HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/27/1994 - Regular
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
659
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Roanoke County Administration Center
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
September 27, 1994
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met
this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the
fourth Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the
month of September, 1994.
IN RE:
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Eddy called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The
roll call was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman Lee B. Eddy, Vice Chairman Edward G.
Kohinke, Sr., Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, H. Odell
"Fuzzy" Minnix, Harry C. Nickens
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M.
Mahoney, County Attorney; Brenda J. Holton, Deputy
Clerk; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County
Administrator; Don C. Myers, Assistant County
Administrator; Anne Marie Green, Director,
Community Relations
IN RE:
OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was given by the Reverend John Hartwig of
~
JII""
660
September 27, 1994
Þ
recited
Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was
by all present.
IN RE:
REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
Mr. Hodge requested that the resolution of appreciation for
Congressman Boucher be deferred to another time and added Executive
Session Item (3) to discuss location of a prospective business or
industry.
Chairman Eddy deleted Executive Session Item (4) discussion
of a personal matter not related to public business.
Supervisor Minnix added the appointment of a citizen
member I
to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission.
Supervisor Nickens advised that he would be unable to attend
the evening session.
IN RE:
PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS
~ Resolution of Aooreciation Uoon the Retirement of Tina
C. Greene. Social Services Deoartment.
R-92794-1
Chairman Eddy presented Ms. Green with the resolution and a
$100 savings bond.
Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the resolution. The
\
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
I
.....
~
I
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994
661
NAYS:
None
RESOLUTION 92794-1 OF APPRECIATION UPON THE RETIREMENT OF
TINA C. GREENE, SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS,
Tina C. Greene was first employed in January,
1975, as an Eligibility Worker with the Department of Social Services;
and
WHEREAS,
Tina C. Greene has also served as a Senior
Eligibility Worker in the Department of Social Services; and
WHEREAS,
Tina C. Greene, through her emploYment with
Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life
for its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby expresses its deepest appreciation
and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to TINA C.
GREENE for over nineteen years of capable, loyal, and dedicated
service to Roanoke County.
FURTHER,
the Board of Supervisors does express its best
wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
~
,...-- .
662
September 27, 1994
þ
~ Resó1ution of Aooreciation Uoon the Retirement of
william E. Poole. Sheriff's Office.
R-92794-2
Chairman Eddy presented Mr. Poole with the resolution and a
$100 savings bond. )
Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the resolution. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
RESOLUTION 92794-2 OF APPRECIATION UPON THE RETIREMENT OF
WILLIAM E. POOLE, SHERIFF'S OFFICE
WHEREAS, William E. Poole was first employed in DeCember'lI
a Deputy Sheriff-Corrections Officer in the Sheriff's Office;
1979, as
and
WHEREAS,
william E. Poole has also served as a Deputy
Sheriff-Corrections Division Transportation in the Sheriff's Office;
and
WHEREAS,
William E. Poole, through his emploYment with
Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life
for its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby expresses its deepest appreciatiO)
and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to WILLIAM E.
.....
~
II
I
~
September 27, 1994
663
POOLE for over fourteen years of capable, loyal, and dedicated service
to Roanoke County.
FURTHER,
the Board of Supervisors does express its best
wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
'Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
~ Resolution of Aooreciation Uoon the Retirement of
Gloria T. Lovelace. Sheriff's Office.
R-92794-3
Chairman Eddy presented Ms. Lovelace with the resolution and
a $100 savings bond.
Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the resolution. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
RESOLUTION 92794-3 OF APPRECIATION UPON THE RETIREMENT OF
GLORIA T. LOVELACE, SHERIFF'S OFFICE
WHEREAS,
Gloria T. Lovelace was first employed in April,
1984, as a Corrections Division Cook in the Sheriff's Office; and
WHEREAS,
Gloria T. Lovelace has also served as a Deputy
....4
"..-
664
September 27, 1994
þ
Sheriff-Corrections Officer in the Sheriff's Office; and
WHEREAS,
Gloria T. Lovelace, through her emploYment with
Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life
for its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby expresses its deepest appreciation
and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to GLORIA T.
LOVELACE for over ten years of capable, loyal, and dedicated service
to Roanoke County.
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its bestll
wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
~ Proclamation Dec1arinq October as Crime Prevention
Month in Roanoke County.
Chairman Eddy presented the proclamation to Chief Cease and
Tom Kincaid, Crime Prevention Officer, from the Police Department.
IN RE:
NEW BUSINESS II
~ Resolution Authorizinq an Apo1ication to the Virqinia
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
665
Public School Authority
$10.100.000 School Bonds.
Finance)
with resoect to Sale of
(Diane Hyatt. Director of
R-92794-4
Ms. Hyatt advised that at the September 13, 1994 meeting,
the Board expressed their support to apply to the VPSA for the Spring
1995 bond sale in the amount of $10,100,000. The School Board adopted
a resolution authorizing this application at a special meeting on
September 22, 1994. She advised that this will complete the
remaining immediate needs that the Board approved in the School
Capital Program and includes $1,500,000 for architectural and
engineering work on a new Cave Spring High School (CSHS).
In response to Supervisors Eddy's questions, Dr. Gordon
advised that completion of a new CSHS would take four years if the
funds were available now, and in that interim, the need to upgrade the
existing Cave Spring Junior High School (CSJHS) still remains. She
also advised that although there are no specific long-range plans for
the Southwest County schools at this time, the parents will be
involved in completing these plans and this information will be
provided to the Board.
Supervisor Nickens expressed his confidence in the School
Administration to bring back plans and moved to approve the resolution
for staff to proceed with the amount not to exceed $10,100,000. He
withdrew his motion when informed that Supervisor Johnson had already
moved to approve staff recommendation after the agenda item was
j
"..-
666
September 27, 1994
þ
presented.
Dr. Gordon was asked by the Board to attempt to hold down
the renovation costs àt CSHS, especially for the stadium, and
Supervisor Nickens requested that the exact amount of the renovation
be provided to the Board.
Supervisor Eddy advised that cannot support this request
because he feels that school renovations should be funded by annual
appropriations rather than by bond issue, that the architect fees for
the new high school should be for preliminary study only, and that
there should be more specific information about the amount of
renovations to the stadium at CSRHS.
Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the resolution.
Theil
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens
NAYS:
Supervisor Eddy
Dr. Gordon asked for direction from the Board as to when the
new CSHS might be built because when this fact is know, it will make
clearer the solution for renovating CSJHS, and future plans for the
other Southwest County schools.
RESOLUTION 92794-4 AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION TO THE
VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO THE SALE OF
$10,100,000 SCHOOL BONDS
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County School Board and the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia ("County") have determinedl
that it is advisable to contract a debt and issue general obligation
.....
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
667
'bonds of the County in an amount not to exceed $10,100,000 ("Bond") to
finance certain capital improvements for public school purposes
("Projects") and to sell the Bonds to the Virginia Public School
Author i ty ( "VPSA") ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ~UPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA:
1. The County Administrator is authorized and directed to
submit an application to the VPSA in order to sell the Bonds to the
VPSA at the Spring 1995 bond sale.
2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens
NAYS: Supervisor Eddy
~ Resolution of Aooreciation to Conqressman Rick Boucher
for His Efforts in securinq a $150.000 Grant for Valley
Director of Economic
TechPark. (TimothY Guba1a.
Deve1ooment)
This item was deferred to
another . meeting because
Congressman Boucher was unable to attend.
N RE:
CITIZENS REQUEST
~ Request from
Melinda Lane.
Walter Camobe11 for Funds to Reoair
(Elmer Hodqe. County Administrator>
...4
,...
668
September 27, 1994
þ
A-92794-5
Supervisor
Nickens
moved
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation. He withdrew his motion to allow Brian Campbell to
speak.
Mr. Hodge advised that it has not been the County's practice
to pay ,for repairs to private roads. This is a one-lane private road
serving six families. It was initially paved 14 years ago and patched
by the County in 1991 when damaged by the County's rear loader refuse
trucks. He advised that staff recommends paying up to $1,000 toward
the costs of repaving the driveway but not the entire portion. An
estimate of $3,400 has been obtained for repairing the road.
Brian Campbell, 6188 Melinda Lane, advised that Melinda Lanell
has deteriorated over the year due to the damage from the garbage
trucks and because the repairs in 1991 were never completed. He
requested that the County pay for the entire cost for repair of the
road.
After discussion, Supervisor Minnix moved to approve paYment
by County of 75% and campbell 25% of costs for repair not to exceed
$3,400. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke
IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
~ Request for Board of Suoervisors P1anninq Retreat. I
It was the consensus of the Board to schedule a planning
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
669
retreat after January,
1995, and for the Clerk to poll the Board
members for dates and time.
~ Request for Work session for Stormwater Detention
Ponds.
It was the consensus of the Board to set the Work Session
for October 11, 1994, and that a preliminary draft of the ordinance be
presented at that time.
IN RE:
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING
ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the first readings and
set the public hearings for October 25, 1994, after discussion of Item
2. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
~ Ordinance 'to Rezone Aooroximate1Y 9.33 Acres from I-1
Conditional to I-1 to Remove Conditions. Located off of
Cha11enqer Avenue Aooroximate1Y 1.000 Feet. Northeast
of the Roanoke city line. Hollins Maqisteria1 District.
Uoon the Petition of Davis H. Elliot Comoany. Inc.
~ Ordinance 'to Rezone 1.790 Acres from R-2C. R-1 and C-2
to C-2 and Obtain a Soecia1 Use Permit to Ooerate a
Convenience Store with Fast Food. Located at the
Intersection of Washinqton Avenue and Feather Road.
Vinton Maqisteria1 District. Uoon the Petition of
Shanks Associates P.C.
IN RE:
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
~
Ordinance Amending Ordinance 51193-7 and sections 18-
~
"..-
670
September 27, 1994
þ
J,
156.2 and 18.156.3 of the Roanoke county Code
concerning' the Procedure to Enforce the Prohibited
Discharqe of stormwater. Surface Water. Groundwater.
Roof Runoff or Subsurface Drainaqe into the Public
Sanitary
Sewer
System.
bY
Establishing'
certain
cateqories of violations for Puroose of Enforcement.
(Garv Robertson. utility Director)
There was no discussion and no citizens were present to
speak on this issue.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first reading and
set the public hearing and second reading for October 25, 1994.
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
The
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
I
NAYS:
None
~ Ordinance Amendina the Roanoke Countv zonina ordinance
by Enactinq the Roanoke River Conservation Overlay
District. (Terrv Harrinqton. Director of P1anninq and
Zoninq)
Jon Hartley, Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning, advised
that since the Planning Commission's public hearing, staff has met
with residents and representatives of key businesses in the area
affected and discussed specific problems.
changes to the text:
(1) an exception be
Staff is recommending two
included in the listing ofll
minor and major automobile
prohibited uses which would allow existing
.....
