Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/19/2013 - Regular1 Vinton Town Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers 311 South Pollard Street Tuesday, March 19, 2013 AGENDA Consideration of: A. 6:00 p.m. - WORK SESSION 1. Briefing on petition of Trey Boyd, t/a Scorpion Towing & Recovery, authorized agent, to amend Ordinance No. 824, adopted October 4, 2005, Special Use Permit (SUP) to operate a police impoundment storage lot at 814 2nd Street, tax map number 060.19-02-16, zoned M-1 Limited Industrial District. Petitioner requests that SUP be amended to allow storage of vehicles repossessed by financial institutions, and safe storage of vehicles purchased by a dealership. No vehicles shall be stored for more than 30 days. 2. Briefing on petition of Jason M. Varney, t/a Consolidated Real Estate Enterprises, LLC, authorized agent, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to convert a single-family dwelling, located at 134 West Augusta Avenue, tax map number 060.15-05-18, zoned RB Residential Business District, into a two-family dwelling. B. 7:00 p.m. - ROLL CALL AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUORUM C. MOMENT OF SILENCE D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE U. S. FLAG E. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Consider approval of minutes for the regular Council meeting of March 5, 2013 F. AWARDS, RECOGNITIONS, PRESENTATIONS 1. Recognition of Doris Ross and Billie Jo O’Connor. Bradley E. Grose, Mayor William “Wes” Nance, Vice Mayor I. Douglas Adams, Jr., Council Member Robert R. Altice, Council Member Matthew S. Hare, Council Member Vinton Municipal Building 311 South Pollard Street Vinton, VA 24179 (540) 983-0607 2 2. Co-Officers of the Month for February 2013 – Sergeant Fabricio Drumond and Officer Stephen Foutz 3. Request for funding presentation by the American Red Cross-Roanoke Valley Chapter 4. Roanoke Regional Partnership 5. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority G. CITIZENS’ COMMENTS AND PETITIONS - This section is reserved for comments and questions for issues not listed on the agenda. H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consideration of public comments regarding a proposed Ordinance to amend Appendix B, Zoning, Article VI, Nonconforming Uses and Features of the Town Code. a. Report from Staff b. Open Public Hearing • Receive public comments • Close Public Hearing c. Council discussion and questions d. Consider adoption of Ordinance 2. Consideration of public comments regarding setting of the real estate, personal property and machinery and tools tax rates for calendar year 2013. a. Report from Staff b. Open Public Hearing • Receive public comments • Close Public Hearing c. Council discussion and questions d. Consider adoption of an Ordinance setting the real estate tax rate for calendar year 2013 e. Consider adoption of an Ordinance setting the personal property tax rate for calendar year 2013 I. TOWN ATTORNEY J. TOWN MANAGER ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION 1. Consider adoption of a Resolution setting the allocation percentage for Personal Property Tax Relief in the Town of Vinton for the 2013 tax year. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on Town branding/marketing initiative. 3 2. Briefing on Downtown Grant budget recommendation from Project Management Team. 3. Briefing on VHDA Feasibility Study Grant for Roland E Cook Elementary School. K. MAYOR L. COUNCIL 1. Financial Report for January 2013 M. CLOSED MEETING 1. Request to Convene in Closed Meeting, Pursuant to § 2.2-3711 A (6) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, for discussion or consideration of the investment of public funds. N. RECONVENE AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED MEETING O. ADJOURNMENT NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. Reasonable efforts will be made to provide assistance or special arrangements to qualified individuals with disabilities in order to participate in or attend Town Council meetings. Please call (540) 983-0607 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date so that proper arrangements may be made. NEXT TOWN COMMITTEE/COUNCIL MEETINGS: • March 28, 2013 – 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. – Budget Work Sessions – Council Chambers • March 29, 2013 o 8:00 a.m. – Public Safety Committee – Town Conference Room o 9:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. – Budget Work Sessions – Council Chambers • April 2, 2013 - 6:00 p.m. – Work Session, followed by Regular Council Meeting at 7:00 p.m. – Council Chambers • April 16, 2013 – 6:30 p.m. – Council in the Neighborhood Meeting – Craig Avenue Recreation Center, followed by Regular Council Meeting at 7:00 p.m. Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Planning & Zoning Issue Briefing on petition of Trey Boyd, t/a Scorpion Towing & Recovery, authorized agent, to amend Ordinance No. 824, adopted October 4, 2005, Special Use Permit (SUP) to operate a police impoundment storage lot at 814 2nd Street, tax map number 060.19-02-16, zoned M-1 Limited Industrial District. Petitioner requests that SUP be amended to allow storage of vehicles repossessed by financial institutions, and safe storage of vehicles purchased by a dealership. Summary In 2005, John Blankenship, t/a/ Big John’s Towing, requested a Special Use Permit (SUP) in order to store police impounded vehicles in this lot. As Mr. Blankenship’s application only stated police impounded vehicles, that is what was approved by Town Council. In April, 2012, Scorpion Towing and Request Towing obtained zoning permits to operate an impoundment lot at this location. They were given copies of the SUP that was granted in 2005. In October, 2012, a complaint was made before Town Council, stating that more than police impounded vehicles were stored in the lot. A site visit by staff did show that to be true. Mr. Trey Boyd (Scorpion Towing) and Mr. Tim Meadows (Request Towing) were advised of what types of vehicles could be stored in the lot under the current SUP. They were also advised that they could submit an application to amend the SUP to include other vehicles. Mr. Boyd submitted the application and fee on January 30, 2013, requesting that he also be allowed to store vehicles that have been repossessed for a financial institution, as well as to safely store vehicles temporarily for an automobile dealership. Attachments Staff report with supporting materials Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Planning & Zoning Issue Briefing on petition of Jason M. Varney, t/a Consolidated Real Estate Enterprises, LLC, authorized agent, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to convert a single-family dwelling, located at 134 West Augusta Avenue, tax map number 060.15-05-18, zoned RB Residential Business District, into a two-family dwelling. Summary According to a previous owner, the house had been used as a two-family dwelling prior to her purchasing it in 1998. Her family converted the house back into a