Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/27/2004 - Regular January 27, 2004 47 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 27, 2004 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January, 2004. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Flora called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard C. Flora, Vice-Chairman Michael W. Altizer, Supervisors Joseph B. “Butch” Church, Joseph McNamara, Michael A. Wray MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk to the Board; Teresa Hamilton Hall, Public Information Officer IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by Pastor David Fraser, Faith Alliance Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS January 27, 2004 48 Mr. Mahoney added an item to the closed meeting pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) personnel matter. Chairman Flora advised that due to the weather, the recognition of the Cave Spring High School volleyball team has been postponed until February 24, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Recognition of the Parks, Recreation & Tourism Department for receiving accreditation by the American Camping Association (ACA) for residential camp programs offered at Camp Roanoke Chairman Flora presented the certificate of recognition to Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. Also present was Bill Sgrinia, former Recreation Supervisor at Camp Roanoke, who is currently the Director of Parks & Recreation for Montgomery County. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of resolution endorsing and adopting the Ozone Early Action Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) R-012704-1 Mr. Hodge introduced the following staff members from the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission (RVARC) who were present: Wayne Strickland, January 27, 2004 49 Executive Director; Mark McCaskill, Senior Planner, Transportation; and John Hull, Regional Planner. Mr. Hodge advised that this is a request to adopt the Ozone Early Action Plan (EAP) which was developed to reduce ozone levels to comply with air quality standards. The Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), the RVARC, local governments, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) were involved in development of the EAP. He advised that Supervisor Flora worked with the school system and Jim Vodnik, Assistant Director of General Services, were also involved in developing this action plan. Mr. Hodge advised that some of the air quality readings that were taken over a period of time in the Roanoke Valley were very high, especially on one particular day, and to avoid being designated as an official non-attainment area and face mandatory compliance measures, the EAP was developed. This is an opportunity for the region to serve as a voluntary test pilot project to avoid a twenty-year mandatory plan which would impact the economic development recruiting program and existing businesses. Mr. Hodge advised that on January 14, 2003, the Board ratified the execution of an EAP Compact with the EPA to prepare a regional plan for ozone reduction. The Cites of Roanoke and Salem, Counties of Roanoke and Botetourt and January 27, 2004 50 the Town of Vinton worked throughout 2003 with many other agencies and local organizations to develop the plan which will reduce pollutants and improve air quality. In response to Mr. Hodge’s inquiry about the school system’s involvement in the EAP, Supervisor Flora advised that the school system was approached by VDEQ which is administering an EPA grant as part of a settlement with the power companies. The school system was offered $300,000 to retrofit the school buses with devices to reduce the emissions and this action has been approved by the School Board. The process should begin in the next ninety days when the state funds are received. Mr. McCaskill thanked the Board for pursuing the EAP and working with the other regional localities. He advised that this is an opportunity to demonstrate that regional cooperation can produce results. Mr. Strickland advised that this region was selected as one of twenty-five pilot programs in the nation to pursue an EAP. The EPA will designate more than 100 non-attainment ozone areas in the nation and these areas will be involved in a twenty- year process with mandatory compliance measures. The Roanoke Valley’s process will involve seven years and he expressed his appreciation that the local governments came together to support and develop this plan. He advised that W. Tayloe Murphy, Secretary of Natural Resources, and Robert Burnley, Director of VDEQ, reported that they were very pleased with the actions being taken at this time. Supervisor McNamara thanked everyone for their hard work and advised that this region was the second area allowed in the program after Austin, Texas. He January 27, 2004 51 believes that the reason for this area being allowed in the program is that the EPA and VDEQ felt that the valley governments and leadership were willing to put together a plan and support it. Supervisor Church expressed appreciation to those present for their work on this plan and advised that he knew this process required a tremendous effort. Supervisor Altizer expressed appreciation for the speakers’ efforts and asked for an explanation of ozone action days. Mr. McCaskill advised that VDEQ will forecast particular days when this region’s ozone levels will be above the air quality standards but they can not guarantee more than a few days advance notice. This is a very strategic part of the EAP and essentially the region will strive through the culmination of many small efforts to reclaim the forecasted day from non-attainment status to attainment. Supervisor Altizer advised that it is his understanding that the region will get some advance notice so that that the air quality can be impacted on that particular day. He thanked those involved with the plan or their hard work. Mr. Strickland advised that although it looks like the burden rests on the local governments, businesses are being requested to voluntarily participate in order to make this a public and private process. Some of the chambers of commerce have already passed resolutions or letters supporting this action. They have had calls from businesses that want to participate and are requesting to be notified of the ozone action days because they are willing to take such actions as reducing lawn mowing, and refueling their vehicles before or after the high ozone times. January 27, 2004 52 Mr. Hodge advised that although the educational process has already begun, there will be an on-going effort to disseminate this information so that everyone can participate. Some ways that citizens can participate is by fueling their vehicles early or late in the day to avoid the times when the ozone levels are the highest and also shortening their vehicle idling time. Supervisor Wray echoed the support of the Board for this plan and advised that he appreciated the thoroughness of the staff report on this item. He inquired about the reason that the ozone levels in 1998 exceeded the air quality standards. Mr. McCaskill explained that part of the ozone is generated through volatile organic compounds and nitric oxides, that the presence of heat and sunlight can form chemical reactions to make ground level ozone, and that ozone can be transported into the region from other areas. In summers like 1998, ozone is usually a combination of heat, transport and some local emissions. Certain weather conditions affect the ozone levels but they are not controllable. Supervisor Flora thanked the speakers and expressed his appreciation that the RVARC organized the localities to take action and complete the EAP. He advised that the region’s actions were proactive and not reactive and he felt this is very beneficial for everyone. He felt that the alert system is critical because it can cause people to change their behavior but for this to occur, training will be necessary. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: January 27, 2004 53 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012704-1 ENDORSING AND ADOPTING THE OZONE EARLY ACTION PLAN FOR THE ROANOKE VALLEY AREA WHEREAS, clean air is essential for quality of life, economic development and general public well-being of the Roanoke Valley Area; and, WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established a revised 8-hour ozone standard in 1997 that was set at 0.085 parts per million (ppm), averaged over a three-year period; and, WHEREAS, the ozone monitoring station in the Roanoke area (in the Town of Vinton) currently has a design value of 0.085 ppm that would qualify the area for the designation of non-attainment area for ozone under the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1990; and, WHEREAS, the EPA has developed and endorsed the air quality planning concept of Early Action Compacts, where an area that marginally exceeds the ozone standard can enter into a voluntary agreement with state and federal governments to develop and implement an Early Action Plan to proactively reduce ozone levels and come into compliance with the standard; and, WHEREAS, elected officials, representing the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the Counties of Botetourt and Roanoke and the Town of Vinton, acting through the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) entered into an Ozone Early Action Compact with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) and the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in December 2002; and, WHEREAS, the Ozone Early Action Compact authorized the establishment of an Early Action Plan Task Force and the development of a regional Early Action Plan consisting of local, state and national strategies to bring the Roanoke Valley Area into attainment with the 8-hour Ozone standard by 2007; and, WHEREAS, in response, the Early Action Plan Task Force has developed and submitted a Early Action Plan for consideration and adoption by the localities that have entered into the Early Action Compact; and, WHEREAS, the Early Action Plan contains specific commitments and responsibilities to be undertaken by the localities that have entered into the Early Action Compact; and, WHEREAS, technical analyses conducted by VDEQ and EPA indicate that air quality is expected to improve in the Roanoke Valley area by 2007; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County is fully committed to fulfill these specific commitments and responsibilities under the Ozone Early Action Plan; and, January 27, 2004 54 WHEREAS, furthermore, the Board of Supervisors is fully committed to the regional cooperation and coordination necessary to bring the area into attainment, as measured by the regional Ozone monitor, for the 8-hour Ozone standard in 2007. th NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that on this 27 day of January, 2004, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, officially approves and endorses the regional Ozone Early Action Plan (EAP), and is committed to its implementation and success. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a signed copy of this resolution of commitment from Roanoke County will be sent to the Director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality for processing and inclusion into the official State Implementation Plan, which once approved by EPA will make these commitments and responsibilities federally enforceable. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the first readings and set the second readings and public hearings for February 24, 2004. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None 1. First reading of ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a Private Kennel on 1.5 acres, located at 5005 Buffalo Circle, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Les and Angela Meadows and Barbara J. Schuyler 2. First reading of ordinance to rezone 2.37 acres from R-1 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District to C-1 Office District January 27, 2004 55 to construct a general office, located at 3640 Colonial Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Roanoke Council of Garden Clubs, Incorporated 3. First reading of ordinance to amend the conditions of Ordinance 032399-8, Condition 4, to increase the maximum light pole height from 22 feet to 33.5 feet for property located at 3270 Electric Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Balzer & Associates, Inc. 4. First reading of ordinance to amend conditions on Planned Residential Development (PRD) consisting of approximately 220 acres and rezone 32 acres from R1-C Single Family Residential District with conditions to PRD, located south of the Blue Ridge Parkway at milepost 125, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Land Planning & Design Associates IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of an ordinance authorizing the quitclaim and release of Roanoke County's interest in a portion of the "Old Bushdale Road" pursuant to an agreement with Elga Draper and Lura Draper, Vinton Magisterial District. