4/27/2004 - Regular
April 27, 2004
317
Roanoke County Administration Center
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
April 27, 2004
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe
Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second
regularly scheduled meeting of the month of April, 2004.
IN RE: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Flora called the meeting to order at 2:03 p.m. The roll call was
taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman Richard C. Flora, Vice-Chairman Michael W.
Altizer, Supervisors Joseph B. “Butch” Church, Joseph
McNamara, Michael A. Wray
MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
STAFF PRESENT:
Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney,
County Attorney; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County
Administrator; Dan O’Donnell, Assistant County
Administrator; Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board; Teresa
Hamilton Hall, Public Information Officer
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was given by Reverend Diane Scribner-Clevenger, Unity
Church of Roanoke Valley. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present.
IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF
AGENDA ITEMS
April 27, 2004
318
Supervisor Wray requested that a closed session be added pursuant to
the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or consideration of the
appointment of specific public officers.
Mr. Hodge requested that the order of the following agenda items be
changed: (1) Move the presentation of the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget from Item R-1
to Item D-1. (2) Item R-1, public hearing on the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget, will need
to be held at 7:00 p.m. or later due to the fact that the advertisement stated that the
public hearing would be held at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Mahoney requested that a closed session be added pursuant to the
Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) to discuss pending litigation, Cellco Partnership
d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Board of Supervisors.
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
Proclamation declaring the week of May 3 through 9, 2004 as
1.
National Historic Preservation Week in the County of Roanoke
Chairman Flora presented the proclamation to John Kern, Director of the
Roanoke Regional Preservation Association, and Alison Blanton, President of the
.
Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation
Proclamation declaring the week of May 8 through 16, 2004 as
2.
National Tourism Week in the County of Roanoke
Chairman Flora presented the proclamation to David Kjolhede, Executive
Director of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau. Also present were
April 27, 2004
319
Susan Jennings, Executive Director of the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge; Beth Poff,
Executive Director of Mill Mountain Zoo; Blaine Shively, Vice President of Operations –
Hampton Inn Salem; and Cecelia Bradley, General Manager – Hampton Inn Airport..
IN RE: BRIEFINGS
1. Presentation of the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget for Roanoke
County. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Brent
Robertson, Budget Director)
Mr. Hodge advised that at this time, a state budget has not been adopted
so final budget figures are not available for all areas. The state contributes 6% of the
County’s total budget, and 48% of the school’s budget. He stated that the budget is
balanced within the existing tax rates and fees and does not include any new personnel.
The budget places strong emphasis on public education, public safety, and economic
development. It includes funding for several large County capital projects.
The General Government Fund budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 is
projected to be $135,889,036. This represents a $7.9 million increase of which
$800,000 is federal pass-through funding for social service program reimbursements
and $400,000 is generated from rescue transport fees that must be set aside for fire and
rescue services.
Mr. Hodge reported that the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA)
contract negotiations are expected to be completed by July 1, 2004, and both the City
and County will transfer assets and personnel. The County will transfer approximately
April 27, 2004
320
$28 million and 63 employees to the WVWA. The transfer will result in the elimination
of inter-fund transfers which will cost General Fund operations approximately $315,000
that will need to be offset against new revenues; however, the long-term benefits of the
Authority will outweigh this cost.
Human services has experienced increases in both case loads and costs
for providing services that will necessitate a transfer of approximately $1 million to the
Community Policy Management Team (CPMT). This program is supported with local
funds from the County and schools, as well as state allocations. In addition, the
demand for social service programs such as foster care and detention continues to
increase, resulting in the need for an additional allocation of $800,000. These programs
are, however, 100% reimbursable and the cost is offset by federal pass-through funds.
In summary, the total general government revenues are projected to be
$135,889,036 and the total projected revenues for all funds are $314,969,985. Mr.
Hodge highlighted the following proposed expenditures: Public Safety - $17,293,121;
Community Services - $10,552,518; Human Services - $14,011,769; Transfer to School
Operating Fund - $56,065,852; Comprehensive Services (an increase of $2 million over
prior year) - $5,037,171. The proposed revenues from real estate taxes are
$64,475,000. Personal property tax revenues reflected a decline in the assessments for
used vehicles; however, this was offset by increases in new car sales. The proposed
personal property tax revenues total $25,464,846.
April 27, 2004
321
With respect to employee benefits, Mr. Hodge advised that a 3% salary
increase has been included in the budget. The County also absorbed the increase in
VRS retirement costs and a portion of the proposed health insurance increase. An
increase in the deferred compensation match was also included. He noted that
approximately $800,000 was set aside for contributions to human service, social
service, cultural, tourism, and other agencies. Approximately $4,444,826 in additional
funding requests was not funded in the proposed budget. Mr. Hodge also highlighted
the projects included in the capital improvements program (CIP).
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE
1. Second reading of ordinance to amend Ordinance 012704-5 which
amended Section 2-7. “Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for
Emergency Response” of the Roanoke County Code. (Paul
Mahoney, County Attorney)
O-042704-1
Mr. Mahoney advised that there have been no changes in this matter
since the first reading which was held on April 13, 2004. There was no discussion on
this item.
Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
April 27, 2004
322
ORDINANCE 042704-1 AMENDING ORDINANCE 012704-5 WHICH
AMENDED SECTION 2-7. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES
INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY CODE
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted Ordinance
No. 031202-6 amending the Roanoke County Code by the adoption of a new Section
2.7 “Reimbursement of expenses incurred for emergency response to accidents or
incidents caused by driving while impaired” providing the County with an opportunity to
recover its reasonable expenses in providing an appropriate emergency response to
such accidents or incidents. This ordinance was authorized by Section 15.2-1716 of the
Code of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the 2003 session of the Virginia General expanded Section 15.2-
1716 of the Code of Virginia to also include reckless driving, driving without a license,
and leaving the scene of an accident; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, by Ordinance
No. 012704-5, amended Section 2-7 to include several of these violations of State Code
; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to clarify the reference to provisions of the State
Code is in the public interests; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 13, 2004; and
the second reading was held on April 27, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency
Response to Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired be amended to
read and provide as follows:
Chapter 2. Administration
Article I. In General
* * * *
Section 2-7. Reimbursement of Expenses Incurred for Emergency Response to
Accidents or Incidents Caused by Driving While Impaired, Driving Without
a License, and Leaving the Scene of an Accident.