single-family dwelling once they bought the property. A two-family dwelling is a use by right in the R-B district as long as the lot size – 12,000 square feet – and lot width – 75 feet – requirements are met. A two-family dwelling that does not meet the lot area and lot width requirements of will be permitted by a special use permit. The property does not meet those requirements, having only 7,840 square feet in area and only 50 feet in width. Attachments Staff report with supporting documents Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Town Clerk Issue Consider approval of minutes for the regular Council meeting on March 5, 2013 Summary None Attachments March 5, 2013 minutes Recommendations Motion to approve minutes Town Council Agenda Summary 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF VINTON TOWN COUNCIL HELD AT 6:00 P.M. ON TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 2013, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA. MEMBERS PRESENT: Bradley E. Grose, Mayor I. Douglas Adams, Jr. Robert R. Altice Matthew S. Hare MEMBERS ABSENT: William W. Nance, Vice Mayor STAFF PRESENT: Christopher S. Lawrence, Town Manager Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk Susan Waddell, Town Attorney Ryan Spitzer, Assistant to the Town Manager Ben Cook, Police Chief Anita McMillan, Planning & Zoning Director Mary Beth Layman, Special Programs Director Gary Woodson, Public Works Director Joey Hiner, Assistant Public Works Director The Mayor called the work session to order at 6:00 p.m. to hear funding presentations by Community Agencies for the FY2014 budget. The first presentation was by Angie Lewis on behalf of the Vinton Chamber of Commerce. Ms. Lewis commented that the membership has grown over the past two years to 250, which includes 60 new members in the past year and a half. The Chamber is sponsoring 13 major events this year. Council made comments and expressed their appreciation for all that the Chamber does for the community. Mr. Adams commented that he would like the Chamber to contact the Roanoke Times concerning the possibility of having a Vinton section in the paper. Doug Forbes, Treasurer, gave a presentation on behalf of the Vinton Historical Society. This year the Historical Society is celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Vinton Museum. Last year more than 920 people visited the Museum. The Historical Society would like to keep the Museum open, but because of the age of most of the members, they would like to see a paid staff person work the Museum on a regular basis. Mr. Forbes also commented that the water cannot be used at the Museum because of the odor. A new water heater and the main floor plumbing need to be replaced. He indicated he had an estimate of $1,800 to do this work. There is a real need for younger people to become involved to keep the Museum open in the future. Barbara Hartis and Mattie Forbes were also present. 2 Kelly Cass, Executive Director, gave the next presentation on behalf of the Mountain View Human Spay/Neuter Clinic. She introduced Corrie Prater, the Director of Marketing and Development. This clinic opened in August of 2012 and the clinic in Christiansburg has been open about 2-1/2 years. She reviewed a printed Power Point presentation giving statistics of the overpopulation of dogs and cats and indicating that the only solution is aggressive spaying and neutering. To date Mountain View Humane has performed over 14,000 sterilizations. Of the animals coming to the clinic from Vinton, 64% need assistance with the cost of the procedure. They currently spend around $30,000 a month subsidizing people who need help and have been successful in receiving funds from PetSmart charities and local donors. However, the subsidy funding is now low and they are asking the Town for $30,271 which will help over 1,000 animals. Mr. Hare asked about the relationship with the current Pound. Ms. Cass responded that there is a current program involving the free transporting of animals that are being rescued to the Clinic for spaying or neutering. A program they would like to start is that whenever an animal comes out of the Pound it has an appointment at the Clinic before it leaves. This program is already being implemented in Montgomery County. Mr. Hare asked if the Clinic did the trap, neuter and release program and the response was no, but they have volunteers who will. Ms. Cass also mentioned the possibility of the Clinic selling dog tags because between the two Clinics, they are doing around 7-8,000 rabies vaccinations in a year. Representatives from the American Red Cross-Roanoke Valley Chapter and the Brain Injury Services of SWVA were not able to attend and will be rescheduled. Craig Sheets, President-Elect, made brief comments on behalf of the Dogwood Festival. He expressed his thanks to the Town for the continued support of the Dogwood Festival both financially and in-kind services and they are asking for the same amount as last year. He commented that they are going to have the large concert at the War Memorial this year to showcase the War Memorial. The Mayor called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The Town Clerk called the roll with Council Member Adams, Council Member Altice, Council Member Hare, and Mayor Grose present. Vice Mayor Nance was absent. After a Moment of Silence, Mr. Hare led the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. Flag. Roll Call 3 Mr. Adams made a motion to approve the consent agenda; the motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and carried by the following vote, with all members voting: Vote 4-0; Yeas (4) – Adams, Altice, Hare, Grose; Nays (0) – None; Absent (1) - Nance. Approved minutes of regular Council meeting of February 19, 2013 The next item on the agenda was a presentation from the Liz Belcher on behalf of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. She recognized Janet Scheid, Anita McMillan and Matt Hare, Greenway members who were present at the meeting. Ms. Belcher then proceeded to give a Power Point presentation first commenting that the funding request to the Town for FY2014 is the same as last year, $3,300.00. Next she mentioned the return on the Town’s investment of last year which included the Novozymes’ donation of $50,000; the revenue sharing match of $50,000 and donations in the amount of $570 as well as volunteer time amounting to $13,900 from the Pathfinders group. She commented on the progress on the Greenway in 2012 and the economic development impact it is having across the Valley. Roanoke City is focusing on being a bicycle friendly community and probably Salem is going to follow suit. Ms. Belcher commented that this may be something the Town might want to consider. She next commented on the progress of the Roanoke River Greenway construction status beginning with Greenhill Park in Salem to the Blue Ridge Parkway. The Bridge the Gap piece is a 4.1 mile section and projected to cost $7 million. At this point $4.1 million has been collected which consists of 74% government