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) January 27, 2004 56 O-012704-2 Mr. Mahoney advised that this was the second reading of the ordinance and there have been no changes since the first reading on January 13. He requested that the Board approve and adopt the ordinance. Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None ORDINANCE 012704-2 AUTHORIZING THE QUITCLAIM AND RELEASE OF ROANOKE COUNTY’S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE “OLD BUSHDALE ROAD” PURSUANT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH ELGA DRAPER AND LURA DRAPER, VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Bushdale Road was placed on the Rural Addition Priority List for upgrade for future State maintenance, with road construction being provided by VDOT through Rural Addition Funds and the cost associated with engineering and right-of-way acquisition being funded by Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the donation of all right, title and interest in Bushdale Road by Elga Draper and Lura Draper was contingent upon Roanoke County’s agreement to quitclaim and release the “old Bushdale Road section” to the Drapers once the project was complete and staff had determined that this portion of Bushdale Road was no longer required for any public purpose; and WHEREAS, the Bushdale Road project is complete and this road has been accepted by VDOT as part of the State Secondary System; and WHEREAS, County staff has determined that the “old Bushdale Road section” is no longer required for any public purpose and can be quitclaimed and released pursuant to the agreement between Roanoke County and the Drapers. 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 January 13, 2004, and the second reading was held on January 27, 2004; and, January 27, 2004 57 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be released are no longer needed for any public purpose; and 3. That quit-claim and release to Jeffrey A. Dorsett and Stephanie R. Dorsett of that portion of the “old Bushdale Road section,” adjacent to Tax Map No. 79.003-4-36 as shown on the attached map prepared by Balzer and Associates dated November 28, 2003, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby authorized. 4. That quit-claim and release to the heirs of Elga Draper and Lura Draper of the remaining portion of the “old Bushdale Road section,” adjacent to Tax Map No. 79.03-4-35.1 as shown on the attached map prepared by Balzer and Associates dated November 28, 2003, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby authorized. 5. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None 2. Second reading of ordinance to amending Chapter 20. Solid Waste of the Roanoke County Code to provide revised definitions and revised provisions for collection of solid waste from residential and commercial customers. (Anne Marie Green, Director of General Services) O-012704-3 Ms. Green advised that this is the second reading of an ordinance to amend the solid waste provisions. Based upon the Board’s requests at the first reading on January 13, 2004, AV (Agricultural Village) zoning was added to the areas where trash cans must be removed from the curb after pickup and an analysis of the projected costs of the proposed dumpster service was compiled. If the schools are included, the January 27, 2004 58 program will break even after the third year and by year seven, it will save over $250,000 for the County. This estimate is very conservative because it is assumed that there will be no increase in the costs from the current contractor. At this time, staff is asking that the Board approve the language in the ordinance to allow for providing dumpster service. The current contract will be re-bid to give the private sector the opportunity to participate before coming back during the budget process for a funding request with more accurate figures. Supervisor Altizer advised that citizens who already have extra cans are grandfathered in the ordinance so they can retain these extra cans. He advised that handicapped citizens can receive premium service without charge but inquired as to other citizens who receive this service. Ms. Green responded that premium service is purchased by customers throughout the County who want collection at their door for various reasons. Supervisor Altizer inquired as to the number of dumpsters the County will need to purchase initially for this service not including the amount for the school system. Ms. Green estimated that it would be 10 for the County and probably 20 to service the condominiums that they are currently paying rebates. Assistant Director of General Services Jim Vodnik advised Ms. Green who then reported to the Board that the number of dumpsters was 38. Supervisor Altizer advised that according to the analysis, in year nine the truck would have to be replaced and in year ten the dumpsters would have to be January 27, 2004 59 replaced. Ms. Green confirmed that this information is based upon the information provided by the City of Salem which provides dumpster service. Supervisor Altizer advised that at the end of ten years, the County would be spending an additional $182,000. Ms. Green advised that this program is only feasible if they include servicing the school system. Supervisor Altizer inquired if a number of the citizens in the condominiums have agreed to having County dumpster service. Ms. Green advised that this has been discussed and that most of the citizens living in condominiums are not concerned if their trash is picked up by a private business or the County. Supervisor Altizer advised that the County would not break even in three years but it would take 5.3 years to recoup the losses that are generated during the first three years, and only in year three would there be a positive cash flow. He advised that this is not a cost saving project. With service for the County and the schools combined over a ten year period, the savings are $222,000 but if that is averaged, it will be $22,000 per year. Ms. Green confirmed to Supervisor Altizer that although the department will institute four ten-hour work days, that extra help will not be necessary. She also advised in response to Supervisor Altizer’s inquiry, that she could not guarantee that no additional personnel would be hired over the next ten years or that the cost to Waste Management will remain at $90,000. Supervisor Altizer advised that if there are cost savings and increased productivity by working four ten-hour days, those savings could be applied elsewhere in General Services instead of hiring another person. If another person has to be hired in the next ten years, years, a conservative January 27, 2004 60 cost estimate, including benefits, would be approximately $300,000. This leaves a deficit of about $68,000 rather than the reported savings of $200,000. He advised that there is also the matter of liability when trucks are going into small areas where there are dumpsters. He advised that there are many positive revisions in the ordinance but he would recommend removing the dumpster service and voting on the approval of the remainder of the ordinance. In response to Supervisor Church’s inquiry as to why dumpster service should be authorized, Ms. Green advised that several years ago management associations from the condominiums approached the County and complained that it was not fair that they had to pay a vendor to pick up their trash when they own real estate like other County citizens who have their trash picked up without charge. The Board agreed and directed the former General Services Director, Ms. Carver, to provide a rebate to those condominiums based on what they were spending. These rebates are continuing to increase every year because: (1) new condominium associations become aware of the program; (2) sometimes there is a need to increase pickups which increases the bill; and (3) some are smaller entities and the private contractor charges a larger fee. These funds are taken from the solid waste budget because there is no line item in the budget for these expenses. Another consideration is that the private contractors who pick up County dumpsters are paying the $55 a ton tipping fee as opposed to the $45 tipping fee the County pays. Staff plans to put the project out for bid so they will have more accurate costs before the budget process begins. The schools January 27, 2004 61 will save a considerable amount of money because while they will be paying the tipping fees and dumpster costs, the County will absorb the cost of the truck. Supervisor Church advised that he understands Supervisor Altizer’s concern about approving a program with unknown information. He advised that the cost of the waste management contract in the future could be a key factor and he could not endorse the program at this time. He felt the program should be looked at in its entirety before proceeding. Supervisor Flora advised that in reality, the break-even point is after the third year because the County has a deficit of $6,000 and beginning with the fourth year, the savings are $60,000. It is true that the savings are $222,000 over ten years but if you add the benefit of replacing the truck and dumpsters, more money has been saved. He feels that a significant amount of money can be saved by servicing the dumpsters for the school system. He thought the figures were conservative because the contract with Waste Management has just expired and in the next contract the prices may go up substantially. He suggested that the Board move ahead with approving this service because it is a cost savings program. Supervisor McNamara advised that if you look at the total usage of the assets, eight years would be the appropriate break even point because at that time all integral assets have been completely utilized. After eight years, the savings are $320,000 which is $40,000 savings per year. From a service perspective, the program would be beneficial to citizens but the Board did not have the costs/benefits analysis at January 27, 2004 62 the first reading of the ordinance on January 13, 2004. He advised that if Supervisor Altizer had made a motion approving the ordinance without the dumpster service, he would support that motion to give staff more time to provide a more thorough analysis of the program. This does not mean that he is against providing the service but the Board needs to know the real cost of the program before making any decision. Ms. Green advised that staff could bring this back during the budget process after the contract has been re-bid and with the new costs from the private sector. Supervisor McNamara advised that there might be savings on the tipping fees but since the County owns the tipping station, this means saving money from ourselves and pulling business away from the private sector into the public sector which may or may not be efficient. In response to Supervisor Wray’s inquiries, Ms. Green advised that the school savings in year four are $154,000 but this amount needs to be combined with the negative to continue the program. Supervisor Wray advised that due to the number of unknowns about the program including additional personnel, overtime, and other costs, he felt the program needs more study before approval. Mr. Hodge advised that there is an advantage to leaving the provision for dumpster service in the ordinance and requiring staff to get bids from private contractors to gather factual information and review the program during the budget process. The program cannot be implemented without Board approval because of the capital expenses involved. Another reason to go forward at this point is that the demand and costs for this service will continue to increase. January 27, 2004 63 Supervisor Altizer clarified that he did make a motion to remove the dumpster provision from the ordinance and approve the second reading of the remainder of the ordinance. In response to Mr. Hodge’s comments, he advised that he understands that the Board will have final approval but he still does not feel comfortable approving a program where the costs are unknown. Supervisor Flora asked that when staff completes the next analysis of the costs for the service, the costs to the school system should be apportioned to include operational costs. Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the ordinance eliminating the provision for dumpster service. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None ORDINANCE 012704-3 AMENDING CHAPTER 20. SOLID WASTE OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY TO PROVIDE REVISED DEFINITIONS AND REVISED PROVISIONS FOR COLLECTION OF SOLID WASTE FROM RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS WHEREAS, the current solid waste ordinance for Roanoke County was adopted in 1994, and with the passage of time numerous changes to this ordinance are necessary to reflect changed circumstances in the collection of solid waste; and WHEREAS, certain change are needed to improve the safety, efficiency and cost effectiveness of the service; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 13, 2004, and the second hearing was held on January 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Chapter 20. Solid Waste of the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended to read and provide as follows: January 27, 2004 64 ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 20-1. Definitions. The following words and terms, as used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section: Automated collection: A mechanical method of garbage collection utilizing a vehicle equipped with a hydraulic arm that empties special containers provided by the County. Brush collection: Curbside collection of brush, small tree limbs, and other arboreal materials from residential customers. Bulk collection: Manual curbside collection from residential customers of appliances, furnaces, air conditioners, furniture, carpeting, rugs, bagged leaves and grass, boxes, four (4) unmounted tires and other permissible household items too large or heavy for garbage cans. Commercial collection: Roanoke County's limited curbside collection of garbage placed in approved containers, generated by licensed business establishments, including 3-5 family rental properties, 1-5 unit retail complexes, churches and church- run daycares. Construction/ demolition waste: Any structural waste material produced in the construction, remodeling, repair, or demolition of buildings, homes, industrial plants, pavements and structures including but not limited to, lumber, concrete, asphalt pavement, roofing tile, plaster board, piping and all other similar items. Contractor/Commercial waste: Waste material, including construction/demolition waste, resulting from work performed under contract for consideration. This includes, but is not limited to, trimming, yard maintenance and remodeling or other home repair. Curbside collection: The collection of solid waste that has been placed no farther than five (5) feet from a curb or edge of a qualified road. Curbside recycle collection: Curbside collection of recyclable materials derived from residential customers. Debris waste: Stumps, logs, limbs, wood, brush, leaves, soil and rock from land clearing operations. Free loader: Dumpster-style trailer which may be reserved by Roanoke County residential customers for one weekday or one weekend. Garbage: Solid and semi-solid items including discarded food wastes, wastes likely to decompose, bottles, waste paper, cans and clothing. Hazardous waste: “Hazardous substances” as defined by the Virginia Hazardous Management Waste Regulation; posing a danger to human health, harm to the environment, including but not limited to oil-based paint, insecticides, herbicides, poisons, corrosives, combustibles, caustics, acids, motor oils and gasoline. Household waste: Non-hazardous material, including garbage and trash, derived from households. Industrial waste: Any solid waste generated by manufacturing or industrial January 27, 2004 65 process that is not a regulated hazardous waste. Manual collection: Removal of solid waste materials at the curb by personnel as distinguished from automated collection. Physically-challenged service: Refuse pickup at the house for citizens who are physician-certified as unable to transport garbage to the street. Private road: A road not in the primary or secondary system. See also “Qualified Road” below. Premium garbage collection: Optional pickup of garbage from a residential customer for a fee. Residential customers: County residents living in single-family homes including individually-owned townhouses duplexes, single lot mobile homes and condominiums, Residential collection: Garbage, bulk and brush collection from residential customer’s dwellings. Recyclables: Newspaper, cardboard, office paper, aluminum, copper, steel, tin, auto batteries, motor oil. Qualified road: A road in the primary or secondary system of highways in the Commonwealth of Virginia. This term also includes private roads meeting specific County prescribed conditions, as noted in Section 20-23 below. Seasonal collection: Collection of Christmas trees and bagged leaves, during applicable times of the year. Solid waste: Solid and semi-solid materials including household garbage, yard waste, brush, bulk household waste, unmounted tires and other permissible discarded, non-hazardous materials. Yard waste: Lawn clippings, small brush and twigs, shrubbery clippings, bagged leaves. Sec. 20-2. Reserved. Secs. 20-3--20-20. Reserved. ARTICLE II. COLLECTION BY COUNTY Sec. 20-21. Article not applicable to Town of Vinton. This article shall not apply to residents or commercial or industrial establishments of the Town of Vinton, Virginia, an incorporated town lying within the boundaries of the county, since the council for the town has provided for solid waste collection for the residents of the town. Sec. 20-22. Responsibility of county administrator under article. January 27, 2004 66 The administration of this article, including the establishment of a budget for providing effective solid waste collection service; the hiring of all employees necessary for providing such service; the billing of persons receiving such service; and all other matters related thereto shall be the responsibility of the county administrator; provided, that all matters pertaining to the establishment of an annual budget and the establishment of collection rates and charges shall be approved by the board of supervisors. Sec. 20-23. Right to, and application for, service. All county residents shall be entitled to receive solid waste collection service consistent with the provisions of this article, subject to the determination of the county administrator, or his designee, regarding the economic feasibility of providing such service to any particular location subject to the provisions of this chapter and the policies of the board of supervisors. Any person desiring such service shall make application through the office of general services. P Arrangements for payment, if required, shall be made at the time of application. Solid waste collection service shall be provided to County residents from and along a qualified road. This service may be provided from and along a private road under the following conditions: (i) there are at least three homes on the road, (ii) the county has written permission from all owners to be on the road, the owner/s assume the risk of any damage to the private road arising from the provision of such service by the county, and (iii) the Director of General Services has approved the collection. This approval shall be based on the feasibility and safety of operating refuse collection vehicles on the private road. Sec. 20-24. Specific collection categories. Roanoke County shall provide weekly curbside garbage collection of household waste at no charge to all residential customers, meeting requirements of this chapter, in Roanoke County. To receive curbside collection, the following general rules must be followed: ? All containers placed within five (5) feet of the curb line of a qualified road by 7:00 a.m. of the scheduled collection day. ? In R-1, R-2, R-3 and AV zoning districts, containers shall be removed from the public street right-of-way no later than 7:00 a.m. of the day following the scheduled collection day. ? No dead animals, hazardous material, automobile parts, ashes, liquids, debris, rocks, or construction waste, contractor/commercial waste, or any other material January 27, 2004 67 deemed unsafe for collection shall be placed in the containers for collection. ? Sharps and needles must be sealed in proper needle disposal containers or other heavy, capped plastic containers, such as detergent bottles, milk jugs or soft drink bottles. ? Pet feces must be double bagged before being placed in containers for collection. ? Latex paint may be placed in containers after it has completely solidified. Specific Rules Pertaining to Automated Collection All residential customers within the automated service area will receive one automated container. Weekly collection will only be for household waste, garbage and yard waste placed within the container. The containers are assigned to the structure, not to the occupants. Those households with six (6) or more occupants will be entitled to one additional automated container. No more than two (2) containers per residential customer will be allowed. When set to the curb line, each container must have at least five (5) feet of clearance on all sides. ? The replacement fee for a container shall be established by the Solid Waste Manager subject to the approval of the County Administrator. ? Residents may be charged for repairs or replacement of containers, if the loss or damage is due to negligence of the customer as determined by the Solid Waste Manager. Physically-Challenged Collection Backyard household waste collection will be provided to residential customers when everyone living in the structure is disabled or handicapped and unable to transport the refuse to the curb. A Physician’s certification of handicaps or disabilities is required for all individuals residing in the household. Physically-challenged residents will be required to renew this certification on an annual basis. The following additional criteria apply: ? Customers receiving this service are limited to one container. ? Customers will be subject to all automated guidelines except placing container at curb. ? All materials placed in containers for collection must be bagged. ? Container weight is limited to 30 lbs. ? This service is not available for bulk and brush collection. Premium Garbage Collection January 27, 2004 68 Optional backyard service may be available to residential customers for household waste only by application. The charge for premium backyard collection will be a minimum of fifteen dollars ($15.00) per month and will include service up to one hundred (100) feet from the curbside pickup location. For each additional one hundred (100) feet or fraction thereof, an additional ten dollars ($10.00) charge will be assessed. The premium refuse collection charges shall be paid in advance on a quarterly basis. The following additional criteria apply: ? Customers receiving this service are limited to one container. ? Customers will be subject to all automated guidelines except placing container at curb. ? All materials placed in containers for collection must be bagged. ? Container weight is limited to 30 lbs. ? This service is not available for bulk and brush collection. ? A non-refundable application fee in the amount of twenty dollars ($20.00) shall be made in advance together with proper application forms from the Solid Waste Division of General Services. Commercial Collection Roanoke County shall provide free, weekly, curbside collection of garbage to licensed commercial establishments (including churches and church-run daycares), generating not more than three (3) County provided automated containers per week. This service will be provided by application only through the office of General Services. The County will not provide collection to any apartment office, or retail complexes of more than five (5) commercial establishments or to mobile home parks of any size. The County will provide licensed commercial establishments one (1) container at no cost; the commercial establishment may purchase two (2) additional containers. Commercial establishments generating over three hundred (300) gallons of refuse per week are required to secure private collection. The following conditions apply to Commercial Collection: ? Commercial customers within the automated service area will be subject to the rules pertaining to standard automated collection and all County solid waste rules. January 27, 2004 69 ? Bulk/brush or bagged leaf collection is not available to commercial customers Non-Resident Collection: Roanoke County may, at its option, provide weekly garbage collection to nearby, non-county residents upon application and approval. A monthly fee of twenty dollars ($20) will be required. These customers are allowed only one container and they will be required to pay a monthly rental fee of $1.00 for the use of the container. Non-Roanoke County residents are not eligible for bulk/brush collection. Condominium and Townhouse Development Collection Roanoke County shall provide once weekly pickup by an automated vehicle to residential customers residing in owner-occupied condominium and townhouse developments. The method of collection shall be consistent with the collection service received by other residential customers. General Debris waste will not be collected under any circumstances. ? Mixed or contaminated loads, e.g. bulk intermingled with brush, will not be collected. ? Solid waste contaminated with hazardous wastes will not be collected nor handled by County personnel. Sec. 20-25. Supplemental collection service. Brush Collection The County provides free brush collection every other week to residential customers. Brush or other yard waste collection service will not be provided to commercial or non-Roanoke County residential customers. It will be the responsibility of premium and physically-challenged customers to place any brush items at the curb for collection. Brush must be placed as close as possible to the curb line or road and five (5) feet away from any horizontal obstruction and have overhead clearance, such that the operation of the equipment is not impaired or restricted. Such placement shall be made