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
671
repair to be expanded and (2)
waiver procedure as long as
storage Tank Regulations.
replacement tanks be permitted under the
they meet the new Virginia Underground
Mr. Fenton Childers, Real Estate Manager for the Kroger
Company, Mid-Atlantic Division, advised of their concerns related to
future operations of the warehouse and distribution center. Mr.
Hartley advised that Kroger's concerns are being addressed by the two
modifications proposed.
It was the consensus of the Board: (1) that staff address
Mr. Childers' concerns before the second reading of the ordinance; (2)
that the effective date be January 1995; and (3) that the ordinance be
publicized.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first reading and
set the public hearing and second reading for October 25, 1994. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
~ Ordinance Authorizing Conveyance of a 4.41 Acre Parcel
of Real Estate Known as Oqden Community Center Located
at 2932 Oqden Road. Cave Sorinq Maqisteria1 District.
(Paul Mahoney. County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney advised that the County has advertised this
property for sale, and that the legal deadline for the receipt of bids
is October 7, 1994, with the second reading and public hearing for
,~
~
672
September 27, 1994
þ
this sale scheduled for October 11, 1994.
Fred Corbett, 5511 stearns Avenue, speaking for the Cave
Spring National Li ttle League, requested tha~ when the building is
sold, the proceeds be used to replace the ball fields on the site.
Chairman Eddy directed that staff contact Mr. Corbett
concerning the replacement of the ballfields.
Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set
the public hearing and second reading for October 25, 1994. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
ordinance Authorizina the Acauisition of a permanentll
Drainaqe Easement from Roderic Moore and Donna P.
Grayson for the Pinkard Court Road and Drainaqe
ImÞrovement Pro;ect. (Paul Mahonev. Countv Attorney>
Mr. Mahoney advised that this will complete the pinkard
Court Road and Drainage Improvement Project. There was no discussion
and no citizens were present to speak on this issue.
Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set
the second reading for October 11, 1994. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
~
I
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
(.;
673
h Ordinance Authorizinq Ouit-C1aim and Release of
Sanitary Sewer Easement within Boundaries of Fox Ridqe
Road and Located between Lots 2 and 22 of Huntinq
Hills. section 23. (Paul Mahoney. County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney advised that the County is conveying property
without any warranty to the Virginia Department of Transportation in
order that Fox Ridge Road can be accepted into the state secondary
road system. There was no discussion and no citizens present to speak
on this issue.
Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set
the second reading for October 11, 1994. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
IN RE:
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
h Ordinance Amendinq and Reenactinq Section 21-16.
Returns of Article II. Taxes on Tanqib1e Personal
ProDertv of Chaþter 21. Taxation of the Roanoke county
Code to Provide an Alternative Method of Filinq Returns
for Motor Vehicles. (Wayne ComDton. Commissioner of the
Revenue)
0-92794-6
There was no discussion and no citizens present to speak on
~
,...
674
"
September 27, 1994
þ
this issue.
Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ORDINANCE 92794-6 AMENDING AND REENACTING SEC. 21-16.
RETURNS OF ARTICLE II. TAXES ON TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY
OF CHAPTER 21, TAXATION OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO
PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF FILING RETURNS FOR MOTOR
VEHICLES.
WHEREAS, Sec. 21-16. Returns. of the Roanoke county Code
requires that a personal property return form be filed with the
Commissioner of the Revenue before February 1 of each year
for every
county onll
motor vehicle, trailer or boat having a situs within the
January 1 of each year; and
WHEREAS, the 1994 session of the General Assembly of
Virginia has enacted a new § 58.1-3518.1 of the Code of Virginia to
permit the governing body of any locality to adopt by ordinance an
al ternati ve method for the assessment and taxation of most motor
vehicles based upon a previous personal property tax return filed by
the owner or owners of such vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of such an alternative method of
filing returns for motor vehicles will both provide greater service to
the citizens of the County of Roanoke by eliminating thousands of
unnecessary personal property tax returns as well as free the
employees of the Office of the Commissioner of the Revenue to focus onll
more essential and productive matters.
.....
~
~
September 27, 1994
675
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance took place on
September 13, 1994; the second reading took place on September 27,
1994.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Roanoke as follows:
1. That Sec. 21-16. Returns. of Article II. Taxes on
Tanqible Personal Propertv of Chapter 21, TAXATION, is hereby amended
and reenacted as follows:
Sec. 21-16. Returns.
I
(a) Returns for tangible personal property, (except tangible
personal property on motor vehicles, trailers and boats) tangible
personal property employed in a trade or business and machinery and
tools taxes shall be filed with the commissioner of the revenue on or
before February 1 of the year for which the tax is to be assessed. Any
person who shall fail to file such a return on or before February 1 of
the year for which the tax is to be assessed shall, in addition to the
tax to be paid, be assessed a penalty of ten (10) percent of the tax
due.
mš~ fÐt Returns of tangible personal property on motor
·Jehicleß,·t·iailerD, boats and motors, and mobile homes with a situs
within the county on January 1 shall be filed with the commissioner of
the revenue on or before February 1 ªlš~i§§M¥~ª~;, returno of taR~ible
peraonal property OR motor vehicleo ,....···..EFàìTC'rii·······5rid boato ~ihich aCCJUires
a situs withiR the couRty or which haa ita title traRaferreå. after
January 1 ohall be filed tdthiR thirty (30) dayo of the date OR uhich
oituo io aCCJUired or title traRoferred, of the year for tmich the ta.x
ia to be aoaeooed. Any person who shall fail to file such return on or
before the date due of the year for which the tax is assessed shall,
in addition to the tax to be paid, be assessed a penalty of ten (10)
,
percent of the tax due.
I
~
,...
676
September 27, 1994
Þ
:IM::::::::::::::::::::::IIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII,IIll"iI1"ëDmlfJìB
-
2. This ordinance shall be effective from and after
October 1, 1994.
carried
AYES:
NAYS:
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance,
by the following recorded vote:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
None
and I
~ Ordinance Authorizinq Conveyance of an Easement to
Aooa1achian Power Como any
for Electric service
Extendinq Across Darrell shell Memorial Park.
(Paul
Mahoney. County Attorney)
0-92794-7,
There was no discussion and no citizens present to speak on
this issue.
Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
I
NAYS:
None
~
~
~
September 27,1994
677
ORDINANCE 92794-7 AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF AN
EASEMENT TO APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY FOR ELECTRIC
SERVICE EXTENDING ACROSS DARRELL SHELL MEMORIAL
PARK OWNED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
WHEREAS, Appalachian Power Company (APCO) has requested an
easement for extension of underground lines across property owned by
the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and leased by the School Board
of Roanoke County, located along Virginia Route No. 1723 (Commonwealth
Drive) and known as the Darrell Shell Memorial Park; and,
WHEREAS, APCO requires the easement in order to provide more
reliable service to the businesses and residences in the immediate
area; and,
I
WHEREAS, the proposed easement will serve the interests of
the public and is necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare
of citizens of the County of Roanoke.
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 September 13, 1994; and a second reading was
held on September 27, 1994.
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed
are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for
II other public uses by conveyance to Appalachian Power Company for the
~
~
678
September 27, 1994
þ
provision of electrical service.
3. That donation of an easement, fifteen feet (15') in
width, for an underground line(s) along the property lines of the
property known as Darrell Shell Memorial Park, as shown on APCO
Drawing No. R-3048, dated May 6, 1994, to Appalachian Power Company is
hereby authorized, subject to the fOllowing conditions:
(a) Appalachian's facilities shall be placed a minimum of
five feet (5') away from any County water line, facility, or
related improvements.
(b) Appalachian agrees to restore and repair any damage to
the .. County's property which may be caused by the
construction, operation, or maintenance of said easement,
including but not limited to restoration of the
jogging/walking track to its former condition, and
replacement of stone and railroad ties with material equal
to or exceeding what is currently in place. I
(c) Appalachian agrees to accommodate use of the
walking/jogging track, to the extent possible, during any
phase of construction, reconstruction or maintenance of the
easement.
4. That the 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.
5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the
date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the'ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
I
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
679
IN RE:
APPOINTMENTS
h Community Corrections Resources Board
Supervisor Eddy nominated J. Michael Vulgan to serve as
alternate for a one-year term which will expire August 31, 1995.
~ Roanoke Reqiona1 Airoort Commission
Supervisor Minnix resigned from the Roanoke Regional Airport
Commission and nominated a citizen, Arthur M. Whittaker, to serve the
remainder of his term. This term will expire February 10, 1995, and
Supervisor Minnix requested that a press release be prepared about the
appointment.
IN RE:
CONSENT AGENDA
R-92794-8
R-92794-8.b
R-92794-8.C
Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the Consent Resolution.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
RESOLUTION 92794-8 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN
CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM L - 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 September 27, 1994 designated as Item L - Consent
Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item
...4
,....
680
September 27, 1994
þ
separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6,
inclusive, as follows:
1.
Approval of Minutes for August 23, 1994, and September
12, 1994.
2.
Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Building
Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals and Grievance
Panel.
3.
Request for Acceptance of 0.12 Miles of College View
Court into the virginia Department of Transportation
Secondary System.
4.
Resolution to the Virginia Department of Education
Requesting Certain Changes to the Regulations
Concerning Literary Loan Fund Applications.
5.
Acceptance of the Local Government Challenge Grant from
the Virginia commission for the Arts.
Approval of Raffle Permit from Junior Miss Localll
Organization, Blue Ridge Junior Miss Festival.
That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and
6.
2.
directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the
resolution.
separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this
Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote:
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the Consent
AYES:
NAYS:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
None
RESOLUTION 92794-S.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF COLLEGE VIEW
COURT INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEK
WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Addi tions
Form SR-5 (a), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown onll
plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke
County, and .
l
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
681
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the virginia Department
of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the
requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the
Virginia Department of Transportation, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the
Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state
highways, pursuant to §33 .1-229, Code of Virginia, and the
Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and
unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements
for cuts, fills and drainage, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation.
Recorded Vote
Moved By:
Seconded By:
Yeas:
Nays:
H. Odell Minnix
Not Required
Supervisors Johnson.
None
Kohinke.
Minnix.
Nickens.
Eddv
RESOLUTION 92794-8.cTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION REQUESTING CERTAIN CHANGES TO THE
REGULATIONS CONCERNING LITERARY LOAN FUND
APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors and the School Board for
Roanoke County have reviewed the capital needs of the citizens of
Roanoke County, and in particular, the educational needs of the
children of the county, and have adopted a Capital Improvements
Program to address these needs; and,
WHEREAS, the County has embarked upon an extensive program
of school capital improvements, including both renovation of existing
facilities, as well as new construction; and,
WHEREAS, the Department of Education is considering certain
changes with respect to the regulations governing literary loan
....4
,...
682
September 27, 1994
Þ
increased funding to local school
applications in order to provide
divisions for school construction.
