-c V &Letcv� Q -S t YW UJ PC V 6 CA- A:5, J\'>-> �5 AJ ke V (2� e: -T- I -P-T� e--111 'r -- I Nov 21 14 09:53a The Tyler Rose Ino. JUSTIFICATION FOA VARIANCE REQUEST efr An I Applicant kw-/ 540-380-3076 p.6 The of Zoning Appeals is required by Section 15.2-2309 of the Code of Virginia to consider the follDwing factors before a variance can begranted, Please read the factors listed below carefWly and in your own words, describe how the request meets each factor. If additional space is Deeded, use additional sheets of paper - I - The vaiance shall not be contrary to the public interest and shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. PC \�Q'Lfl AA 2- The strict application ofthe zoning, ordinance would produce undue hardship (as distinguished ftrn a special privil(-'ge or convenjencu) and would prohibit or unyeasonably restrict the use of the property- kk N c 6, 3- The hardship is not sbared by other properties iD the same zoning district or vicinity. Such hardships should be addressed by the Board of Supervisors as amendments to the Zoning Ordinane-c. 4- The variance will not be of a siibstantial detriment to the adjacent propedies or the character of the district. Cure - 4 Nov 21 1409:54a The Tyler Rose Inc, M5TITICATIM FOR ADMINNSTRATWE APPEAL.REQUEST 540-380-3076 p. 7 Applicant ��C)Q2 Please respond to the following as thoroughly as possible. If additional space is needed, use additional sheets of paper. 1. Reasons for appeal-. 0'-r C-�PA IV M - -2� �P-r A v --g) 0-3 P --r, c-L� r \!�o Q-, —4-Cw-, eA J�' 2. Evidence. supporting claim: C"o-, 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 depiet the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential laad use or design issues arising from the request. in such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and deyelopment of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regoladom, The concept plan should not be oonfused with the site ptan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building p�=it. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and Tnay require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless litniting conditions aTe proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a sp3cial usepermit or Yarianoc, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is requi-red with all rezoning, special use permit, waivvr, community plan (15.2-2232) review and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of dezafl 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 rnin1mum: AL5LAPPMCANTS ' a, Applicant name and name of development b Date, scale and north arroxv o- Lot size in acres orsquare fccl and dimensions Louetion, names of owners and Rounuke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties Physical features such as ground eovcr, natural watercourses, floodplain, etu. The zoning and land usu of all adjaceriL properties P"" All property lines and easements ��h' h-> All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights Loca(ion,widt'hsaridn-aines of all existing o -r 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 ��equiredfor REZOMING and SPECDIL USE PERM1TAFPL1CA-,N7S I! Existing utilities (water, se"�er, storm drains) and connpctions at the site Any driveways, enlraric�es/cxits, curb open[ngs 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 condifionsat the sile and hew they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I cerdf� that all items required in, the check -list above are, complete, h—� Signature of applic nt Date IN d 9LOC-OW-OVS -aul qso�j AGIAi qqj BOS:60-VL �ZAON Nov 21 14 09:54a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 P.9 2014 RARDIN CONCEPT PLAN CHECKUST 1. Applicant name and name of development- * Roger and Deborah R-ardin —Chimney Hills 2. Date, scale and north arrow. 0 11/20/14, See attached map. 3. Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions, 6 8.00 acres. 349,374 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, 0 50-57 Poor Mountain Rd., Salem, VA 241-53 Wright, Dallas Jl� 064M-02-56_00-0000 0 0 Technology Dr., Salem, VA 241S3 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- 064.0Z- 02-SO.0"000. 6. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties. 0654.02-02-56.00-0000 — 1-2 064.02-02-50.06-0000 — 1-2 7. All propertv lines and easements. 0 See attached map. There -are a. 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, Dirnen,5ions and locations of all dTiveways, parking spaces and loading spaces. 0 No driveways, parking spaces or loading spaces. 