no earlier than the Saturday preceding the scheduled collection and no later than 7:00 a.m. of the day scheduled collection date. ? Brush resulting from normal property maintenance, may not exceed six (6) feet in length or six (6) inches in diameter. Debris waste and tree stumps will not be January 27, 2004 70 collected pursuant to this section. The cuttings and limbs must be placed in a pile not to exceed six (6) by six (6) by six (6) feet in size. ? Brush cuttings and tree limbs resulting from commercial tree trimming operations (contractor/commercial waste) will not be collected. ? Brush resulting from land-clearing will not be collected. Yard Waste Residential customers may place small quantities of yard waste in their County- provided containers on their regularly-scheduled collection day. Excess quantities of yard waste must be placed in disposable containers, to include but not be limited to, plastic or paper bags or cardboard boxes and adjacent to the road or curb line for scheduled bulk collection. The disposable containers must be of substantial construction and shall not weigh more than fifty (50) pounds when full. The containerized clippings must be separate from any other bulk or brush items set out for collection. Seasonal Collections For a six (6) week period, usually beginning with the first Monday in November, bagged leaves will be collected on a weekly basis from all residential customers. The county will not provide vacuum service for the collection of leaves. ? Leaves must be placed in sturdy, tied, plastic bags within five (5) feet of curb and may not exceed fifty (50) pounds per bag. ? Christmas trees will be collected separately from other yard waste during a one- week period in January. Trees must be placed within five (5) feet of the curb with all decorations removed so they may be safely mulched. Notice will be provided as to exact collection dates for these services. General Materials resulting from land-clearing operations or commercial yard waste management operations will not be collected pursuant to this section. It will be the responsibility of the contractor or owner to properly dispose of any such materials. Bulk Collection The County provides free collection of bulk items every other week to residential customers. Bulk collection service will not be provided to any commercial customers. It will be the responsibility of premium and backyard service customers to place any bulk items adjacent to the qualified road or curb line for collection. The bulk items must be January 27, 2004 71 placed as close as possible to the curb line or road and five (5) feet away from any obstruction. The items must be completely clear of any overhanging wires or branches, in order to be collected. Such placement shall be made no earlier than the Saturday preceding scheduled collection and no later than 7:00 a.m. the day of collection. ? Pursuant to Section 20-1, bulk collection items will be defined as household waste too large or heavy to fit into the automated containers. ? Residential customers can place no more than a pickup truck size load of bulk for pickup. If it is necessary for the materials to be containerized, the container must be of a disposable nature. ? Bulk items include materials resulting from normal household activity, including but not limited to, items such as appliances, furniture, four (4) un-mounted tires, pallets, bicycles, swing sets (disassembled), lawn furniture, and cardboard moving boxes or other trash resulting from moving. ? Any material that may be wind blown must be bagged. Any glass items, such as mirrors, windows or shower doors, must be taped and bagged. Excluded items : All prohibited waste, such as construction waste, debris waste, hazardous materials, animal carcasses, automobile parts, propane tanks and riding lawnmowers will be the responsibility of the owner or contractor to properly dispose of. Additional Disposal Services County residential customers are entitled to the use of a 14-foot “freeloader” at no charge on a “first come, first serve” basis. The freeloader must be scheduled in advance and is to be used during spring cleaning, basement or attic cleaning, or major yard work projects. Use of the freeloader is governed by the following criteria: ? Residential customers may reserve the freeloaders no more than four (4) times a year. ? Materials may only be hand loaded (not mechanically) onto the trailer. ? Small items or any material susceptible to wind must be containerized in some manner, such as bags or boxes. ? The freeloader will be delivered only to occupied residential homes. Homes currently under construction are not eligible to receive the freeloader. The freeloader will only be delivered to a safe and easily accessible location determined by Solid Waste staff. January 27, 2004 72 ? The resident must be home to accept delivery of the freeloader to sign a release liability form. ? No hazardous materials, debris waste or construction waste shall be placed in freeloader. ? Permissible items include brush, bulk and yard waste pursuant to Section 20-1. ? Prior to removal the loads will be inspected and the resident will be required to remove non-approved materials. County residential customers are entitled to haul one pickup truck load of non- hazardous household material directly to the Tinker Creek Transfer Station per week. The truck may be no larger than one (1) ton and must have a Roanoke County decal. This service is for residential customers only. Roofing shingles are not included in this program. This service is at no cost to County residential customers. Sec. 20-26. Penalties Any violation of the provisions of Article II. shall be punishable as a Class 3 misdemeanor. In addition, collection service by the County may be discontinued until the violation is abated or corrected. 2. The effective date of this ordinance shall be January 27, 2004. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the ordinance after deletion of the provision for providing dumpster service, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None 3. Second reading of an ordinance to vacate, quit-claim and release a portion of a 20’ access easement and to accept in exchange a relocated new portion of a 20’ access easement across Lots 1 and 2, Section No. 5, “The Groves”, owned by Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc., to The Groves sewer lift station, January 27, 2004 73 Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) O-012704-4 Mr. Robertson advised that this is an access easement for a County owned pumping station. The developers are asking that the easement be relocated at their expense and there have been no changes since the first reading of the ordinance. In response to Supervisor Wray’s inquiries, Mr. Robertson advised that this is a recorded buildable lot but construction would be very difficult with the access road as it is located now. This action will put most of the access road on Lot 1 instead of Lot 2. Supervisor Wray moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None ORDINANCE 012704-4 TO VACATE, QUIT-CLAIM AND RELEASE A PORTION OF A 20' ACCESS EASEMENT AND TO ACCEPT IN EXCHANGE A RELOCATED NEW PORTION OF A 20' ACCESS EASEMENT ACROSS LOTS 1 AND 2, SECTION NO. 5, “THE GROVES”, (TAX MAP NOS. 96.07-9-18 AND 96.07-9-19), OWNED BY BOONE, BOONE & LOEB, INC., TO THE GROVES SEWER LIFT STATION IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, by Deed dated July 16, 2001, Palm Land Company, L.C., conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, a .400-acre pump station lot, designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map #96.07-99-1, together with a 20' access easement across Lots 1 and 2, Section No. 5, The Groves, for ingress, egress and regress to and from said lot; and, WHEREAS, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc., is the current owner of Lots 1 and 2, January 27, 2004 74 and has determined that the location of said 20' access easement renders Lot 2 virtually unusable for residential construction; and, WHEREAS, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc., has proposed an acceptable alternative location for a portion of the 20' access easement (Exhibit B) and has requested that the Board of Supervisors authorize a portion of the former access easement (Exhibit A) to be quit-claimed and released; and, WHEREAS, the relocation is to be accomplished without cost to the County and meets the requirements of the Utility Department. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on January 13, 2004; and a second reading on January 27, 2004; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject real estate (portion of easement) is hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interest in real estate renders it unavailable for other public uses; and 3. That, conditioned upon the exchange as hereinafter provided, vacation, quit-claim and release of the “PORTION OF EXISTING 20' ACCESS EASEMENT HEREBY VACATED” as shown hatched on Exhibit A attached hereto, across Lots 1 and 2, Section No. 5, “The Groves”, (Tax Map Nos. 96.07-9-18 and 96.07-9-19), owned by Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc., is hereby authorized and approved; and, 4. That, in exchange, acquisition and acceptance of a “NEW 20' ACCESS EASEMENT” as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto, for purposes of ingress, egress and regress across Lots 1 and 2, Section No. 5, “The Groves”, to and from the Pump Station lot (Tax Map No. 96.07-99-1) is hereby authorized and approved; and, 5. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to, recordation fees, survey costs, and relocation of the access drive, shall be the responsibility of the petitioners, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc., or their successors or assigns; and, 6. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this vacation and acquisition, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 7. That this ordinance shall be effective on the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Wray to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None January 27, 2004 75 4. Second reading of an ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Code by the amendment of Section 2-7 “Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response.” (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) O-012704-5 Mr. Mahoney advised that the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 14, 2003, and while staff attempted to hold a work session several times, that work session was not held until the meeting on January 13, 2004. At that meeting, the Board directed that the ordinance be revised in two ways: (1) to delete reckless driving as one of the offenses that would trigger the application of the ordinance; and (2) to authorize the billing of a flat fee to the maximum amount authorized by the General Assembly. The current flat fee is $100. Mr. Mahoney advised that currently there are two bills before the General Assembly that would substantially increase the flat fee and if this fee is increased, this ordinance automatically approves the same increase. Mr. Mahoney confirmed to Supervisor Church that there was a consensus during the work session to delete reckless driving from the offenses that would trigger the application of the ordinance. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None January 27, 2004 76 ORDINANCE 012704-5 AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 2-7. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Ordinance No. 031202-6 amending the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of a new Section 2.7 “Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or incidents caused by driving while impaired” providing the County with an opportunity to recover its reasonable expenses in providing an appropriate emergency response to such accidents or incidents. This ordinance was authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the 2003 session of the Virginia General expanded Section 15.2- 1716 of the Code of Virginia to also include reckless driving, driving without a license, and leaving the scene of an accident; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby finds that the amendment of Section 2.7 to include several of these violations of State Code is in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 14, 2003; and the second reading was postponed from October 28, 2003, to December 16, 2003, and then continued to January 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired be amended to read and provide as follows: Chapter 2. Administration Article I. In General * * * * Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired, Driving Without a License, and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. (a) Any person who is convicted of violation of Section 12-8 of this Code, or of Sections 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, or Section 29.1-738 of the Code of Virginia, when his operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or water craft is the proximate cause of any accident or incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response; or of Section 46.2- 300 relating to driving with out a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license; or of Section 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident, shall be liable in a separate civil action to the county, for the reasonable expense thereof, in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident. In determining the "reasonable expense," the County may bill a flat January 27, 2004 77 fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or to the maximum flat fee authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, or a minute-by-minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. (b) As used in this section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all costs of providing law-enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical services. (c) The provisions of this section shall not preempt or limit any remedy available to the commonwealth, the County, or any fire/rescue squad to recover the reasonable expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident not involving a violation of any of the above mentioned State Code sections as set forth herein. 