HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/23/2016 - Regular
February 23, 2016
75
Roanoke County Administration Center
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe
Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second
regularly scheduled meeting of the month of February 2016. Audio and video
recordings of this meeting will be held on file for a minimum of five (5) years in the office
of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES
Before the meeting was called to order an invocation was given by Pastor
Gregg S. Irby of Temple Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all
present.
IN RE: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. The roll call was
taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman P. Jason Peters,Supervisors George G. Assaid,
Al Bedrosian, Martha B. Hooker and Joseph P. McNamara
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator; Daniel R.
O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Richard
Caywood, Assistant County Administrator; Ruth Ellen
Kuhnel, County Attorney; Amy Whittaker, Public Information
Officer and Deborah C. Jacks, Chief Deputy Clerk to the
Board
IN RE: BRIEFINGS
1. Briefing to update the Board of Supervisors on the branding of
the Roanoke Valley region(Landon Howard, President, Roanoke
Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau)
Briefing was given. In attendance with Mr. Howard was Lee Wilhelm,
Chairman of the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau.
February 23, 2016
76
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
1. Resolution supporting the designation of the Roanoke Valley
region as Virginia’s Blue Ridge and directing Roanoke County’s
use of the Virginia’s Blue Ridge brand on County promotional and
marketing materials in support of expanded destination travel and
tourism (P. Jason Peters, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors;
Landon Howard, President, Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors
Bureau)
Chairman Peters commented he had worked with Supervisor Assaid and
Landon Howard on this.
RESOLUTION 022316-1 SUPPORTING THE DESIGNATION OF
THE ROANOKE VALLEY REGION AS VIRGINIA’S BLUE RIDGE
AND DIRECTING ROANOKE COUNTY’S USE OF THE
VIRGINIA’S BLUE RIDGE BRAND ON COUNTY PROMOTIONAL
AND MARKETING MATERIALS IN SUPPORT OF EXPANDED
DESTINATION TRAVEL AND TOURISM
Whereas, travel in Virginia’s Blue Ridge generates nearly $784 million in travel
expenditures annually by visitors and supports over 7,600 jobs; and provides more than
$55 million in direct state and local tax revenue;
Whereas, leisure travel, which accounts for more than three-quarters of all trips
taken in the United States, supports our region's arts, entertainment, and recreation
sectors of tourism and spurs local job creation; and
Whereas, traveler spending in our region enhances the lives of local residents
through sales taxes paid by out-of-town guests, thereby decreasing residents' taxes to
cover services enjoyed by all; and
WHEREAS, travel and tourism are vital components of Virginia’s diverse
economy, a cornerstone of our vibrant quality of life, and a catalyst for entrepreneurship,
cultural enrichment, historic preservation, community revitalization and economic
growth; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau is to
promote the travel and tourism industry in the region, direct the development of local
tourism marketing programs, and increase the prosperity and welfare of the people of
Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, in an effort to market Virginia’s Blue Ridge as a premier travel
destination, the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau works in partnership with
localities, businesses, and non-profit institutions to extend the appeal, reach and impact
of the “Virginia’s Blue Ridge” brand; and
February 23, 2016
77
WHEREAS, the Virginia’s Blue Ridge brand promotes a positive and attractive
image, regionally, nationally and globally; and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County desires to work with other regional governments
and private businesses to unite under one regional brand, Virginia’s Blue Ridge; and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County in cooperation with regional governments desires
to cooperate, develop, and maintain a consistent message that supports the Virginia’s
Blue Ridge brand.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors joins its regional partners in designating this region as Virginia’s Blue Ridge
and directs that Roanoke County marketing and promotional materials support the
Virginia’s Blue Ridge brand, encouraging the growth of destination travel and tourism
within the greater Roanoke Valley.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
2. Resolution authorizing the County of Roanoke to enter a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Town of Vinton, for the
County of Roanoke to act as the Virginia Stormwater Management
Program (VSMP) Authority for the Town of Vinton (Tarek Moneir,
Deputy Director of Development)
Mr. Moneir outlined the request for the resolution. There was no
discussion.
RESOLUTION 022316-2 AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY OF
ROANOKE TO ENTER A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
WITH THE TOWN OF VINTON, FOR THE COUNTY OF
ROANOKE TO ACT AS THE VIRGINIA STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (VSMP) AUTHORITY FOR THE
TOWN OF VINTON
WHEREAS, on this day of February 23, 2016, the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County adopted Ordinance 022316-6, amending Chapter 23 of the Code of
Roanoke County, wherein the County of Roanoke (the "County") is authorized to
establish a Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) and a Virginia Erosion
and Sediment Control Program (VESCP) within the County of Roanoke and within the
Town of Vinton (the "Town"); and
WHEREAS, the VESCP and the VSMP are becoming increasingly more
interrelated and complex to administer; and
February 23, 2016
78
WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton has determined that it would be beneficial for
Roanoke County to operate as the local VSMP Authority in the Town; and
WHEREAS, the County is willing to serve in this capacity; and
WHEREAS, the County currently reviews and inspects new land disturbing
activities for conformance with the Stormwater Management Design Standards,
Hydrologic Design, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) of the Town; and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County is also currently recognized as the local VESCP
Authority within the County and the Town to regulate stormwater runoff from
construction sites; and
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2013, the County executed two Memorandum of
Understanding agreements with the Town for the County to provide inspections for
stormwater management facilities and post-construction inspection services; and
WHEREAS, on August 31, 2015, Christopher S. Lawrence, the Town Manager of
the Town, submitted a letter to the County, requesting the County to become the VSMP
authority for the Town; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to enter a
Memorandum of Understanding, on behalf of the County, with the Town of Vinton, upon
a form approved by the office of the County Attorney, for the County to become the
Virginia Stormwater Management Program Authority for the Town of Vinton.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor
Hooker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1.
Ordinance amending Article IV.-Self-Insurance Program, Sections 2-81
and 2-83 of the County Code clarifying the current practice that Fire
and Rescue Volunteers are covered under Workers’ Compensation,
and that other Volunteers may remain covered under a Blanket
(Daniel R.
Accident Policy and/or subject to a General Liability Policy
O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator)
Mr. O’Donnell outlined the ordinance and advised there were no changes
from the first reading. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 022316-3 AMENDING ARTICLE IV.-SELF-
INSURANCE PROGRAM, SECTIONS 2-81 AND 2-83 OF THE
COUNTY CODE CLARIFYING THE CURRENT PRACTICE THAT
February 23, 2016
79
FIRE AND RESCUE VOLUNTEERS ARE COVERED UNDER
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, AND THAT OTHER
VOLUNTEERS MAY REMAIN COVERED UNDER A BLANKET
ACCIDENT POLICY AND/OR SUBJECT TO A GENERAL
LIABILITY POLICY
WHEREAS, Roanoke County maintains a self-insurance program (“the program”)
to indemnify certain individuals against losses incurred as the result of personal injury or
property damage arising from actions or omissions of or on behalf of the County and its
related agencies in such amounts as the County shall approve for indemnification; and
WHEREAS, the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Act, Section 65.2-101, et seq.
(“the Act”), of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, sets forth the mandates for
indemnification of County employees for accidents and injuries arising out of and in the
course of their employment for the County; and
WHEREAS, such employees who suffer injuries arising out of and in the course
of their County employment are subject to the County’s program for workers’
compensation benefits under the Act; and
WHEREAS, the mandates of the Act do not require the County to indemnify
volunteers who donate efforts or resources to various County projects and who may
suffer personal injury during the course of such volunteer activities, in the same manner
the County would otherwise be required to indemnify County employees; and
WHEREAS, the County wishes to amend its self-insurance program regarding
coverage for volunteers so that the provisions of the program are consistent with the
terms of the Act; and
WHEREAS, this Amendment shall cause the Code of Roanoke County to
conform to the provisions of the Act with regard to volunteers; and
WHEREAS, in recognition of the public service role that volunteers provide for
the County, the County has procured certain insurance under a Blanket Accident policy
and a general liability policy with VACORP that may otherwise provide some limited
medical payment coverage for volunteers performing approved volunteer services for
the County; and
WHEREAS, this Amendment shall not be construed to apply to or otherwise
affect any applicable benefits that those registered emergency fire and rescue
volunteers who perform volunteer emergency fire and rescue roles for the County
currently receive following accident or injury in the course of their volunteer fire and
rescue roles; and
WHEREAS, this Amendment codifies and memorializes the current practices of
the Roanoke County Office of Risk Management; and
WHEREAS, this Amendment is drafted to promote good stewardship of the
taxpayer funds entrusted to the self-insured program; and
WHEREAS, Article IV of the Roanoke County Code, Section 2-81 defines
“covered persons” under the program. This amendment will remove “volunteers” from
February 23, 2016
80
the list of “covered persons” and instead, will specify that “fire and rescue volunteers”
are “covered persons” under the program.
WHEREAS, Article IV of the Roanoke County Code, Section 2-83 sets forth
“Risks covered by the self-insurance program” and sub-section 2-83 (c)(2) lists various
entities and persons who are excluded from the provisions of the County’s workers’
compensation self-insurance coverage; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment adds a category of “Volunteers, except
fire and rescue volunteers,” to this list of exclusions under the Workers’ Compensation
portion of the self-insured program; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of the ordinance was held on February 9, 2016, and
the second reading was held on February 23, 2016.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that Article IV of the Roanoke County Code, Sections 2-81 and 2-83,
Self-Insurance Program, be amended as follows:
Sec. 2-81. - Definitions.
\[As used in this article, unless the context requires a different meaning:\]
Claim(s) means requests for payment for personal injury or property damage.
County officer means a member of the Board of County Supervisors, a
constitutional officer, an elected official, or a member of a board, commission or
authority which is appointed by the Board of Supervisors or performs functions of the
County, e.g., Electoral Board, Board of Zoning appeals.
Covered person means a County officer, County employee, or fire and rescue
volunteer.
Employee means a person other than a volunteer or County officer who performs
services for the County, is paid wages or a salary by the County in exchange for
services, and who is subject to direction by County officers or their designees. The term
also includes persons who perform functions of the County, e.g., registrar. The term
specifically excludes independent contractors.
Occurrence means an event or accident that results in personal injury or property
damage.
Personal injury includes:
(1) Death, bodily injury, sickness, shock, intentional infliction of mental anguish or
mental injury;
(2) False arrest, false imprisonment, wrongful eviction, wrongful detention,
malicious prosecution, or humiliation;
(3) Libel, slander, defamation, invasion of rights to privacy, infringement of
copyright, false service of civil papers, abuse of process;
(4) Assault and battery; and
(5) Deprivation of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by state or federal law
or by the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of Virginia.
Property damage means physical injury to or destruction of tangible and/or
intangible property and all direct and consequential loss resulting therefrom.
February 23, 2016
81
Self-insurance fund. The risk management fund shall be a continuing
appropriation, notwithstanding fiscal years, to be used for payment of the administrative
costs, expenses, settlements, judgments, and claims of the self-insurance program. The
self-insurance fund may also be augmented from time-to-time with transfers from other
accounts.
Self-insurance trustees. There is hereby created a self-insurance committee for
the purpose of administering, in accordance with the provisions of this article, the self-
insurance program with the risk manager. The self-insurance trustees shall be
comprised of the County administrator, County attorney, director of finance, and the risk
manager, or their designee.
Volunteer means a person other than a County officer or employee who performs
services for the County without remuneration and who performs them subject to
direction by County officers or employees and who is registered as such with the
County’s department of human resources.
(Ord. No. 61494-6, § 1, 6-14-94)
Sec. 2-83. - Risks covered by the program.