funds and 26% private funds. She commented on the option of Revenue Sharing money and its availability for the Greenway. Some options the Town might consider are incorporating connections in non- greenway projects like the downtown and the new library; making the downtown bike friendly and adding bike lanes on Walnut; utilizing Revenue Sharing and budgeting some CIP money each year for revenue sharing matching and maintenance. Mr. Hare commented that he was disappointed that not much was said about the Greenways at the Economic Summit held last week. There is a major investment happening and the return is happening at lot faster than we realize. The next item on the agenda was an update on the Economic Development Summit held on February 28, 2013. After brief comments, the Mayor made a recommendation to appoint the Town Manager as our representative to the Task Force that is being created. Mr. Altice made a motion to appoint the Town Manager to the Task force and the motion 4 was seconded by Mr. Hare. After comments from Council Members and the Town Manager, the motion was carried by the following roll call vote, with all members voting: Vote 4-0; Yeas (4) – Adams, Altice, Hare, Grose; Nays (0) – None; Absent (1) - Nance. Appointed the Town Manager to the Task Force to be created from the Economic Summit Mr. Adams made a motion that Council go into a Closed Meeting pursuant to § 2.2-3711 A (7) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, for consultation with legal counsel pertaining to actual litigation; the motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and carried by the following vote, with all members voting: Vote 4-0; Yeas (4) – Adams, Altice, Hare, Grose; Nays (0) – None; Absent (1) - Nance. Council went into Closed Meeting at 7:40 p.m. At 8:00 p.m., the regular meeting reconvened and the Certification that the Closed Meeting was held in accordance with State Code requirements was approved on motion by Mr. Adams, seconded by Mr. Altice and carried by the following roll vote, with all members voting: Vote 4-0; Yeas (4) – Adams, Altice, Hare, Grose; Nays (0) – None; Absent (1) - Nance. Certification of Closed Meeting Mr. Hare made a motion that the regular meeting be adjourned, the motion was seconded by Mr. Adams and carried by the following vote, with all members voting: Vote 4- 0; Yeas (4) – Adams, Altice, Hare, Grose; Nays (0) – None; Absent (1) - Nance. The regular meeting was adjourned at 8:01 p.m. Regular meeting adjourned The Work Session continued with a presentation by Chief Tom Philpott on behalf of the Volunteer First Aid Crew. He reviewed a breakdown of the proposed use of the funds which was furnished to Council. One item was a surveillance camera for the east side of the building. Mr. Philpot also requested that the Crew be allowed to fuel the Crown Vic at the Town garage because they are saving the Town money by using it instead of a less efficient emergency vehicle. Another new item is a subscription to the Active 911 alerting system which sends a message to a member’s cell phone indicating the type of call, directions and a map. Mr. Philpott commented that the Crew has purchased an emergency generator for the radio system which will also cover the Town’s Public Works radios. A new power stretcher and new ambulance were also purchased. Chief Richard Oakes gave a presentation on behalf of the Volunteer Fire Department. He reviewed a breakdown of the funds which included uniforms, contract services, office supplies, travel and training and equipment replacement such as turnout gear. They have eight new members and their 5 turnout gear will run about $16,000.00, but are only asking for $7,400 since they also get assistance from Roanoke County. Other items are radios and pagers. Mr. Oakes also mentioned that the Town needs to definitely consider a new ladder truck next year. They have just ordered a new brush truck chassis totaling $28,000 which was paid for with volunteer funds to replace the old brush truck. They will be utilizing the skid unit off of the old truck. The next item was briefing on the proposed Ordinance to amend Appendix B, Zoning, Article VI, Nonconforming Uses and Features of the Town Code. The Town Manager commented that our Code needs to be updated to reflect the State Code regarding nonconforming uses. Anita McMillan, Planning & Zoning Director, made brief comments regarding the changes to the Code. The major change relates to nonconforming uses. After a large number of natural disasters, the Federal government said that a locality cannot restrict someone from rebuilding because of a natural disaster. In our current Code, we stated that anything that is damaged more than 50% cannot be rebuilt. The State Code allows the rebuilding within perimeters and this would apply to the Clearview Manor Apartments. By amending our Code if the apartments were damaged more than 50% they would be allowed to rebuild as they are now at the same location and would be required to meet the current Uniform State Building Code. The Mayor asked about fire damage and the response was they will be allowed to rebuild within two years. If a natural disaster occurs such as flooding or a tornado, they are given four years. A fire is considered an act of God as long as it is accidental. Ms. McMillan indicated that the Planning Commission is having their Public Hearing on the matter on March 7th and Council will have theirs at the March 19th meeting. Mr. Hare asked if we have any other amendments that need to be made to our Code and the response was the one regarding time limitation for vehicles to be stored in an impoundment lot. The Town Manager indicated that our Zoning Ordinance was last amended in 1995. The Mayor commented that keeping the Code updated is really important for economic development and he feels that there is a certain amount of liability involved when it is not up- to-date. If we need to devote extra resources to that, this may be the year to do it. He also asked how the Planning Commission is working. Ms. McMillan responded that some members because of health issues have not been able to 6 come to the meetings and it has been challenging. The Mayor asked if we needed to make some adjustments and the Town Manager responded that they are valid questions. Possibly we need to have another joint meeting with Council and the Planning Commission to address these issues. The Town Attorney commented that when the State Code changes our Code we adopt automatically whatever the changes are. There will be times that the law is changed and we will not have time to change our Code to conform. The ordinances and the Town Code recognize that and there is no actual liability. The law is what the State legislature says it is and our amending our Code is basically a formality to help staff know what the law is. Further discussion was had regarding resources available to help with reviewing and updating our Code. The last item for discussion was briefing on a proposed Extraterritorial Arrest Agreement between the Town of