(a) Any person who is convicted of violation of Section 12-8 of this Code, or of
Sections 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, or Section 29.1-738 of the Code of Virginia, when his
operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or water craft is the proximate cause of any
accident or incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response; or the provisions
of Article 1 (Section 46.2-300 et seq.) of Chapter 3 of Title 46.2 ”or of Section 46.2-300
relating to driving with out a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license; or of
Section 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident, shall be liable
in a separate civil action to the county, for the reasonable expense thereof, in an
April 27, 2004
323
amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) in the aggregate for a particular
accident or incident. In determining the "reasonable expense," the County may bill a flat
fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or to the maximum flat fee authorized by Section
15.2-1716 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, or a minute-by-minute accounting
of the actual costs incurred.
(b) As used in this section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all
costs of providing law-enforcement, firefighting, rescue, and emergency medical
services.
(c) The provisions of this section shall not preempt or limit any remedy
available to the commonwealth, the County, or any fire/rescue squad to recover the
reasonable expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident not involving
a violation of any of the above mentioned State Code sections as set forth herein.
2. Any expenses recovered shall be deposited into the General Fund and
appropriated annually to the Police Department and the Fire & Rescue Department
operating budgets based upon an estimate of the proportional expenses incurred in
responding to such accidents or incidents.
3.
That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: APPOINTMENTS
1. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission
Supervisor Flora nominated Richard Kelly to serve an additional three-
.
year term that will expire on April 8, 2007
2. Social Services Advisory Board (Appointed by District)
Supervisor Flora nominated Dot Hayes to complete the unexpired four-
year term of Patricia W. Thompson, Hollins Magisterial District, who has resigned. This
term will expire on August 1, 2005.
April 27, 2004
324
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
R-042704-2; R-042704-2.a
Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the consent resolution with Item J-3,
request to approve name for the former Salem Office Supply Building, removed. He
requested that a work session be scheduled for May 11, 2004 to discuss this item. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 042704-2 APPROVING AND CONCURRING
IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED
AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for April 27,
2004, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and
concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1
through 2, inclusive, as follows:
1. Approval of minutes – April 13, 2004
2. Request to accept Laurel Ridge Drive and a portion of Cortland Road
into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System
3. Request to approve name for the former Salem Office Supply Building
2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required
by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item
pursuant to this resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution with Item J-3
removed, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 042704-2.a REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF LAUREL RIDGE
DRIVE AND A PORTION OF CORTLAND ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM.
April 27, 2004
325
WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Addition Form SR-5(A),
fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office
of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and
WHEREAS, the 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,
WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation
have entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999 for comprehensive stormwater
detention which applies to this request for addition,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia
Department of Transportation to add the 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: Supervisor Altizer
Seconded by None Required
Yeas: Supervisors, McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
Nays: None
IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
1.Request for a work session on June 8, 2004, to conduct a training
session with the Board regarding planning and zoning laws in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney
)
It was the consensus of the Board to schedule the work session on June
8, 2004. Supervisor Wray requested that staff ensure that citizens are notified of the
upcoming meetings that would allow them to provide input regarding the
Comprehensive Plan revisions.
April 27, 2004
326
IN RE: REPORTS
Supervisor Wray moved to receive and file the following reports. The
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
3. Board Contingency Fund
4. Future Capital Projects
5. Accounts Paid – March 2004
6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for
the month ended March 31, 2004
7. Statement of Treasurer’s accountability per investment and
portfolio policy as of March 31, 2004
8. Proclamations signed by the Chairman
9. Report of claims activity for the self-insurance program for the
period ending Mach 31, 2004
IN RE: CLOSED MEETING
At 3:08 p.m., Supervisor Flora moved to go into closed meeting followed
by a work session pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion or
consideration of the appointment of specific public officers; and Section 2.2-3711 A (7)
April 27, 2004
327
discussion of pending litigation, Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Board of
Supervisors. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
The closed meeting was held from 3:13 p.m. until 3:38 p.m.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1. Work session to discuss refuse collection on private roads.
(Elmer Hodge, County Administrator)
The work session was held from 3:40 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. The Board
participated in a tour of private roads in Roanoke County where trash collection
concerns had been expressed.
IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
R-042704-3
At 6:03 p.m., Supervisor Altizer moved to return to open session and
adopt the certification resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 042704-3 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS
HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened
a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in
accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was
April 27, 2004
328
conducted in conformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members
knowledge:
1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting
requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this
certification resolution applies, and
2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening
the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to
operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located
at 4040 Jae Valley Road, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the
petition of Jeff Bennett. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner)
O-042704-4
Ms. Scheid advised that the business would be located in an existing
2,000 square foot garage and a 2,000 square foot expansion of the garage is planned.
The existing space would be used for the assembly/fabrication of custom motorcycles
and automobiles. The expansion area would be used for the existing parts and
accessories business and for storage of finished vehicles awaiting delivery. All work
would be fabrication and installation, and no collision repair, paint booths, or general
maintenance of vehicles would be allowed. Mr. Bennett plans to be the only employee.
Ms. Scheid stated that the Planning Commission approved the request with a vote of 4-
April 27, 2004
329
0 with one condition: the business shall have a maximum of three employees in
addition to the owner.
In response to an inquiry from Supervisor Wray, Ms. Scheid advised that
visibility of the business from the street would be difficult because the drive is very
steep. Mr. Bennett advised that he will store the vehicles inside the building.