(a) In accordance with section 2-82 of this program, the County shall
indemnify against personal injury or property damage losses arising from actions or
inactions taken or not taken by or on behalf of the County or its related agencies in such
amounts as the County shall approve, after it is determined that:
(1) Indemnifying against such losses would have a beneficial effect on
the County's ability to employ and retain qualified employees; or
(2) Indemnifying against such losses would otherwise further the
County's lawful responsibilities without detrimentally affecting the County's
responsibilities as a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
(b) In the event the County chooses to limit indemnification, it shall notify the
employee of such limitation in a reasonable time following receipt of the claim.
(c) Risks covered by the program include:
(1) Property damage (including consequential damages when not due
to other causes excluded by the program) to or loss of real and personal property
owned by the County or property owned by others that is under care, custody or
control of the County.
a. Property damage shall include:
1. The expense of removing damaged property and
debris (other than building foundations) after any covered loss;
2. Expenses incurred to reduce or prevent actual or
imminent loss or damage as long as these expenses are less than
the loss or damage being reduced or prevented;
3. Expenses incurred due to the demolition of
undamaged portions of covered property when required by law,
ordinance, code or regulation, including site clearing, replacement
February 23, 2016
82
of the undamaged portion, and business interruption expenses due
to the delay in repair or rebuilding;
4. Architects' fees for consultation arising from covered
losses, subject to a limit of seven (7) percent of replacement cost;
and
5. Construction or repair expenses required by any law,
ordinance, code or regulation which regulates construction, repair,
replacement or use of any damaged or undamaged portions of the
property.
b. Property damage shall not include:
1. Loss by moth, vermin, termites or other insects; wear,
tear or gradual deterioration; rust, wet or dry rot or mold, shrinkage,
evaporation, loss of weight, or leakage unless caused by fire or
firefighting;
2. Loss or damage caused by contamination unless
directly resulting from fire or extended coverage perils, such as
earthquakes, floods, lightning, windstorms, and hail;
3. Loss resulting from dampness of atmosphere or
variation in temperature unless caused by fire or extended
coverage perils, such as earthquakes, floods, lightning, windstorms,
and hail;
4. Loss of electrical appliances or devices of any kind,
including wiring, arising from electrical injury or disturbance unless
as a direct result of loss or damage caused by fire or extended
coverage perils, such as earthquakes, floods, lightning, windstorms,
and hail;
5. Loss to motor vehicles, aircraft, or watercraft including
tires, caused by normal wear or tear, mechanical or electrical
breakdown or failure or freezing;
6. Loss to property other than motor vehicles, aircraft,
and watercraft by mechanical breakdown, including rupture or
bursting by centrifugal force;
7. Loss to aircraft, standing timber, trees, shrubs, lawns,
growing crops and livestock;
8. Unexplained loss or mysterious disappearance, or
shortage disclosed upon taking inventory; and
9. Loss resulting from normal aging of equipment,
buildings, or other property.
(2) Workers' compensation. The County will pay workers' compensation
benefits to employees and fire and rescue volunteers who are injured by accident or
who develop an occupational disease caused by their employment or volunteer service
when required by Title 65.2 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended (the Virginia
February 23, 2016
83
Workers' Compensation Act, hereinafter "the Act"). The employee must notify the
County of any return to employment, increase in earnings, or recovery for injury from
third parties and if the employee fails to so notify the County, the County's obligation to
pay benefits will terminate. The County reserves its subrogation rights as provided in
the act.
Benefits shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of state law and
provisions of County administrative regulations as promulgated by the County
Administrator.
To be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits, a volunteer firefighter must
have been duly certified to the Clerk of Circuit Court as required by Section 27-42 of the
Code of Virginia.
This workers' compensation coverage does not apply to:
a. Individuals not employed by the County;
b. Persons providing services to the County as independent contractors;
and
c. Employees receiving medical treatment provided by a physician not
listed in the County's physician list, except when (a) the nature of the
illness or injury requires emergency medical services or (b) the
employee is referred by a physician who is on the County's physician list
to a physician who is not on the County's physician list; and
d. County officers, unless they are deemed to be covered "employees"
under the Act;
e. All volunteers, except fire and rescue volunteers.
(3) Automobile liability. The program will pay claims which a covered person
is legally obligated to pay for negligent operation of a motor vehicle in the course of
County business. However, if the covered person is driving a non-County owned vehicle
on County business and is guilty of negligence, the program will only provide secondary
coverage to the covered person's personal liability insurance over and above minimum
amounts required by Virginia law, i.e., the program will pay for any claims against the
covered person which exceed the limits of the covered person's personal insurance
policy up to the program limit of liability. The program will not pay claims for any
damage to any non-County owned vehicle operated by a covered person which is due
to the negligence or intentional actions of that covered person.
The program provides the statutory minimum limits for uninsured motorist
coverage and specifically rejects coverage in excess of the statutorily mandated
minimum. The limits of liability for uninsured and underinsured motorist liability coverage
shall be the minimum amounts required by Virginia law, currently established as follows:
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) because of bodily injury to or death of any one
person in any accident, and subject to the limit for one person, to a limit of fifty thousand
dollars ($50,000) because of bodily injuries to or death of two (2) or more persons in
any one accident, and to a limit of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) because of injury
to or destruction of property of others in any one accident, or as may be hereafter
February 23, 2016
84
established by law. The program's uninsured motorist coverage shall be secondary to
any such coverage in the covered person's personal liability insurance policy or any
other available uninsured motorist coverage.
The program provides medical payments coverage only to the extent mandated
in Code of Virginia Title 38.2.
The program will not pay collision and comprehensive damage claims for County
owned or leased motor vehicles. These repair expenses or losses shall be the
responsibility of the County department, agency, or officer to which the motor vehicle is
assigned.
(4) Comprehensive general liability including law enforcement legal liability
and public officials' liability. The program will pay claims for liability imposed upon a
covered person for personal injuries and property damage or loss because of the acts,
errors or omissions of a covered person in the course of his duties on behalf of the
County. Not included in this comprehensive general liability coverage are County
employees whom the covered person may have injured in the course of their
employment (because such employees have coverage under the workers'
compensation section).
(5) Medical services. The program will pay claims, if based solely on error,
negligence, omission or mistake, arising out of medical services which were rendered or
which should have been rendered by any duly qualified medical practitioner, nurse or
technician employed by the County or acting at its request. The program will provide
coverage only to the extent that the losses exceed the medical professional's other
insurance coverage and to the extent of the program's limit of liability.
(6) Faithful performance blanket bond liability. The program will indemnify
the County for loss caused through failure of any County officer, volunteer or employee,
acting alone or in collusion with others to perform faithfully his duties or to account
properly for all monies and property received by virtue of his position or employment.
(7) The program may, but is not obligated to, provide for a policy for
payment of certain medical expenses incurred by approved volunteers, other than
registered fire and rescue volunteers, for bodily injuries that occur during the course of
approved volunteer projects in the County.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
2. Ordinance approving a new Intergovernmental Agreement
between the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem and the County of
Roanoke for the establishment of a Regional Collision Center with
Roanoke Accident Support Services, LTD (Howard B. Hall, Chief
of Police)
February 23, 2016
85
Chief Hall outlined the ordinance and advised there were no changes from the
first reading. He added that Roanoke City Council passed without any changes on
February 16, 2016, in a unanimous vote.
Supervisor Bedrosian asked for confirmation that Roanoke City will be using this
as well with Chief Hall reiterating in the affirmative and advising the City of Salem would
be voting in March. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked about the compliance rate in
Canada with Chief Hall responding Ms. Hooker has asked him at the last meeting to find
out what the compliance rate it. There is a 97% compliance rate in Canada. Supervisor
Bedrosian asked what that meant. Chief Hall advised three percent (3%) of the people
who don’t go to the center and would have to be followed up on by the Police
Department. Supervisor Bedrosian asked if this was an acceptable compliance rate
with Chief Hall responding in the affirmative. There was no further discussion.
ORDINANCE 022316-4 APPROVING A NEW
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ROANOKE, THE CITY OF SALEM AND THE COUNTY OF
ROANOKE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A REGIONAL
COLLISION CENTER WITH ROANOKE ACCIDENT SUPPORT
SERVICES, LTD
WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke, the City of Roanoke and the City of Salem,
pursuant to Section 15.2-1300 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, have
negotiated a new Intergovernmental Agreement with Roanoke Accident Support
Services, Ltd. ("RASS") for the establishment of a regional collision center; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1300 of the Code of Virginia authorizes two or more
localities to enter into agreements with one another for joint action; and
WHEREAS, Section 46.2-373 of the Code of Virginia requires every law-
enforcement officer who in the course of duty investigates a motor vehicle accident
resulting in injury to or death of any person or total property damage to an apparent
extent of $1,500 or more to forward a written report of the accident to the Department of
Motor Vehicles within twenty-four hours after completing the investigation; and
WHEREAS, the governing bodies of Roanoke City, Roanoke County, and Salem
have determined that it is in the best interest of all three jurisdictions to enter into a
Roanoke Valley Regional Collision Center Agreement with RASS to operate a Regional
Collision Center to assist in the preparation of accident reports act as a clearing house
for reporting on all such accidents that occur in the three jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 2016, and
the second reading was held on February 23, 2016.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
February 23, 2016
86
1. That the Intergovernmental Roanoke Valley Regional Collision Center
Agreement with Roanoke Accident Support Services, Ltd. is approved.
2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute the
Intergovernmental Roanoke Valley Regional Collision Center Agreement
upon such form as approved by the County Attorney.
3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizing the vacation of unimproved right-of-way
shown as Tinkerdale Road identified on the map of North
Burlington Heights in Plat Book 3, Page 57 located in the Hollins
(Arnold Covey, Director of Community
Magisterial District
Development)
Mr. Covey outlined the request for the ordinance and advised there were
no changes from first reading. There were no citizens to speak on this agenda item.
ORDINANCE 022316-5 AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF AN
UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY SHOWN AS TINKERDALE
ROAD ON MAP OF NORTH BURLINGTON HEIGHTS IN PLAT
BOOK 3, PAGE 57, OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CIRCUIT
COURT CLERK’S OFFICE, SAID RIGHT-OF WAY LOCATED IN
THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the map of North Burlington Heights subdivision recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 57,
established a street designated as Tinkerdale Road fifty feet (50’) in width and
intersecting with Enon Drive (Rte. 1806), located between Lot 3, Block 14, Section 1
(Map of North Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57) and Lot 3 and ½ of Lot 2, Block
15, Section 1 (map of North Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57) for a portion of its
length; and
WHEREAS, the area designated and set aside for public use as Tinkerdale Road
on the map of North Burlington Heights has never been improved or accepted into the
Virginia State Secondary Road System; and
WHEREAS, the property owners of Lot 3, Block 14, Section 1 (map of North
Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57) and Lot 3 and ½ of Lot 2, Block 15, Section 1
February 23, 2016
87
(map of North Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57) adjoining the unimproved
section of Tinkerdale Road, extending approximately two hundred fifty (250) feet from
the northern edge of Enon Drive, have requested the vacation of this unimproved
portion of the fifty foot (50’) width right-of-way so as to permit these property owners to
make improvements to their residential properties; and
WHEREAS, Appalachian Power Company, Cox Communications and Verizon
Virginia LLC have requested that a public utility easement be retained for their utilities
presently occupying the existing right-of-way. Western Virginia Water Authority has
requested an easement for an existing water line occupying the existing right-of-way
and Roanoke County Community Development would also like to retain an easement
for a storm drain that is present; and
WHEREAS, the above described street or road is more clearly indicated as
“Portion of Tinkerdale Road To Be Vacated and Reserved as a 50’ Public Utility
Easement” on “PLAT SHOWING PORTION OF TINKERDALE ROAD – TO BE
VACATED BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA”,
dated 1-4-2016, prepared by Roanoke County Department of Community Development
and attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; and
WHEREAS, no other property owner will be affected by the vacation of this
undeveloped portion of said Tinkerdale Road and that its current existence imposes an
impediment to the adjoining property owners making improvements to their properties
adjoining this previously dedicated but unimproved street; and
WHEREAS, the adjoining property owners and residents of Roanoke County
and Roanoke City, as the Petitioners, have requested that, pursuant to Section 15.2-
2272 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, vacate this right-of-way, designated as “Tinkerdale Road” on the plat
of the North Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57 and the plat of as now shown on
the attached Exhibit “A”; and
WHEREAS, this vacation will not involve any cost to the County and the affected
County departments have raised no objection; and
WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by Section 15.2-2204 of the Code
of Virginia (1950, as amended); and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by
ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 2016, and a
second reading and public hearing of this ordinance was held on February 23, 2016.