)
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of supervisors
of Roanoke County, Virginia:
1. That the Commonwealth of Virginia, through its elected
officers and-appointed officials, must allocate greater funding to the
Literary Fund; and authorize an increase in annual expenditures from
this Fund for school construction purposes.
2. That proceeds from the Literary Fund must not be
diverted for purposes other than school construction.
3. That the regulations governing the Literary Fund be
amended to increase the amount available for a proj ect from $2.51
Million to $5 Million.
4. That the regulations governing the Literary Fund be
amended to increase the total amount available to a local school
division be increased from its current limit of $20 Million.
5. That the regulations governing the Li terary Fund be
amended to expedite the review, approval and disbursement of monies to
local school divisions and local governments, thereby reducing the
inordinate delays in the actual receipt of money from the Literary
Fund.
6. That the clerk to· the Board of Supervisors is hereby
directed to mail a certified copy of this Resolution to the Department
of Education, members of the General Assembly representing the
Roanoke I
Valley, and the Clerk to the School Board for Roanoke County.
l
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
683
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Suoervisor Nickens: ( 1) He asked that the staff contact the
Virginia Department of Transportation about the snow removal damage to
the Howell Property on Indian Rock Road. (2) He questioned Mr.
Mahoney about the memo from the Treasurer concerning the sale of
delinquent real estate. After discussion, it was the consensus of the
Board for staff to move ahead. (3) He complimented Joe Obenshain,
Senior Assistant County Attorney, on a successful negotiation with
Booth and Salem Communications.
SUDervisor JOhnson: (1) He complimented the staff on the
appearance of the Roanoke County Administration Center foyer. He
asked that the staff look again at having a volunteer or employee
placed in the foyer area to help citizens. (2) He was pleased with
the joint meeting with Botetourt County Board of Supervisors at the
Read Mt Fire Station on September 26, 1994, and learned that the
volume and the patrons have significantly increased at the Blue Ridge
Library. (3) He advised that he and Supervisor Nickens spoke as
private individuals at the public hearing on parole reform last
evening.
Suoervisor EddY: (1) He advised that the Grand Opening of
the Teen Center at Brambleton Community Center was well attended. (2)
He advised that Supervisor Kohinke will attend the Virginia
~
,...
684
September 27, 1994
þ
Association of Counties Conference at The Homestead in November and
that the Board needs to designate a voting delegate.
(2) He advised
that the tax paYment drop box has been placed at the public entrance.
IN RE:
DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATE FOR VACO
Supervisor Johnson moved to designate Supervisor Kohinke as
Roanoke County's voting delegate at the VACo Conference in November,
1994, at The Homestead. The motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS:
None
IN RE:
REPO~S I
Supervisor Johnson moved to receive and file the following
reports after discussion of Items 6 and 8.
The motion carried by a
unanimous voice vote.
~ Genera1 Fund UnaÐÐrOÐriated Ba1ance
~ Caoital Fund Unaoorooriated Balance
~ Board continqency Fund
~ Proclamation Siqned bY Chairman
h Bond proiect Status Reoort
~ Imoact of the Cat Ordinance
Supervisor Eddy asked that Mr. Mahoney provide him with a
copy of the portion of the state Code which says that wild animals are
not the County's responsibility.
~ Automated Fuel-Fleet Manaqement systems
I
~
~
I
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994
685
h
Request for Information on crime statistics in Roanoke
County
Chief Cease, Tom Kincard, Crime Prevention Officer, and
Charlie Jones, Coordinator for the Business Watch Program, briefed the
Board on the Business Watch Program.
They also provided copies for
each Board member of quarterly reports on crime statistics for each
district in the County and the Roanoke County Police Department Annual
Report for 1993.
IN RE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 5:20 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to go into Executive
Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (3)
Acquisition of Real Property for Public Purpose, Cave Spring High
School; (3) For Consultation with Legal Counsel to Discuss Potential
Litigation Concerning Enforcement of Admissions Tax; (4)
Diaoucaion
of a Peraonal Platter not Related to Publio Buainecc, (6) Investing of
Public Funds Where the Financial Interest of the County May be
Affected, Receipt of Financial Audits and Dispersing of County Funds
to Volunteer Fire and Rescue Departments: and (7) To Discuss a Legal
Matter wi th Respect to Consideration of Regional Sewage Treatment
Contract and (5) To Discuss Location of a Prospective Business or
Industry. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy
NAYS: None
IN RE: EVENING SESSION
At 7: 00 p.m., Chairman Eddy reconvened the meeting with
Supervisor Nickens being absent.
~
,...
686
September 27, 1994
þ
IN RE:
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION
R-92794-9
At 7: 05 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to return to Open
Session and adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
RESOLUTION 92794-9 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to ani
affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The
Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires
a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, that such executive 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 executive
meeting which
this certification resolution applies, and
Only such public business matters as were identified inll
2.
~
~
~
September 27, 1994 687
the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or
considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Resolution, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
IN RE:
PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
h Ordinance Amendinq and Reenactinq Sections 22-82."Rates
and Fees" of Chaoter 22 "water" Article II. "Water
I
Systems". Division 2. "County Water System" of the
Roanoke County Code to Provide for Chanqes in the
utility Bil1inq Fees. Charqes. DeÞosits. and Procedures
,
for Water and Sewer Service. (Paul Grice. Assistant
Finance Director)
0-92794-10
Mr. Grice advised that this ordinance includes the suggested
changes and procedural changes made at the first reading of the
ordinance on September 13, 1994. Mr. Mahoney advised that a further
clarification in language was made in Section 22.86.3 to specify that
an appeal by the utility customer in writing must be made before the
due date of the bill.
Richard Evans, 4443 Cordell Drive, advised that he feels the
I County policy of holding deposits indefinitely is unfair and there
~
JII""
688
September 27, 1994
þ
should be procedures for returning the deposits.
Supervisor Kohinke moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-10 AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 22-82,
et seq., "RATES AND FEES", et seq., OF CHAPTER 22 "WATER",
ARTICLE II. "WATER SYSTEMS" , DIVISION 2. "COUNTY WATER
SYSTEM", OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR CHANGES
IN THE UTILITY BILLING FEES, CHARGES, DEPOSITS, AND
PROCEDURES FOR WATER AND SEWER SERVICE IN THE COUNTY OF
ROANOKE.
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, has determined that certain changes in the utility billing II
fees, charges, deposits, and procedures for water and sewer service in
the County of Roanoke are necessary in order to accurately reflect the
cost of providing the services, particularly for disconnection and
reconnect ion fees; to require security deposits from seriously
delinquent customers in amounts that are equitable to all customers
and adequately protect the County's interest; and to clarify and
specify procedures for utility service billing and collection of
unpaid bills; and,
WHEREAS, the provisions of this ordinance are adopted
pursuant to the authority found in §§ 32.1-167, et sea., and Chapter
9, Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended).
WHEREAS, legal notice of these amendments has been
published II
County on
in
a
newspaper of general circulation within Roanoke
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
689
September 13, 1994, and September 20, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on
September 13, 1994, and t~e second reading and public hearing on this
ordinance was held on September 27, 1994.
BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia:
1. That Division 2. County Water System of Article II.
Water Systems, Chapter 22 WATER, of the Roanoke County Code is hereby
amended and reenacted as follows:
* * * *
Sec. 22-82. Rates and fees.
(7)
* * *
Miscellaneous charqes. In addition to sale of water,
~~
a. Re-check reading of meter. . . . $10.00
(No charge if original reading was in error)
b.
Investigation/verification of
customer's line. . . . $20.00
leakage
in
c. Meter accuracy test. . . . $25.00
(No charge if meter fails accuracy test)
d. Raund trip fer metcr turn aff, turn on far nan
paymcnt . . . . $25.00
~I·
Reset meter if pulled due to non-paYment .
$25.00
. . .
4·
Special request to discontinue or turn-on service
~
,...
6 0
l
September 27, 1994
for other than non-paYment .
. . .
$10.00
. . . .
(c) !~!~ì!~ Deposits.
(1) Æ.~:lil:::::~:::::::ilêílffilíl , sha'll be imposed:;':: ~
~ w~en r7quest for service is màae~:!:i ~
ii¡:iii~[~MæMª.~ii::::::ãi:¡¡ii~B'ii:~ omicr. Ii.wën:::~::::i:i:;I:\~m;il!II\~~!I
ã:f::::::::::::~::~~:~::~~~ÎI!~iªglæãæ:~f:
:~~~~i[~::[~::[:::[[:[:[:~::[[[[[[:[:¡[::::::::::::::::::::::liEefi::::::::f::~~::~:[:[:f[:~[:~:::::f:::~~~[:[:::f:[:::::::[:f:::~:~::::::f:I~:::::f:::::~~~~@i::::[:::::f::::~:[::[[@I:![I::f::![!
::~:ffiæ:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::~::::::lilll::::~:li~::::[:~Uiiifi::::::::f::::::::::::f::::¡::~:::f::::::::::::f:::::::::::f:::I::~::ê::±::I:1
::~::i!æ:æ~::§\.IE:::::::flÐ~i@::::::::::U:::t~:::::::::::t:::::::::j:~::::¡::::¡t::::::I:f,¡::::::::::tI~¡ê:!::t::II;
-- I
:::~::Í:~::::::::::::~~:::~:::::~:~~:~:~~~:~:~:~:~~~:~::::::~~:liE!I:[[;;g:::::::::it:t:t[t::ttf:Itt::::ti:t:t:¡t::[f:tttt:tttt@:t:t:t:t:i:¡:¡t¡t¡t¡ti;:t!t¡t!tti:[:;;:t:I[I:!I[[i[~t!
::t::ææ~),~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~[~[~:::[::::~:[[~[~~:~:~~[~IªIII:~:~[~li~:::::~liliit:::~:f:~::::::::~@~~[::::::i:::::::::::f::::::::::I:~:I!::f:¡I:1
::~::i¡æ~ffi[~~~§~miIE:[[:[::flÐ~¥i:f,:::::::::::t:::~~::::::f,:::::::::::t:~:~~::::::f,:~:::::::::~::::t:::::::f,:::::::::I::::::::¡ê~!::t::R~
(2) ~~ ~~~pU~¡;i;~c~~~~o~~~r:~t~n~e~~~~i!læ:'!I~;llllllii¡¡è¡¡
&:1: discontinuance of service, that custoIiîEiif"'''šñãrr''''þ-ay
:a-ñ additional deposit aooordißEj to the schedule for
rcinstitutioß of oCr\·ioc, as prcsoribcd by the beard of
"'(ã)"""""åilÊi"""tliC"""'tÙ'rß"""'eir""Ohå'i¡'c reEIUircd by oeotioß 22 86.
I
~
~
September 27, 1994
691
I
I
~
"..-
692
September 27, 1994
(4~)
(Code 1971, § 20.1-27; Ord. No. 84-108, § 1, 6-26-84; Ord. No. 62486-
147, § § 1, 2, 6-24-86; Ord. No. 81286-169, § 1, 8-12-86; Ord. No.