Supervisor Wray also inquired whether any additional solid waste services would be
required. Ms. Scheid stated that the proposed business does not require new urban
services; it requires minimal land disturbance for the proposed addition; and it would not
change the existing rural residential development patterns.
Supervisor Altizer questioned if the petitioner was aware of and in
agreement with the condition placed on the special use permit. Mr. Bennett advised
that he was in agreement with the condition.
There were no citizens present to speak on this item.
Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
ORDINANCE 042704-4 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO JEFF
BENNETT TO OPERATE A CUSTOM MANUFACTURING BUSINESS
ON 3.56 ACRES LOCATED AT 4040 JAE VALLEY ROAD (TAX MAP
NO. 90.00-3-28) VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Jeff Bennett has filed a petition for a special use permit to operate a
custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae Valley Road (Tax
Map No. 90.00-3-28) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and
April 27, 2004
330
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on
April 6, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first
reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on
this matter was held on April 27, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 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 Jeff
Bennett to operate a custom manufacturing business on 3.56 acres located at 4040 Jae
Valley Road in the Vinton Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted
2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950
Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the
following condition:
(1) The business shall have a maximum of three employees, in addition to the
owner.
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. 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 Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
2. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to
conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14
acres located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive, Catawba Magisterial
District, upon the petition of D. Gregory Roberts. (Janet Scheid,
Chief Planner)
O-042704-5
Ms. Scheid reported that the petitioner is requesting the special use permit
in order to conduct a very limited, part-time dog grooming occupation. This does not fall
under the definition of a commercial kennel, and the petitioners have agreed to limit the
April 27, 2004
331
business to no more than one dog on the premises for grooming at any given time and
to schedule no more than 10 appointments per week. The applicants understand that if
they have more than one animal on the premises at a time, they will be in violation of
the zoning ordinance by operating an illegal commercial kennel. Ms. Scheid advised
that the Planning Commission approved the petition with a vote of 4-0 at their meeting
on April 6, 2004, with two conditions.
Supervisor Church requested that Mr. Roberts provide additional
information regarding how he will handle scheduling of appointments to avoid being in
violation of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Roberts stated that the main concerns expressed
by citizens involved the kenneling of dogs and dogs barking, and he indicated that this
will not occur. He advised that there will be no more than 10 appointments per week
and the business will have only one holding cage for animals that are waiting to be
picked up by their owners.
Supervisor Church noted that the property consists of 2.14 acres which is
positive, and he requested that Mr. Roberts adhere to the one dog limit.
Supervisor Wray confirmed with the petitioner that there would only be
one holding cage. He also questioned if there was a minimum land use required for this
type of business. Ms. Scheid advised that there is no minimum acreage required for
this use. Mr. Roberts noted that his home sits on 10 acres of land.
There were no citizens present to speak on this matter.
April 27, 2004
332
Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
ORDINANCE 042704-5 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO D.
GREGORY ROBERTS TO CONDUCT A HOME OCCUPATION IN AN
ACCESSORY BUILDING ON 2.14 ACRES LOCATED AT 5228
PONDEROSA DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 36.12-3-32) CATAWBA
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, D. Gregory Roberts has filed a petition for a special use permit to
conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres located at 5228
Ponderosa Drive (Tax Map No. 36.12-3-32) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on
April 6, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first
reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on
this matter was held on April 27, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 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 D.
Gregory Roberts to conduct a home occupation in an accessory building on 2.14 acres
located at 5228 Ponderosa Drive in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in
accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section
15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is
hereby approved with the following conditions:
(1) No more than one (1) dog on the premises for grooming at any given time.
(2) No more than ten (10) appointments per week.
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. The Zoning Administrator is directed
to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized
by this ordinance.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
April 27, 2004
333
3. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit to
conduct recreational vehicle sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328
Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition
of Marc I. Wilson. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner)
O-042704-6
Ms. Scheid advised that Mr. Wilson currently operates a minor automobile
repair and used automobile dealership business at the site known as the Sportscar
Clinic. The sale of recreational vehicles is a separate use category under the zoning
ordinance and therefore a special use permit is required. Mr. Wilson has agreed to only
display and sell one recreational vehicle at a time on the property. Ms. Scheid stated
the Planning Commission approved the petition at their meeting on April 6 with a vote of
4-0 with two conditions added: (1) recreational vehicle sales and service shall be
allowed only as an accessory use to minor automobile repair and automobile
dealership, used; and (2) no more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for
sale at any one time.
Supervisor Church confirmed with Mr. Wilson that he accepts and agrees
to the conditions placed on the special use permit.
Supervisor Wray questioned if the special use permit also includes boats.
Mr. Wilson advised that he has no interest in the sale of boats, and that this is an area
governed by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and requires separate
April 27, 2004
334
licensing. In response to an inquiry from Supervisor Wray, Mr. Wilson advised that
there would not be any additional signage.
There were no citizens present to speak on this matter.
Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
ORDINANCE 042704-6 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
MARC I. WILSON TO CONDUCT RECREATIONAL VEHICLE SALES
ON 1.4088 ACRES LOCATED AT 3328 PETERS CREEK ROAD (TAX
MAP NO. 37.14-1-7) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Marc I. Wilson has filed a petition for a special use permit to conduct
recreational vehicles sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters Creek Road (Tax
Map No. 37.14-1-7) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on
April 6, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first
reading on this matter on March 23, 2004; the second reading and public hearing on
this matter was held on April 27, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 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 Marc I.
Wilson to conduct recreational vehicles sales on 1.4088 acres located at 3328 Peters
Creek Road in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the
adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the
1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved
with the following conditions:
(1) Recreational Vehicles sales and service shall be allowed only as an
accessory use to Minor Automobile Repair and Automobile Dealership, Used.
(2) No more than one (1) recreational vehicle will be displayed for sale at any
one time.