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the subject real estate (Tinkerdale Road, fifty feet (50’) in width street and
approximately two hundred and fifty (250) feet in length) is hereby declared to be
surplus and the nature of the interests in real estate renders it unavailable for other
public use.
February 23, 2016
88
3. That this street, Tinkerdale Road, being designated and shown as “Portion of
Tinkerdale Road To Be Vacated and Reserved as a 50’ Public Utility Easement” on
Exhibit “A” attached hereto, said street being located between Lot 3, Block 14, Section 1
(map of North Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57) and Lot 3 and ½ of Lot 2, Block
15, Section 1 (map of North Burlington Heights, Plat Book 3, page 57), in the Hollins
Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to
Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia,1950, as amended.
That a fifty foot (50’) public utility easement is accepted, reserved and maintained
for public purposes in the area previously designated as “Tinkerdale Road” as shown on
Exhibit “A” attached hereto.
5. That all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to
publication, survey and recordation costs, shall be the responsibility of the Petitioners.
6. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is
hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be
necessary to accomplish the provisions of this ordinance, all of which shall be on a form
approved by the County Attorney.
7. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption, and
a certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in accordance with Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of
Virginia (1950, as amended).
On motion of Supervisor Bedrosian to adopt the ordinance, seconded by
Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
1. Ordinance amending Chapter 23 “Stormwater Management” of the
Roanoke County Code (Arnold Covey, Director of Community
Development)
Mr. Covey outlined the request for ordinance and advised one slight
change was made to modify a definition. There were no citizens to speak on this
agenda item. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 022316-6 AMENDING CHAPTER 23.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
WHEREAS, on April 22, 2014, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County
adopted Ordinance 042214-12 which adopted a new Chapter 23. – Stormwater
Management Ordinance for Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has reviewed this
Ordinance, and in consideration of recent legislative and regulatory changes, and is
February 23, 2016
89
recommending that the Board consider adopting minor modifications to this Ordinance;
and
WHEREAS, the Federal Clean Water Act requires the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to enact regulations to permit and eliminate pollutants
discharged into the nation’s waterways; and
WHEREAS, the EPA has required the states and in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to enforce these regulations; and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County through the state-mandated programs is required
to lessen the adverse impacts from stormwater runoff from land disturbing activities and
from previous development through the local erosion and sediment control ordinance,
the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP), Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (MS4) Permit, and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program; and
WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia has determined that to increase the
effectiveness of these programs, the administration of the VSMP stormwater
management requirements are being transferred to the localities; and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County is the local VSMP authority, which will result in
additional plan reviews, field inspections, educational activities, enforcement actions,
and coordination with DEQ; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance satisfies the DEQ current requirements effective July
1, 2015; and
WHEREAS, staff presented proposed changes to the Board of Supervisors on
September 22, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Board and public requested staff to review and explore
additional information regarding the proposed changes which results are included
herein;
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 2016, and
the second reading and public hearing was held on February 23, 2016.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Chapter 23. Stormwater Management be, and hereby is, amended
and readopted to read and provide as attached.
2. That the effective date of this ordinance is February 23, 2016.
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, seconded by
Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
The complete Stormwater Management Ordinance is on file in the office of
the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.
February 23, 2016
90
3. Ordinance amending Chapter 8.1, Erosion and Sediment Control
(ESC) of the Roanoke County Code (Arnold Covey, Director of
Community Development)
Mr. Covey outlined the request for the ordinance and advised there were a few
language clarification changes made since the first reading. There were no citizens to
speak on this agenda item. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 022316-7 AMENDING CHAPTER 8.1. – EROSION
AND SEDIMENT CONTROL OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE
WHEREAS, Chapter 8.1. – Erosion and Sediment Control of the Roanoke
County Code was last amended by Ordinance #052708-19 on May 27, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia has
adopted legislative changes to the enabling legislation, Article 2.4, Chapter 3.1 of Title
62.1 of the Code of Virginia, and these changes must be incorporated into the
ordinances of its local governments; and
WHEREAS, the administration of the Erosion and Sediment Control Program
was transferred to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) by Acts 2013,
Chapters 756 and 793; and
WHEREAS, DEQ has adopted regulations to administer the Erosion and
Sediment Control Program; and
WHEREAS, DEQ has identified various County streams as being impaired due to
excessive sediment, has assigned Roanoke County a waste load allocation for
sediment based on regional Total Maximum Daily Load studies, and requires Roanoke
County in its Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit to provide additional
stormwater controls; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for Roanoke County to amend Chapter 8.1 of the
Roanoke County Code to incorporate the recent legislative and regulatory changes
adopted by the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, these amendments revise various definitions and require
compliance with water quantity of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 9, 2016 and
the second reading and public hearing was held on February 23, 2016.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Chapter 8.1. – Erosion and Sediment Control be amended to read
and provide as follows:
Chapter 8.1 - EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Sec. 8.1-1. - Title, purpose and authority.
February 23, 2016
91
This chapter shall be known as the "Erosion and Sediment Control and Steep Slope
Development Ordinance of the County of Roanoke, Virginia." The purpose of this
chapter is to prevent degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and other
natural resources of Roanoke County by establishing requirements for the control of soil
erosion, sediment deposition and non-agricultural runoff and by establishing
requirements for development of steep slopes, and by establishing procedures whereby
these requirements shall be administered and enforced.
This chapter is authorized by the Code of Virginia, Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Article
2.4, known as the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law.
Sec. 8.1-2. - Applicability of chapter in Town of Vinton.
The provisions of this chapter shall be applicable within the corporate limits of the
Town of Vinton. Administrative procedures and review fees may be established to
accommodate the review of plans for development located within the town.
Sec. 8.1-3. - Definitions.
As used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different meaning:
Agreement in lieu of a plan means a contract between the plan-approving authority
and the owner that specifies conservation measures that must be implemented in the
construction of a single-family residence; this contract may be executed by the plan-
approving authority in lieu of a formal site plan. Agreement in lieu of a plan also means
a contract between the plan-approving authority and the owner that specifies
conservation measures that must be implemented in the construction of any land
disturbing activity, other than a single-family residence, that disturbs between two
thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet and nine thousand nine hundred and ninety
nine (9,999) square feet; this contract may be executed by the plan-approving authority
in lieu of a formal site plan.
Applicant means any person submitting an erosion and sediment control plan for
approval or requesting the issuance of a permit, when required, authorizing land-
disturbing activities to commence.
Board means the Virginia State Water Control Board.
Certified inspector means an employee or agent of a VESCP authority who (i) holds
a certificate of competence from the Board in the area of project inspection or (ii) is
enrolled in the Board’s training program for project inspection and successfully
completes such program within one year after enrollment.
Certified plan reviewer means an employee or agent of a VESCP authority who (i)
Holds a certificate of competence from the Board in the area of plan review, (ii) is
enrolled in the Board’s training program for plan review and successfully completes
such program within one year after enrollment, or (iii) is licensed as a professional
February 23, 2016
92
engineer, architect, certified landscape architect or land surveyor pursuant to Article
1(Sec. 54.1-400 et seq.) of Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 or a professional soil scientist as
defined in Sec. 54.1-2200 of the Code of Virginia.
Certified program administrator means an employee or agent of a VESCP authority
who (i) holds a certificate of competence from the Board in the area of program
administration or (ii) is enrolled in the Board’s training program for program
administration and successfully completes such program within one year after
enrollment.
Clearing means any activity which removes the vegetative ground cover including,
but not limited to, root mat removal or top soil removal.
County means the County of Roanoke.
Department means the Department of Environmental Quality.
Development means a tract or parcel of land developed or to be developed as a
single unit under single ownership or unified control which is to be used for any
business or industrial purpose or is to contain three (3) or more residential dwelling
units.
Director means the Director of the Department of Environmental Quality.
District or Soil and Water Conservation District refers to the Blue Ridge Soil and
Water Conservation District.
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan or Plan means a document containing material
for the conservation of soil and water resources of a unit or group of units of land. It may
include appropriate maps, an appropriate soil and water plan inventory, and
management information with needed interpretations and a record of decisions
contributing to conservation treatment. The plan shall contain all major conservation
decisions and all information deemed necessary by the County to assure that the entire
unit or units of land will be so treated to achieve the conservation objectives. An Erosion
and Sediment Control Plan must be prepared by a Virginia Professional Engineer, Land
Surveyor, Landscape Architect, Architect, or Professional Soil Scientist.
Erosion impact area means an area of land not associated with current land
disturbing activity but subject to persistent soil erosion resulting in the delivery of
sediment onto neighboring properties or into state waters. This definition shall not apply
to any lot or parcel of land of ten thousand (10,000) square feet or less used for
residential purposes.
Excavating means any digging, scooping or other methods of removing earth
materials.
Filling means any depositing or stockpiling of earth materials.
Geotechnical report means a report provided at the applicant's expense, prepared
and stamped by a professional engineer, that communicates site conditions, and
recommends design and construction methods.
(1) The geotechnical report shall include any or all of the following basic
information, as determined by the professional engineer:
February 23, 2016
93
a. Summary of all subsurface exploration data, including subsurface soil
profile, exploration logs, laboratory or in situ test results, and ground water
information;
b. Interpretation and analysis of the subsurface data;
c. Specific engineering recommendations for design;
d. Discussion of conditions for solution of anticipated problems; and
e. Recommended geotechnical special provisions.
(2) For guidance in investigating site conditions and preparing geotechnical reports,
the professional engineer may refer to all applicable sections of: "Checklist and
Guidelines for Review of Geotechnical Reports and Preliminary Plans and
Specifications", US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration Publication No. FHWA ED-88-053, as amended.
(3) The geotechnical report shall be submitted to the plan-approving authority and
included in site development files prior to issuance of a land disturbing permit.
Grading means any excavating or filling of earth material or any combination
thereof, including the land in its excavated or filled conditions.