Vinton, Roanoke County, Roanoke City and the City of Salem. Ben Cook, Police Chief, commented that the local law enforcement agencies have been meeting once a month to discuss issues concerning the Valley. These meetings will in the future include Fire and EMS Chiefs in the Valley as well. One of the items discussed was the development of a regional agreement regarding responses, activities and arrests in the Roanoke Valley. Currently if an officer is in another jurisdiction and they encounter, for example, a drunk driver in Roanoke County, they would have to call Roanoke County. Our officer could stop the vehicle, but Roanoke County would have to respond to take over the investigation and both officers would have to go to Court. The proposed agreement would allow an officer to handle an offense outside their jurisdiction in the interest of public safety. There is a similar agreement between Roanoke County and Roanoke City from 1996 and we are enhancing that agreement to include the Town and the City of Salem and to update the language. The agreement gives the law enforcement officer in each jurisdiction the authority as if they were in their own jurisdiction. Each locality will regulate their own officers outside their jurisdiction and will be notified of any action that is taken in their jurisdiction. It does allow the officers to freelance, for example, run radar on Feather Road. The agreement specifically involves on-duty officers that are having to taken some type of enforcement action for public safety. Officers will still make every effort to get an officer of that jurisdiction, but when no officer is available, they can 7 take action. Also, other officers cannot enforce their locality’s ordinances in another jurisdiction, only enforce State law. Chief Cook furnished Council with a copy of the draft Agreement which has been approved by all the localities’ attorneys. The Mayor asked how it would affect policies from one department to the other and how they are carried out. One of his concerns has always been pursuit policies. If their pursuit policy is different from ours and they are chasing someone into the Town, whose policy applies? The response was the jurisdiction that is pursuing them. If a Vinton officer is making an arrest or any kind of enforcement anywhere, they follow our Vinton Police Department policies. If Roanoke City chases someone through Vinton, we basically block roads for them and let them come on through. If they need our help, we will assist. Otherwise we just maintain a safety zone for them, which is the current policy. The Mayor asked if the pursuit policies in the surrounding localities are much different from the Town and the response was that ours is a little more restrictive, but are basically the same and follow the model from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services. Mr. Hare asked the Chief how he would feel as a citizen of Vinton if a Roanoke Police Officer arrested somebody and did something that we do not feel was appropriate in the way they conducted that arrest. The Chief responded that he would call the Police Department and ask questions. That is the reason that each locality needs to know when an arrest is made in their jurisdiction by another Officer. It would be no different than a citizen making a complaint against a Vinton Police Officer. Mr. Hare then commented that he knows and trusts the Vinton Police Officers, but he does not know the Officers in other jurisdictions. The Mayor commented that we need to be careful what we commit ourselves to and Chief Cook indicated that he would not do anything to jeopardize our citizens’ faith and trust in our local government and Police Department. There is a stipulation in the agreement that if it does not work, we can pull out. Mr. Hare asked what the policy was regarding business advertising in the right-of-way as a result of a local business having signs from the City line to the County line through the Town. The Town Manager commented that over the past several years, we have been more lax with business signage because of the economy and businesses trying to drum up more retail attention. The question now is when do you start 8 to reel that back in? Are we being as effective with our enforcement on signage as other parts of our Code? Mr. Hare commented that it is one thing to put signs in front of your business, but it is another thing to do the entire town. It is disrespectful to the citizens. The Town Manager indicated that staff will review our current Code. The work session ended at 9:15 pm. APPROVED: ________________________________ Bradley E. Grose, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Council Issue Recognition of Doris Ross and Billie Jo O’Connor Summary Doris Ross and Billie Jo O’Connor, employees of Magic City Ford, will be present at the meeting to be recognized for their concern and attention to a customer who was in need of medical attention. Attachments Certificate of Appreciation for Doris Ross Certificate of Appreciation for Billie Jo O’Connor Recommendations Read and present certificates Town Council Agenda Summary Certificate of Appreciation Presented To Doris Ross In recognition of your concern and care for those in need of assistance by attending to an individual who was in dire need of medical attention. We recognize you as an outstanding member of our community and are proud that you are a citizen of Vinton. Presented on Behalf of the Town of Vinton This 19th day of March, 2013 VINTON TOWN COUNCIL ________________________________ Bradley E. Grose, Mayor Certificate of Appreciation Presented To Billie Jo O’Connor In recognition of your concern and care for those in need of assistance by attending to an individual who was in dire need of medical attention. We recognize you as an outstanding member of our community. Presented on Behalf of the Town of Vinton This 19th day of March, 2013 VINTON TOWN COUNCIL ________________________________ Bradley E. Grose, Mayor Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Police Issue Co-Officers of the Month for February 2013 – Sergeant Fabricio Drumond and Officer Stephen Foutz Summary Sergeant Fabricio Drumond and Officer Stephen Foutz were selected as Co-Officers of the month for February and will be recognized at the meeting Attachments Memo from Chief Cook Recommendations Read Memo Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Administration Issue Request for funding presentation by the American Red Cross-Roanoke Valley Chapter Summary A representative from this Community Agency will be present to give a 10 minute presentation to support their request for funding in the FY2014 budget. Attachments FY2014 Request for Funding Application Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Administration Issue Presentation by the Roanoke Regional Partnership Summary Beth Doughty will be present at the meeting to give this annual report on behalf of the Partnership. Attachments None Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Administration Issue Presentation by