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. The Zoning Administrator is directed
April 27, 2004
335
to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized
by this ordinance.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
4Second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 15.7 acre tract of real
.
estate located at Route 419 near its intersection with Keagy Road
(Tax Map No’s. 67.18-2-1, 67.18-2-2, 67.18-2-3, 67.18-2-4) from the
zoning classification of C-1 and R-1 to the zoning classification of
C-2, with conditions, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the
petition of Kahn Development Company. (Janet Scheid, Chief
Planner) Postponed from March 23, 2004 at the request of the
petitioner
A-042704-7
Maryellen Goodlatte, attorney for the petitioner, advised that she had sent
a letter to the County of Roanoke advising that Khan Development Company would not
be proceeding with their petition tonight. She stated that Kahn Development and Mr.
Via have reached an agreement that would reconfigure the site and remove the 5.8
acres of R-1 property and involve the acquisition of property from Mr. Via along Route
419. She advised that this will necessitate referring this matter back to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration. With respect to future hearing dates, Ms. Goodlatte
stated that Kahn Development will attempt to proceed with this matter at the June 1
Planning Commission meeting and the June 22 Board of Supervisors meeting. She
April 27, 2004
336
requested that the Board refer this matter back to the Planning Commission for
reconsideration.
Supervisor McNamara questioned if information regarding the proposed
changes will be made available to the public before June 1. Ms. Goodlatte advised that
the engineers are working to develop revised plans as quickly as possible, and these
will be made available to the County and the public as soon as they are completed.
Supervisor McNamara moved to refer the matter back to the Planning
Commission for reconsideration. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
Supervisor Church advised that it has been his practice in the past to not
send items back to the Planning Commission but that in this case, the scheme of the
project has changed to the extent that it merits reconsideration by the Planning
Commission.
Earle C. Atkins, 4926 Keagy Road, SW, advised that he is in favor of the
new proposal. He noted that it provides a better buffer zone between his home and the
proposed shopping center, and thanked Mr. Via for offering the land swap as a
compromise.
Supervisor McNamara thanked the citizens and the developer for their
willingness to compromise. He also expressed appreciation to Mr. Via, the Greater
April 27, 2004
337
Hidden Valley Neighborhood Association, Mary Ellen Goodlatte, and Kahn
Development.
5Second reading of an ordinance to rezone 4.92 acres from C2C
.
General Commercial District with Conditions to C2 General
Commercial District, 8.03 acres from C1 Office District to C2
General Commercial District, and 17.01 acres from R3 Medium
Density Residential District to C2 General Commercial District in
order to construct a general office and retail sales facility located
at 4486 Summit Street, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the
petition of Slate Hill I, LLC, Slate Hill II, LLC, and Woodcliff
Investments, LLC. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Postponed from
March 23, 2004 at the request of the Planning Commission
A-042704-8
Ms. Scheid reported that the Planning Commission held a public hearing
on this petition on April 6, 2004, and several citizens spoke against the proposed
rezoning at that time. The concerns expressed included unknown uses, tree removal
and grading, possible storm water runoff, appearance of the buildings, traffic
congestion, and access. Several representatives from the Sierra Club spoke against
the project. In addition, the Planning Commission members shared many of the same
concerns as the citizens. There were specific concerns expressed by several
commissioners about the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) response to the
April 27, 2004
338
traffic study. The commissioners discussed the size of buildings, the amount of parking,
and the grading of the site. There was discussion between the commissioners and Mr.
Natt about the development of the site with the existing C-1 and R-3 zoning. The
commissioners repeatedly attempted to have the petitioner clarify the uses and provide
more information about the project.
Ms. Scheid stated that Mr. McNeil made a motion to make a negative
recommendation on the petition and the motion carried with a vote of 4-0. The following
proffers have been made on the property: (1) The C-2 uses set forth on Exhibit A,
included in the agenda packet, would be prohibited. (2) The square footage of any
building located on the property would not exceed 110,000 square feet. (3) No building
will be of a butler type building with a metal exterior. (4) The roads shall be in the
approximate location as set forth on the “Slate Hill Proposed Roadway and
Development Plan” dated January 20, 2004, prepared by Rife+Wood Architects,
included in the agenda packet as Exhibit B. In the event VDOT does not grant
permission to construct a portion of the road on the VDOT property as shown on said
plan, the approximate road location shall be as set forth on the “Slate Hill Proposed
Roadway and Development Plan” dated December 11, 2003 prepared by Rife+Wood
Architects, included in the agenda packet as Exhibit C. (5) Structures constructed in
Zones 1, 2 and 3 will be similar in appearance, materials and design. Structures
constructed in Zone 4 may be similar in appearance, materials and design, but will be
subject to requirements of specific users.
April 27, 2004
339
Mr. Ed Natt, attorney for the petitioner, requested that the petition be
considered on the basis of what is the appropriate land use for this property. He
presented a packet of information and maps to the Board, and advised that the existing
zoning in Area A is currently C-1 and C-2 with no conditions or proffers on the use of
this property. Area B is currently zoned R-3 with no conditions and allows, by right, the
building of up to 12 multi-family units per acre; since approximately 17 acres are
involved, this allows approximately 200 multi-family units. Area C is currently C-2C with
conditions, and the petitioner is requesting that the conditions in this area be replaced
with the proffers being submitted. Mr. Natt also advised that there are two access
points from Route 419: the former McNeil entrance and the entrance through the
former unfinished wood products business (“rocking chair” property). There is also an
additional 20 acres owned by the petitioner which is zoned R-3. This property is at the
rear of the Lowe’s property and adjacent to the Quail Valley condominium project. The
petitioner is not requesting any rezoning of this portion of the property. In addition,
there is also a right of access through the Lowe’s entrance onto Route 220 .
With respect to soil erosion, sediment control and drainage concerns, Mr.
Natt reported that the property is topographically challenging. However, the petitioner
has followed the County’s procedures and all tree removal has been done in
accordance with the County’s zoning ordinance. Lumsden & Associates developed the
Slate Hill conceptual plan which shows the approximate location of buildings. This
information was required by Roanoke County prior to obtaining the erosion and
April 27, 2004
340
sediment control (E&S) permit, which was approved on January 20, 2004. He further
advised that the issues with VDOT relative to right-of-way and the erosion control plan
have been resolved.