Land-disturbing activity means any man-made change to the land surface that may
result in soil erosion from water or wind and the movement of sediments into state
waters or onto lands in the Commonwealth, including, but not limited to, clearing,
grading, excavating, transporting and filling of land, except that the term shall not
include:
(1) Minor land-disturbing activities such as home gardens and individual home
landscaping, repairs and maintenance work;
(2) Individual service connections;
(3) Installation, maintenance, or repairs of any underground public utility lines when
such activity occurs on an existing hard-surfaced road, street or sidewalk
provided such land-disturbing activity is confined to the area of the road, street
or sidewalk that is hard-surfaced;
(4) Septic tank lines or drainage fields unless included in an overall plan for land-
disturbing activity relating to construction of the building to be served by the
septic tank system;
(5) Permitted surface or deep mining operations and projects, or oil and gas
operations and projects conducted pursuant to Title 45.1 of the Code of
Virginia;
(6) Tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or forest crops, or
livestock feedlot operations; including engineering operations as follows:
construction of terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes,
ponds, ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour
February 23, 2016
94
furrowing, land drainage, and land irrigation; however, this exception shall not
apply to harvesting of forest crops unless the area on which harvesting occurs
is reforested artificially or naturally in accordance with the provisions of Chapter
11 (Sec. 10.1-1100 et seq.) of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia or is converted
to bona fide agricultural or improved pasture use as described in Subsection B
of Sec. 10.1-1163;
(7) Repair or rebuilding of the tracks, rights-of-way, bridges, communication
facilities and other related structures and facilities of a railroad company;
(8) Agricultural engineering operations including but not limited to the construction
of terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds not
required to comply with the Dam Safety Act (Va. Code § 10.1-604 et seq.)
ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing,
land drainage, and land irrigation;
(9) Disturbed land areas of less than two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet
in size; except as herein described for residential development in Section 8.1-
6(e).
(10) Installation of fence and sign posts or telephone and electric poles and other
kinds of posts or poles;
(11) Emergency work to protect life, limb or property, and emergency repairs;
however, if the land- disturbing activity would have required an approved
erosion and sediment control plan, if the activity were not an emergency, then
the land area disturbed shall be shaped and stabilized in accordance with the
requirements of this Ordinance.
Land-disturbing Permit or approval means a permit or other form of approval issued
by the County for the clearing, filling, excavating, grading, transporting of land or for any
combination thereof or for any other land disturbing activity set forth herein.
Natural channel design concepts means the utilization of engineering analysis and
fluvial geomorphic processes to create, rehabilitate, restore, or stabilize an open
conveyance system for the purpose of creating or recreating a stream that conveys its
bankfull storm event within its banks and allows larger flows to access its bankfull bench
and its floodplain.
Owner means the owner or owners of the freehold of the premises or lesser estate
therein, a mortgagee or vendee in possession, assignee of rents, receiver, executor,
trustee, lessee or other person, firm or corporation in control of a property.
Peak flow rate means the maximum instantaneous flow from a given storm
condition at a particular location.
Permittee means the person to whom the land-disturbing approval is issued or the
person who certifies that the approved erosion and sediment control plan will be
followed.
Person means any individual, partnership, firm, association, joint venture, public or
private corporation, trust, estate, commission, board, public or private institution, utility,
February 23, 2016
95
cooperative, county, city, town or other political subdivision of the commonwealth, any
interstate body, or any other legal entity.
Responsible Land Disturber or RLD means an individual holding a certificate issued
by the Department who is responsible for carrying out the land-disturbing activity in
accordance with the approved ESC plan. In addition, the RLD may be a Virginia
Professional Engineer, Land Surveyor, Landscape Architect, Architect, or Professional
Soil Scientist, provided that it is the same licensed professional who sealed and signed
the ESC plan. The RLD may be the owner, applicant, permittee, designer,
superintendent, project manager, contractor, or any other project or development team
member. The RLD must be designated on the ESC plan or permit as a prerequisite for
engaging in land disturbance.
Runoff volume means the volume of water that runs off the land development
project from a prescribed storm event.
Single-family residence means a noncommercial dwelling that is occupied
exclusively by one (1) family.
Steep slope means a slope greater than 3:1, or thirty-three and one-third (33.3)
percent.
State permit means an approval to conduct a land-disturbing activity issued by the
Board in the form of a state stormwater individual permit or coverage issued under a
state general permit.
State waters means all waters on the surface and under the ground wholly or
partially within or bordering the Commonwealth or within its jurisdictions.
Town means the incorporated Town of Vinton.
Transporting means any moving of earth materials from one place to another place
other than such movement incidental to grading, when such movement results in
destroying the vegetative ground cover either by tracking or the buildup of earth
materials to the extent that erosion and sedimentation will result from the soil or earth
materials over which such transporting occurs.
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program or VESCP means a program
approved by the Board that has been established by a VESCP authority for the effective
control of soil erosion, sediment deposition, and non-agricultural runoff associated with
a land-disturbing activity to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream
channels, waters, and other natural resources and shall include such items where
applicable as local ordinances, rules, permit requirements, annual standards and
specifications, policies and guidelines, technical materials, and requirements for plan
review, inspection, enforcement where authorized in this article, and evaluation
consistent with the requirements of this article and its associated regulations.
VESCP plan-approving authority means the Director of Community Development or
his assignee, which is responsible for determining the adequacy of a plan submitted for
land-disturbing activities on a unit or units of lands and for approving plans.
VESCP authority or program authority means Roanoke County which has adopted
a soil erosion and sediment control program that has been approved by the Board.
February 23, 2016
96
Water Quality Volume means the volume equal to the first one-half inch of runoff
multiplied by the impervious surface of the land development project.
Sec. 8.1-4. - Administration of chapter in conjunction with subdivision and zoning
ordinances.
This chapter shall be administered, where applicable, in conjunction with the
county's subdivision and zoning ordinances wherein such apply to the development and
subdivision of land within the county or where such apply to development on previously
subdivided land within the county.
Sec. 8.1-5. - Local erosion and sediment control program.
(a) Pursuant to section 62.1-44.15:54 of the Code of Virginia, the County hereby
establishes a VESCP program and adopts the regulations promulgated by the
Board; with the exception that the requirements contained in 9VAC25-840-40.19 do
not apply to the regulated land-disturbing activities that meet the requirements of
8.1-7 of this Ordinance; (for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment
deposition to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels,
waters and other natural resources) and the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook, as amended, and those more stringent local criteria which the County
Board of Supervisors, may adopt by resolution and incorporate into the manual of
regulations and policies entitled "Stormwater Management Design Manual" and
"Design and Construction Standards Manual".
(b) In accordance with § 62.1-44.15:52 of the Code of Virginia, any plan approved prior
to July 1, 2014 that provides for stormwater management that addresses any flow
rate capacity and velocity requirements for natural or man-made channels shall
satisfy the flow rate capacity and velocity requirements for natural or man-made
channels if the practices are designed to (i) detain the water quality volume and to
release it over 48 hours; (ii) detain and release over a 24-hour period the expected
rainfall resulting from the one year, 24-hour storm; and (iii) reduce the allowable
peak flow rate resulting from the 1.5, 2, and 10-year, 24-hour storms to a level that
is less than or equal to the peak flow rate from the site assuming it was in a good
forested condition, achieved through multiplication of the forested peak flow rate by
a reduction factor that is equal to the runoff volume from the site when it was in a
good forested condition divided by the runoff volume from the site in its proposed
condition, and shall be exempt from any flow rate capacity and velocity
requirements for natural or man-made channels
(c) For plans approved on and after July 1, 2014, the flow rate capacity and velocity
requirements for natural and man-made channels shall be satisfied by compliance
with water quantity requirements specified in § 62.1-44.15:28 of the Stormwater
Management Act and 9VAC25-870-66 of the Virginia Stormwater Management
Program (VSMP) regulations, unless such land-disturbing activities are in
February 23, 2016
97
accordance with the grandfathering provisions of the Virginia Stormwater
Management Program (VSMP) Regulations.
(d) The County hereby designates the Director of Community Development or his
assignee as the plan-approving authority.
(e) The program and regulations provided for in this chapter shall be made available for
public inspection at the office of the Department of Community Development.
(f) Pursuant to Sec. 62.1-44.15:53 of the Code of Virginia, an erosion and sediment
control plan shall not be approved until it is reviewed by a certified plan reviewer.
Inspections of land-disturbing activities shall be conducted by a certified inspector. The
erosion control program of the County shall contain a certified program administrator, a
certified plan reviewer, and a certified inspector, who may be the same person.
Sec. 8.1-6. - Regulated land-disturbing activities; submission and approval of plans;
contents of plans.
(a) Except as provided herein, no person may engage in any land-disturbing activity
until he or she has submitted to the Department of Community Development an
erosion and sediment control plan for the land-disturbing activity and such plan has
been approved by the VESCP authority. No approval to begin a land-disturbing
activity will be issued unless evidence of state permit coverage is obtained where it
is required. Where land-disturbing activities involve lands under the jurisdiction of
more than one VESCP, an erosion and sediment control plan, at the option of the
applicant, may be submitted to the Department for review and approval rather than
to each jurisdiction concerned. The Department may charge the applicant a fee
sufficient to cover the cost associated with conducting the review.
(b) Where the land-disturbing activity results from the construction of a single-family
residence, an agreement in lieu of a plan may, at the discretion of the County, be
substituted for an erosion and sediment control plan if executed by the plan-
approving authority. Additional requirements are given below:
(1) Where the land-disturbing activity, from the construction of a single-family
residence, results in less than five thousand (5,000) square feet of disturbed
area, an "agreement in lieu of a plan" shall be accompanied by a plot plan that
meets the County Building Permit Plot Plan requirements.
(2) Where the land-disturbing activity, from the construction of a single-family
residence, results in five thousand (5,000) square feet or more of disturbed
area, an “agreement in lieu of a plan” shall be accompanied by a plot plan that
meets the County Building Permit Plot Plan requirements, prepared by a
responsible land disturber, Virginia Professional Engineer, Land Surveyor,
Landscape Architect, Architect, or Professional Soil Scientist. A responsible
land disturber must also be provided and identified.
(3) The County may require additional information, or may decline to execute an
agreement in lieu of a plan and may require an erosion and sediment control
plan in instances where, in the County’s opinion, it is necessary to properly
protect downstream properties or the environment.
February 23, 2016
98
(c) An erosion and sediment control plan shall be filed for a development and the
buildings constructed within, regardless of the phasing of construction.
(d) If individual lots or sections in a residential development are being developed by
different property owners, all land-disturbing activities related to the building
construction shall be covered by an erosion and sediment control plan or an
“Agreement in Lieu of a Plan” signed by the property owner. The property owner is
responsible for complying with the provisions of (a) or (b) above for each lot to
obtain an erosion and sediment control permit.
(e) Land-disturbing activity of less than two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet
on individual lots in a residential development shall not be considered exempt from
the provisions of this ordinance, if the total land-disturbing activity in the
development is equal to or greater than two thousand five hundred (2,500) square
feet.
(f) The standards contained with the "Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Regulations," and The Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, as
amended and those more stringent local criteria which the Board of Supervisors of
the County, may adopt by resolution and incorporate into the manual of regulations
and policies entitled "Stormwater Management Design Manual" and "Design and
Construction Standards Manual" are to be used by the applicant when making a
submittal under the provisions of this chapter and in the preparation of an erosion
and sediment control plan. In cases where one standard conflicts with another, the
more stringent applies. The VESCP plan-approving authority, in considering the
adequacy of a submitted plan, shall be guided by the same standards, regulations
and guidelines.
(g) The VESCP plan-approving authority shall review erosion and sediment control
plans submitted to it and grant written approval within 60 days of the receipt of the
plan if it determines that the plan meets the requirements of the Erosion and
Sediment Control Law and the Board's regulations, and if the person responsible for
carrying out the plan certifies that he will properly perform the measures included in
the plan and will conform to the provisions of this ordinance. In addition, as a
prerequisite to engaging in the land-disturbing activities shown on the approved
plan, the person responsible for carrying out the plan shall provide the name of the
responsible land disturber, to the program authority, as provided by § 62.1-
44.15:52, of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law, who will be in charge
of and responsible for carrying out the land-disturbing activity. Failure to provide the
name of the responsible land disturber, prior to engaging in land-disturbing activities
may result in revocation of the approval of the plan and the person responsible for
carrying out the plan shall be subject to the penalties provided in this ordinance.