the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Summary Dan Miles will be present at the meeting to give this annual report on behalf of the Authority. Attachments None Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Planning and Zoning Issue Conduct a Public Hearing to consider public comments regarding a proposed Ordinance to amend Appendix B, Zoning, Article VI, Nonconforming Uses and Features of the Town Code. Summary During Town Council work session held on March 5th, members were briefed of the need to amend the Town’s zoning ordinance to conform and be consistent with the Code of Virginia. Town Council was provided with the draft amendment pertaining to nonconforming uses, features, structures, and lots. Since the Town Council work session, minor changes were made to the draft ordinance, with the addition of (i) under Section 6-4 on Page 4 and further clarification for (c) under Section 6-10 on Page 7. Section 6-4 (i) will allow nonconforming single-family dwellings in non-residential zoned districts to continue to be used as single-family dwelling if the property owners are not financially able to convert the structures to meet building codes requirements for commercial uses. On March 7th, Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider comments regarding the proposed amendment and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance to amend Appendix B, Zoning, Article VI. Attachments Ordinance Recommendations Motion to adopt Ordinance Town Council Agenda Summary 1 ORDINANCE NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 2013, AT 7:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA AN ORDINANCE to substantially amend Article VI. Nonconforming Uses and Features of Appendix B, Zoning, of the Vinton Town Code for the purpose of conforming the Town’s Zoning Ordinance concerning nonconforming uses, features, structures, and lots with the Virginia Code governing same; setting forth the purpose of the ordinance; providing that a nonconformity may continue so long as it is not abandoned for more than two years; specifying when certain property rights become vested; limiting the enlargement, extension, or increase in intensity of nonconforming uses and features; regulating, consistent with the Virginia Code, the repair and replacement of nonconforming structures to allow for restoration to original nonconforming condition under certain circumstances and within a certain time period; providing for the development of lots that lack public road frontage upon issuance of a special use permit; providing for an effective date. BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Vinton that Vinton Town Code, Appendix B, Zoning, Article VI, Non-conforming Uses and Features, is hereby amended and reenacted as follows: ARTICLE VI. NONCONFORMING USES, AND FEATURES, STRUCTURES, AND LOTS Sec. 6-1. - Nonconforming uses and features may continue. Subject to the limitations set forth in this article, nonconforming uses, nonconforming features and nonconforming buildings may continue. The terms "nonconforming use," "nonconforming feature" and "nonconforming building" shall have such meaning as specified in article X of this appendix. Sec. 6-1. Purpose. The purpose of this article is to regulate nonconforming uses, structures, and lots. The intent of these regulations is to: (a) Permit such nonconforming uses, structures, and lots to remain until removed, discontinued, abandoned, or changed to conform with the regulations of this chapter; (b) Recognize that nonconforming uses, structures, and lots are generally incompatible with the character of the districts in which they occur and, as such, in certain circumstances, such continuances should not be indefinite and that the nonconforming uses should gradually be removed in favor of uses, structures, and lots that conform to this chapter and the Official Zoning Map; and 2 (c) Recognize that nonconforming uses, structures, and lots need not be entirely unchanged, and that under certain circumstances may change according to law and the provisions of this chapter. Sec. 6-2. - Extension of nonconforming uses. No nonconforming use shall be extended, enlarged or moved so as to occupy a different or greater area of land or buildings than was occupied by and actively devoted to such use at the time it became nonconforming, provided that a nonconforming use may be extended throughout such portion of land or such part of a building which was lawfully arranged, designed, equipped and intended for such use at the time it became nonconforming. Sec. 6-2. Generally. (a) Within the zoning districts established by this ordinance, or by future amendments which may later be adopted, or by legitimate and legal actions taken by the town council or any other governmental agency, there exists or may exist lots, parcels, structures, uses of land and structures, and characteristics of site design and/or use, which were lawful before this ordinance was adopted or amended, but which would be prohibited, regulated, or restricted under the terms of this ordinance, or future amendment. Some of such structures, lots, parcels, uses, and characteristics are considered nonconforming. (b) A nonconforming use, structure, lot, or parcel may continue, as it existed when it became nonconforming, until removed, discontinued, abandoned, or changed to conform to the regulations of this ordinance. It is the intent of this ordinance that the continuance of nonconformities should not be indefinite, and that the nonconforming uses, structures, or characteristics should gradually be removed. (c) Except as provided within this article, no nonconforming use, structure, or lot shall be changed, moved, increased, enlarged upon, expanded, extended, or resumed after removal, discontinuance, or abandonment, or used as grounds for adding other lots, structures, uses of land and structures, or characteristics of use not in keeping with the regulations for the district in which such nonconformity exists. Sec. 6-3. Nonconformities; Establishment of vested rights. (a) Nothing in this article shall be construed to authorize the impairment of any vested right. Without limiting the time when rights might otherwise vest, a property owner's rights shall be deemed vested in a land use and such vesting shall not be affected by a subsequent amendment to this chapter, when the property owner: (1) Obtains or is the beneficiary of a significant affirmative governmental act which remains in effect allowing development of a specific project; (2) Relies in good faith on the significant affirmative governmental act; and (3) Incurs extensive obligations or substantial expenses in diligent pursuit of the specific project in reliance on the significant affirmative governmental act. (b) For purposes of this section and without limitation, the following are deemed to be significant affirmative governmental acts allowing development of a specific project: 3 (1)The Town Council has accepted proffers or proffered conditions which specify use related to a zoning