Mr. Natt stated that an important feature of the property is that it is lower
than Chateau Mont, Pheasant Ridge, and the Roanoke County water tank which sits at
the top of the hill. He reported that most of the citizens who spoke at the Planning
Commission meeting in opposition to the project expressed concerns about tree
removal and E&S. He advised that the petitioner will comply with all Roanoke County
E&S regulations.
With respect to the proposed zoning, Mr. Natt advised that the proffers
which have been submitted protect and safeguard the property. He stated that the
exact details of the buildings are not known at this time because it will depend on who
will be the ultimate users of the property. The petitioner, Mr. Smith, is a local developer
who is proposing to provide the stimulus for commercial development in the County.
Mr. Natt re-stated the proffers presented by Ms. Scheid and outlined above. He
reported that the roads will be in the locations outlined in the materials distributed to the
Board and will limit what can be built by virtue of the road locations. In addition, access
through the McNeil property has been eliminated.
With respect to access issues, Mr. Natt stated that there are two
entrances off of Route 419, as well as access through the Lowe’s entrance on Route
220, if entrance permits are granted by VDOT. He reported that the McNeil property
April 27, 2004
341
entrance was used for a number of years by the former owner in conjunction with the
operation of his business. He noted that in 1995, VDOT granted an entrance permit for
a 400 seat restaurant through the McNeil property. Mr. Natt advised that the petitioner
would seek an entrance permit from VDOT through this property, and that the petitioner
is willing to construct a deceleration lane on Route 419 if this is needed to obtain the
entrance permit. However if the rezoning is granted, the petitioner will not seek access
through this entrance and the sole entrance off of Route 419 will be through the “rocking
chair property”. In addition, the petitioner will seek to access the property from Route
220 through the Lowe’s entrance.
Mr. Natt reported that the petitioner is willing to state that all structures
within Zones 1, 2, and 3, as shown on the submitted materials, will be similar in
appearance, materials, and design. All buildings constructed within Zone 4 will be
similar in appearance, materials, and design.
Mr. Natt stated that the existing zoning allows for the development of
multi-family units; if developed as R-3, this will generate more traffic than the proposed
C-1 and C-2 zoning. Mr. Gene Kress, Traffic Engineer at Mattern and Craig, conducted
a traffic study which states that the vehicle count with R-3 zoning would be
approximately 1,200 vehicle trips per day compared to 600 vehicle trips per day if it
were rezoned to C-2C.
Mr. Kress reported that on February 19, the interested stakeholders met to
discuss the proposed plan. It was agreed that there would be one point of access to the
April 27, 2004
342
development from Route 419 which would be through the “rocking chair” property. The
McNeil entrance would be closed. It was also agreed that the frontage road which runs
parallel to Route 419 in front of Wendy’s Restaurant would not be utilized. From Route
220, access would be through the Lowe’s entrance at Valley Drive. If traffic becomes
congested in this area, there is an access road parallel to Route 220 that goes to the
Lowe’s southern entrance and exit. This access was also included in the traffic study.
Mr. Kress advised that the study was submitted to Integra on March 29;
however, VDOT did not have sufficient time to review the study prior to the Planning
Commission meeting on April 6. Arrangements were made to meet with VDOT staff on
April 12 to address their concerns. Mr. Kress stated that beginning at Route 419, there
would be a low level of service – coming out of the development would be level of
service F. Other agreements that were made include the following: (1) there is a right
turn in, right turn out only on Route 419; (2) there would be no median breaks or signal
installations. It was also recommended by Mattern and Craig that a separate right turn
lane be added for the southbound Route 419 traffic that would be making a right turn
into the development. The only additional information requested by VDOT at the April
12 meeting was the recommended length of the right turn lane.
Mr. Kress advised that regarding the intersection at Valley Drive and
Franklin Road, VDOT challenged some of the level of service operations at this location
because a percentage of trucks and a percentage grade on Franklin Road were not
included in the study. VDOT requested that the percentage grade be included in the
April 27, 2004
343
study, as well as possible signalization at the Crossbow Circle/Wal-Mart intersection.
Mr. Kress advised that the study was re-configured with 17% trucks, a grade on Franklin
Road, and the effects of a signalized intersection at the Crossbow Circle/Wal-Mart
intersection. As a result, the levels of service dropped from the initial study. The
revised study was completed on April 16 and was submitted to the applicant, who in
turn has re-submitted the study to the County and VDOT for their comments. He
advised that those comments were received this afternoon.
Mr. Kress reported that the results of the study show that the development
is expected to produce approximately 6,200 vehicle trips per day, of which
approximately 4,900 would be new trips, 900 would be pass-by trips, and 400 would be
internal trips. Approximately 60% of the traffic arriving at the development would be
coming from Route 419, 30% from the downtown area via Route 220 South, and 10%
would be coming from the south along Route 220. The study shows approximately
4,000 vehicle trips per day through the Route 419 point of ingress and egress; 1,800
vehicle trips per day through the Franklin Road/Route 220 entrance, of which 1,600 will
access the development through Valley Drive and the remaining 200 through the
Lowe’s entrance.
Mr. Kress advised that the level of service does not change significantly
for the development as compared to the existing level of service. The principal
difference is that during the a.m. peak hour, the traffic exiting the development via
Valley Drive is currently operating at a level of service C. If the development is
April 27, 2004
344
approved, the level of service would drop to level D. In addition, the left turn northbound
traffic along Route 220 is currently operating at a level of service D. In the p.m. peak
hour, there is still a level of service D coming out of Lowe’s and there are two level of
service E for the p.m. peak hours: (1) southbound traffic on Route 220 – this is at
capacity; (2) northbound left turn lane coming from Wal-Mart into Lowe’s – also
currently at capacity. When looking at the projected levels of service during the a.m.,
traffic exiting the development on Route 419 would be level of service C. The
northbound left turn lane coming from Wal-Mart into Lowe’s is projected to drop from
level of service E to F. This is primarily due to the fact that the left turn lane length is
insufficient to accommodate the volumes anticipated at the location. In the p.m., the
level of service for traffic exiting Lowe’s would drop from D to E and it would be at
capacity. In addition, the E level of operations that currently exist along Route 220 at
the Lowe’s entrance would drop from E to F. This would result in traffic that exceeds
capacity and backup of vehicles.