However, the VESCP plan-approving authority may waive the certificate of
competence requirement for an agreement in lieu of a plan for construction of a
single family residence. If a violation occurs during the land-disturbing activity, then
the person responsible for carrying out the agreement in lieu of a plan shall correct
February 23, 2016
99
the violation and provide the name of the responsible land disturber, as provided by
§ 62.1-44.15:52 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law. Failure to
provide the name of the responsible land disturber shall be a violation of this
chapter.
(h) When the plan is determined to be inadequate, written notice of disapproval stating
the specific reasons for disapproval shall be communicated to the applicant within
forty-five (45) days. The notice shall specify the modifications, terms and conditions
that will permit approval of the plan. If no action is taken by the plan-approving
authority within the time specified above, the plan shall be deemed approved and
the person authorized to proceed with the proposed activity.
(i) The VESCP authority shall act on any erosion and sediment control plan that has
been previously disapproved within 45 days after the plan has been revised,
resubmitted for approval, and deemed adequate.
(j) The VESCP authority may require changes to an approved plan when:
(1) The inspection reveals that the plan is inadequate to satisfy applicable
regulations; or
(2) The person responsible for carrying out the plan finds that because of changed
circumstances or for other reasons the approved plan cannot be effectively
carried out, and proposed amendments to the plan, consistent with the
requirements of this chapter, are agreed to by the plan approving authority and
the person responsible for carrying out the plan.
(k) Variances: The VESCP plan-approving authority may waive or modify any of the
standards that are deemed to be inappropriate or too restrictive for site conditions,
by granting a variance. A variance may be granted under these conditions:
(1) At the time of plan submission, an applicant may request a variance to
become part of the approved erosion and sediment control plan. The
applicant shall explain the reasons for requesting variances in writing.
Specific variances which are allowed by the plan-approving authority shall
be documented in the plan.
(2) During construction, the person responsible for implementing the
approved plan may request a variance in writing from the plan-approving
authority. The plan-approving authority shall respond in writing either
approving or disapproving such a request. If the plan-approving authority
does not approve a variance within 10 days of receipt of the request, the
request shall be considered to be disapproved. Following disapproval, the
applicant may resubmit a variance request with additional documentation.
(3) The VESCP authority shall consider variance requests judiciously,
keeping in mind both the need of the applicant to maximize cost-
effectiveness and the need to protect off-site properties and resources
from damage.
(l) In order to prevent further erosion, the County may require the property owner of
land identified by the County as an erosion impact area to immediately take actions
February 23, 2016
100
to minimize the delivery of sediment onto neighboring properties or into state
waters, and to prepare and submit to the County an Erosion and Sediment Control
Plan that details how the erosion impact area will be permanently stabilized. Failure
by the property owner to comply with County directions to immediately take actions
to minimize the delivery of sediment onto neighboring properties or into state
waters; or failure to submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan within a
reasonable time period set by the County; or failure to implement the Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan after approval by the County within a reasonable time period
set by the County shall be a violation of this ordinance. Such violation shall be
subject to all of the penalties and other legal actions contained in Section 8.1-10.
(m) When a land-disturbing activity will be required of a contractor performing
construction work pursuant to a construction contract, the preparation, submission,
and approval of an erosion control plan shall be the responsibility of the property
owner.
(n) In accordance with the procedure set forth in §62.1-44.15:55 (E) of the Code of
Virginia, any person engaging, in more than one jurisdiction, in the creation and
operation of wetland mitigation or stream restoration banks, which have been
approved and are operated in accordance with applicable federal and state
guidance, laws, or regulations for the establishment, use, and operation of wetland
mitigation or stream restoration banks, pursuant to a mitigation banking instrument
signed by the Department of Environmental Quality, the Virginia Marine Resources
Commission, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, may, at the option of that
person, file general erosion and sediment control specifications for wetland
mitigation or stream restoration banks annually with the Board for review and
approval consistent with guidelines established by the Board. Approval of general
erosion and sediment control specifications does not relieve the owner or operator
from compliance with any other local ordinances and regulations including
requirements to submit plans and obtain permits as may be required by such
ordinances and regulations.
(o) State agency projects are exempt from the provisions of this chapter, except as
provided for in the Code of Virginia, Sec. 62.1-44.15:56.
(p) If the grade of a site is more than thirty-three and one-third (33.3) percent, refer to
the International Building Code, Chapter 18, as amended, for foundation clearances
from slopes.
(q) Cut slopes or fill slopes shall not be greater than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical), unless a
geotechnical report is provided for the proposed slopes.
(r) Cut slopes or fill slopes shall not be greater than twenty-five vertical feet in height,
unless a geotechnical report is provided for the proposed slopes. Cut slopes or fill
slopes less than or equal to 3:1 (horizontal:\\vertical) may exceed twenty-five (25)
vertical feet in height and shall not require a geotechnical report.
(s) For any cut slopes or fill slopes greater than or equal to 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) or
greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) vertical feet in height with a slope greater
February 23, 2016
101
than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical), as-built plans showing that the finished geometry,
based on a field survey performed by a licensed surveyor, is in substantial
conformity with the design shall be provided to the plan-approving authority.
(t) Fill materials, compaction methods and density specifications shall be indicated on
the site development plans. Fill areas intended to support structures shall also be
indicated on the site development plans.
(u) Development plans for all new subdivisions shall show proposed lot grades to
ensure positive drainage.
Sec. 8.1-7. – Special provisions for land-disturbing activities that disturb less than ten
thousand (10,000) square feet
(a) This section applies to all land-disturbing activities that disturb less than ten
thousand (10,000) square feet, except that these special provisions shall not apply
to any land-disturbing activity of less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet on
individual lots in a residential development, if the total land-disturbing activity in the
development is equal to or greater than ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
(b) Land-disturbing activities shall meet all of the requirements of this ordinance, except
for the following:
(1) The technical provisions contained in 9VAC25-840-40.19 shall not apply to land
disturbing activities that meet the requirements of this section. These include:
(a) The adequacy of downstream channels and pipes are not required to be
analyzed and verified.
(b) No stormwater management measures to address any flow rate capacity
or velocity requirements for downstream natural or man-made channels
shall be required.
(2) An agreement in lieu of a plan may, at the discretion of the County, be
substituted for an erosion and sediment control plan if executed by the plan-
approving authority. All of the requirements of Section 8.1-6(b) shall apply. This
provision expands the use of an agreement in lieu of, beyond a single-family
residence, to all land-disturbing activities that disturb less than ten thousand
(10,000) square feet.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to negate any requirements of the
Stormwater Management Ordinance of the County of Roanoke, where applicable.
Sec. 8.1-8. - Permits; fees; surety; etc.
(a) Agencies authorized under any other law to issue grading, building, or other permits
for activities involving land-disturbing activities may not issue any such permit
unless the applicant submits with his application an approved erosion and sediment
February 23, 2016
102
control plan, certification that the plan will be followed and evidence of state permit
coverage where it is required.
(b) No person shall engage in any land-disturbing activity until he has acquired a land-
disturbing permit, unless the proposed land-disturbing activity is specifically exempt
from the provisions of this chapter, and has paid the fees and posted the required
surety.
(c) Fees. An applicant requesting permission to begin land-disturbing activity pursuant
to this article shall pay the following fees to cover the administrative expense of
review, permitting, and inspection.
Disturbed Area (Square Feet) Fee
Less than 5,000 $25.00
5,000 – 9,999 $50.00
10,000 – or greater $100.00 + $100.00 per disturbed acre,
or portion of an acre
(e) No land-disturbing permit shall be issued until the applicant submits with the
application an approved erosion and sediment control plan or agreement in lieu of
an approved erosion and sediment control plan and certification that the plan will be
followed.
(f) Surety. All applicants for permits shall provide to the County a performance bond,
cash escrow, or an irrevocable letter of credit acceptable to the Director of
Community Development or his assignee, to ensure that measures could be taken
by the County at the applicant's expense should the applicant fail, after proper
notice, within the time specified to initiate or maintain appropriate conservation
measures required of him as a result of his land-disturbing activity. The amount of
the bond or other security for performance shall not exceed the total of the
estimated cost to initiate and maintain appropriate conservation action based on
unit price for new public or private sector construction in the locality plus a
contingency for the County’s administrative costs and inflation. The contingency
shall be 10% of the total estimated cost to initiate and maintain the appropriate
conservation action. Should it be necessary for the County to take such
conservation action, the County may collect from the applicant any costs in excess
of the amount of the surety held.
(g) Within 60 days of adequate stabilization and completion of all other site
requirements, as determined by the Director of Community Development or his
assignee, such bond, cash escrow or letter of credit, or the unexpended or
unobligated portion thereof shall be either refunded to the applicant or terminated.
(h) These requirements are in addition to all other provisions relating to the
issuance of permits and are not intended to otherwise affect the requirements for
such permits.
February 23, 2016
103
Sec. 8.1-9. - Monitoring, reports, and inspections.
(a) The responsible land disturber, as provided in § 62.1-44.15:52, shall be in charge of
and responsible for carrying out the land-disturbing activity and provide for periodic
inspections of the land-disturbing activity. The County may require the person
responsible for carrying out the plan to monitor the land-disturbing activity. The
person responsible for carrying out the plan will maintain records of these
inspections and maintenance, to ensure compliance with the approved plan and to
determine whether the measures required in the plan are effective in controlling
erosion and sedimentation.
(b) The Department of Community Development shall periodically inspect the land-
disturbing activity in accordance with 9VAC25-840-60 of the Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Regulations to ensure compliance with the approved plan and to
determine whether the measures required in the plan are effective in controlling
erosion and sedimentation. The owner, permittee, or person responsible for carrying
out the plan shall be given notice of the inspection. If the Director of Community
Development, or his assignee, determines that there is a failure to comply with the
plan or if the plan is determined to be inadequate, notice shall be served upon the
permittee or person responsible for carrying out the plan by registered or certified
mail to the address specified in the permit application or in the plan certification, or
by delivery at the site of the land-disturbing activities to the agent or employee
supervising such activities.
The notice shall specify the measures needed to comply with the plan and shall
specify the time within which such measures shall be completed. Upon failure to
comply within the specified time, the permit may be revoked and the permittee shall
be deemed to be in violation of this chapter and, upon conviction, shall be subject to
the penalties provided by this chapter.
(c) Upon issuance of an inspection report denoting a violation of Va. Code §§ 62.1-
44.15:55, -44.15:56, the Director of Community Development, or his assignee, may,
in conjunction with or subsequent to a Notice to Comply as specified in this chapter,
issue a Stop Work Order requiring that all or part of the land-disturbing activities
permitted on the site be stopped until the specified corrective measures have been
taken.
If land-disturbing activities have commenced without an approved plan or proper
permits, the Director of Community Development or his assignee may, in conjunction
with or subsequent to a Notice to Comply as specified in this chapter, issue a Stop
Work Order requiring that all of the land-disturbing and/or construction activities be
stopped until an approved plan or any required permits are obtained. Failure to
February 23, 2016
104
comply will result in civil charges or penalties as outlined in section 8.1-10 of this
chapter.
Where the alleged noncompliance is causing or is in imminent danger of causing
harmful erosion of lands or sediment deposition in waters within the watersheds of
the Commonwealth, or where the land-disturbing activities have commenced without
an approved plan or any required permits, such a Stop Work Order may be issued
without regard to whether the permittee has been issued a Notice to Comply as
specified in this chapter. Otherwise, such a Stop Work Order may be issued only
after the permittee has failed to comply with such a Notice to Comply.