2. Any expenses recovered shall be deposited into the General Fund and appropriated annually to the Police Department and the Fire & Rescue Department operating budgets based upon an estimate of the proportional expenses incurred in responding to such accidents or incidents. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Building Code Board of Adjustments & Appeals (Fire Code Board of Appeals) Chairman Flora requested that the Clerk determine if Mr. Darnall would like to serve an additional term. 2. Grievance Panel Supervisor McNamara requested that the Clerk determine if Ms. Anderson would like to serve an additional term. January 27, 2004 78 IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-012794-6; R-012704-6.e Supervisor Flora moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012704-6 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: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for January 27, 2004, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 1-8, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes - January 13, 2004 2. Confirmation of Committee appointment to the Roanoke Valley-Allegehany Regional Commission 3. Request to accept grant in the amount of $1,500 from the Department of Motor Vehicles for uniform police officers to work DUI checkpoints in conjunction with the National Park Service 4. Request to accept grant in the amount of $3,000 from the Department of Motor Vehicles for uniform police officers to work DUI checkpoints, Aggressive Driving Enforcement, Injury Accident Reduction and Safety Belt and Child Seat Enforcement 5. Request to accept grant in the amount of $39,725 from the Department of Criminal Justice Services for the funding of the Violent Crimes Against Women Unit 6. Resolution in support of Chesterfield County’s submission to the 2004 Virginia General Assembly requesting the adoption of legislation allowing any Chartered County to assess Transportation Impact Fees on new development 7. Request from the schools to appropriate tuition for the Preschool Program funding in the amount of $79,650 for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 January 27, 2004 79 8. Request from schools to accept and appropriate Title III, Part A grant funds in the amount of $21,738.98 for educational programs for students with limited English proficiency That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012704-6.e IN SUPPORT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY’S SUBMISSION TO THE 2004 VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY REQUESTING THE ADOPTION OF LEGISLATION ALLOWING ANY CHARTERED COUNTY TO ASSESS TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES ON NEW DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Chesterfield County has adopted a Legislative Program for the 2004 session of the Virginia General Assembly which includes a request to allow any county granted a charter by the General Assembly to assess transportation impact fees on new development; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County has requested Roanoke County’s support for this legislative proposal since it is one of the few counties in the Commonwealth with a charter; and WHEREAS, the adoption of this legislation would enable Roanoke County better to address the growth pressures it is currently facing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That it supports Chesterfield County’s legislative initiative to amend Section 15.2-2328 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, which would allow any county, granted a charter by the General Assembly to assess transportation impact fees on new development. 2. That it amends its legislative program by adding this proposal to its 2004 Legislative Program. 3. That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to send a certified copy of this resolution to Senator John S. Edwards, Senator Brandon Bell, Delegate H. Morgan Griffith, Delegate Onzlee Ware, Delegate William Fralin; Mary F. Parker, Roanoke City Clerk; Forest Jones, Clerk for Salem City Council; Clerk for the Town of Vinton; and the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, and the Virginia Association of Counties. January 27, 2004 80 On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor McNamara moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Accounts Paid – December 2003 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended December 31, 2003 7. Report from VDOT of changes to the secondary road system in December 2003 8. Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program for the period ending December 31, 2003 9. Statement of Treasurer’s accountability per investment and portfolio policy as of December 31, 2003 IN RE: CLOSED MEETING January 27, 2004 81 At 4:10 p.m., Supervisor Flora moved to go into closed meeting pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel regarding pending litigation, namely Cellco Partnership vs. Roanoke County; Section 2.2-3711 A (30) discussion of the award of a public contract involving the expenditure of public funds, including interviews of bidders or offerors, and discussion of the terms or scope of such contract where discussion in an open session would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, namely public safety center; and Section 2.2-3711 A (1) personnel matter. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None IN RE: CLOSED MEETING The closed meeting was held from 4:15 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-012704-7 At 7:00 p.m., Chairman Flora moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012704-7 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA January 27, 2004 82 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of congratulations to the Cave Spring High School Volleyball team for winning the State Group AA Championship for the second consecutive year Chairman Flora advised that due to the weather, recognition of the Cave Spring High School Volleyball team has been postponed until February 24, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing to solicit citizen comment on the proposed creation of the Western Virginia Water Authority and adoption of resolution. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) January 27, 2004 83 R-012704-8 Mr. Hodge introduced the team that has been working on the Authority since the beginning which included: Gary Robertson, Utility Director; Paul Mahoney, County Attorney; and Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer. He advised that the Board members have also been involved in joint meetings with City Council, community meetings were held throughout the County to solicit citizen input, and they attended many civic league meetings. This public hearing and approval of a resolution is necessary before the Authority is operational. Roanoke City Council approved this resolution at their meeting on January 20, 2004, and he pointed out the action requested does not involve water rates. The resolution states that the name of the Authority will be Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) and that there will be seven members, three from the City and County and the seventh member chosen jointly by the County and City. He advised that the five steps necessary to be taken include the following: 1. The Articles of Incorporation will be sent to the State Corporation Commission (SCC) for approval. This approval process should take anywhere from 30 – 45 days. 2. The County and City will need to approve user contracts with the Authority to outline specific agreements regarding debt, transfer of capital, and zoning issues, as well as other issues. A public hearing will be held before the transfer of assets from the County to the Authority. 3. The Authority Board will need to adopt bylaws and operating procedures. 4. Water and sewer rates for the new Authority will need to be approved. The staff is still working on the rates with Black & Veatch. A joint meeting of January 27, 2004 84 the City Council, the County Board and the Authority Board has been scheduled for February 10, 2004 to present and discuss the proposed rates. The Authority will be holding a public hearing in the next few months on the proposed rates. 5. The new Authority will need to adopt a budget for 2004-05. Mr. Hodge advised that some of the benefits for the County forming the Authority include: (1) establishing a stronger, more dependable water and sewer system for the Roanoke Valley by combining water sources and interconnections; (2) a small decrease in the County’s residential customers water bills to help offset a small anticipated increase in sewer rates; (3) a single billing system; (4) reducing standby crew costs; (5) reducing operator costs at water treatment facilities; (6) improving future planning for the next major source of water; and (7) avoiding duplication of water lines. Mr. Hodge advised that the impact on water rates is not known at this time but the average water bill for County residents is $22.25. If the Authority is formed, that rate could be reduced to $20.00, but if the Authority is not formed, this amount could increase to $26.00. Another benefit of forming the Authority is that the County an ownership interest in the wastewater treatment plant. In response to Supervisor Wray’s inquiry about stand-by crews, Mr. Robertson explained that one of the issues that the City and County are discussing is how to schedule service outside the normal daylight working hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Both the City and County have stand-by crews which are dispatched for these after-hours calls and are paid overtime. With the formation of the Authority, the City and January 27, 2004 85 County crews will have 12 crews and plan to have one crew rotating every six weeks to work the evening shift. It is estimated that this will save $30,000 per year in overtime. Supervisor Church advised that the City and County staffs and teams have worked on organizing this Authority for over a year. Community meetings to receive citizens input have been held in all five magisterial districts and with the information that has been published, every citizen should have some knowledge about how the Authority will affect them. He expressed appreciation to Mr. Hodge, Mr. Robertson and Mike McEvoy, Roanoke City Utility Director, for leading the process. Mr. Hodge advised that this is a public hearing but there are no citizens present to speak on this item. He advised that there will be another opportunity for citizens to speak when the contract is approved within ninety days and it has been suggested that additional community meetings might be held. In response to Supervisor McNamara’s inquiry about who had suggested having additional public hearings, Mr. Hodge advised that there have been opportunities from the beginning of the process for citizens to receive information. Community meetings were held in each of the five districts and two in Roanoke City. It was thought that another public hearing might be scheduled after receiving the contract but if the Board does not feel this necessary, it would not have to be held. Supervisor McNamara inquired as to when the rate study will be made available. Mr. Hodge advised that the rate study should be available either February 9 or 10. Supervisor McNamara expressed appreciation to the staff for a job well done. January 27, 2004 86 Supervisor Altizer advised that he had the opportunity to meet two of the teams working on the Authority last Friday, one from Roanoke County and one from Roanoke City, and the comaradie developing between these teams is commendable and he credits Mr. Robertson, Mr. Hodge and Mr. McEvoy for providing leadership. He also expressed his appreciation to the staff. Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None RESOLUTION 012704-8 CREATING THE WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (“County”) and the City Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia (“City”) have determined that it is in the best interests of the Roanoke Valley to create the Western Virginia Water Authority pursuant to the provisions of the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act, Chapter 51, Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended (“Act”), and desire to do so by the adoption of concurrent resolutions, and a public hearing has been held in accordance with the requirements of Section 15.2-5104 of the Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. Creation of the Authority. There is hereby created the Western Virginia Water Authority (“Authority”). 2. Articles of Incorporation. The Articles of Incorporation of the Western Virginia Water Authority are as follows: ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF THE WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County and the Council of the City of Roanoke have by concurrent resolution adopted the following Articles of Incorporation of the Western Virginia Water Authority, pursuant to the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act (Chapter 51, Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as January 27, 2004 87 amended) (“Act”). ARTICLE I The name of the Authority shall be the Western Virginia Water Authority and the address of its principal office is 2012 South Jefferson Street, Suite 200, Roanoke, Virginia 24014. ARTICLE II The names of the incorporating political subdivisions are the County of Roanoke, Virginia and the City of Roanoke, Virginia. The County of Roanoke and the City of Roanoke, as the incorporating political subdivisions, hereby acknowledge, covenant, and agree that these Articles of Incorporation shall not be further amended or changed without the express agreement of each of the governing bodies of each of the incorporating political subdivisions. None of the following actions shall be taken or permitted to occur by the Board of the Authority without the affirmative vote of a majority of the members from each incorporating political subdivision of the Board of the Authority: (1) The inclusion of additional political subdivisions on the Authority; (2) Additional agreement with other political subdivisions, entities, or persons, for the bulk sale of surplus water or the acceptance and treatment of waste water. (3) The recommendation to the governing bodies for the appointment of the seventh member of the Board of the Authority. ARTICLE III The Board of the Authority shall consist of seven members. The names, addresses, and terms of office of the initial members of the Board of the Western Virginia Water Authority (“Authority”) are as follows: 1. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator – 3 year term Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 2. Michael W. Altizer, Board of Supervisors – 2 year term 3108 Valley Stream Drive Roanoke, VA 24014 3. H. Odell “Fuzzy” Minnix , Citizen – 4 year term 3314 Kenwick Trail, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 4. Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager – 3 year term Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building January 27, 2004 88 City Manager’s Office 215 Church Avenue, Room 364 Roanoke, VA 24011 5. M. Rupert Cutler, City Council –2 year term 2865 Jefferson Street, SE Roanoke, VA 24014 6. Robert C. Lawson, Jr., Citizen – 4 year term Suntrust Bank, Suntrust Plaza th 10 Franklin Road, SE, 9 Floor Roanoke, VA 24001 P. O. Box 2867 Roanoke, VA 2400 7. George W. Logan, Citizen – 4 year term 2217 Crystal Spring Ave., SW, Suite 200 Roanoke, VA 24014 P. O. Box 1190 Salem, VA 24153 The terms of office of each of the initial members shall begin on the date of issuance of a certificate of incorporation or charter for the Authority by the State Corporation Commission. The governing body of each participating political subdivision shall appoint the number of members, who may be members of the governing body, set forth opposite its name below: County of Roanoke - three City of Roanoke – three A seventh member shall be appointed jointly by the City of Roanoke and County of Roanoke. The six members of the Authority Board shall recommend to the City and the County the appointment of the seventh member. The City and the County shall ratify and confirm the appointment of the seventh member. If the City and the County fail to act or are unable to act within 60 days of the receipt of this recommendation, then the appointment of the seventh member shall be made by the judges of the Circuit rd Court for the 23 Judicial Circuit. Initially, the governing body of the County of Roanoke shall appoint one member for a four-year term, one member for a three-year term, and one member for a two-year term. Initially, the governing body of the City of Roanoke shall appoint one member for a four-year term, one member for a three-year term, and one member for a two-year term. After the initial terms, each member shall be appointed for a four-year term or until a successor is appointed and qualified. The governing body of each political January 27, 2004 89 subdivision shall be empowered to remove at any time, without cause, any member appointed by it and appoint a successor member to fill the unexpired portion of the removed member’s term. Each member shall be reimbursed by the Authority for the amount of actual expenses incurred in the performance of Authority duties. ARTICLE IV The purposes for which the Authority is to be formed are to exercise all the powers granted to the Authority to acquire, finance, construct, operate, manage and maintain a water, waste water, sewage disposal and storm water control system and related facilities pursuant to the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act, Chapter 51, Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended (“Act”). The Authority shall have all of the rights, powers, and duties of an authority under the Act. It is not practicable to set forth herein information regarding preliminary estimates of capital costs, proposals for specific projects to be undertaken, or initial rates for the proposed projects. ARTICLE V The Authority shall serve the County of Roanoke, the City of Roanoke, and to the extent permitted by the Act and by the terms of these Articles and the Western Virginia Water Authority Member’s Use Agreement, such other public or private entities as the Authority may determine upon the terms and conditions established pursuant to such contracts. ARTICLE VI The Authority shall cause an annual audit of its books and records to be made by the State Auditor of Public Accounts or by an independent certified public accountant at the end of each fiscal year and a certified copy thereof to be filed promptly with the governing body of each of the incorporating political subdivisions. 3. Effective immediately. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None 2. Public hearing to solicit citizen comments on possible funding from the Virginia Community Development Block Grant (VCDBG) Local Innovation Program for entrepreneurial loans to Roanoke County businesses. (Melinda Cox, Existing Business Manager ) January 27, 2004 90 Ms. Cox advised that this is the first of two public hearings to receive citizen comments on applying for $100,000 of Virginia Community Development Block Grants which is available for County use. The allowed uses for these funds are microloans, technical assistance, education and training, research and development, developing entrepreneurial networks, and 50% of the beneficiaries must have low to moderate income. The County has applied for VCDBG funds in the past with the City of Salem and Alleghany County under the business seed program but this is the first time that the County has applied for funds restricted to Roanoke County businesses. The second public hearing will be held on February 10 and if citizens would like additional information, they can contact the Economic Development Department at 772-2069. Supervisor Wray inquired as to the amount of a normal loan. Ms. Cox introduced Chris Scott, Vice President of Business Seed Capital, and Anne Lemon, planner and grant writer for Total Action Against Poverty, who were present. Mr. Scott responded to Supervisor Wray that a typical loan would be between $10,000 and $25,000 with $20,000 to $25,000 being the average size of a small business loan. There were no citizens present to speak on this matter. IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Second reading of ordinance to repeal in its entirety Chapter 8. Erosion and Sediment Control of the Roanoke County Code and adopting Chapter 8.1. Erosion and Sediment Control of the January 27, 2004 91 Roanoke County Code. (Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development) O-012704-9 Mr. Covey advised that this is the second reading of the ordinance and is the result of a work session in August, 2003 regarding concerns about development standards. One of the short-term actions identified was to amend the erosion and sediment control ordinance to reduce the disturbed area exemption. County staff and representatives from the Roanoke Valley Homebuilders Association have worked together and support the proposed changes. Several of the proposed changes are administrative. The most significant change is the reduction in the disturbed area exemption from 10,000 to 2,500 square feet. This will help in controlling residential developments on steep slopes. Another change is that certified inspectors may be employed by developers on job sites to reduce the erosion and sediment control permit fees that need to be paid prior to plan approval. He asked that the Board approve the ordinance. Supervisor Flora requested clarification on several items. He asked about the difference between the previous in lieu of agreement and the in lieu of agreement which is in the ordinance. Mr. Covey advised that a change has been made to clearly identify when an in lieu of agreement would be allowed and this is when the land- disturbing activity results in between 2,500 to 5,000 square feet of disturbed area. January 27, 2004 92 Supervisor Flora inquired what costs would be necessary if a citizen built on his own lot. Mr. Covey advised that if there is an in lieu of agreement, the maximum costs would be $300 to $400 but if there are steep slopes with 10,000 square feet or greater, the costs would be $1,000 or more. The costs would depend upon the amount of disturbed area. Mr. Covey advised that there are also fees that apply more for the larger subdivision and the cap was removed on those fees. It was agreed that if the homebuilders wanted to put a cap back on the fees, they would need to train people to be on the job site. Mr. Covey advised that this is an attempt to reduce the amount of soil and erosion problems with large developments. Supervisor Flora inquired if certified inspectors on the project would relieve staff of inspections. Mr. Covey advised that it would reduce inspection time but staff would still be required to make periodic reviews. Supervisor Flora advised that even though a certified inspector is present on the site, staff will make sure that they are complying with the plans. Supervisor Altizer referred to the problems experienced in the Falling Creek subdivision and inquired how homeowners would be notified about the costs if they are disturbing a significant amount of land. Mr. Covey advised that staff has notified all of the developers, building contractors, and land developers of the changes. He advised that information has been available in their department for citizens, that signs were posted, and letters sent out to inform the community of the changes but he is January 27, 2004 93 aware that there will probably be some homeowners who will not be aware of the changes. Supervisor McNamara moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None ORDINANCE 012704-9 TO REPEAL IN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 8. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE AND ADOPTING CHAPTER 8.1. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority of Article 4. Erosion and Sediment Control Law, Chapter 5, SWC, of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia OIL AND ATER ONSERVATION (1950, as amended), the County of Roanoke, Virginia, is authorized to establish and administer an erosion and sediment control program, including an Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, at the request of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, staff is reviewing the development standards and is recommending several revisions to be made effective by repeal of the former ordinance and adoption of the following Code provisions; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been published in a newspaper of general circulation within Roanoke County on January 13, 2004, and January 20, 2004; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 13, 2002, and the second reading and public hearing was held on January 27, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Chapter 8. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL of the Roanoke County Code be, and hereby is, repealed in its entirety. 2. That Chapter 8.1. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL of the Roanoke County Code be enacted as follows: CHAPTER 8.1 January 27, 2004 94 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Section 8.1-1 TITLE, PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY. Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance of the This ordinance shall be known as the " County of Roanoke, Virginia ." The purpose of this chapter is to conserve the land, water, air and other natural resources of the County of Roanoke by establishing requirements for the control of erosion and sedimentation, and by establishing procedures whereby these requirements shall be administered and enforced. Section 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. Section 8.1-3 DEFINITIONS: As used in the ordinance, unless the context requires a different meaning: Agreement in Lieu of a Plan A. "" means a contract between the plan-approving authority and the owner which specifies conservation measures which must be implemented in all construction disturbing between 2,500 square feet and 5,000 square feet and/or 250-500 cubic yards; this contract may be executed by the plan-approving authority in lieu of a formal site plan. Applicant B. "" 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" C. means the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board. “Certified Inspector” D. means an employee or agent of a program authority who holds a certificate of competence from the Board in the area of project inspection. “Certified Plan Reviewer” E. means an employee or agent of a program authority who (i) holds a certificate of competence from the Board in the area of plan review (ii) is licensed as a professional 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. “Certified Program Administrator” F. means an employee or agent of a program authority who holds a certificate of competence from the Board in the area of program administration. Clearing G. "" means any activity which removes the vegetative ground cover including, but not limited to, root mat removal or top soil removal. January 27, 2004 95 Conservation PlanErosion and Sediment Control PlanPlan H. "," "" or "" 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 to assure that the entire unit or units of land will be so treated to achieve the conservation objectives. County I. "" means the County of Roanoke. Denuded J. "" means a term applied to land that has been physically disturbed and no longer supports vegetative cover. Department K. "" means the Department of Conservation and Recreation. Development L. "" means a tract 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 or more residential dwelling units. Director M. "" means the Director of Community Development or his assignee. “District”“Soil and Water Conservation District” N. or refers to the Blue Ridge Soil and Water Conservation District. Dormant O. "" refers to denuded land that is not actively being brought to a desired grade or condition. Erosion Impact Area P. "" 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 10,000 square feet or less used for residential purposes. "Excavating" Q. means any digging, scooping or other methods of removing earth materials. Filling R. "" means any depositing or stockpiling of earth materials. Grading S. "" means any excavating or filling of earth material or any combination thereof, including the land in its excavated or filled conditions. Land-Disturbing Activity T. "" means any land change which 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: January 27, 2004 96 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 which 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. Surface or deep mining; 6. Exploration or drilling for oil and gas including the well site, roads, feeder lines, and off- site disposal areas; 7. 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 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 this title or is converted to bona fide agricultural or improved pasture use as described in subsection B of Sec. 10.1-1163; 8. Repair or rebuilding of the tracks, rights-of-way, bridges, communication facilities and other related structures and facilities of a railroad company; 9. 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, Article 2 (Section 10.1-604 et. seq.) of Chapter 6 of the Code of Virginia, ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing,contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage, and land irrigation; 10. Disturbed land areas for all uses of less than 2,500 square feet and/or less than 250 cubic yards in size; 11. Installation of fence and sign posts or telephone and electric poles and other kinds of posts or poles; 12. Emergency work to protect life, limb or property, and emergency repairs; provided that 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 the plan-approving authority. January 27, 2004 97 Land disturbing permit U. "" means a permit issued by the County of Roanoke for the clearing, filling, excavating, grading, transporting of land or for any combination thereof or for any purpose set forth herein. Local Erosion and Sediment Control Programprogram V. "" or "" means an outline of the various methods employed by the County of Roanoke to regulate land-disturbing activities and thereby minimize erosion and sedimentation in compliance with the state program and may include such items as local ordinances, policies and guidelines, technical materials, inspection, enforcement, and evaluation. Owner W. "" 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. Permittee X. "" means the person to whom the permit authorizing land-disturbing activities is issued or the person who certifies that the approved erosion and sediment control plan will be followed. Person Y. "" means any individual, partnership, firm, association, joint venture, public or private corporation, trust, estate, commission, board, public or private institution, utility, cooperative, county, city, town or other political subdivision of the commonwealth, any interstate body, or any other legal entity. Plan-approving authority Z. "" means the Department of Community Development which is responsible for determining the adequacy of a conservation plan submitted for land-disturbing activities on a unit or units of lands and for approving plans. Post-development AA. "" refers to conditions that may be reasonably expected or anticipated to exist after completion of the land development activity on a specific site or tract of land. Pre-development BB. "" refers to conditions at the time the erosion and sediment control plan is submitted to the plan-approving authority. Where phased development or plan approval occurs (preliminary grading, roads and utilities, etc.), the existing conditions at the time the erosion and sediment control plan for the initial phase is submitted for approval shall establish pre-development conditions. Program authority CC. "" means the County of Roanoke which has adopted a Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Program approved by the Board. “Responsible Land Disturber” DD. means an individual from the project or development team, who will be in charge of and responsible for carrying out a land-disturbing activity covered by an approved plan or agreement in lieu of a plan, who (i) holds a Responsible Land Disturber certificate of competence, (ii) holds a current certificate of competence from the Board in the areas of Combined Administration, Program Administration, Inspection or Plan Review, (iii) holds a current Contractor certificate of competence for erosion and sediment control, or (iv) is licensed in Virginia as a professional 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. January 27, 2004 98 Single-family residence EE. "" means a noncommercial dwelling that is occupied exclusively by one family. Stabilized FF. "" means an area that can be expected to withstand normal exposure to atmospheric conditions without incurring erosion damage. State waters GG. "" means all waters on the surface and under the ground wholly or partially within or bordering the Commonwealth or within its jurisdictions. Town HH. "" means the incorporated Town of Vinton. Transporting I I. "" 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. Section 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. Section 8.1-5 LOCAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROGRAM A. Pursuant to section 10.1-562 Of the Code of Virginia, the County of Roanoke hereby adopts the regulations, references, guidelines, standards and specifications promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board and those more stringent local stormwater management criteria which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, may adopt by resolution and incorporate into the Design and Construction Standards Manual" manual of regulations and policies entitled "for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment deposition to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and other natural resources. Said regulations, references, guidelines, standards and specifications for erosion and sediment control are included in but not limited to the "Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations" and the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, as amended. B. The County of Roanoke hereby designates the Director of Community Development or his assignee as the plan-approving authority. C. The program and regulations provided for in this ordinance shall be made available for public inspection at the office of the Department of Community Development. D. Pursuant to Sec. 10.1-561.1 of the Code of Virginia, an erosion control plan shall not be approved until it is reviewed by a certified plan reviewer. Inspections of land-disturbing activities shall be January 27, 2004 99 conducted by a certified inspector. The Erosion Control Program of the County of Roanoke shall contain a certified program administrator, a certified plan reviewer, and a certified inspector, who may be the same person. Section 8.1-6. REGULATED LAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES; SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL OF PLANS; CONTENTS OF PLANS SHALL A. Except as provided herein, no person engage in any land-disturbing activity until he has submitted to the Department of Community Development for the County of Roanoke one of the following for the land-disturbing activity and it has been approved by the plan approving authority. 1. Where the land-disturbing activity results in between 2,500 square feet and 5,000 square agreement in lieu of a plan feet land/or 250-500 cubic yards of disturbed area, an "" may be substituted for an erosion and sediment control plan if executed by the plan-approving authority. 2. Where the land-disturbing activity results in between 5,000 square feet and 10,000 square plot plan prepared by a certified feet and/or 500-750 cubic yards of disturbed area, either a Responsible Land Disturber or an engineered plan prepared by a professional engineer showing the erosion and sediment control measures must be submitted and executed by the plan-approving authority. A certified Responsible Land Disturber must be named. 3. Where the land-disturbing activity results in 10,000 square feet or more and/or 750 cubic an erosion and sediment control plan yards or more of disturbed area, must be submitted which has been prepared by a professional engineer. For disturbed areas of less than 10,000 square feet, refer to the chart below to determine requirements for the site. Square Feet&/orCubic YardsRequirements <2,5000Exempt from E & S Plan; *Building Permit Plot Plan required 2,500-5,000250-500"Agreement in Lieu" of a plan; permit fee; *Building Permit Plot Plan required 5,000-10,000500-750Certified RLD, *Building Permit Plot Plan by a certified RLD or a P.E.; permit fee >10,000>750RLD, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan prepared by a P.E.; agreement; surety; a *Building Permit Plot Plan, if required by the Building Commissioner B. *Refer to the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code for Building Permit Plot Plan Requirements. C. If lots in a subdivision are sold to another owner, that person is responsible for obtaining a certified Responsible Land Disturber and submitting a plot plan for each lot to obtain an Erosion and Sediment Control permit. D. The standards contained with The "Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations," and The Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and those more stringent local stormwater management criteria which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, may adopt by Design and resolution and incorporate into the manual of regulations and policies entitled " January 27, 2004 100 Construction Standards Manual " are to be used by the applicant when making a submittal under the provisions of this ordinance and in the preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan. In cases where one standard conflicts with another, the more stringent applies. The plan approving authority, in considering the adequacy of a submitted plan, shall be guided by the same standards, regulations and guidelines. E. The plan approving authority shall grant written approval within 45 days of the receipt of the plan, if it is determined that the plan meets the requirements of the local control program, and if the person responsible for carrying out the plan certifies that he or she will properly perform the erosion and sediment control measures included in the plan and will conform to the provisions of this ordinance. 