11, Exi5ting utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site. 0 No existing utilities at this parcel. 12. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers. 0 No driveways, entrances/exit5, curb openings or crossovers. 13. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals. a See attached map. 14, Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections. 0 No streets or intersections. 15. Locations of all adjacentfire hydrants, a No fire hydrants. Nov 21 14 09:55a The Tyler Rose I no, 540-380-3076 P.10 16. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed. e No proffered conditions at the site - 17. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule. a Project not to be phased, Nov 21 14 09:55a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 P.1 1 10�20'- Mm -n Strff--t. Si.�te I I T ?. 0. Box 178 k�,dp, CHARI-1110N New Castiv, VA 24127 ASSOCIATES 540-964-6900 Fax- 540-864-6903 AMEND NIENVADDENDLFMTO CONTRACT OF PURCHASE This /Amendment ( ) Addcndum aif tbet certairi Comma dated //`.q. - 20_4., betwcen the undcrsigned, in consideration of the pxemis-c-s and. of tkie follo-Wing niutaikl promises avd agreaments -relating to the p-urchasa of -real proper, -,y kno-wa as '7,-q- � Z f 5 6 V, L'� - 2. - 6, a - 56 -- i � 6 - 6, o r pro,iides tS�� following- 5e-Vexl, -54�*rhnF Ile 2-oal/!5 - OF &Ulo& 46 AA W— 4� roeej�� u� 4-A 4�k cout Y�arce,l I-e-z'o-tw-d C) 4i-�,n aty rp ty aZ, da:�& /- 13,'� .AA).O ZLM,40- 4-, P- ;L3 "Vitness the follcwin,- signatures and s�als this day of �er �,o Listing Agent S01ing Agent Seller Purchaser Purchaser Nov 21 14 09:55a Th e Tyle r Rose I n c. 640-380-3076 p, 12 lIfI812.014 Gmaj I - Rardin to RepacontTact I 1-4-2C14- Rezoning of Tax ID#064.02-02-55DO-0000 from split zon�ng c;urrantly R I and 12tc ALL R1. David Pollock <P0lloCkdkJl@gmail.corn> 0 Rardin to Repa contract 11 -4 -2014 -Rezoning of Tax ID#064.02-02-55.00-0000 from split zoning currently R1 and 12 to ALL RI. 1 message DEHARTREALTORS <dehartrealtc)rs@tds. net> Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 8:33 PIV To: pollockdkjl@gmail.com Cc: 9_repa@yahoo.corn 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 drGpped off to my offire. 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 him 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 seyeral 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 ihe 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 rezon�ng of the entire parcel to RI would solve this zoning di(emnna which is holding up this entire process. Due to the holdup with the zoning, we will need to readjust our dates f or the release of the subject to's , loan approval and closing dates, I have attached an amendment pertaining to this. Obviously, the sooner we can get the larger tract rezoned 20 RI -the quicker we can proceed ahead with the purchase and closing -so these dates for everything cart be moved up-shoulo we be able to get the zoning change accomplished quicker than the amendment calls for. Please feel free to call me at any tirne with questions, comments or to discuss, Thanks so much, Sheila SWla A Del-lart, Associate Broker httpF,WMaI,9o%I e,camfm Sfl/?ui=2&I 315�_Q86b3b&vIew= pt&soarch=i rbax&th= 1 49c089Ut_br0caG8&si rn i � 149r,0a90cbc0car_B V2 Nov 21 14 09:56a The Tyler Rose Inc. 640-380-3076 p.1 3 11/18Q.014 Gm all - RardintoRepa contract 11-4-2014-RazoningoTax I D#064.02-02-55.00-0000frorn spfitzon�ngcurrerftl�FR`l and 12 to ALL R I. Charlton Associates New Castle, VA 24127 540 864-6589 dehartrealtors@tds-ret Licensed in Virginia New Doc 103-1jpg 630K Rardin to Repa nov 4th contract amendment.pdf 330K �dps�flm ail. google.com/rnaiJ/?u�=2&j k=315c986b3b&view= pt&suarrh=inbox&h=1 49cO&90cbcOcacB&sim 1= 149cO89Gcbr-Ocac!8 Nov 21 14 09:56a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p. 14 Nov 21 14 09:58a Th e Tyle r Rose I n c. 540-380-3076 p.1 5 Fwd-. dual zoning proNem Fwd: dual zoningpl-oblem Actions David Pollock 11/18/14 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 hand. Frorr: David Pollock (pollockdkjlCa)gmaiJ.corn) You moved this message to its current location. Sent: Tue 11/18/14 10,02 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 under -stand 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@gm aiLcom Cc: S_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 14 th . 