The Stop Work Order shall be served in the same manner as a Notice to Comply,
and shall remain in effect for a period of seven (7) days from the date of service
pending application by the County or permit holder for appropriate relief to the Circuit
Court. The County shall serve such Stop Work Order for disturbance without an
approved plan or permits upon the owner by mailing with confirmation of delivery to
the address specified in the land records. Said Stop Work Order shall be posted on
the site where the disturbance is occurring, and shall remain in effect until permits
and plan approvals are secured, except in such situations where an agricultural
exemption applies.
If the alleged violator has not obtained an approved plan or any required permits
within seven (7) days from the date of service of the Stop Work Order, the Director
of Community Development or his assignee may issue a Stop Work Order to the
owner requiring that all construction and other work on the site, other than corrective
measures, be stopped until an approved plan and any required permits have been
obtained. Such an order shall be served upon the owner by registered or certified
mail to the address specified in the permit application or the land records of the
County.
The owner may appeal the issuance of a Stop Work Order to the Circuit Court of the
County. Any person violating or failing, neglecting or refusing to obey a Stop Work
Order issued by the Director of Community Development or his assignee may be
compelled in a proceeding instituted in the Circuit Court of the County to obey same
and to comply therewith by injunction, mandamus or other appropriate remedy.
Upon completion and approval of corrective action or obtaining an approved plan or
any required permits, the Stop Work Order shall immediately be lifted. Nothing in this
section shall prevent the Director of Community Development or his assignee from
taking any other action authorized by this chapter.
Sec. 8.1-10. - Penalties, injunctions, and other legal actions.
(a) Violators of this chapter shall be guilty of a Class I misdemeanor.
February 23, 2016
105
(b) Civil penalties:
(1) A civil penalty in the amount listed on the schedule below shall be assessed for
each violation of the respective offenses:
a. Commencement of land disturbing activity without an approved plan as
provided in section 8.1-6 shall be one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day.
b. Vegetative measures. Failure to comply with items 1, 2 3, or 5 of the
minimum standards shall be three hundred dollars ($300.00) per violation
per day.
c. Structural measures. Failure to comply with items 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15,
17, or 18 of the minimum standards shall be three hundred dollars
($300.00) per violation per day.
d. Watercourse measures. Failure to comply with items 12, 13 and 15 of the
minimum standards shall be three hundred dollars ($300.00) per violation
per day.
e. Underground utility measures. Failure to comply with item 16(a) and/or (c)
shall be three hundred dollars ($300.00) per violation per day.
f. Failure to obey a stop work order shall be one thousand dollars ($1,000)
per day.
g. Failure to stop work when permit revoked shall be one thousand dollars
($1,000) per day.
(2) Each day during which the violation is found to have existed shall constitute a
separate offense. However, in no event shall a series of specified violations
arising from the same operative set of facts result in civil penalties which
exceed a total of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), except that a series of
violations arising from the commencement of land-disturbing activities without
an approved plan for any site shall not result in civil penalties which exceed a
total of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). The assessment of civil penalties
according to this schedule shall be in lieu of criminal sanctions and shall
preclude the prosecution of such violation as a misdemeanor under subsection
(a) of this section.
(c) The Director of Community Development or his assignee, or the owner of
property which has sustained damage or which is in imminent danger of being
damaged, may apply to the Circuit Court of the County to enjoin a violation or
a threatened violation of Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:55, 62.1-44.15:56, without
the necessity of showing that an adequate remedy at law does not exist.
However, an owner of property shall not apply for injunctive relief unless (i) he
has notified in writing the person who has violated the local program, and the
program authority, that a violation of the local program has caused, or creates
a probability of causing, damage to his property, and (ii) neither the person
who has violated the local program nor the program authority has taken
February 23, 2016
106
corrective action within fifteen days to eliminate the conditions which have
caused, or create the probability of causing, damage to his property.
(d)In addition to any criminal penalties provided under this chapter, any person
who violates any provision of this chapter may be liable to the County in a civil
action for damages.
(e) Civil penalty enumerated. Without limiting the remedies which may be
obtained in this section, any person violating or failing, neglecting, or refusing
to obey any injunction, mandamus or other remedy obtained pursuant to this
section shall be subject, in the discretion of the Court, to a civil penalty not to
exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) for each violation. A civil action for
such violation or failure may be brought by the County. Any civil penalties
assessed by a Court shall be paid into the Treasury of the County, except that
where the violator is the locality itself, or its agent, the Court shall direct the
penalty to be paid into the state treasury.
(f) With the consent of any person who has violated or failed, neglected or
refused to obey any regulation or condition of a permit or any provision of this
chapter, the County may provide for the payment of civil charges for violations
in specific sums, not to exceed the limit specified in subsection (b)(2) of this
section. Such civil charges shall be instead of any appropriate civil penalty
which could be imposed under subsection (b) or (e).
(g) The County's Attorney shall, upon request of the County take legal action to
enforce the provisions of this chapter.
(h) Compliance with the provisions of this chapter shall be prima facie evidence
in any legal or equitable proceeding for damages caused by erosion, siltation
or sedimentation that all requirements of law have been met, and the
complaining party must show negligence in order to recover any damages.
Sec. 8.1-11. – Hearings and Appeals
(a) Hearings
(1) Any permit applicant or permittee, or person subject to the requirements of this
Ordinance, who is aggrieved by any action, of the County in approving or
disapproving any plans required by this Ordinance, or by any enforcement
action taken pursuant to Sec. 8.1-10, shall have the right to request, in writing, a
hearing to the County Administrator or his/her designee provided a petition
requesting such hearing is filed with the Administrator within 30 days after notice
of such action is given by the Administrator.
(2) The hearing shall be held provided that the County Administrator and the
aggrieved party has at least thirty (30) days prior notice.
(3) A verbatim record of the proceedings of such hearings shall be taken and filed
with the Board of Supervisors. Depositions may be taken and read as in actions
at law.
February 23, 2016
107
(4) The County Administrator, shall have power to issue subpoenas and subpoenas
duces tecum, and at the request of any party shall issue such subpoenas. The
failure of any witness without legal excuse to appear or to testify or to produce
documents shall be acted upon by the County Administrator whose actions may
include the procurement of an order of enforcement from the circuit court.
Witnesses who are subpoenaed shall receive the same fees and reimbursement
for mileage as in civil actions.
(5) During its review, the County Administrator shall consider evidence presented
by all parties. After considering the evidence, the County Administrator’s
decision shall be final.
(b) Appeals
Final decisions of the County Administrator, under this Ordinance, shall be subject
to judicial review by the Roanoke County Circuit Court, provided an appeal is filed
within thirty (30) days from the date of any written decision adversely affecting the
rights, duties, or privileges of any permit applicant, permittee, or person subject to
any enforcement action under this Ordinance.
Sec. 8-1.12. - Civil violations, summons, generally.
(a) The Director of Community Development, or his assignee, shall prepare an
appropriate erosion and sediment control civil violation summons for use in
enforcing the provisions of this chapter.
(b) Any person of the VESCP plan approving authority charged with enforcing this
chapter shall serve upon any owner or permittee in violation of this chapter, a
summons notifying the owner or permittee of said violation. If unable to serve the
owner or permittee in person, the County may notify by summons an owner or
permittee committing or suffering the existence of a violation by certified, return
receipt requested mail, of the infraction. The County Sheriff's office may also deliver
the summons. The summons shall contain the following information:
(1) The name and address of the person charged.
(2) The nature of the violation and chapter provision(s) being violated.
(3) The location, date, and time that the violation occurred, or was observed.
(4) The amount of the civil penalty assessed for the violation.
(5) The manner, location, and time that the civil penalty may be paid to the County.
(6) The right of the recipient of the summons to elect to stand trial for the infraction
and the date of such trial.
(c) The summons shall provide that any person summoned for a violation may, within
five (5) days of actual receipt of the summons or, within ten (10) days from the date
of mailing of the summons, elect to pay the civil penalty by making an appearance
in person, or in writing by mail to the County Treasurer's office and, by such
appearance, may enter a waiver of trial, admit liability, and pay the civil penalty
established for the violation charged and provide that a signature to an admission of
February 23, 2016
108
liability shall have the same force and effect as a judgment in court; however, an
admission shall not be deemed a criminal conviction for any purpose.
(d) If a person charged with a violation does not elect to enter a waiver of trial and
admit liability, the County shall cause the Sheriff of the County to serve the
summons on the person charged in the manner prescribed by law. The violation
shall be tried in General District Court in the same manner and with the same right
of appeal as provided for in Title 8.01 of the Code of Virginia. In any trial for a
scheduled violation authorized by this section, it shall be the burden of the County
to show the liability of the violator by the preponderance of the evidence. Any
admission of liability, or finding of liability shall not be a criminal conviction for any
purpose.
(e) The remedies provided for in this section are cumulative, and are not exclusive and,
except as provided above, shall be in addition to any other remedies by law.
(f) The owner or permittee may pay the civil penalty to the Treasurer prior to the trial
date, provided he also pays necessary court costs in addition to the civil penalty.
(g) Within the time period prescribed in (c), above, the owner or permittee, may contest
the violation by presenting it to the Director of Community Development, who shall
certify the contest in writing, on an appropriate form, to the General District Court.
(h) Failure to pay the civil penalty, or to contest the violation, within the time period
prescribed in (c), above, shall result in the immediate issuance of a Stop Work
Order and the revocation of the permit, if any.
2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, seconded by Supervisor
Hooker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
N RE: CONSENT AGENDA
I
RESOLUTION 022316-8 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN
CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM J- CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for February
23, 2016, designated as Item K - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and
concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1
through 6 inclusive, as follows:
1. Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $5,000 from
February 23, 2016
109
Vantage, Human Resources Services, Inc. to Parks, Recreation and
Tourism for the Therapeutic Recreation Program- “I Can Do It, You Can
Do It”
2. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Steven D. White, Senior Appraiser (Real Estate
Valuation), upon his retirement after more than thirty-one (31) years of
service
3. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Charlotte Poff, Social Services Aide, upon her
retirement after more than thirty-five (35) years of service
4. Confirmation of appointments to the Audit Committee; Western Virginia
Regional Industrial Facility Authority
5. Resolution requesting acceptance of Archrest Drive and Nover Avenue
into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System
6. Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $15,187.50
from the Commonwealth of Virginia to the Clerk of the Circuit Court for the
Virginia Circuit Court Records Preservation Program for fiscal year 2015-
2016
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
A-022316-8.a
RESOLUTION 022316-8.b EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
TO STEVEN D. WHITE, SENIOR APPRAISER, UPON HIS
RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTY-ONE (31) YEARS
OF SERVICE
WHEREAS, Steven D. White was employed by Roanoke County on May 30,
1984; and has served in the positions of Appraiser and Senior Appraiser in the Real
Estate Valuation Department during his tenure with Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Mr. White retired on January 1, 2016, after thirty-one (31) years and
seven (7) months of devoted, faithful and expert service to Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Mr. White, throughout his employment with Roanoke County, has
been instrumental in improving the quality of life and providing services to the citizens of
Roanoke County; and
February 23, 2016
110
WHEREAS, during Mr. White’s time serving the citizens of Roanoke County, Mr.