amendment; (2) The Town Council has approved an application for a rezoning for a specific use or density; (3) The Board of Zoning Appeals has granted a special exception; (4) The Board of Zoning Appeals has approved a variance; (5) The Town Council or its designated agent has approved a preliminary subdivision plat, site plan, or plan of development for the property and the applicant pursues approval of the final plat or plan within a reasonable period of time under the circumstances; or (6) The Town Council or its designated agent has approved a final subdivision plat, site plan, or plan of development for the applicant's property. (7)The Zoning Administrator or other administrative officer has issued a written order, requirement, decision or determination regarding the permissibility of a specific use or density of the landowner's property that is no longer subject to appeal and no longer subject to change, modification, or reversal under Subsection C of § 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. (c) Nothing in this ordinance shall be deemed to require a change in the plans, construction or designated use of any building on which actual construction was lawfully begun prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or amendments thereto, and upon which actual building construction was carried out diligently. Actual construction is hereby defined to include the placing of construction materials in permanent position and fastened in a permanent manner. Where excavation or demolition or removal of an existing building has begun in preparation for rebuilding, such activities shall be deemed actual construction provided the work has been carried out diligently. Sec. 6-4. Nonconforming uses. (a) Where, at the effective date of this ordinance, or amendment thereto, lawful use exists of buildings, structures or land, individually or in combination with another structure, which use is no longer permissible under the terms of this ordinance as enacted or amended, such use may be continued provided: (1) The use is not abandoned for more than two (2) years and so long as the structure in which such use is located is maintained in its then structural condition. Abandonment means the actual cessation of the nonconforming use of the property for more than two years regardless of whether or not the owner of the property intends to resume the nonconforming use at some point in the future. (2) Should a structure in which such nonconforming use is located be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or structurally altered, except as otherwise permitted by the provisions of this article, the use of such a structure thereafter shall conform to the regulations of the district in which it is located. (b) No nonconforming use shall be enlarged, intensified or increased, or extended to occupy a larger square footage of building or lot area than was occupied on the effective date of the adoption or subsequent amendment of this ordinance. Such intensification, increase, or extension shall include enlargement of the building or other structure, expansion of the use on the premises, or the erection of an additional principal or accessory structure associated with such nonconforming use on the property on which the nonconforming use is located. 4 (c) No nonconforming use shall be moved in whole or in part to any portion of the lot or parcel unoccupied by such use at the time of the adoption or subsequent amendment of this ordinance. (d) No building or structure not conforming to the requirements of this ordinance shall be erected in connection with the nonconforming use of land. (e) Where nonconforming use status applies to a building or structure, removal of the building or structure shall eliminate the nonconforming status of the building or structure or land. (f) Any legally established use which existed prior to the adoption of this ordinance, or any subsequent amendments, shall not be considered a nonconforming use where a special use permit is now required for establishment of such use. The use shall be allowed to continue operation, as well as reconstruct or structurally alter the building or structure without the necessity of obtaining a special use permit. However, approval of a special use permit shall be required, in accordance with special use provisions, when either of the conditions below are present, in the opinion of the zoning administrator. (1) There is a ten (10) percent or greater net increase in the square footage of the use or structure proposed for expansion or enlargement; or (2) The expansion or enlargement will substantially alter the site design and layout as it relates to circulation, parking or other site characteristics so as to adversely affect surrounding properties. (3) This section shall not apply to broadcasting towers and associated antenna allowed by right as set forth by the ordinance. (g) A manufactured home park legally established prior to June 1, 1986 shall be allowed to continue operation in conformance with the provisions, provided the use as a park has not been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years. (h) Notwithstanding (a) through (g) above, a nonconforming manufactured home existing on an individual lot of record that has served as an active dwelling for at least six (6) months may be replaced with another manufactured home provided: (1) The replacement home is installed on the lot within two (2) years of the removal of the home to be replaced, and; (2) The replacement home is installed in approximately the same location on the lot, and is installed to comply with the district setback regulations for principal structures, and; (3) The installation of the replacement home complies with the use and design standards for manufactured homes. (i) Notwithstanding any provision in this Article to the contrary, a single family home legally established prior to a zoning amendment that renders the property nonconforming may continue to be used as a single family home so long as the use is not converted or replaced, in whole or in part, by a use permitted in the district regulations, and the building or structure of the home is maintained in its then structural condition. If the home is damaged, it shall comply with section 6-9 of this Article. Sec. 6-3 Sec. 6-5. Alterations to buildings devoted to nonconforming use. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this article, no building or portion of a building devoted to a nonconforming use shall be enlarged, extended, structurally altered, reconstructed or moved, unless such building or portion of a building is thereafter devoted to a use which conforms with the use regulations of this appendix. Nothing in this article shall be construed to prohibit normal 5 repair, maintenance or incidental alteration of a building or the alteration, strengthening or restoring of a building to safe condition as may be required by law. (b) A single-family dwelling which is a nonconforming use in a GB, CB, M-1 or M-2 district may be structurally altered and may be enlarged or extended, and a building or structure accessory thereto may be altered, enlarged or constructed, provided that in no case shall the total amount of floor area, including all enclosed and unenclosed space and garage or carport space, be increased more than 800 square feet. No existing lot area, lot width or yard shall be reduced to less than required for single-family dwelling use in the R-3 residential district. Sec. 6-4. Sec. 6-6. Change of nonconforming use. (a) A nonconforming use of land or a nonconforming use of a building may be changed to a use which conforms with the use regulations of the district in which it is located or to a use, other than a multifamily dwelling, which is first permitted by right in a more restricted zoning district. Whenever a nonconforming use has been changed to a conforming use or to a more restricted use, such use shall not thereafter be changed back to the original nonconforming use or to any less restricted use. (b) For purposes of this article, a more restricted zoning district shall be construed to be a district in which the permitted uses and intensity of use are more limited. The term "use" shall be construed to be a type of activity as listed in the use regulations of a zoning district, and a change in occupancy, ownership or management shall not in itself constitute a change in use. Sec. 6-5. Sec. 6-7. Discontinuance of nonconforming uses. (a) Unless otherwise provided herein, Whenever whenever a nonconforming use of land or a nonconforming use of a building is discontinued for a period of more than two years (except if the premises is damaged or destroyed as a direct result of conditions resulting in a federal disaster declaration as set forth in Sec. 6-9 herein), whether or not equipment or fixtures intended for such uses are removed, any subsequent use shall conform with the use regulations of the district in which the property is located. (b) In case of determination by the zoning administrator that a nonconforming use has been changed to an illegal use, such illegal use shall cease and any subsequent use of the premises shall be in conformity with the use regulations of this appendix, or the illegal use may be changed to the last lawful nonconforming use to occupy the premises, so long as it has not been more than two years since the non-conforming use ceased. Sec. 6-6. Sec. 6-8. Use and alteration of buildings with nonconforming features. (a) A building which is nonconforming with respect to the bulk regulations or other feature required by this appendix may nonetheless be converted to and occupied by a use permitted in the district in which the building is located, provided that off-street parking and other requirements applicable to the new use are satisfied. (b) A building which is devoted to a conforming use and is nonconforming with respect to the bulk regulations or other feature required by this appendix may be enlarged, extended or structurally altered, provided that the degree or extent of any nonconforming feature is not increased. 6 (c) An increase in the height of any portion of a building which is nonconforming with respect to a yard requirement shall be deemed to be an increase in the extent of the nonconforming yard of the building. Sec. 6-7. Sec. 6-9. Damage to nonconforming buildings and uses. (a) Damage not exceeding 50 percent of value. A building having a nonconforming feature or a building devoted to a nonconforming use which is damaged by an accidental fire, or an explosion, natural disaster or other act of God or the public enemy to an extent not exceeding 50 percent of its most recent assessed taxable value may be restored, repaired, reconstructed and used as before the damage, provided that the degree or extent of any nonconforming feature that existed prior to the damage shall not be increased, and the area devoted to any nonconforming use prior to the damage shall not be increased. Such restoration, repair, reconstruction or reuse shall be completed within two years of the date of damage. For purposes of this section, an "act of God" shall be defined as any natural disaster or phenomena including, but not limited to, a hurricane, tornado, storm, flood, high water, wind-driven water, tidal wave, earthquake or fire caused by lightning or wildfire. For purposes of this section, owners of property damaged by an accidental fire have the same rights to rebuild such property as if it were damaged by an act of God. (b) Damage greater than 50 percent of value. Whenever a building having a nonconforming feature or a building devoted to a nonconforming use is damaged by any cause whatsoever or destroyed by a natural disaster or other act of God to an extent greater than 50 percent of its more most recent assessed taxable value, such building shall not be restored, repaired, reconstructed or used except in conformance with all of the applicable provisions of this appendix, except as may be authorized by the board of zoning appeals pursuant to section 6-8 of this appendix. and cannot be repaired, rebuilt, or replaced except to restore it to its original non- conforming condition, the owner shall have the right to do so. However, the owner shall apply for a building permit and any work done to repair, rebuild, or replace such building shall be in compliance with the provisions of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (Virginia Code § 36-97, et seq.) and the provisions of the local flood plain regulations adopted as a condition of participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. (c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, any restoration, repair, reconstruction, or reuse undertaken pursuant to this section shall be completed within two years of the date of damage. If the nonconforming building is in an area under a federal disaster declaration and the building has been damaged or destroyed as a direct result of conditions that gave rise to the declaration, then any restoration must be started and completed within forty-eight (48) months of the date of the damaging event. Owners of property damaged by an accidental fire shall have the same right to rebuild such nonconforming property as if it were damaged by an act of God. Nothing herein shall be construed to enable the property owner to commit arson under Virginia Code §§ 18.2-77 or 18.2-80, and obtain vested rights under this section. Sec. 6-8. - Special exception for nonconforming buildings and uses. The board of zoning appeals shall have the authority to grant a special exception as provided in article IX of this appendix for restoration, repair, reconstruction or reuse of a building having a nonconforming feature or a building devoted to a nonconforming use which is damaged by fire, 7 explosion, act of God or the public enemy to an extent greater than 50 percent of its most recent assessed taxable value, provided that: (a) Before granting any such special exception, the board shall be satisfied from the evidence presented that the proposed restoration, repair, reconstruction or reuse would