Mr. Kress stated that the analysis shows that there are an insufficient
number of lanes on Franklin Road and Route 220 to carry today’s volume at the desired
level of service. It is already an E and, at times, a level F along Route 419 (during the
p.m. peak hour). Traffic will back up at the signal light for the ramp onto Route 220
South and will back up through several signal lights along Route 419. Therefore, traffic
trying to exit the development along Route 419 will experience a level of service F, as
well.
April 27, 2004
345
Mr. Natt advised that the project encourages appropriate economic
development with proffers that are designed to protect the property. If the rezoning is
denied, the petitioner will still develop the C-1 and C-2 without any proffers or
conditions. In addition, the R-3 portion of the property will be developed for multi-family
use. He indicated that the project would provide economic stimulus for the Tanglewood
Mall area.
Mr. Jim Smith, the petitioner, advised that this project is different from the
proposal recently submitted by Kahn Development in that there are 32 separate parcels
of land that had to be acquired. He voiced his commitment to developing the property
and indicated that if the rezoning is not approved, he will develop it in accordance with
the existing zoning. He stated that there is a better way to develop the project, and
indicated that he would like to move toward this goal.
Mr. Natt re-stated the petitioner’s intent to develop the project and advised
that the question is whether it will be developed with no conditions or whether it will be
developed with the proffers submitted. He also advised that the R-3 property will be
developed and it is only a question of whether it will be developed as R-3 or rezoned to
C-2C with conditions. He stated that if the rezoning request is denied, the County will
have 200 multi-family units at the top of the property, increased traffic, and commercial
development with no proffers or conditions. In addition, there will be a possibility of two
entrances on Route 419 at the McNeil and “rocking chair” properties. If the property is
rezoned, there will be a large commercial tract with economic benefits to Roanoke
April 27, 2004
346
County, proffers that will dictate how the development will take place (land use
parameters), better traffic flow, one entrance along Route 419, and no multi-family
development.
Supervisor Altizer advised that he had heard numerous times what could
be done if the rezoning request is not approved. He asked the petitioner if it was his
wish to develop the property under the current conditions or for the best use. Mr. Smith
advised that he preferred to develop the property for the best use.
Supervisor Wray requested that staff explain the rules governing the
issuance of grading permits. Ms. Scheid stated that a plan was submitted for grading
the property, which was reviewed and approved. She confirmed that the review
addresses issues relating to E&S.
The following citizens spoke regarding this matter:
Mr. Hunter Smith, 5260 Crossbow Circle – #4D, Roanoke, Virginia, waived
his time to speak.
Mr. Robert K. Eggbert, 3571 Bradshaw Road, Salem, Virginia, advised
that he is the Chair of the Sierra Club – Roanoke River Group, and he requested that
the rezoning request be denied. He stated that the land is too steep and the traffic is
too congested. He stated that approving the request would set a dangerous precedent
for future development. He requested that if the development proceeds, that the Board
ensure that the site development and construction is done in a safe and environmentally
April 27, 2004
347
sound manner. He requested that for the future, the Board have ordinances in place
that will protect steep hillsides and ridgelines.
Ms. Frances E. Boatman, 5260 Crossbow Circle, SW - #5C, Roanoke,
Virginia, stated that she is President of the Quail Valley Homeowners Association. She
commended staff in the Community Development Department for their work on this
matter. She voiced the following concerns: (1) She advised that she has heard
repeatedly that the petitioner is a local developer; however, the registered agent for
Slate Hill I and II, LLC is National Registered Agents in Alexandria, Virginia. The
registered agent for Woodcliff is Neil Burkoff at the First Union Tower in Roanoke. She
stated that she has been unable to determine who the principals of Slate Hill are, and
expressed concerns about the limited liability of a corporation in Alexandria. (2) She
stated that the petitioner has advised that the 20 acres behind Lowe’s is not included in
the rezoning; however, the maps distributed by the petitioner show the 20 acres
(outlined in green) and the legend indicates that all areas outlined in green are the
proposed development areas. (3) She stated that the petitioner is requesting rezoning
of property at 4486 Summit Avenue. Ms. Boatman indicated that Summit Avenue is an
abandoned road which is on the property line between Lowe’s and Quail Valley and
runs perpendicular to Route 220. She requested that the 20 acre parcel not be included
in the proposed rezoning. (4) She voiced concerns about the appearance of buildings,
the number of parking spaces, traffic, landscaping, and storm water runoff. She stated
that none of this information has been provided even though the Planning Commission
April 27, 2004
348
offered the petitioner additional time to provide the details. (5) She stated that there are
concerns about the traffic impact on the community, and reported the following traffic
statistics: (a) Hunting Hills Drive to Route 419 has experienced 161 vehicle accidents
from January 2000 – January 2003; (b) Route 419 from Ogden Road past Tanglewood
Mall – 276 accidents since 2000. She read and submitted a letter from VDOT to
Anthony Ford, Roanoke County Traffic Engineer, dated April 23, 2004.
Ms. Elizabeth Abe, 6909 Mary B. Place, Roanoke, Virginia, stated that
rezoning from residential to commercial will increase the density of the buildings
allowed, thus contributing to excess water runoff. She reviewed slope information
presented on maps with the Board. Ms. Abe submitted a copy of a Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) inspection report dated March 4, 2004, and advised that
the site is currently in violation on 8 out of 18 categories. In addition, the petitioner did
not obtain the DEQ permit until citizens became involved and questioned the lack of a
permit. The permit was obtained on February 19, 2004. Ms. Abe stated that the
violations required a response to DEQ within 7 days and she advised that she is not
aware whether this response has yet been made.