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 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. F. Responsible Land Disturber requirement. 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 an individual holding a certificate of competence, to the program authority, as provided by Section 10.1-561, of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law, who will be in charge of and responsible for carrying out the land-disturbing activity (the Responsible Land Disturber). Failure to provide the name of an individual holding a certificate of competence 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 plan-approving authority may waive the certificate of competence for an “Agreement in Lieu of a Plan” for construction of a single-family residence meeting the requirements in 8.1-3T (10) of this ordinance. 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 the violation and provide the name of an individual holding a certificate of competence, as provided by Section 10.1-561 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law. Failure to provide the name of an individual holding a certificate of competence shall be a violation of this ordinance and may result in penalties provided in this ordinance. G. An approved plan may be changed by the plan approving authority 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 ordinance, are agreed to by the plan approving authority and the person responsible for carrying out the plan. January 27, 2004 101 H. In order to prevent further erosion, the County of Roanoke may require approval of a conservation plan for any land identified in the local program as an erosion impact area. I. When 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 owner. J. Whenever electric and telephone utility companies or railroad companies undertake any of the activities included in subdivisions 1 and 2 of this subsection, they shall be considered exempt from the provisions of this ordinance. 1. Construction, installation or maintenance of electric transmission, natural gas and telephone utility lines, and pipelines; and 2. Construction of the tracks, rights-of-way, bridges, communication facilities and other related structures and facilities of the railroad company. The Board shall have 60 days in which to approve the specifications. If not action is taken by the Board within 60 days, the specifications shall be deemed approved. Individual approval of separate projects within subdivisions 1 and 2 of this subsection is not necessary when approved specifications are followed. Projects not included in subdivisions 1 and 2 of this subsection shall comply with the requirements of the appropriate local erosion and sediment control program. The Board shall have the authority to enforce approved specifications. K. State agency projects are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance, pursuant to Section 10.1- 564 of the Code of Virginia. L. If the grade of a site is more than 33.3%, refer to the International Building Code for Steep Slope Development requirements. Section 8.1-7. PERMITS; FEES; BONDING; 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 control plan and certification that the plan will be followed. SHALL B. No person 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 ordinance, and has paid the fees and posted the required bond. 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. January 27, 2004 102 Square Feet&/orCubic YardsFeesCapRequirement <2,500<250$0.00None 2,500-5,000250-500$25.00In Lieu of Agreement 5,000-10,000500-750$50.00Responsible Land Disturber >10,000>750$100 + $100/disturbed acre or portion $500.00Certified Inspector for project >10,000>750$100 + $100/disturbed acre or portion No Certified Inspector for project D. Bond: All applicants for permits shall provide to the County of Roanoke 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 of Roanoke at the applicant's expense AFTER PROPER NOTICE should the applicant fail, , within the time specified to initiate or maintain appropriate conservation measures required of him as a result of his land-disturbing activity. Should it be necessary for the County of Roanoke to take such conservation action, the County of Roanoke may collect from the applicant any costs in excess of the amount of the surety held. Within sixty (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. E. 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. Section 8.1-8. MONITORING, REPORTS, AND INSPECTIONS A. The County of Roanoke may require the person responsible for carrying out the plan and/or the Responsible Land Disturber to monitor and maintain the land-disturbing activity. The Responsible Land Disturber 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 as required under the state program to ensure compliance with the approved plan and to determine whether the measures required in the plan are effective in controlling erosion and sedimentation. 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, person responsible for carrying out the plan or the Responsible Land Disturber 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 ordinance and, upon conviction, shall be subject to the penalties provided by this ordinance. January 27, 2004 103 C. Upon determination of a violation of this ordinance, the Director of Community Development or his assignee may, in conjunction with or subsequent to a notice to comply as specified in this ordinance, issue an 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 ordinance, issue an 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 comply will result in civil penalties as outlined in Section 8.1-9 of this ordinance. 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 an order may be issued without regard to whether the permittee has been issued a notice to comply as specified in this ordinance. Otherwise, such an order may be issued only after the permittee has failed to comply with such a notice to comply. The order shall be served in the same manner as a notice to comply, and shall remain in effect for a period of seven days from the date of service pending application by the enforcing authority or permit holder for appropriate relief to the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke. If the alleged violator has not obtained an approved plan or any required permits within seven days from the date of service of the order, the Director of Community Development or his assignee may issue an 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 of Roanoke. The owner may appeal the issuance of an order to the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke. Any person violating or failing, neglecting or refusing to obey an 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 of Roanoke 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 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 ordinance. Section 8.1-9. PENALTIES, INJUNCTIONS, AND OTHER LEGAL ACTIONS A. Violators of this ordinance shall be guilty of a Class I misdemeanor. 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: January 27, 2004 104 a) Commencement of land disturbing activity without an approved plan as provided in Section 8.6-1 shall be $1,000/day. b) Vegetative Measures - failure to comply with items 1, 2 and 3 of the Minimum Standards shall be $100/violation/day. c) Structural Measures - failure to comply with items 2, 4, 9, 10, 11, 15 and 17 of the Minimum Standards shall be $100/violation/day. d) Watercourse Measures - failure to comply with items 12, 13 and 15 of the Minimum Standards shall be $100/violation/day. e) Underground Utility Measures - failure to comply with item 16(a) and/or (c) shall be $100/violation/day. f) Failure to obey a stop work order shall be $100/day. g) Failure to stop work when permit revoked $100/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 $3,000, 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 $10,000. 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 may apply to the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke to enjoin a violation or a threatened violation of this ordinance, without the necessity of showing that an adequate remedy at law does not exist. D. In addition to any criminal penalties provided under this ordinance, any person who violates any provision of this ordinance may be liable to the County of Roanoke in a civil action for damages. Civil Penalty Enumerated E.: 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 $2,000 for each violation. A civil action for such violation or failure may be brought by the County of Roanoke. Any civil penalties assessed by a court shall be paid into the Treasury of the County of Roanoke, 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 ordinance, the County of Roanoke may January 27, 2004 105 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 of Roanoke or the permit issuing authority, take legal action to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. H. Compliance with the provisions of this ordinance 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. Section 8.1-10. APPEALS AND JUDICIAL REVIEW Any applicant under the provision of this ordinance who is aggrieved by any action of the County of Roanoke or its agent in disapproving plans submitted pursuant to this ordinance shall have the right to apply for and receive a review of such action by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. In reviewing the agent's actions, the Board of Supervisors shall consider evidence and opinions presented by the aggrieved applicant and agent. After considering the evidence and opinions, the Board of Supervisors decision shall be final, subject only to review by the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke. Any applicant who seeks an appeal hearing before the Board of Supervisors shall be heard at the next regularly scheduled Board of Supervisors public hearing provided that the Board of Supervisors and other involved parties have at least 30 days prior notice. Final decisions of the County of Roanoke under this ordinance shall be subject to review by the County of Roanoke Circuit Court, provided an appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of any written decision adversely affecting the rights, duties, or privileges of the person engaging in or proposing to engage in land-disturbing activities. Section 8-1.11 CIVIL VIOLATIONS, SUMMONS, GENERALLY. A. The Director shall prepare an appropriate "Erosion and Sediment Control Civil Violation Summons" for use in enforcing the provisions of this Chapter. B. Any inspector of the 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 inspector 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 Roanoke 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 ordinance provision(s) being violated. January 27, 2004 106 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 5 days of actual receipt of the summons or, within 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 Roanoke 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 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 Roanoke 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, 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. 3. That the provisions of this ordinance shall be effective on February 1, 2004. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora NAYS: None January 27, 2004 107 IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Wray: He advised that there was a water line break this past weekend, and he thanked the Utility Department staff and Gary Robertson for getting it fixed so quickly. Supervisor Church: (1) He advised that he had responded in writing to Mr. Branscom’s inquiries about staffing at the Catawba Fire Station explaining that effective December 1, 2003, the Catawba Station had been staffed with two crew members from 6:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. He expressed appreciation to Mr. Branscom for his continued interest in this matter. (2) He expressed condolences upon the death of Dr. Kizer-Bell, President of Hollins University. She was a vibrant person who was communicating her vision for Hollins University, and she made a big impact on the Roanoke Valley. Supervisor Flora: He also expressed condolences to Dr. Kizer-Bell’s family, friends and the Hollins University community. He advised that Dr. Kizer-Bell was an active and influential leader, and he offered any assistance that the County could provide during the University’s transition period. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Flora adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m. until Tuesday, th February 10, 2004 at 12:00 Noon, 4 Floor Training Room, Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, for the purpose of a joint meeting with January 27, 2004 108 Roanoke City Council and Western Virginia Water Authority. Submitted by: Approved by: ________________________ ________________________ Brenda J. Holton Richard C. Flora Deputy Clerk to the Board Chairman