121686-259, § 1, 12-16-86; Ord. No. 101387-5, 10-13-87; Ord. No.
62591-7, § 1, 6-25-91; Ord. No. 52593-9, § 1, 5-25-93)
Cross reference(s)--Schedule of charges for wastewater
disposal, § 18-168; adjust to utility charges for filling of swimming
pool, \§ 18-168(d).
Sec. 22-83. Inspection and readinq of meters; bills; refunds.
The director shall cause ªw.œ:r:;:;:jjjU~J.:W$Yf}¡$.¡'i#.i:¡ø."}:Ii~ti.W" to be
inspected and read at least once e~;;ê:r:y'·:·:·:·"tñre'ê""·:·:':{'3'I:"':·":'môiîth:š':':':':':'â'î'r~ metero
I
reading cannõt be obtained. i#.æmli2~f$.i.iŸæSi. Water bills shall be paid
at the utility if$.$$.di offi¿e~or=a€~suëh=other places designated by
:.:.:.::.;.:-:.:-:.:.;.:.;.:.:.:.:-:.:.;.:.:......:
l
~
~
September 27, 1994
693
the director. All deposits or advance paYments for water, refunds to
depositors of advance paYments, or other refunds on account of errors
shall be made at the utility "$~$.$D.g office. Bills shall be due and
~:~a~t:o'~~"~~~!~ before
(Code 1971, § 20.1-28)
Sec. 22-84. Calculation of charges--Genera1ly.
All water passing through a meter shall be charged for,
whether or not used; provided, where leaks occur in water pipes or
metered services, and the owner, agent or tenant shall have promptly
made all necessary repairs, the director may rebate the. amount in
excess of double the amount of the average monthly bill for the
premises. Such average monthly bills shall be determined by averaging
monthly bills for the preceding six (6) months.
(Code 1971, § 20.1-29)
Sec. 22-85. Same--When meter fails.
I
In the event a water meter fails to register properly for
any cause, and the consumer has received the usual or necessary supply
of water during the time of such failure of the meter to register, the
consumer shall be billed for such amount as is shown to be the average
monthly amount of water consumed on his premises for the preceding six
(6) months or a longer period, as determined by the director.
(Code 1971, § 20.1-30)
Sec. 22-86.1 Unpaid bills.
If a bill for \later ohall remain unpaid for thirty (30) àayo
~;~~~ ~:~l{c:~i~\ :h~ ~~~tC':;¿m' ~~ me~~:~~:1:,:,:,:~~~j,:,:,::~:~::::;,~,~«<¡<~r.W~~,¡i
I
j
JII""
694
September 27, 1994
Þ
gì:;¡~¡~:~:æBmŠæ;IEB:::::¡¡ilmI.M
iiiiit::¡¡is'~i¡'¡¡ig[i.¡iìi¡iii¡i¡:ii¡i.i_q§ìÎ~ premises
(Code 1971, § 20.1-31)
Sec. 22-87. When water may be turned off.
I
The water shall be turned off when necessary for the
protection of the water system or when a recognized cross connection
is discovered- and corrective action is not taken in accordance with
the director's instructions.
(Code 1971, § 20.1-32)
Sec. 22-88. Connector's responsibility when moving from premises.
When the connector using water intends to move, he shall
give the director at least three (3) days' notice. Any person vacating
~ff~~~":!:nl:~:w:E~:~:~~
(Code 1971, § 20.1-33)
2. That the provisions of this Ordinance shall be
effective on and from October 1, 1994.
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the ordinance, andll
carried by the following recorded vote:
~
..
""l1lI1
~ ,
~
September 27, .1994
695
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke ., Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
~ ordinance Amendinq and Reenactinq Ordinance 81490-6
Authorizinq Ad;ustments to the Fee structure for
services for Parks and Recreation Activities. (Pete
Hais1io. Director of Parks and Recreation)
0-92794-11
Supervisor Eddy advised that he felt the fees charged for
recreation classes should be reviewed by the Board, and did not
I
approve of the excess costs going into a Parks & Recreation Department
discretionary fund for capital improvements.
There was no further discussion and no citizens were present
to speak on this issue.
Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix,
NAYS:
Supervisor Eddy
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-11 AMENDING AND REENACTING
ORDINANCE 81490-6 AUTHORIZING CERTAIN INCREASES IN
FEES FOR SERVICES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION
ACTIVITIES
WHEREAS, on August 14, 1990, the Board of Supervisors
II adopted, Ordinance 81490-6 imposing certain fees for parks and
~
,...
696
September 27, 1994
þ
recreation activities; and
WHEREAS, in July 13, 1993, the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Commission and the Board of Supervisors met in a work session to
discuss inequities and inconsistencies in this ordinance and to
discuss recommendations to improve the fee structure, including the
recovery of a greater portion of indirect costs, particularly in the
area of adult athletics; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 1994, both the Commission and the
Board concurred in certain staff recommendations to establish a new
fee policy and directed staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance
amendment; and
WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was held on I
September 13, 1994, and the second reading and public hearing on this
ordinance was held on September 27, 1994.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Director of the Roanoke County Department of
Parks and Recreation is hereby authorized to establish fees for parks
and recreation services, programs, and activities, subject to the
approval of the County Administrator, and subj ect to the following
standards:
a) Definitions:
Indirect costs include the general fund appropriation
for each of the cost centers associated with the Plil$.wifia recreation
~ lil~mšll based on the f~eviou~ fiscal year~buãge~~, plua the
ûllÐoût~on of thc oentral aàm~n~atrat~~e ooata far the Dcpartment. of
rar]ta anà. Reoreation, and in the ca3C af athlctioe, the ahara af the
ballfield maiatenûncc, which iG providcd by the rar]ta Di·,liaion af t.he
Depûrtmcnt.
t :::~~ãE:;::;fi:~:liîr:pirec~ costs. r:l~te to 1 ~he s:g;8:~::!:~!:~::::~;?:æ:~:~:~;m:~i" in;~Sãll
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
697
to àe eatabliaheà at $S per participant, per activity and the
memberahip fec ia propoBcà to be $10 annually for acnior citieena, in
lieu of a rc~iatrQtion fee.
b) Standards:
The standards, which were approved by the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Commission, are as follows:
1) For activiti~a included under community educations
leisure arta, outdoor ad7enture and adult athletica, the fee ahall be
baacd upon a $S reEjiatration fcc, per participant, plua 25' of the
indirect coat, plua 109\ of the direct coat. In any of the programD
offered by theDe diviDioRa primarily for youth under 18 yeara of aEje,
there Dhall bc no $S per participant fee.
~
,...
698
September 27, 1994
þ
~ìM That the effective date of this ordinance and for
the impositioir:':·:':':·of the fees and charges authorized herein shall be
AUCJUBt 1, 1990 !1Ilml~È:::::::I::!::::::::::~!:gl::f::
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix
NAYS:
Supervisor Eddy
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
~ Ordinance to Rezone .409 acre from AV Conditional to C-
2 to Allow Retail Uses. Located at 5449 Franklin Road.
Cave Sorinq Maqisteria1 District. Uoon the Petition of
Kinqerv Bros. Associates. (Terrv Harrinqton. planninq 'I
Zoninq Director)
0-92794-12
Mr. Harrington advised that the petitioner is asking to
rezone this parcel from AV Conditional to C-2 to allow retail uses.
The Planning commission recommended that the property be rezoned AV
without
conditions because this
area
is designated by the
Comprehensive Plan as Village Center and this would set a precedent of
allowing C-2 zoning.
Mr. Kingery advised that the property has been vacant for
three years with the zoning restricted to service facili ties. He
feels that he has a better chance of marketing the property with the
C-2 zoning for retail uses.
Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance.
The motionll
.....
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
699
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix
NAYS:
Supervisor Eddy
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-12 TO CHANGE THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF A .409 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE
LOCATED AT 5449 FRANKLIN ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 98.02-
2-9) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM
THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AV, CONDITIONAL, TO
THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C2 UPON THE
APPLICATION OF KINGERY BROS. ASSOCIATES
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on
August 23, 1994, and the second reading and public hearing were held
September 27, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a
public hearing on this matter on September 6, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as
required by law.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of
real estate containing .409 acre, as described herein, and located at
5449 Franklin Road, (Tax Map Number 98.02-2-9) in the Cave Spring
Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification
of AV,
Conditional, Village Center District,
to the zoning
classification of C2, General Commercial District.
2. That this
action
is taken upon the
application of
Kingery Bros. Associates.
~
JII""
700
September 27, 1994
3.
That
said real estate is
more
fully described
Þ
as
follows:
BEGINNING at an iron pin in the west line of Route 220 at the
northeast corner of the property of John M. Davis; thence with the
west line of Route 220 and a curve to the left whose arc distance is
88.01 feet and radius is 1,352.39 feet and chord bearing is N. 41 deg.
20' 41" W. 87.99 feet to an iron pin, the true point of beginning;
thence leaving Route 220 and with the division line between Tracts "A"
and "B" S. 44 deg. 16' 49" W. 161.89 feet crossing a branch to a point
in the east line of the property of Inez Simmons; thence with the said
line N. 25 deg. 23' W. 136.27 feet to a point at the division line
between Tracts "B" and "C"; thence with said line N. 44 deg. 16' 49"
E. 115.83 feet to an iron pin in the west line of Route 220; thence
with said line S. 45 deg. 43' 11" E. 68.53 feet to a point of a curve
to the right whose arc distance is 59.26 feet and radius is 1,352.39
feet and chord bearing is S. 44 deg. 27' 52" E. 59.25 feet to the true
point of beginning and containing .409 acre and known as Tract "B" as
shown on a survey of the division of property of Donald F. Taylor, by
Jack G. Bess, C.L.S., dated June 21, 1985, a copy of which is
attached.
4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effectll
thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of
ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and
the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed
to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning
classification aµthorized by this ordinance.
On motion of supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix
NAYS:
Supervisor Eddy
ABSENT:
&upervisor Nickens
~
Ordinance to Rezone Aooroximate1 y Ten Acres from R-311
Conditional to C-1 to Construct an Office Comolex.
~
~
I
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994
701
Located at the Intersection of Airoort Road and Dent
Road. Hollins Maqisteria1 District. Uoon the Petition
of Friendshio Manor Aoartment Vi11aqe Corooration.
(Terrv Harrington. Planninq & Zoninq Director)
0-92794-13
Mr. Harrington advised that the petitioner proposes to
rezone approximately ten acres to construct an office complex. The
Planning Commission recommended that the request be denied because the
issues of access to the site have not been resolved.
Mr. Harrington advised that the peti tioner had proffered
that access to the site would be,limited to one point on Airport Road
and one point on Dent Road, as designed by the developer's engineer,
and reviewed by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the
County.
Supervisor Johnson
moved to adopt the ordinance with
..,,-
proffered condition added limiting access to one point on Airport Road
and one point on Dent Road.
The motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-13 TO CHANGE THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF A 10 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE
LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT ROAD AND
DENT ROAD (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 27.17-4-13) IN THE
HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF R3, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF C1 ^ UPON THE APPLICATION OF
FRIENDSHIP MANOR APARTMENT VILLAGE CORPORATION
Con~:+,'oY\ct I
~
JII""
702
September 27, 1994
þ
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on
August 23, 1994, and the second reading and public hearing were held
September 27, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, the Roanoke county Planning Commission held a
public hearing on this matter on september 6, 1994; and,
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as
required by law.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of
real estate containing ten (10) acres, as described herein, and
located at the intersection of Airport Road and Dent Road, (Part ofll
Tax Map Number 27.17-4-13) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is
hereby changed from the zoning classification of R3, conditional,
Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District, to the zoning
classification of C1,^Office District.
CÐri& ötìDh a..
2. That this action is taken upon the application of
Friendship Manor.
3. That said real estate is more fully described as
follows:
From a highway monument on Airport Road located as position #19 on a
plat prepared by Lumsden Associates for Friendship Manor Apartment
Village Corporation, 97.51 acres dated 27 February 1979, and being the
point of beginning thence N. 15 deg. 00' 40" W. 180.63 feet~ thence N.
14 deg. 57' 20" W. 57.98 feet; thence N. 56 deg. 51' 00" E.
approximately 975 feet to a drainage swale; thence southerly following
the line of said drainage swale approximately 800 feet to Dent Roadll
and intersection with position #14 on the above-referenced plat;
thence N. 45 deg. 08' 00" W. 232.70 feet; thence following curve "A"
and liB" to position #16; thence S. 69 deg. 57' 35" W. 149.84 feet;
.....
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
703
thence N. 73 deg. 52' 30" W. 90.48 feet; thence N. 27 deg. 24' 00" W.
64.78 feet to position #19, the point of beginning, and containing,
subject to survey, approximately 10 acres.
4. That the owner has voluntarily proffered in writing the
following condition which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts:
::~:~:~:~:::::~::::::::1:::1:1I$s~!1:1:::::1:lffiÆ:i::1::::::::I&::::::::::m:ffimæE~~::::::1:1:le::::::::::ãn~:~::1::~1:ÎgænE::::::::::gl::::::::læ.gi;
(
Ig!!I:::::::I1I:::::::gl~:::::::Re:~nl::::1::en:~::::::.nl:::::::t{§ªªÆ,
5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect
thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of
ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and
the same hereby are, repealed.
The Zoning Administrator is directed
to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning
classification authorized by this ordinance.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson t6 adopt the ordinance with
proffered condition (1) added, and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
h Ordinance Authorizinq a Soecial Use Permit to Construct
and Ooerate an Electric Substation. Located on Kirk
Lane. off Cotton Hill Road. Cave Sorinq Maqisteria1
District. Uoon the Petition of Aooa1achian Power
Comoany.
(Terrv Harrinqton.
Planninq , Zoning
Director)
0-92794-14
~
JII""
704
September 27, 1994
þ
Mr. Harrington advised that APCO is proposing to build a new
substation in the vicinity of Route 221 and Cotton Hill Road to meet
the increasing demand for service in the Back Creek area. He advised
that the site improvements, particularly the cut and fill slopes, will
be visible from the existing Route 221.
Mr. Harrington advised that APCO by letter informed him that
they would be open to discussion regarding the granting of an open
space or greenway easement along Back Creek and the granting of
utility easement through the excess lands of APCO.
Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance with two
conditions as suggested by
be retained as much as
environmentally sensitive.
supervisor Eddy: (1) existing trees on site
possible and (2) substation designed be I
The motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-14 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
TO APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT AND
OPERATE AN ELECTRIC SUBSTATION LOCATED ON KIRK
LANE OFF COTTON HILL ROAD (TAX MAP NOS. 96.01-3-2
AND 2.1) CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Appalachian Power Company has filed a petition to
construct and operate an electric substation (utility services, major)
located on Kirk Lane off Cotton Hill Road (Tax Map Nos. 96.01-3-2 and
2.1) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and I
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
705
this matter on September 6, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 23, 1994; the
second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September
27, 1994.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use
permit to construct and operate an electric substation (utility
services, major) located on Kirk Lane off Cotton Hill Road (Tax Map
Nos. 96.01-3-2 and 2.1) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District is
substantially in accord with the adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan
pursuant to the provisions of § 15.1-456 (b) of the 1950 Code of
Virginia, as amended.
2. That the Board hereby grants a Special Use Permit to
Appalachian Power Company to construct said electric substation on
Kirk Lane off Cotton Hill Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District
subject to the following conditions:
(a) The disturbed area will be stabilized with grass
and natural vegetation--not riprap.
(b) The existing trees on the site will be retained as
much as possible.
(c) The substation will be designed sensitive to the
environment.
3.
That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect
~
,...
706
September 27, 1994
þ
thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of
ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and
the same hereby are, repealed.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance with
Conditions (b) and (c) as suggested by Supervisor Eddy, and carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
~ Ordinance Authorizinq a soecia1 Use Permit to Construct
a Bui1dinq for Reliqious AssemblY Inc1udinq Classrooms. I
Office and Recreational Facilities. Located on
NorthridCJe Lane. Aooroximate1Y 700 Feet Northwest of
Peters Creek Road. Catawba Maqisteria1 District. Uoon
the Petition of North Valley Seventh-Day Adventist
Church. (Terrv Harrington. Planninq , Zoninq Director)
0-92794-15
Mr. Harrington advised that is a special use permit request
to construct a building for religious assembly with the recommended
condition that vehicular access to the site will be located on
Northridge Lane.
The Planning Commission recommended approval with
the condition.
Aubrey Kelly, from the North
Valley seventh-Day Adventist I
Church was present to answer questions.
l
~
~
September 27, 1994 707
Supervisor Johnson requested that the county's aerial
photographs be updated to reflect changes as the budget permits.
Supervisor Kohinke moved to adopt the ordinance with the
condition. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
Supervisor Johnson requested that the names on aerial
photographs be updated when possible.
I
ORDINANCE
TO NORTH
CONSTRUCT
INCLUDING
FACILITIES
IMATELY 700
(TAX PARCEL
TRICT
92794-15 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
VALLEY SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH TO
A BUILDING FOR RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY
CLASSROOMS, OFFICE, AND RECREATIONAL
LOCATED ON NORTHRIDGE LANE APPROX-
FEET NORTHWEST OF PETERS CREEK ROAD
37.14-1-1) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DIS-
WHEREAS, the Trustees of the North Valley Seventh-day
Adventist Church have filed a petition to allow the construction of a
building for religious assembly including classrooms, office, and
recreational facilities to be located on Northridge Lane approximately
700 feet northwest of Peters Creek Road in the Catawba Magisterial
District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this matter on September 6, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on August 23, 1994; the
II second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September
....4
,...
708
September 27, 1994
þ
27, 1994.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, virginia, as follows:
1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use
permit to allow the construction of a building for religious assembly
to be located on Northridge Lane approximately 700 feet northwest of
Peters Creek Road in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially
in accord with the adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the
provisions of § 15.1-456 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended.
2. That the Board hereby grants a Special Use Permit to
the Trustees of the North Valley Seventh-day Adventist Church to allow
the construction of a building for religious assembly to be located onll
Northridge Lane approximately 700 feet northwest of Peters Creek Road
in the Catawba Magisterial District, subject to the following
conditions:
a) Vehicular access to the site wil1 be located on
Northridge Lane. No vehicular access to the site
will be located off of Craun Lane for church
activities and other activities held at the
church. This would allow a parsonage only to
access Craun Lane.
On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, KOhinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
Ordinance Authorizin~ a 8Þecial Use permit to constructll
h
~
~
I
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994 709
a Fast Food Restaurant at the Intersection of
Bramb1eton Avenue and Westmoreland Drive. Cave SÐrinq
Maqisteria1 District. Uoon the petition of Tacoma. Inc.
(Terrv Harrinqton. Planninq & Zoninq Director)
0-92794-16
Mr. Harrington advised that this is a request for a special
use permit to construct a fast food restaurant.
There are two
conditions recommended pertaining to access to the property and
acquisition of additional property from the Virginia Department of
Transportation.
The Planning Commission recommended approval wi th
conditions.
Paul Bell, 2705 Hillbrook Drive, advised that he opposes the
request because of the increased traffic, congestion and access
problems on Brambleton Avenue.
Supervisor Kohinke moved to adopt the ordinance with
conditions. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson
ORDINANCE 92794-16 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
TO TACOMA, INC. TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
FAST FQOD RESTAURANT LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION
OF BRAHBLETON AVENUE AND WESTMORELAND DRIVE (TAX
PARCELS 77.13-4-14, 15, 16, 17), CAVE SPRING
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Tacoma, Inc. has filed a petition to allow the
~
,...
710
September 27, 1994
. . Þ
the 1ntersect10n of
construction of a fast food restaurant located at
Brambleton Avenue and Westmoreland Drive in the Cave Spring
Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this matter on September 6, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 26, 1994; the
second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September
27, 1994.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use I
permit to allow the construction of a fast food restaurant located at
the intersection of Brambleton Avenue and Westmoreland Drive in the
Cave Spring Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the
adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.1-
456 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended.
2 . That the Board hereby grants a Special Use permi t to
Tacoma, Inc. to allow the construction of a fast food restaurant
located at the intersection of. Brambleton Avenue and Westmoreland
Drive in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, with the following
conditions:
1) Access to the property shall be limited to single
point of ingress and egress from Westmoreland Drive of
a width no greater than 30 feet. Direct access from I
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
711
Brambleton Avenue shall be prohibited.
2) Approval of the special use permit shall be condi-
tioned upon the acquisition of the additional property
from VDOT shown on the concept plan submitted and dated
7/19/94.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson
h
Ordinance Amendinq the Text of the Roanoke county
Zoninq Ordinance to Include a Planned Commercial
Deve100ment District and a Planned Industrial
Deve100ment District. (Terry Harrinqton. Planninq ,
Zoninq Director)
0-92794-17
Mr. Harrington advised that the creation of two districts
would promote the efficient use of commercial and industrial land
while also providing the land developer a high level of flexibility in
combining land uses and densities. Both districts incorporate
incentives to encourage the creation of aesthetically pleasing and
functional planned developments.
Supervisor Eddy moved to adopt the ordinance after inserting
~
,...
712
September 27, 1994
þ
in Sec. 30-57-5 (H) and Sec. 30-63-6 (H) "and after holding a public
hearing". The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-17 AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY
ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT AND A PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on
August 23, 1994; the second reading and public hearing was held on
September 27, 1994.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of
Supervisors I
of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That the following amendments be made to the Zoning
Ordinance of Roanoke County.