Ms. Annie Krochalis, 9428 Patterson Drive, Bent Mountain, advised that a
short-term boom in construction does not fund long-term service and infrastructure
costs. New residential developments are being added on questionable slopes while
funding is cut for teaching positions in the schools and Fire and Rescue reports state
that services cannot be rendered in a timely fashion. She noted that the Slate Hill
April 27, 2004
349
development has slopes of 33% to 57% and this presents risks of erosion and
landslides that will aggravate existing water pollution concerns in the area. Businesses
in the area have reported problems with sliding hillsides, storm water backup and
flooding. She requested greater coordination between the County and DEQ regarding
E&S ordinances and enforcement. She also stated that there were citizen concerns
due to the fact that full sets of construction documents are not required before a
rezoning is considered; thereby allowing for clearing and grading to commence prior to
rezoning approval.
Mr. Sherman Banford, 2423 Winthrop Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia, stated
that he is the Conservation Chair of the Sierra Club. He indicated that at the Planning
Commission meeting, written comments were submitted outlining their concerns and
urging denial of the project. He advised that the major concerns are as follows: (1)
Ensure that the development not become an eyesore and that proper procedures are
followed. He stated that large buildings on ridge tops with no landscaping are not
pleasing to the eye. (2) Slopes on the project are 33% - 57% and this presents the
potential for landslides and sediment flowing into the ore branch. (3) Details regarding
the proposed development are critical in establishing the potential traffic impact.
Ms. Kristin Peckman, 8131 Webster Drive, Roanoke, Virginia, requested
that the Board heed the conclusions of the staff and Planning Commission and deny the
request. She stated that the petitioner has shown bad faith in scraping the hillside bare
prior to the approval of the rezoning request. She indicated that the petitioner has
April 27, 2004
350
repeatedly conveyed the message “if you don’t give us what we want tonight, we’ll just
do something worse”. She stated that the petitioner is wasting the Board’s time by not
providing adequate details regarding the proposed project. She noted concerns about
potential cut-through traffic from Route 419 to Route 220 if the rezoning is approved.
Ms. Peckman stated that this project is inappropriate for this location with its steep
slopes.
Mr. Bob Johnson, 8276 Olsen Road, Roanoke, Virginia, stated that Mr.
Smith is a decent, honorable member of the community. He advised that utilizing a
national firm to register an LLC is a less expensive way to operate a limited liability
corporation, as opposed to utilizing a local attorney for this service. He stated that no
threats have been made: Mr. Smith owns the property and he is going to develop it. He
stated that what should have been rightfully debated was that Roanoke County has an
opportunity – would the County rather see this property as commercial or does the
petitioner have to develop it as residential. He stated Mr. Smith envisions a better use
for the property.
Mr. Natt stated that there has been no evidence of bad faith. He advised
that an E&S plan was submitted and approved. DEQ did note violations which have
been corrected. He noted that this has not been an easy project, but all required steps
have been followed. He stated that the key issue is what is the best land use for this
property.
April 27, 2004
351
Supervisor Flora questioned how much of the steep slope is now zoned
commercial. Ms. Scheid indicated that a significant portion of the hill is currently C-1
and this extends close to the top of the hill.
Supervisor Flora also questioned whether an evaluation of the traffic
impact on the stoplight at Tanglewood Mall was conducted since the proposal only
allows for a right turn in and out of Route 419. Mr. Kress advised that a small
percentage of the traffic will make a U-turn or a right at Tanglewood Mall and go back
out onto Route 419 to access the development. With respect to the impact on service
levels, Mr. Kress advised that a breakdown already exists in this area because of the
level of service F operations during the p.m. peak hour. In addition, there will be level of
service F operations for traffic exiting the proposed development during the p.m. peak
hour. During the morning, there will be a level of service C coming out of the
development.
Supervisor McNamara noted that many DEQ questions had been raised
relative to this site. He requested that Mr. Mahoney review this transaction relative to
DEQ matters and outline what responsibilities exist for the County, the State, and DEQ.
In addition, he requested that Mr. Mahoney specify what breakdowns occurred in the
system and recommend ways to improve the process.
Supervisor Wray requested that the petitioner elaborate on the 20 acre
residential parcel which is outlined in green on the map. Mr. Natt advised that this
property will remain R-3 and will be preserved as a buffer zone. Supervisor Wray
April 27, 2004
352
further expressed concerns regarding the slopes on the property and requested
information relating to landscaping and water retention measures. Mr. Natt reported
that the County has regulations governing storm water runoff and retention, and Mr.
Smith will comply with these regulations. Mr. Smith stated that the slope at the top of
the hill will be decreased from 1,350 feet to 1,300 feet; the bottom of the site will be
elevated from 1,100 feet to 1,150 feet. A retention wall approximately 20 feet high will
be constructed.
Supervisor Altizer advised that in the Vinton District, he has seen what a
disregard for slopes can do for the properties below. He noted that much of the
remaining developable land in Roanoke County is on steep slopes, and advised that
this is an issue that the County must begin to examine. He inquired how the petitioner
would proceed given the new building code regulations pertaining to construction on
steep slopes. Mr. Smith stated that he is not familiar with the new regulations, but he
stated that their approach to the project was to lower the slope, construct retention
walls, and finish the grading to allow for hydro seeding on the slopes.
Supervisor Altizer inquired if it was out of the question that the petitioner
specify the type of building materials that would be utilized. Mr. Smith stated that a
likely scenario would be that the site on the corner of Route 419 and Route 220 would
be highly sought after for a fast food location. He advised that it is his hope that the
desirability of the site will allow them to have input into the architecture of the building.
April 27, 2004
353
He stated that the stretch of property along Route 220 would be uniform in design
across the site, and this property is likely to attract a grocery retailer.