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 goaJ is not just to buy the raw land. Our goal is to undertake construction and then to puta competitive traditional mortgage on the home once it is compfeted, 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 Mae. This is the complication, leaving only higher priced financing options to consider. This doesn't work for us - Farm Credft does_not offer competitive loans compared to options opened to us if the p�rcel 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 I - 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 nnatter 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 Th e Tyle r Rose I n c. 540-380-3076 P. 18 F1 From: David Pollock (pollockdkjl@gmail.com) You moved this message to its current location. Sent: Tue 11J18/14 10:02 AM To: Deborah Rar-din (deborahrardin@msn.com) # 2 Forwarded MeSS2ge ---------- Frorn� DEHARTREALTORS<dchai-trealtors@tds.net> Date, Mon, Novl7,2014at3,37 PM Subject: correction of split(dual) zoning -per Roanoke County To: pollockdkjl@gmail.com CC: g_repa@y2hoo.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 soLinds like the second option would be the way to go. 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 cGmmerciai 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 approx�mataly 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 1 0:00a 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 Nov 21 14 1 0:00a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p.20 Community Development Planning & Zoning Division POTENTIAL OF NEED FoR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS A-ND/oR 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 rneet 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, (Mote this list i5 not inclusive and tl7e couaty staff and VDO T reserve the rigl2t 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 statiDn/Convenience store/Car wash . Retail s6op/Shopping center Offices (including., financial institutions, general, medical, etc.) Regional public facMdes Educational/RecreaL�cnal 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: 4b 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, 117, 460, 111460, 220, 221, 419, etc) 9 For new phases or changes to a development where a previously submitted traffic study is more than two (2) years old andfor roadway conditions have changed sjgnl�ficantly & When required to evaluate access issues V Development with ingress/egress on r -cads planned or scheduled for expansion, widening, improvements, etc. (i.e. on Long Rarige Transportation Plan, Six -Yr Road Plan, etc�) 0 Development in an area where there is a known existing traffic arid/orsafety problem 0 Development wouid potentially negat�vely impact existing/planned traffic signal(s) 0 Substantial departure from the Community Plan 0 Any site that is expected to generate over one hundred (100) 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 afate. ApM 1-9, 2095 7 Nov 21 1410:00a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p,21 Community Development Planning & Zoning Division NOTICE To APPLICANTS FOR REzoNiNG, SUBDIVISION ANTAIVER, PUBLIC STREET NVAMER, OR SPECIAL USE PERNHT PETITION PLANNING CommissioN APPLICATIoNi AcCEPTANCE PROCHI-)UR-E 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 preselited at the public bearing. If it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public bearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff anWor an outside refenal agency to adequately evaluate and provld�- written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public heariag thon the Planning Commission may vote to continue the petition, This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all ne4,essary reviewing parties to evaluate the new oradditional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be inchided in a written memorandum by planning staff to ihe Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted. POTENTIAL c)F NEED FOR TRAFFic ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Comm ission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Traffic Engineer or staff from the Virginia Department of Transporuation re-qjests 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 tha( would necessitate.further study isprovided as part of this application package). This continuance shall allow sufficient tirne for all necessary reviewing parties. to evaluate the required traffic analvses and/b—r traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions"to the planning staff and the Planning Commission. If a continuance is warraDtod, the applicant will be netified of the continuance and the ne My scheduled public hearing date, Effective date. April 19, ZOOS -'a ion Petitionee's Signature Nov 21 14 1 0:00a The Tyler Rose Inc. 540-380-3076 p,22 REZONING AND LAND USE PERMITS REVIEW COMMENTS William & Tonla Goodrich Econ. Devel. —Joe Zie�inski Roanoke County Planning Department P.0, 29300 Roanoke, VA 24018 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 Nlay 8, 2002 The Department of Economic Development's position normally is to preserve industrial la -n& HoweNref, we, do not object to the -rezonirig request from William and Tonja: Goodrich to rezone a portion of an industrially zoned 20 -acre parcel ftorn 1-2 to R-1. The property proposed for n�zoning is not ideaJ for idustrial use clue to its lack of industrial access and challenging topography, Joe Zielinski Economic Development Specialist Thank you. Tarnmi Wood Prograrn Support Specialist, P & Z .. � I - a � / -Z� ') 0 � VMRM V y 66L MOMEW" DATEZ��O' 0 1 ART 1. Mio Q. - 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 1-2 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-11, 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. 4. That said real estate is more fully 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 Cl) C) L6 L? (N C? C\l C? CD (3) U) C: -0 2 m Of C) N C5 CN -0 E (D 0 PAI 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 1-2 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: I . 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 fully 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. 47' 29" 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: 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 Mm "p - I It VIP I L r m C,7 .C: -2 -0 0) 0 0 0 cu c C? 0 0 LO 0 C\l Lr) Lo L2 0) LL 0 m CL 0) c 0 0 0 E b) 0) U) L: o 0 .0 c 'E E 0 N U) 0 4it 0 N 0 0) CL (U 0 U) CL 4 0 CL 0 CL m U) 00 CL < LU 2 0- 2 0- x < T— Of N lr-- or- I Fwo AM� N P -M 14 LnL -2 0 T— Of N lr-- or- I Fwo AM� N P -M 14 -2 0 -0 0) 0 0 cu c 0 0 8 LO C'4 Lr) LL 0 (00 Ir 0 0) c 0 E t 80 Ew 0 ol w 4it 0 .2 0) U) 0 U) 0 CL 00 < 1 < Ir U) CL 2 CL 2 M 2 m (D CL < x LLJ IL IL < E -L E -L E -L E -L M I -2 0 -0 0) 0 0 cu c 0 LO 0 C'� L2 a) LL tf (01 0 o 0) 0 0 1 8- E U) b) S� o o U) 0 0 .0 CL 0 CL 0 CL CL (U 0 (U C) U) C) U) CL 2 2 x 2 m < LU 0- 0- < R-1 District Regulations SEC. 30-41. R-1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30-41-1. Purpose. (A) The R-1, low density residential district is established for areas of the county within the urban service area with existing low -middle density residential development, with an average density of from one (1) to three (3) units per acre, and land which appears appropriate for such development. These areas are generally consistent with the neighborhood conservation land use category as recommended in the comprehensive plan. In addition, where surrounding development and the level of public services warrant, these areas coincide with the development category recommended in the plan. This district is intended to provide the highest degree of protection from potentially incompatible uses and residential development of a significantly different density, size, or scale, in order to maintain the health, safety, appearance and overall quality of life of existing and future neighborhoods. In addition to single-family residences, only uses of a community nature which are generally deemed compatible are permitted in this district. This would include parks and playgrounds, schools and other similar neighborhood activities. (Ord. No. 042799-11, § If., 4-27-99; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08) Sec. 30-41-2. Permitted uses. (A) The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. Agricultural andForestry Uses Stable, Private * 2. Residential Uses Accessory Apartment * Home Beauty/Barber Salon * Home Occupation, Type I * Manufactured Home * Manufactured Home, Emergency * Multiple Dog Permit * R-1 District Regulations Residential Human Care Facility Single Family Dwelling, Attached * Single Family Dwelling, Attached (Cluster Subdivision Option) Single Family Dwelling, Detached Single Family Dwelling, Detached (Cluster Subdivision Option) Single Family Dwelling, Detached (Zero Lot Line Option) 3. Civic Uses Community Recreation * Family Day Care Home Park and Ride Facility * Public Parks and Recreational Areas * Utility Services, Minor 4. Commercial Uses Bed and Breakfast * 5. Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower * Wind Energy System, Small * (B) The following uses are allowed only by special use permit pursuant to section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. I . Residential Uses Alternative Discharging Sewage System * 2. Civic Uses Cemetery * R-1 District Regulations Crisis Center Day Care Center * Educational Facilities, Primary/Secondary * Religious Assembly * Utility Services, Major 3. Commercial Uses Golf Course * 4. Miscellaneous Uses Outdoor Gatherings * (Ord. No. 42793-20, § 11, 4-27-93; Ord. No. 62293-12, §§ 3, 8, 6-22-93; Ord. No. 82493-8, § 2, 8-24-93; Ord. No. 62795-10, 6-27-95; Ord. No. 042799-11, § 2, 4-27-99; Ord. No. 042500-9, § 11, 4-25-00; Ord. No. 072605-7, § 1, 7-26-05; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08; Ord. No. 052609-22, § 1, 5-26-09; Ord. No. 030811-1, § 1, 3-8-11; Ord. No. 052411-9, § 1, 5-24-11, Ord. No. 111213-15, § 1, 11-12-13) Sec. 30-41-3. Site Development Regulations. General Standards. For additional, modified, or more stringent standards for specific uses, see Article IIIV, Use and Design Standards. (A) Minimum lot requirements. I All lots served by private well and sewage disposal systems: a. Area: 0.75 acre (32,670 square feet). b. Frontage: 90 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. 2. Lots served by either public sewer or water: a. Area: 20,000 square feet. b. Frontage: 75 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. 3. All lots served by both public sewer and water: a. Area: 7,200 square feet. 3 R-1 District Regulations b. Frontage: 60 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. (B) Minimum setback requirements. I . Front yard: a. Principal structures: 30 feet. b. Accessory structures: Behind the front building line. 2. Side yard: a. Principal structures: 10 feet. b. Accessory structures: 10 feet behind front building line or 3 feet behind rear building line. 3. Rear yard: a. Principal structures: 25 feet. b. Accessory structures: 3 feet. 4. Where a lot fronts on more than one street, front yard setbacks shall apply to all streets. (C) Maximum height of structures. I . Height limitations: a. Principal structures: 45 feet. b. Accessory structures: 15 feet, or 25 feet provided they comply with the setback requirements for principal structures. (D) Maximum coverage. I . Building coverage: 35 percent of the total lot area for all buildings and 7 percent for accessory buildings. 2. Lot coverage: 50 percent of the total lot area. (Ord. No. 62293-12, § 10, 6-22-93; Ord. No. 42694-12, § 8, 4-26-94; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08, Ord. No. 111213-15, § 1, 11- 12-13) El 1-2 District Regulations SEC. 30-62. 1-2 HIGH INTENSITY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30-62-1. Purpose. (A) The purpose of the 1-2, high intensity industrial district is to provide areas within the urban service area which contain more intensive industrial uses or are suitable for such activities. These areas coincide with the principal industrial land use category contained in the comprehensive plan and are designated based on the suitability of the land in terms of slope and freedom from flooding and the relative remoteness and absence of substantial residential development which could be adversely affected by such development. In addition, the availability of adequate sewer and water capacity, access to arterial road network, and proximity to rail and airport facilities or the interstate highway system are major considerations. Distributing these areas around the county in a planned manner to create employment centers within close proximity to residential growth areas and reduce heavy traffic generation of industrial uses is encouraged. (Ord. No. 042799-11, § If., 4-27-99; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08, Ord. No. 111213-15, § 1, 11-12-13) Sec. 30-62-2. Permitted Uses. (A) The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. I . Agricultural and Forestry Uses Agriculture 2. Civic Uses Day Care Center * Park and Ride Facility Post Office Public Maintenance and Service Facilities Public Parks and Recreational Areas * Safety Services Utility Services, Major * 1-2 District Regulations Utility Services, Minor 3. Office Uses Financial Institutions General Office Laboratories 4. Commercial Uses Automobile Repair Services, Major * Business Support Services Business or Trade Schools Equipment Sales and Rental * Laundry 5. Industrial Uses Construction Yards * Custom Manufacturing * Industry, Type I Industry, Type 11 Landfill, Rubble Meat Packing and Related Industries Railroad Facilities Recycling Centers and Stations Scrap and Salvage Services Transfer Station * Transportation Terminal J-2 District Regulations Truck Terminal Warehousing and Distribution 6. Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower Parking Facility * Wind Energy System, Small* (B) The following uses are allowed only by special use permit pursuant to section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. I . Civic Uses Correctional Facilities 2. Commercial Uses Commercial Indoor Sports and Recreation Fuel Center * Mini -warehouse Surplus Sales Truck Stop * 3. Industrial Uses Asphalt Plant Composting * Industry, Type III Resource Extraction 4. Miscellaneous Uses Aviation Facilities, Private 1-2 District Regulations Broadcasting Tower Outdoor Gatherings Wind Energy System, Large Wind Energy System, Utility (Ord. No. 82493-8, § 2, 8-24-93; Ord. No. 042297-14, § 1, 4-22-97; Ord. No. 042799-11, § 2, 4- 27-99; Ord. No. 082807-18, § 1, 8-28-07; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08; Ord. No. 030811-1, § 1, 3-8-11; Ord. No. 052411-9, § 1, 5-24-11; Ord. No. 091311-7, § 1, 9-13-11, Ord. No. 111213-15, § 1, 11-12-13) Sec. 30-62-3. Site Development Regulations. General Standards. For additional, modified, or more stringent standards for specific uses, see Article IV, Use and Design Standards. (A) Minimum lot requirements. I . Lots served by private well and sewage disposal system; a. Area: I acre (43,560 square feet). b. Frontage: 100 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. 2. Lots served by either public sewer or water, or both: a. Area: 20,000 square feet. b. Frontage: 100 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. (B) Minimum setback requirements. I . Front yard: 30 feet, or 20 feet when all parking is located behind the front building line. 2. Side yard: a. Principal structures: 10 feet. b. Accessory structures: behind front building line and 3 feet from side line. 3. Rear yard: a. Principal structures: 15 feet. El 1-2 District Regulations b. Accessory structures: 3 feet. 4. Where a lot fronts on more than one street, front yard setbacks shall apply to all streets. (C) Maximum height of structures. I . Height limitations: a. All structures: When adjoining property zoned Residential, seventy-five (75) feet, including rooftop mechanical equipment. The maximum height may be increased provided each required side and/or rear yard adjoining a residential district is increased two (2) feet for each foot in height over seventy-five (75) feet. This distance shall be measured from the portion of the structure which exceeds seventy-five (75) feet. In all other locations the height is unlimited. (D) Maximum coverage. I . Building coverage: 75 percent of the total lot area. 2. Lot coverage: 90 percent of the total lot area. (Ord. No. 42694-12, § 9, 4-26-94; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08) k, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2015 ORDINANCE REZONING AN APPROXIMATE 8.00 ACRE PORTION OF AN APPDXIMATELY 19.44 ACRE PARCEL OF REAL ESTATE FROM 1-2, HIGH INTENSITY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, TO R-11, LOW DENISTY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AND REMOVING A PROFFERED CONDITION FROM THE 11.44 ACRE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ZONED R-11, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT LOCATED IN THE 5000 BLOCK OF POOR MOUNTAIN ROAD AND NORTH OF BYDAWYLE ROAD, CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (TAX MAP NO. 064.02-02-55.00- 0000), UPON THE APPLICATION OF ROGER AND DEBORAH RARDIN WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 9, 2014, and the second reading and public hearing were held January 27, 2015-1 and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on January 6, 2015-1 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 approximately 8.00 acres, as described herein, and located in the 5000 block of Poor Mountain Road (portion of Tax Map No. 064.02-02-55.00-0000) in the Catawba Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of 1-2, to the zoning classification of R-1. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Roger and Deborah Rardin. 3. That by Ordinance 062502-4the ownerof the property voluntarily proffered in writing the following condition which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, accepted and which is being REMOVED: Page 1 of 2 (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. 4. That said real estate is more fully 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 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. 47' 29" 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. Page 2 of 2