ARTICLE III DISTRICT REGULATIONS
SEC. 30-57
PCD PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Sec. 30-57-1 Purpose
(A) The intent of the Planned Commercial Development (PCD)
district is to promote the efficient use of commercial land
by allowing a range of land uses and densities and the
flexible application of development controls. This may be
accomplished while also protecting surrounding property, the
natural features and scenic beauty of the land.
The Planned Commercial Development district is provided in
recognition that many commercial, office and residential
establishments seek to develop within unified areas, usually
under single ownership or control. Because these
concentrations of retail, service and office establishments I
are generalÍy stable and offer unified internal arrangement
and development, potentially detrimental design effects can
~
~
~
September 27, 1994
713
be recognized and addressed during the review of the
development. For these reasons, ~he provisions for the PCD
allow greater development latitude. Districts should be
proposed and planned for areas that provide for adequate
development and expansion space, controlled access points,
landscaped parking areas and public utilities. Development
of the PCD will take place in general accordance with an
approved Master Plan, which may allow for clustering of uses
and densities in various areas of the site.
Planned Commercial Development districts should be a visual
asset to the community. Buildings within the district are
to be architecturally similar in style and the relationship
among individual establishments should be harmonious. The
site should be well landscaped and parking and loading areas
are to be screened.
Sec. 30-57-2 Permitted Uses
(A)
All of the residential, civic, office and commercial use
types listed in Article II of this ordinance are permitted
in the PCD. Residential use types shall be limited to no
more than 30% of the gross square footage of the other use
types in the PCD. No use shall be permitted except in
conformity with the uses specifically included in the final
Master Plan approved pursuant to Section 30-57-6. Other
permitted uses are listed below:
I
1. Industrial Uses
Custom Manufacturing
Recycling Centers and stations
Warehouse & Distribution
2. Miscellaneous Uses
Broadcasting Tower
Parking Facility
(A)
Section 30-57-3 site Development Regulations
Each Planned Commercial Development shall be subject to the
following site development standards.
Minimum district size: 5 acres of contiguous land.
1.
2.
I ·3..
Minimum front setbacks: All structures proposed to
front on existing publ ic streets external to the PCD
shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from the existing
public right-of-way.
Lots in the PCD district shall comply with the buffer
~
,...
714
~
September 27, 1994
d " t t" "" Þ
yar requ~remen s of Sec ~on 30-92-4 of th~s ord~nance.
4.
Lot coverage:
a. More than one principal structure may be placed on
a lot.
b. Maximum lot coverage shall be determined through
the preliminary development plan process but in no
case shall exceed 75%
5. Public streets in the PCD district shall be builtin
accordance with VDOT and Roanoke county standards. In
reviewing the PCD preliminary master plan, the
Commission may recommend, and the Board may approve,
one or more private streets within the proposed
district. Private street standards, specifications and
a proposed maintenance agreement shall be submitted
with the preliminary Master Plan.
6. The applicant may propose a reduction to the number of
parking spaces required by this ordinance for each use
type, if justified. This proposal will be reviewed II
wi th consideration given to potential future uses of
the site, parking demand and expansion potential.
7 . Maximum height of structures: When adj oining property
zoned Residential, 45 feet, including rooftop
mechanical equipment. The maximum height may be
increased provided each required yard (side, rear, or
buffer) adj oining a Residential district is increased
two feet for each foot in height over 45 feet. This
distance shall be measured from the portion of the
structure which exceeds 45 feet. In all other
locations the height is unlimited.
8. utilities shall be placed underground.
9. Arrangement of areas:
a.
The location and arrangement of structures,
parking, access drives, outdoor lighting, signs
and other uses and developments within the PCD, in
addition to achieving these development standards,
shall be accomplished in accordance with an
approved final Master Plan to assure compatibility
with the existing and future land use in the
vicinity. I
Areas designed for future expansion or not
b.
~
~
September 27, 1994
715
intended for immediate improvement or development
shall be specified as reserve areas on the
preliminary development plan. The future use and
the limitations on future use of such area shall
be specified, or else such areas shall not be
included as part of the PCD application. Reserve
areas included in the PCD shall be landscaped or
otherwise maintained in a neat and orderly manner.
Section 30-57-4 site Development Recommendations
(A)
The Planned Commercial Development district should be
designed and developed to be a visual asset to the community
of Roanoke County. Since the relationship of the
development to the community and the prospects for economic
success of the proj ect have much to do with the physical
character of the development, these factors shall be
considered in reviewing a Planned Commercial District
application. For this reason the following site development
recommendations are made.
I
(1) The principal entrance into the PCD district should be
sufficiently landscaped to comply with the purposes of
this district. In addition, the first one-hundred
linear feet of street, leading through this principal
entrance into the PCD, should have a landscaped median
of sufficient width and planting density to meet the
purposes of this district.
(2) Parking within the PCD should be located to the side or
rear of the principal structures on the lot, wherever
feasible. During review, consideration will be given
to topographical constraints, innovative site design,
buffering and landscaping factors.
Section 30-57-5
Regulations
(A) All zoning regulations shall apply to the development of the
PCD district, unless modified by the Board of Supervisors in
the approval of the final Master Plan.
Relationship to Existing Development
section 30-57-6 Application Process
(A)
The timeframes outlined in this section are the maximum
timeframes mandated by the Code of Virginia. Roanoke County
will make every reasonable effort to complete the
application process within a shorter timeframe.
I
(B)
Prior to submitting a formal application for review and
~
JII""
716
September 27, 1994
þ
approval under these provisions, the applicant and county
staff shall meet to discuss the requirements of this
section. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain a mutual
understanding of the application requirements and process.
The applicant is encouraged to submit information on the
scope and nature of the proposal to allow staff to become
familiar with the proposal in advance of this meeting.
(C) Any application to rezone land to the PCD designation, shall
constitute an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuant to
section 30-14. The written and graphic information
submitted by the applicant as part of the application
process shall constitute proffers pursuant to section 30-15
of this ordinance. Once the Board of Supervisors has
approved the final Master Plan, all accepted proffers shall
constitute conditions pursuant to section 30-15.
(D) To initiate an amendment, the applicant shall complete a
rezoning application packet. This information shall be
accompanied by graphic and written information, which shall
constitute a preliminary Master Plan. All information
submitted shall be of sufficient clarity and scale to
clearly and accurately identify the location, nature, andll
character of the proposed district. At a minimum this
information shall include:
1. A legal description and plat showing the site
boundaries, and existing street lines, lot lines, and
easements.
2. Existing zoning, land use and ownership of each parcel
proposed for the district.
3. A general statement of planning objectives to be
achieved by the PCD district, including a description
of the character of the proposed development, the
existing and proposed ownership of the site, the market
for which the development is oriented, and obj ecti ves
towards any specific human-made and natural
characteristics located on the site.
4. A description and analysis of existing site conditions,
including information on topography, historic
resources, natural water courses, floodplains, unique
natural features, tree cover areas, known archeological
resources, etc.
5.
The proposed conceptual location
structures within each land use
development.
and number Ofll
of the proposed
.....
~
~
September 27, 1994
717
6.
The gross square footage for each use type proposed in
the PCD.
7. The proposed size, location and use of other portions
of the tract, including landscaping and parking.
8. A traffic circulation plan, including the location of
access drives, parking and loading facilities,
pedestrian walks and the relationship to existing and
proposed external streets and traffic patterns.
General information on the trip generation, ownership,
maintenance and proposed construction standards for
these facilities should be included. A Traffic Impact
Analysis may be required by the Administrator.
9 . I f a reduction to the number of parking spaces is
requested, a justification for this request shall be
submitted. Based on adequate justification, the
Commission may recommend, and the Board may approve
such a reduction.
10. Reserved.
I
11.
The proposed schedule
minimum, the schedule
commencement date for
build-out period.
of si te development. At a
should include an approximate
construction and a proposed
12. Generalized statements pertaining to architectural
design principles and guidelines shall be submitted in
sufficient detail to provide information on building
designs, orientations, styles, lighting plans, signage
plans, landscaping, etc.
13. Signage in the proposed PCD shall be in accordance with
this ordinance.
(E)
The completed rezoning application and supporting
preliminary Master Plan materials shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for review and analysis. The Commission
shall review this information and make a report of its
findings to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission shall
as part of its review hold a public hearing pursuant to
Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. The
proposed district shall be posted with signs indicating the
date and time of the Commission public hearing.
The Commission shall make a report of its findings to the
Board of Supervisors within 90 days of the receipt of the
materials, unless the applicant requests, or agrees to an
I
(F)
....4
"..-
718
September 27, 1994
~
extension of this time frame. The Commission's report shall
recommend approval, approval with modifications, or
disapproval of the preliminary Master Plan. Failure of the
Commission to make a report of its findings to the Board of
Supervisors within this period shall constitute a commission
recommendation of approval.
(G) If the Commission recommends denial of the preliminary
Master Plan, or approval with modification, the applicant
shall, if requested, have 60 days to make any modifications.
If the applicant desires to make any modifications to the
preliminary Master Plan, the Board of Supervisor's review
and action shall be delayed until such changes are made and
submitted for review.
(H) The Board of Supervisors shall review the preliminary Master
~;~~' t~~d p':!!ã':"I'!ffi'~:::::::'I'!~$:ffi'!1'!!¥~ o~C~h;O p~~l~~~~a~
Master Plan shall constitute acceptance of the plan's
provisions and concepts as proffers pursuant to section 30-
15 of this ordinance. The Plan approved by the Board of
Supervisors shall constitute the final Master Plan for the
PCD. Once approved by the Board of Supervisors, the I
Administrator shall authorize the revisions to the official
zoning map to indicate the establishment of the PCD
district.
section 30-57-7 Revisions to Final Master Plan
(A)
Major revisions to the final Master Plan shall be reviewed
and approved following the procedures and requirements of
Section 30-57-6. Major revisions include, but are not
limited to changes such as:
1. Any significant increase in the density of the
development;
2. Substantial change in circulation or access;
3. Substantial change in grading or utility provisions;
4. Substantial changes in the mixture of land uses;
5. Substantial change in architectural or site design
features of the development;
6.
Any other change that the Administra.tor finds is all
major divergence from the approved final Master Plan.
other changes in the final Master Plan shall be
(B)
All
~
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
719
considered minor amendments. The Administrator, upon
receipt of a written request of the owner, may approve such
minor amendments.
1. If the Administrator fails to act on a request for a
minor amendment to the Master Plan within 15 calendar
days, it shall be considered approved.
2. A request which is disapproved by the Administrator
shall be considered a maj or amendment and shall be
subject to the approval process outlined above for such
amendments.
Section 30-57-8 Approval of preliminary and Final site
Development Plans
(A)
Following the approval of the final Master Plan, the
applicant or its authorized agent, shall be required to
submit preliminary and final site development plans for
approval. Final site development plans for any phase or
component of the PCD that involves the construction of
structures or facilities, shall be approved prior to the
issuance of a building and zoning permit, and the
commencement of construction. standards for preliminary and
final site development plans are found in a document
entitled Land Development Procedures, available in the
Roanoke County Department of Engineering and Inspections.