Supervisor Church stated that there are too many unanswered questions
with respect to this project. He advised that he is interested in hearing suggestions from
both sides about what would make this project better. Questions that he would like to
see addressed include: (1) specific information about the 20 acres zoned R-3 and
whether it will be included in the proposed rezoning; (2) information regarding whether
the limited liability corporation is locally owned. He stated that the County must
evaluate what is best for the citizens at this particular site, and he does not know if
enough information exists to make this decision at this time.
In response to an inquiry from Supervisor McNamara, Mr. Smith confirmed
that the site mentioned for the location of a fast food restaurant is 1.5 acres and is
sufficient to accommodate this type of use.
Supervisor Flora stated that the highest and best use for the property must
be considered. If this cannot be determined tonight, he would like to see attempts made
to work through the concerns expressed.
Supervisor McNamara stated that he would like to see this project work in
some fashion, and noted that he would like to see proffers relative to green space,
walking trails, etc.
Supervisor Altizer advised that it is a significant responsibility to attempt to
determine how the project could look if it is developed, and he stated that the Board
April 27, 2004
354
does not want to make a wrong decision. He indicated that additional time is needed
due to the lack of information available. He stated that he has concerns about and
needs answers with respect to the slopes on this property. He voiced support for
allowing the petitioner additional time to make the project work.
Supervisor Wray stated that given some of the unknowns and the new
information that has been presented today, he would like to work toward making this a
good project. He indicated that he does not want Mr. Smith’s vision to turn into
something less desirable for all parties involved.
Mr. Smith stated that he feels he can resolve the concerns with staff within
the next 60 days; however, he requested that this matter not be heard at the same time
as the upcoming Keagy Village rezoning request.
Mr. Mahoney advised that the Board’s next public hearing date is May 25.
Supervisor Wray asked if 30 days is a sufficient amount of time to review this matter
and bring it back to the Board for consideration. Ms. Scheid requested clarification
regarding what the Board would like staff to accomplish during this time frame.
Supervisor Wray moved to refer the matter to staff for a period of 30 days
for further review and continue the public hearing until May 25, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Hodge stated that staff is comfortable with attempting to accomplish
the review within 30 days; however not knowing how extensive the changes might be,
he suggested that a work session be held at the May 11 meeting to provide an update
and ensure that the review is on schedule.
April 27, 2004
355
Supervisor McNamara stated that the Board needs to provide staff with
specific information that they would like addressed in the review. He suggested that the
following issues be examined: (1) Description of the building materials that would be
used; (2) Ingress and egress report from VDOT detailing access to and from the site, as
well as specific information on acceleration and/or deceleration lanes; (3) One or
multiple site plans for building locations; (4) Any proffers on the 20 acre parcel zoned R-
3 (which is not being rezoned) that might help alleviate traffic congestion; (5)
Construction design specifications that would provide information regarding landscaping
and terracing of the slopes.
Chairman Flora re-stated Supervisor Wray’s motion to refer the matter to
staff for a period of 30 days for further review and continue the public hearing until May
25, 2004 at 7:00 p.m., and he requested that staff notify the citizens who spoke at
today’s meeting of the continuation of the public hearing. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Altizer, Flora
NAYS: None
Mr. Natt requested that the Clerk provide his office with the information
requested by Supervisor McNamara tomorrow so that they can begin immediately
addressing these issues.
Mr. Hodge stated that the upcoming review process will be more
productive if he can get additional information regarding two issues: (1) is there any
April 27, 2004
356
room for movement on the part of the petitioner with respect to protecting the slope; (2)
is there any flexibility with respect to looking at other access points in the area. Mr.
Smith advised that he will be glad to look at other solutions to the problem.
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor McNamara: He commended the Parks, Recreation & Tourism
staff for the good job they have done in preparing the athletic fields.
Supervisor Church: (1) He requested that Arnold Covey, Director of
Community Development, contact VDOT in response to concerns expressed by Teresa
Walters regarding road conditions at West Main Street and Fort Lewis Church Road in
Salem. (2) He advised that the County’s engineering staff will be contacting Jimmy
Williamson regarding his recent inquiry. (3) He notified staff and the citizens that he will
be unable to attend the May 11 meeting.
Supervisor Wray: (1) He advised that the National Little League Baseball
opening day will be held this Saturday, May 1. He commended Parks, Recreation and
Tourism for their efforts in preparing the fields. (2) He inquired about the process for
citizens taking materials to the transfer station. Mr. Hodge advised that Roanoke
County offers free acceptance of materials delivered to the transfer station from
Roanoke County residents. The number of trips, however, is limited in order to prevent
commercial use. If citizens wish to make multiple trips, they can call the County and the
fee will be waived. If the trips occur on the weekend, citizens can advise the attendant
April 27, 2004
357
at the transfer station that they are County residents and they will not be charged.
Supervisor Wray requested that bill inserts be utilized to clarify this policy for citizens.
Supervisor Flora: (1) He advised that he attended the Lee Eddy memorial
ceremony at Garst Mill Greenway on Saturday, April 24. He also commended Parks,
Recreation and Tourism staff for the appearance of the park area. (2) He advised that
the schools recently received the results of an efficiency study conducted by the Virginia
Department of Education. He requested that the Clerk contact the School Board Clerk
and schedule a date that this information can be presented to the Board of Supervisors.
IN RE: RECESS
Chairman Flora recessed the meeting at 8:55 p.m. for a brief break period.
IN RE: RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
The Board returned to open session at 9:03 p.m.
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Public hearing to receive written or oral comments concerning
the proposed annual budget for fiscal year 2004-2005 and the
fiscal year 2005-2009 Capita Improvement Program. (Brent
Robertson, Budget Director)
Chairman Flora advised that the budget was presented at the afternoon
session. There were no citizens present to speak on this matter.
April 27, 2004
358
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Flora adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m.
Submitted by: Approved by:
________________________ ________________________
Diane S. Childers Richard C. Flora
Clerk to the Board Chairman