White retired as a Senior Appraiser with the Real Estate Valuation Office. It is extremely
rare in our society today, that you see an employee dedicate his professional life to one
workplace for this period of time. Steve spent his first years in the appraisal industry
working for Wingate Appraisal Company, working on General Reassessments
throughout the State of Virginia. His knowledge and professionalism within the appraisal
field has included Steve earning his Certified Residential License, taking and passing
numerous IAAO and VAAO classes, a member of the VAAO since 1984, and spending
many hours mentoring new appraisers to our office, for Roanoke County. Steve was the
first hire when Roanoke County first started conducting General Reassessment with
county staff. Steve deserves much credit for his involvement with the many general
reassessments and also his work with the Commercial, Industrial, and Multi-Family
appraisals he has completed for many years for Roanoke County. May your retirement
be as great as the time we had with you in this office.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens
of Roanoke County to STEVEN D. WHITEfor more than thirty-one (31) years 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.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 022316-8.c EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
TO CHARLOTTE POFF, SOCIAL SERVICES AIDE, UPON HER
RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTY-FIVE (35) YEARS
OF SERVICE
WHEREAS, Charlotte Poff was employed by Roanoke County on August 1,
1980; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Poff retired on January 1, 2016, after thirty -five (35) years and
five (5) months of devoted, faithful and expert service to Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Poff, throughout her employment with Roanoke County, has
been instrumental in improving the quality of life and providing services to the citizens of
Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Poff issued food stamps for the citizens of Roanoke County for
over 20 years; and
February 23, 2016
111
WHEREAS, during Ms. Poff’s time serving the citizens of Roanoke County, she
assisted almost every team and program in Social Services. Her tasks included
creating, researching and maintaining Agency Case Files; Relative Searches;
maintaining records of children entering and existing Foster Care; assisting with the
Vehicle Fleet, Payment Processing, and administrative support for Custody Records
and other program needs.
WHEREAS, Ms. Poff was known for considerable thoroughness and attention to
detail in her work in all program areas. Her work in diverse program areas provided
tangible support for all the professionals she served. Ms. Poff was invested in doing
precise, useful work and it showed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens
CHARLOTTE POFF
of Roanoke County to for more than thirty-five (35) years 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.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
A-022316-8.d
RESOLUTION 022316-8.e REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
ARCHCREST DRIVE AND NOVER AVENUE INTO THE
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY
SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Addition Form AM-4.3, fully
incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, the representative for the Virginia Department of Transportation has
advised this Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Virginia
Department of Transportation’s Subdivision Street Requirements; and
WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have
entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999, for comprehensive stormwater detention
which applies to this request for addition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia
Department of Transportation to add the street(s) described on the attached Additions
Form AM-4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.2-705, Code
of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, after receiving a
February 23, 2016
112
copy of this resolution and all outstanding fees and documents required of the
developer, whichever occurs last in time; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted
right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be
forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor
McNamara and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
A-022316-8.f
IN RE: CITIZENS’ COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Bill Tyree advised that he has some documentation and asked if he could
hand it over. He stated someone told him one time that nothing is etched in stone
permanently, and he agrees with that statement. He believes if you find the right stone
cutter with a different chisel things can be changed. He has an issue around his home
at 605 Devonshire Drive in Vinton, Virginia. He has actually had some of the people
who have spoken here today out at his home in the past. He and his wife have been
there since 1990. If you look at the documentation presented to you, you will see what
his home looks like from the front view. It’s a modest house, we’re very comfortable
there. If you look at page two, you will see an aerial view of what appears to be my
home from above and the focus he wants to have here is the stormwater drainage
situation. The neighborhood was built in 1958, someone in engineering allowed the
developer to implement curb and guttering in some areas of the neighborhood and other
areas do not have it, and he knows you’ve seen this all over Roanoke County. His
home sits below from the road that runs up the side it which is Camron Drive, there’s no
curb and gutter around his home. For seven blocks behind my house, there is curb and
gutter on both sides of the road. When water comes down the highway it runs down the
curb and gutter on both sides, on his side it dumps into the ditch at his house and floods
his property. It has since 1990. It has prior to that according to the folks that lived there
before. The water on the other side of Camron then goes down into a drop box, goes
under the highway and comes out in front of his house, and floods the front lawn of my
house. If you’ll look at page two, again you can see that ditch line. He wants you to
recognize that there are, from that aerial view, a couple of large trees there, there were
actually two more large trees like that, the first attempt the County did, they had the
State Highway Department come out and they opened up the ditch, by doing so they
disturbed the root system of those two trees and he lost them. The County came out
February 23, 2016
113
again back at the first of February, end of January, I believe and they tried opening up
this ditch drainage again and he is really worried about the two remaining trees. They
are hovering right over the side of his house and he is afraid now that water is going to
come down and erode the ditch out even more and those trees will topple over on his
home. He asked for them to do this, however, he didn’t know it was going to be to the
extreme that it was. He was told that they can take dirt and sediment out, but they
cannot put anything back in. If you look at page four, you will see a contour map of his
property, his property is the one in the center with the red lines around it. If you see
Camron Drive coming from where it says 605 Devonshire at the left bottom corner,
Camron Drive comes down to where you see the circle 1015, that’s the route number,
right where the white line is and the red line, my lines meet, that’s where the curb and
gutter ends and that curb and gutter is actually, at that same positioning and all that
water is coming down on my lot. The ditch line that they have right now is not
containing the runoff like it should. If you look at the contours of that map you will see
everything is coming down to his house, to my lot. If you continue to flip thorough you’ll
see the photos of the results from the last time the County came out to do some work at
rd
the house, this is after the first hard rain, these photos were taken February 3 by
VDOT, not by me; he asked them to come out. By the way, he has worked closely with
Butch Workman, he know Butch on a personal level, and he’s helped him as much as
he possibly can. Mr. Tyree stated he thinks he has exhausted every source from him,
but he appreciates everything he’s done. Chairman Peters actually lives in his
subdivision, not too far from me. Mr. Peters has also been a personal friend of mine for
a very long time, and he feel like he has exhausted him as a personal contact to help
him in any way that he can. After speaking with him, he suggested that maybe he
should come in and speak to the supervisors to see if something can be done here to
help out. He maintains this property. He is the one out there mowing it, he is the one
out there trying to take care of it to keep his property value where it should be. He is
very frustrated; he is exhausted as well. He and his wife considered moving; we don’t
want to do that, we’ve been very happy here, and the house is paid for and, you know,
we have an issue, he would like for something to be done if at all possible. Like he said,
nothing is etched in stone. He does not know what the powers are here, with what can
be done, how you can help him, but he would be very thankful for anything that the
Board might be able to do to get this going in a different direction. Different
considerations have been discussed. He has had different people, engineers, all
different types of people come out, the County has been out several times, if we talk
about it, but it really just behooves me what the County paid for these contractors to
come out, a crew of eight guys, with heavy equipment, for one whole day to make that
mess right there. He does not understand; there is another way to fix it. He advised that
he has another document that he would really like for the Board to look at, if that’s
possible. It’s a subdivision plat that Butch Workman gave to him today, and basically
what it is showing, (he has added a little color to it because it is black and white) it’s
showing his property, highlighted in yellow, it’s showing the curb and gutter that is there,
February 23, 2016
114
that is existing, highlighted in pink, and then it’s showing the easement, the drainage
easement that the water is struggling to reach highlighted in blue. He advised that he
thinks by looking at that you can better understand that the curb and gutter is all around
me, so all the runoff is coming on me. One of the solutions that we talked about was
actually piping, putting a box at the corner of my lot in the back where the curb and
guttering ends and let the water go into a box and then pipe it to the easement, across
the back of my lot and the lot next to me, the water is two lots away from me, but it has
to go all the way around my frontage, my frontage is all the way around my house on
two sides to get to that easement. Now he knows the County has spent a lot of money
in his subdivision over the last few years. He has seen some major infrastructure
improvements, there on drains and stormwater, He know that it can be done, he knows
you will do it, so, you know, he is going to squeak this wheel as much as I can, I hope
this is a good step to take. Thank you very much. Do you have any questions for me?
Supervisor Peters stated he would normally would save his comments to
the end, but would like to comment that he has been on that property, and he has seen
the continual issues that are running down to, that one picture that we did see on page
seven or eight, that’s where a lot of the issues are rising and thinks there is a real issue
there. He did encourage Mr. Tyree to come and have it on record that he has been
before us, so we can look for a resolution.
IN RE: REPORTS
Supervisor Peters moved to receive and file the following reports with the
exception of Outstanding Debt at the request of Supervisor Bedrosian and was
seconded by Supervisor McNamara. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Reserves
3. Reserve for Board Contingency
4. Treasurer’s Statement of Accountability per Investment and
Portfolio Policy as of January 31, 2016
5. Accounts Paid – January 31, 2016
6. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of
January 31, 2016
7. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and
Encumbrances as of January 31, 2016
IN RE: Outstanding Debt
February 23, 2016
115
Supervisor Peters moved to receive and file the following reports with the
exception of Outstanding Debt at the request of Supervisor Bedrosian and was
seconded by Supervisor McNamara. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor McNamara stated he just wanted to make a couple of
comments. About a week and half ago, he had the opportunity to go to Richmond and
meet with our Legislatures with our County Attorney and, you know, to a “T”, our
Legislatures well, they weren’t always available, but they made themselves available to
They all work very hard. Ms. Kuhnel had one of our Legislatures, Mr. Habeeb, we tried
to meet with a couple of time and I know he contacted you the next day and spent quite
a bit of time going over some of our concerns and so he does want to express his
appreciation, really both sides of the isle, when you get to Richmond, your Roanoke
Legislatures are working together, and working very hard for, what they are trying to
accomplish, I’ll leave one of their main accomplishments for the lady from Catawba to
mention. Secondly, a week from Monday is when we start our community meetings
relative to putting together some of our strategic planning and visioning for Roanoke
County, so once again he would like to invite folks that have an interest in participating,
we’d love to have you, you know, they’ll start various different dates, but beginning most
of them will begin a week from Monday.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he wanted to thank Bill Tyree for coming up
here and speaking about this problem and he will tell you as a new Supervisor, one that
started two years ago, if any issue that has gotten me to drive over to some property,
it’s been this issue about drainage. And if I’m not mistaken, I think we’ve had work
sessions upstairs where there are like forty different projects that are going to cost ten
million dollars and take ten years to accomplish, so yours would be one of those and by
looking at those pictures, h thought that some of my constituents pictures were in here
because it looked exactly the same; it’s just water flooding the entire property. And
even once I think how bad, and thinks there was one in the Catawba District, which was
just unbelievable, and so, you know, again he thinks it’s this thing about what is the
priority of Roanoke County, and he has always felt, you need the infrastructure of a
community and that should be one our big priorities. It’s going to cost money and the
fact is I think we as the Board need to say that we’re not going into debt to do this stuff,
but we need to start prioritizing, where we’re going to spend the money, where we’re
going to take the money from and get into fixing the infrastructure in Roanoke County,
because you see it happening every time when we have these rains and it’s just, it can
ruin people’s lives, no other way to say it. He is one hundred percent behind you and
thinks these are the kinds of things, they are not exciting and fun things, you know, not
February 23, 2016
116
these new buildings, not these new projects, but it’s the right thing to do because it’s
people’s homes and we need to fix that, so he challenges this Board that we need to
start doing that. The second item is about the budget. We going to be continuing to
talk about budgets, and as the last time we had a work session upstairs, we were
talking about the fact that we have three point six million dollars more in revenue this
year than we did last year. Last year we probably have three or four millions dollars
more than we did last year and we just keep making our budgets bigger and bigger and
bigger. Unless the people say something and he, for one, just does not like the fact that
we cannot survive on what we did last year. We’re going to have to, and I’ll vote against
it, but the Board I know will continue to expand the budget of Roanoke County and
thinks that is just really, it’s just bad, you know, these are tough economic times for a lot
of people, and instead of us giving people back their money by lowering taxes, you
know, we just continue to make our government bigger, and he can only think what’s
going to happen when things really start accelerating and we get out of this recession, if
we do, and we have more money, we have eight million dollars more, ten million dollars
more, it just seems like we are going to continue the same thing, we’re just going to
continue to make the budgets bigger, and it’s just, it’s very dangerous, it just really is.