(B) It is the intent of this section that subdivision review
under the subdivision regulations be carried out
simultaneously with the review of a PCD under this section.
The plans required under this section shall be submitted in
a form which will satisfy the requirements of the
subdivision regulations, as determined by the Administrator.
(C) Preliminary and final site development plans submitted for
review shall be in compliance with the final Master Plan
approved by the Board of Supervisors. Roanoke County shall
review and approve or disapprove any final site development
plan within 60 days of its submittal.
(D) No Planned Commercial Development district shall be approved
and no work shall be authorized on construction until all
property included in the final Master Plan is in common
ownership.
section 30-57-9 Failure to Beqin Development
(A)
Unless an extension is granted by the Administrator, failure
of the applicant to submit a preliminary site development
~
JII""
720
(A)
September 27, 1994
. ,þ
plan for at least one port:1.on of the Planned Commerc:1.al
Development district within 24 months of the approval of the
final Master Plan, shall constitute an application on the
part of applicant to rezone the PCD to the district
designations in effect prior to the approval of the final
master plan.
Section 30-57-10
Development Plans
Control Followinq Approval of Final
The zoning administrator
and review all building
to ensure compl iance
schedule.
shall periodically inspect the site
permits issued for the development
wi th the submi tted development
ARTICLE III DISTRICT REGULATIONS
SEC. 30-63 PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
(A)
.....
Sec. 30-63-1 Purpose
The Planned Industrial Development (PID) district is
established primarily for light and medium industrial uses.1I
Supporting accessory uses and facilities, such as office and
commercial establishments, are also permitted. The PID
district is intended to be designed with a park-like
atmosphere that complements surrounding land uses by means
of appropriate siting of buildings, controlled access
points, attractive and harmonious architecture, and
effective landscape bUffering. The district is intended to
provide flexibility in design and site layout, allow
latitude in combining different use types within a single
development, and provide the developer with incentives to
create an aesthetically pleasing and functional planned
development.
In addition, the intent of the Planned Industrial
Development (PID) district is to provide certain industries
that are clean and environmentally efficient the opportunity
to locate in an area of like industries, in what is
generally known as an industrial park, developed under a
complete, comprehensive Master Plan. Standards are provided
for landscaping, buffering and open space to encourage high
technology industries and to ensure a park-like atmosphere.
Important in determining the location and size of a PID are
the accessibility of the location, the availability of
pUblic utilities, public safety services and the suitability
of the topography for industrial purposes. I
Sec. 30-63-2 Permitted Uses
~
~
September 27, 1994
721
(A)
All of the residential, civic, office, commercial,
industrial and miscellaneous use type~ listed in Article II
of this ordinance are permitted 1n the PID district.
Residential use types shall be limited to no more than 15%
of the total gross square footage. No use shall be
permitted except in conformity with the uses specifically
included in the Final Master Plan approved pursuant to
Section 30-63-6.
Sec. 30-63-3 site Development Regulations
(A)
Each planned industrial development shall be subject to the
following site development standards.
1. Minimum district size: 15 acres of contiguous land.
I
2. Minimum front setbacks: All structures proposed to
front on existing public streets external to the PID
shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from the existing
public right-of-way.
Lots in the PID district shall comply with the buffer
yard requirements of section 30-92-4 of this ordinance.
3.
4.
Lot coverage: Maximum lot coverage shall be determined
through the preliminary master plan process but in no
case shall exceed 75%.
5. Streets in the PID district shall be public in
accordance with VDOT and Roanoke county standards.
6. The applicant may propose a reduction to the number of
parking spaces required by this ordinance for each use
type, if justified. This proposal will be reviewed
with consideration given to potential future uses of
the site, parking demand and expansion potential.
7. Maximum height of structures: When adjoining property
zoned Residential, 45 feet, including rooftop
mechanical equipment. The maximum height may be
increased provided each required yard (side, rear, or
buffer) adjoining a Residential district is increased
two feet for each foot in height over 45 feet. This
distance shall be measured from the portion of the
structure which exceeds 45 feet. In all other
locations the height is unlimited.
I
8.
Arrangement of areas:
a. The location
and
arrangement
of
structures,
~
,...
722
September 27, 1994
þ
(A)
~
parking, access drives, outdoor lighting, signs
and other uses and developments within the PID, in
addition to achieving these development standards,
shall be accomplished in accordance with an
approved final master plan to assure compatibility
with the existing and future land use in the
vicinity.
b. All areas designed for future expansion or not
intended for immediate improvement or development
shall be specified as reserve areas in the
preliminary master plan. The future use and the
limitations on future use of such area shall be
specified, or else such areas shall not be
included as part of the PID applicatíon. Reserve
areas included in the PID shall be landscaped or
otherwise maintained in a neat and orderly manner.
9.
Accessory structures shall not exceed forty percent of
the gross floor area of the principal structure.
10.
Every structure in the PID shall be a fully enclosed I
building of permanent construction. Any outside
storagé area shall be fully screened so that no
materials so stored are visible at any lot line or
public right-of-way.
Lighting: Lighting shall comply with section 30-94 of
this ordinance.
11.
12.
utilities: utilities shall be underground unless the
type of service necessary for normal activities of the
industry or business shall prohibit underground
installation.
Sec. 30-63-4 site Development Recommendations
The Planned Industrial Development district should be
designed and developed as an industrial park with high
standards for landscaping, buffering and open space. To
ensure a park-like atmosphere the fOllowing site development
recommendations are made.
(1) The principal entrance into the PID district should be
sufficiently landscaped to comply with the purposes of
this district. In addition, the first one-hundred
linear feet of street, leading through this principal I
entrance into the PID, should have a landscaped median
of sufficient width and planting density to meet the
purposes of this district.
""l1lI1
~
September 27, 1994
723
(2)
Parking within the PID should be located to the side or
rear of the principal structures on the lot, wherever
feasible. During review, consideration will be given
to topographical constraints, innovative site design,
buffering and landscaping factors.
(3) Loading areas should be screened from public view and
should not be placed in front yards.
( 4 ) Fences should not be placed in front yards except as
necessary for securi ty purposes. Fencing should be
uniform and well kept.
(A)
Sec. 30-63-5 Relationship to Existing Development
Regulations
All zoning regulations shall apply to the development of the
PID district, unless modified by the Board of Supervisors in
the approval of the final master plan.
Sec. 30-63-6 Application Process
(A)
The timeframes outlined in the Section are the maximum
timeframes mandated by the Code of Virginia. Roanoke County
will make every reasonable effort tb complete the
application process within a shorter timeframe.
I
(D)
(B) Prior to· submitting a formal application for review and
approval under these provisions, the applicant and county
staff shall meet to discuss the requirements of this
section. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain a mutual
understanding of the application requirements and process.
The applicant is encouraged to submit information -on the
scope and nature of the proposal to allow staff to become
familiar with the proposal in advance of this meeting.
(C) Any application to rezone land to the PID designation, shall
constitute an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuant to
Section 30-14. The written and graphic information
submitted by the applicant as part of the application
process shall constitute proffers pursuant to section 30-15
of this ordinance. Once the Board of Supervisors has
approved the final master plan, all accepted proffers shall
constitute conditions pursuant to Section 30-15.
To initiate an amendment, the applicant shall complete a
rezoning application packet. This information shall be
accompanied by graphic and written information, which shall
constitute a preliminary master plan. All information
submitted shall be of sufficient clarity and scale to
clearly and accurately identify the location, nature, and
I
~
JII""
724
September 27, 1994
þ
.....
character of the proposed district.
information shall include:
At a minimum this
1.
A legal description and plat showing the site
boundaries, and existing street lines, lot lines, and
easements.
2.
Existing zoning, land use and ownership of each parcel
proposed for the district.
3.
A general statement of planning objectives to be
achieved by the PID district, including a description
of the character of the proposed development, the
existing and proposed ownership of the site, the market
for which the development is oriented, and objectives
towards any specific human-made and natural
characteristics located on the site.
4.
A description and analysis of existing site conditions,
including information on topography, historic
resources, natural water courses, floodplains, unique
natural features, tree cover areas, known archeological
resources, etc. I
The proposed conceptual location and number of
structures within each land use of the proposed
development.
5.
6.
The gross square footage for each use type proposed in
the PID.
7.
The proposed size, location and use of other portions
of the tract, including landscaping and parking.
A traffic circulation plan, including the location of
access drives, parking and loading facilities,
pedestrian walks and the relationship to existing and
proposed external streets and traffic patterns.
General information on trip generation, vehicle
classification, ownership, maintenance and proposed
construction standards for these facilities should be
included. A Traffic Impact Analysis may be required by
the Administrator.
8.
9.
Reserved
10.
The proposed schedule
minimum, the schedule
commencement date for
build-out period.
of site development. At a
should include an approximatell
construction and a proposed
~
I
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994
725
11.
Generalized statements pertaining to architectural
design principles and guidelines shall be submitted in
sufficient detail to provide information op building
designs, orientations, styles, lighting plans, signage
plans, landscaping, etc.
(E)
The completed rezoning application and supporting
preliminary Master Plan materials shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for review and analysis. The Commission
shall review this information and make a report of its
findings to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission shall
as part of its review hold a public hearing pursuant to
Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. The
proposed district shall be posted with signs indicating the
date and time of the Commission public hearing.
(F)
The Commission shall make a report of its findings to the
Board of Supervisors within 90 days of the receipt of the
materials, unless the applicant requests, or agrees to an
extension of this time frame. The Commission's report shall
recommend approval, approval with modifications, or
disapproval of the preliminary master plan. Failure of the
Commission to make a report of its- findings to the Board of
Supervisors within this period shall constitute a Commission
recommendation of approval.
(G) If the Commission recommends denial of the preliminary
Master Plan, or approval with modification, the applicant
shall, if requested, have 60 days to make any modifications.
If the applicant desires to make any modifications to the
preliminary Master Plan, the Board of Supervisor's review
and action shall be delayed until such changes are made and
submitted for review.
(H) The Board ():f.HHê~P~:t:y~~<:>:r.!:;HH~.hëi~~H:I:"~y.A~~ t~~ preliminary Master
Plan, and~j!!ŠEj:::j:jlt§liªj~D.g:j:::::::~:::;:::::mmmj~§jjjj:j:::I@ä#~§g act to approve or
deny the pláriHH·withiiï"·H9'Ö·HHd'ãys·~'·HHHHAppr6var of the preliminary
Master Plan shall constitute acceptance of the plan's
provisions and concepts as proffers pursuant to Section 30-
15 of this ordinance. The Plan approved by the Board of
Supervisors shall constitute the final Master Plan for the
PID. Once approved by the Board of Supervisors, the
Administrator shall authorize the revisions to the official
zoning map to indicate the establishment of the PID
district.