The third item, and I’ll continue to bring this about, we’re getting ready to spend thirty
million dollars, renovation of Cave Spring High School. Whenever I say that somebody
goes, oh, you’re against education, it’s the same old thing. The reality is that’s a lot of
money to spend on renovation. Two years ago so we did twenty-five million on Glenvar.
More money on bricks and mortar does not equate a better education, it just doesn’t, it’s
not the same thing. He thinks we really need to be careful about how we spend our
money, because when we spend money doing that, we take it away from other things
and we need to get into the twenty first century in education. Being a home school dad,
myself, he finds so many innovative ways that people are educated with technology,
and for us to continue to put money into bricks and mortar, it is just unbelievable to me
and we’re in the twenty-first century and there is so, so many better ways to educate,
where that money would actually go to the education of the child, we look at really the
content of what education is all about, so, he strongly urges people and thinks a lot of
people that have children in school, they think it’s great when you spend money on
building a new school and they don’t really realize that when we do that we have to take
away from other things. The other things that maybe we could be doing, maybe spent a
little less on that, look for innovative ways to improve education and then take the rest of
the money and do other things with it. Just a thought, just start thinking, cause money
isn’t endless, you know, if we borrow the money, which we do, its’ still not endless,
cause you know we’re paying interest payments, guys we can’t get out of it we have to
be smart about what we do. Finally, he always talks about the United Way at every
meeting. I received a letter back from the United Way, remember we sent them a letter,
and I appreciate having this letter sent by our Clerk, the Resolution requests the United
Way of Roanoke Valley cease its financial support of Planned Parenthood that was the
way it was written. The letter he got back you would have never known that’s what we
February 23, 2016
117
asked them to do. They just thanked us for thinking so highly of them and then at the
very end, “we do because it’s the role of the United Way, and we thank you for
recognizing and supporting our efforts. You know, it’s one thing, when we send a letter
he would love it to be addressed back and look at the points that we are talking about,
because it’s serious, you know this resolution, was put and sent, it was a little watered
down resolution than what he actually wanted, but even on that one, we should send
something back that says that you actually looked at the letter. And then, and this is
going to be an issue with me, and he has talked to our County Administrator with this
before, you know now our County Administrator is on the Board and when we talked
about this issues months ago he was not on the Board. He thinks our Board of
Supervisors really needs to look into the fact and I would like our attorney also to think
about conflict of interest, this has been a problem with me, is that we, we have a County
government and we have a Board of Supervisors, several months ago we were upstairs
with our attorney, Attorney Mahoney, and we were going through conflict of interest for
the Board members, and it got down to the point that if you got fifty dollars from
somebody, in a gift or something, he don’t know what that number was, it was such a
low number, that you needed to make sure everybody knew about it, and it was
probably best to stay away from having any sense of conflict of interest. But then he
looks at our own County Administrator who is on the Board of United Way, and he is
thinking and he doesn’t even know if this is the only private, this is private organization,
why are we on the boards of private organizations. We give money to this private
organization. We help facilitate their fund raising. We allow them through our system of
taking money out of pay checks, which is a great system, every nonprofit would love to
be hooked into Roanoke County and just have a deduction go out of their paycheck.
And so he thinks wow, and he looks at the list of names and they’ve got, you know, from
the Roanoke City, their city manager is on there, from the school system, it’s just
hooking in everybody and thinks we are really treading on very dangerous ground.
Some people don’t like him talking about United Way and their affiliation with Planned
Parenthood, the reality is that he talks about it because we’re affiliating ourselves with
Untied Way. If we would just break loose of all of these organizations and let them do
what they want, whether we like it or not, got it, but it’s not affiliated with Roanoke
County, that would be one thing. But he just seriously thinks, and he would love to have
our attorney look and say are other county administrators doing this, are other people
on boards of private organizations. Is this okay? There’s no conflict of interest there.
When money, you know money is going from one organization to another, and we’re
sitting on a Board, it just doesn’t sound right, it doesn’t feel right, but again he is just an
average guy looking at something thinking, hummm… that just doesn’t look right.
Supervisor Hooker stated she has three points of good news she want to
share, and Supervisor McNamara eluded to one earlier, but she is just so pleased that
we have the Catawba Hospital remaining open and she just wants to take this
opportunity to thank the people that were involved. To thank our elected officials, that
worked tirelessly, for our staff that really did a lot of leg work, most importantly, she
February 23, 2016
118
really wants to thank our citizens that rallied around this good hospital that serves a
community, that serves our citizens and beyond and this is for a people who often times
don’t have a voice and so she is just so pleased that this was continued on and good for
now, hopefully for a long period of time. She specifically wants to thank Jack Wood,
because he was just really instrumental, very knowledgeable and with his position as a
retiree from the hospital he was just invaluable with the direction and the sharing of
information and educating that he gave us, so thank you to Jack Wood. We’re
celebrating right now, that we got Catawba to remain open. Next, she has two more
points to share; two more points of good news. This is Miss Brie Belz and she is just a
stellar student from Roanoke County schools, she’s going to be graduating from William
Byrd this year, and she has had quite the honor and I think it’s worthy of us just to
celebrate for a few minutes what she has done. She has won the National Space Club
and Foundation Keynote Scholarship, securing her role as a keynote speaker during the
clubs fifty-eighth annual Dr. Robert H. Goddard Memorial dinner, and that’s going to be
happening in March. She stated she wants to just give a little snippet of what she has
accomplished during her tenure at William Byrd, it’s quite impressive. She is a senior at
William Byrd and aspiring to study mathematics and bio chemistry after graduation. Her
impressive list of awards and honors include winning first place at her local school
Science Fair, as well as for the Roanoke District Science Fair in 2015. Ms. Belz is also
the founder and president of the Math Pound, a peer tutoring program for Math at her
high school and in her spare time interns at Roanoke Memorial Hospital under the Chief
of Emergency Medicine. So in her spare time she is working at the hospital doing great
things. She advised she has one more chart that she wanted to share because she
thinks it’s really significant and she thinks going into budget, something she just wants
to keep in perspective because we do want to be good stewards of taxpayer money,
she believes all of us are in agreement with that. This chart, which is the most recent
version that we have, but it shows our spending compared to our neighboring localities,
spending per student, how much we spend. You’ll notice that we are the bar in yellow
and what’s significant about that is that it is the least amount. We have the least spent
per pupil. If you will look, continue to see that there is a green line and it shows our
percentage of free and reduced meals and so we have a significant portion, it’s not a
significant as some of the others, but we have a significant portion that deals with
hardship in the way of monies, and we still have a pretty good rate going on there per
pupil spending. Here is the real thing she is most proud of, it’s not that we spend the
least it’s that we have the best results which she thinks speaks exactly what you were
saying , Mr. Bedrosian, with what we have here with our on-time graduation rate of
ninety-five point four percent. So we spend the least per student, and yet we’re able to
get the highest on-time graduation rate, and she just thinks that’s a point to celebration
and wanted to bring that up during this time, thanks for indulging me.
Supervisor Peters stated he has a couple of things; a couple points of
clarity. Mr. Bedrosian was incorrect when he says we’re going to spend thirty million on
Cave Spring, if he remembers correctly last year, this Board voted not to, or the prior
February 23, 2016
119
Board voted not to take anymore indebtedness this year, so the Cave Spring project will
not be looked at until next year. With the issue of the County Administrator, he does
not think that we have the authority, nor does the County Attorney have the authority to
say on a private board what we have the authority to do, no different than the Board’s
that he has sat on. There are a couple of things that he does want to talk about. He is
very much into the nuts and bolts of the budgeting and has been over the last couple of
years. He did bring forth the resolution last year to not spend, or not borrow money last
year or this year and was successful in us passing that. But you also have to remember
then when you look at our budgets, we’re not building new buildings currently, our
budgets have went up, but also our needs are going up, and there’s not anybody in this
County who doesn’t want their trash picked up, does not want the police protection,
does not want fire and rescue protection, and we know that the sacrifice of our Social
Services, that everything that goes on to make our County a great place to be, it costs
money. The projects that are taking ten years to get to, we would like to advance those,
we’d like to get them done now, so we have to take advantage of that when we can. He
thinks that our residents should be very pleased that we’re not looking at tax increases,
we don’t want it, we’re not, we’ve made it very clear to our Administrator, you will work
within your, the revenues of the County, but we also realize that we have a lot of
unfunded mandates, that the State says we want you to do this, but there’s not a dollar
to go with it, and we have to make it work, and we do make it work. He would ask that
our media personal that are here today, that again, touch on our community and let
them know that Mr. McNamara said that our strategic planning process will begin
publicly next Monday night, he is very excited about it, it’s something that he has been
pushing for, for quite a while, and is glad to see it to fruition, He is eager to see the
results of that too, and thinks it will be a great insight to what our citizens are looking for,
what they want in their community, and it will give us the vision to work for long term. A
couple of other things, this one is probably on a sad note, but he wants to highlight. A
couple of weeks ago there was an accident over in Vinton area where a young lady lost
her life. But he will say, as we have talked about regional efforts, he wanted to
commend, our, and I’ve reached out to our fire chief, police chief. He wants to reiterate
how much our communities do work together, on the scene of that call we had the Town
of Vinton, Roanoke County and Roanoke City, Fire, Police and Rescue and it was just
a very seamless operation, everybody was on the scene doing what they had to do,
unfortunately the outcome was not what we wanted, but it was just great to see that
response of those entities showing, agencies show up and the work that was done that
night and he is very proud, he has been in the organization for twenty-three years and
remembers the day where there was that line and we’re not crossing it and we’re not
going to help you no matter what you need, so I’m really pleased to see it come to this
point and again I’ve commended our police and our fire and rescue departments. The
last thing that he wants to touch on or try to touch on at every meeting, is our
employees. Again we had another snow storm last week, again he always thanks our
County Administrator first and foremost, he is looking out for our employees making
120 February 23, 2016
sure that they are not coming into work in bad conditions, and he's willing to tell them to
stay at home, He is very pleased with that but again to our employees the great work
that they do and to our all-star teachers, our school staff and what they do, he really
appreciates everything that helps us move forward together.
At 4:01 p.m. Chairman Peters recessed to the fourth floor for work session.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1. Work session to discuss Roanoke County workforce
demographics and Total Compensation as relates to the fiscal
year 2016-2017 Operating Budget (Carlan Myers, Director of
Human Resources; Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance;
Christopher R. Bever, Director of Management and Budget)
A PowerPoint presentation was given by Carlan Meyers, Rebecca Owens
and Christopher Bever on demographics and total compensation. A copy of the
presentation is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.
Supervisor McNamara commented retirees should not get better benefits.
He wants to push the Keycare 100 and look at self-funding life insurance.
Supervisor Bedrosian asked about part-time employees.
Supervisor Peters asked about training regarding the positions that have
employees retiring.
The work session was held from 4:20 p.m. until 5:52 p.m.
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Peters adjourned the meeting at 5:53 p.m.
S bmitted by: Approved by:
#41 �� ' �4, ,/
- - [ m
Deborah C. J. k, P. Jas Peters
Chief Deputy Cl: to the Board Chairman