Sec. 30-63-7 Revisions to Final Master Plan
(A)
Major revisions to the final Master Plan shall be reviewed
and approved following the procedures and requirements of
~
JII""
726
September 27, 1994
þ
(B)
(A)
(B)
l
Section 30-63-6. Major revisions include, but are not
limited to changes such as:
1. Any significant increase in the density of the
development;
2. Substantial change in circulation or access;
3. Substantial change in grading or utility provisions;
4. Substantial changes in the mixture of land uses;
5. Substantial change in architectural or site design
features of the development;
6. Any other change that the Administrator finds is a
major divergence from the approved final master plan.
All other changes in the final Master Plan shall be
considered minor amendments. The Administrator, upon
receipt of a written request of the owner, may approve such
minor amendments.
1. If the Administrator fails to act on a request for all
minor amendment to the Master Plan within 15 calendar
days, it shall be considered approved.
2 . A request which is disapproved by the Administrator
shall be considered a maj or amendment and shall be
subject to the approval process outlined above for such
amendments.
Sec. 30-63-8 Approval of preliminary and Final site
Development Plans
,Following the approv~l of the final Master Plan, the
applicant or its authorized agent, shall be required to
submit preliminary and final site development plans for
approval. Final site development plans for any phase or
component of the PID that involves the construction of
structures or facilities, shall be approved prior to the
issuance of a building and zoning permit, and the
commencement of construction. Standards for preliminary and
final s~te development plans are found in a document
entitled Land Develooment Procedures, available in the
Department of Engineering and Inspections.
It is the intent of this section that subdivision reviewll
under the subdivision regulations be carried out
simultaneously with the review of a planned industrial
~
I
I
~
September 27, 1994
727
(C)
development under this section. The plans required under
this section shall be submitted in a form which will satisfy
the requirements of the subdivision regulations, as
determined by the Administrator.
Preliminary and final site development plans submitted for
review shall be in compliance with the final Master Plan
approved by the Board of Supervisors. Roanoke County shall
/ review and approve or disapprove any Final site Development
Plan within 60 days of its submittal.
(D)
No Planned Industrial Development shall be approved and no
work shall be authorized on construction until all property
included in the final Master Plan is in common ownership.
Sec. 30-63-9 Failure to Beqin Development
(A)
Unless an extension is granted by the Administrator, failure
of the applicant to submit a preliminary site development
plan for at least one portion of the planned residential
development within 24 months of the approval of the final
Master Plan, shall constitute an application on the part of
applicant to rezone the PID to the district designations in
effect prior to the approval of the final Master Plan.
Sec. 30-63-10 Control Fo11owinq Approval of Final
Development Plans
The zoning administrator shall periodically inspect the site
and review all building permits issued for the development
to ensure that the development is in general compliance with
the submitted schedule.
(A)
2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after January 1. 1995.
On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the ordinance, and add
"after holding a public hearing" to Section 30-57-6 (H) and Section
30-63-6 (H), and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
~ Ordinance Vacatinq Portions of Public utility Easements
located in Waterford. Section 5. as Recorded in Plat
Book 16. Paqe 21. in the Hollins Maqisteria1 District.
~
JII""
728
September 27, 1994
þ
(Arnold Covey. Director of Enqineerinq , Insoections)
0-92794-18
Mr. Harrington advised that County staff and the public
utility companies have no objections to this vacation and he
recommends adoption of the ordinance. There was no discussion and no
citizens present to speak on this issue.
Supervisor Johnson
moved to adopt the ordinance.
The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
ORDINANCE 92794-18 VACATING THE FOLLOWING PORTIONS
OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON CERTAIN
LOTS IN SECTION 5 OF WATERFORD (PB 16, PAGE 21)
I
WHEREAS, Strauss Construction Company has requested the
Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia to vacate the follow-
ing portions of public utility easements located on certain lots in
Section 5 of Waterford in the Hollins Magisterial District as shown in
Plat Book 16, at page 21 of record in the Clerk's Office of the
Roanoke County Circuit Court; and,
WHEREAS, section 15.1-482 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia,
as amended, requires that such action be accomplished by the adoption
of an ordinance by the governing body; and,
WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by section 15.1-
431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and a first reading of II
this ordinance was· held pn September 13, 1994; and the second reading
.....
~
I
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994
729
of this ordinance was held on September 27, 1994.
BE IT ORDAINED
by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that portions of the following public utility
easements located in Section 5, Waterford in the Hollins Magisterial
District of record in Plat Book 16, at page 21, in the Office of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, be, and hereby
are, vacated pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the 1950 Code of
Virginia, as amended:
(1) 150-square feet of a public utility
easement located on Lot 1 (Tax Map
No. 26.16-12-1) and shown on a plat
prepared by Lumsden Associates,
P.C., dated 17 August 1994, and
(2) 329-square feet of a public utility
easement located on Lots 19 and 20
(Tax Map Nos. 26.16-12-20 and
26.16-12-21) and shown on a plat
prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.
C., dated 17 August 1994, and
(3) 149-square feet of a public utility
easement located on Lot 21 (Tax Map
No. 26.16-12-22), and shown ona
plat prepared by Lumsden
Associates, P. C., dated 17 August
1994, and,
2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect
thirty (30) days after its final passage.
All ordinances or parts of
ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and
the same hereby are, repealed.
3. That Strauss Construction Company shall record a
certified copy of this ordinance, along with the attached three plats
dated 17 August 1994, prepared by Lumsden and Associates, P. C., with
~
JII""
730
September 27, 1994
þ
the Clerk of the Circuit Court and shall pay all fees required to
accomplish this transaction and in addition, shall be responsible for
all costs and expenses associated herewith.
4. That as a further condition to the adoption of this
ordinance, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, shall
be indemnified of and held harmless from and against all claims for
damages to any improvements or structures within the old easement area
by it, its heirs, successors, or assigns.
5. That pursuant to § 15.1-485 of the 1950 Code of
Virginia, as amended, the circuit Court Clerk shall write in plain
legible letters across the part of the plat vacated, the word
"vacated" and also make a reference on the same to the volume and
pagel
in which the instrument of vacation is recorded.
On motion of supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
,Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Supervisor Nickens
PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE
~ Ordinance Vacatinq and C10sinq an unimoroved Portion of
Riqht-of-Way Known as Creek Circle. A10nq the Eastern
Side of Misty Forest Subdivision. Uoon the
Corore. Inc.
(Arnold Covey. Engineerinq ,
Petition of
:rnsDeationslI
.....
~
I
~
September 27, 1994
731
Director)
Mr. Harrington advised that staff has reviewed the request
to vacate and has determined that this section of Creek Circle does
not serve the public and does not directly affect any property owners
other than the petitioner. There was no discussion and no citizens
were present to speak on this issue.
Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set
the second reading for October 11, 1994. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens
IN RE:
OTHER BUSINESS
~ Bid Protest for Water Line Materials bY American Cast
Iron Pi~e Comoany. (Paul Mahoney. County Attorney)
A-92794-19
Mr. Mahoney advised that the American Cast Iron Pipe Company
(ACIPCO) is challenging the award of the South Loop Transmission Main
Water Line Materials to Griffin Pipe Products and United States Pipe
and Foundry Company. Mr. Mahoney advised that the key issues
involved concern the interpretation of the unit price figures and
contingencies in ACIPCO's bid documents. He advised that the
Procurement and Utility staffs reviewed the bids and their evaluation
II was that the split award was the low bid. He recommended that after
~
JII""
732
September 27, 1994
Þ
staff's
hearing
from all parties concerned, the Board agree with
decision to reject this protest and authorize staff to proceed with
the award of this contract to meet the December, 1995 deadline for
completion of the project.
Ed Natt, Counsel for ACIPCO, stated that they should have
been awarded this contract because they are the low bidder on all pipe
categories using the discount price, and that ACIPCO's bid would save
the County between $76,000 and $93,000.
He asserted that the two
discount condi tions and the order release language in the bid were
incorrectly interpreted by the County. Also present from ACIPCO were
Skip Benton, Assistant Sales Manager, John Hagelskamp, District Sales
Manager, and Andy Dodgen, Sales Engineer.
Gary Pears, Counsel for US Pipe, expressed appreciation
fori
this award, and stressed the importance of the project to US Pipe.
He
advised that the bid invitation did not call for contingencies and
there were no contingencies in US Pipe's quotation. He commented that
ACIPCO's bid documents contained many contingencies and now they are
trying to withdraw theIq verbally.
He felt that the County staff
handled the awarding of the bid properly. Also present from US Pipe
was Charles Turner, Sales Representative, and Allen Webb, Assistant
Eastern Regional Sales Manager.
Joy Lee Price,
Counsel for Griffin Pipe,
expressed
appreciation for the award and the opinion that the award of the bid
,was handled properly by the County.
properly supplied and submitted
Griffin Pipe, along with US Pipe,
its bid in accordance with bidll
~
~
I
""l1lI1
September 27, 1994
733
documents provided by the County. She advised that ACIPCO's bid
contained several contingencies. Also present from Griffin Pipe was
Bill Dudley, proj ect Engineer, and Ken Gravely, District Sales
Manager.
Charles Turner from US Pipe asked to respond ,to Mr. Natt's
contention that this was a unit price bid. He advised that this was
addressed in the pre-bid meeting, and he felt that the County's
intention was clearly stated that it intended to award pipes and
fittings together.
Mr. Natt advised that ACIPCO objects to any consideration of
Griffith Pipe's bid because they bid on C-153 compact fittings instead
of the C-I0 standard fittings called for in the County's
specifications. When Mr. Mahoney advised that this objection was
beyond the ten day protest period, Mr. Natt acknowledged that fact,
but explained that he received the bid documents after the ten day
period because he was required to submi t a Freedom of Information
request.
Skip Benton from ACIPCO advised that since there were no
qualities of fittings and valves called for in the bid, the bid should
be evaluated on the pipe quantities and unit prices that were
available to all bidders, and ACIPCO's bid will save the county about
$75,000. He explained the definition of the verbiage "order
release".
After discussion', Supervisor Kohinke moved to approve the
I staff recommendation to deny the protest and authorize staff to
~
JII""
734
September 27, 1994
þ
proceed with the award of the contract for the South Loop Transmission
Main Water Line Materials.
The motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Eddy
NAYS:
None
IN RE:
CITIZENS COMMENTS
William Carter, 4435 Cordell Drive, and Dennis Vandergrift,
2982 Lockhaven Drive, representing the 4-Wheel Property owners,
advised that Norfolk Southern has not completed fencing of the trash
trail rail spur, barricades have not been erected and signs are not
Chairman
Eddy
directed
staff
to
contact
Hubbard,1
posted.
John
Executive Director, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, and convey the
citizens' concerns.
IN RE:
ADJOURNMENT
At 9: 30 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to adjourn. The
motion carried by a unanimous voice vote with supervisor Nickens
absent.
Submitted by,
Approved by,
1::. ~~y~
I
&&v~~
Brenda J. Holton
Deputy Clerk
.....