result in the minimum deviation from the provisions of this appendix necessary to enable reasonable use of the property with consideration for its use prior to the damage. Whenever possible, the board shall require reduction in the degree or extent of nonconforming features and uses; (b) In no case shall the board authorize restoration, repair, reconstruction or reuse to any extent that constitutes a greater deviation from the provisions of this appendix than existed prior to the damage; and (c) Before granting any special exception, the board shall receive testimony and make a finding that restoration, repair or reconstruction of the building will not unreasonably impair light and air to adjoining property, will not impair established property values in the immediate area and will not otherwise be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public. Before granting any special exception to reestablish a nonconforming use, the board shall also receive testimony and find that the continued operation of the nonconforming use is in the public interest and contributes to public convenience. Sec. 6-10. Nonconforming Lots of Record. (a) Pursuant to Code of Virginia (1950) § 15.2-2261(F), an approved final subdivision plat that has been recorded, from which any part of the property subdivided has been conveyed to third parties (other than to the developer or local jurisdiction), shall remain valid for an indefinite period of time unless and until any portion of the property is subject to a vacation action as set forth in Code of Virginia, §§ 15.2-2270 through 15.2-2278, as amended. (b) A lot of record that is nonconforming due to lack of adequate frontage, width, depth, or area may be developed, provided the development proposed on the lot is in accordance with the applicable use and design standards contained in the district regulations. (c) Any lot of record to which Virginia Code § 15.2-2261(F) does not apply that has legal access but is nonconforming because it has no public street frontage, may be developed or an existing structure on the lot may be expanded, provided the Town reviews and grants a special use permit for the proposed development, expansion, and use in accord with the standards and procedures contained in this ordinance. Sec. 6-9. Sec. 6-11 - Intermittent, temporary or illegal use. Intermittent, temporary or illegal use of land or buildings shall not be construed to establish the existence of a nonconforming use for the purposes of this article, provided that a lawful seasonal use that was in operation for at least two consecutive seasons immediately prior to the adoption of this appendix or subsequent amendment thereto shall be considered a nonconforming use for seasonal purposes only and shall be subject to the provisions of this article. This ordinance shall take effect upon passage. 8 This Ordinance adopted on motion made by Council Member ________________ and seconded by Council Member ____________________, with the following votes recorded: AYES: NAYS: APPROVED: __________________________________ Bradley E. Grose, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk 1 Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Finance Issue Consideration of public comments regarding setting of the real estate, personal property and machinery and tools tax rates for calendar year 2013. Summary Section 58.1-3321 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, requires that certain notices be published and a public hearing be held when the annual real estate assessment results in an increase of 1% or more of the total real estate tax levy. The Town of Vinton’s real estate tax levy has decreased by approximately -2.08% for the calendar year 2013. A summary of the preliminary assessed values and corresponding tax levies are shown below: Assessed Values: Year 2013 $ 456,795,100 Year 2012 - 466,502,000 Total Decrease $ -9,706,900 Year 2013 $ 456,795,100 Less New Construction - 357,000 Net Assessed Value 456,438,100 Year 2012 - 466,502,000 Net Decrease $-10,063,900 Tax Levy: Year 2012 $ 137,039 Year 2012 139,951 Decrease $ -2,912 Assessment Decrease - -2.0807 or -2.08% Town Council Agenda Summary 2 Even though the Town’s Assessment decreased by -2.08% an advertisement was placed in the Vinton Messenger for a public hearing at the March 19, 2013 Council Meeting in order to set the tax rates. Following the public hearing held on setting of the tax rate on the total real estate tax levy. The current rate is $.03 per $100.00 of assessed value. No change is being recommended. The current personal property tax rate is $1.00 per $100.00 of the assessed evaluation of all personal property excepting there from household furnishings, and 50% or $.50 per $100.00 of the assessed valuation of one motor vehicle owned and regularly used by a disabled veteran, subject to certain qualifications. No change is being recommended for calendar year 2013. Attachments Ordinance setting the real estate tax rates Ordinance setting the personal property tax rates Recommendations Separate motions to adopt Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 2013, AT 7:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA AN ORDINANCE to provide for the annual levy on real estate in the Town of Vinton, Virginia. WHEREAS, it is desirable of the Town of Vinton to collect real estate taxes semi-annually by June 5th and December 5th; and WHEREAS, the annual levy is necessary to provide for the daily operation of various municipal departments of the Town of Vinton, and thus avoid creating an emergency. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Vinton that the tax levy for the calendar year 2013 on all real property and improvements shall be as follows: "All Real Estate shall be assessed at 100% of fair market value, local levy of THREE CENTS ($.03) per ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100.00) of the assessed value for the calendar year 2013." BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that a copy of this Ordinance be immediately forwarded by the Town Clerk to the Commissioner of Revenue for Roanoke County/Town of Vinton, and to the Finance Director/Town Treasurer of the Town of Vinton. This Ordinance adopted on motion made by Council Member ___________ and seconded by Council Member ________________, with the following votes recorded: AYES: NAYS: APPROVED: Bradley E. Grose, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 2013, AT 7:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA AN ORDINANCE to provide for the annual levy on all personal property in the Town of Vinton, Virginia, and to provide for the annual levy on the classification of vehicles owned by disabled veterans, pursuant to § 58.1-3506 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended, and by the adoption of Ordinance No. 594 dated August 17, 1993 by the Vinton Town Council. WHEREAS, it is desirable of the Town of Vinton to collect personal property taxes by May 31, 2013; and WHEREAS, the annual levy is necessary to provide for the daily operation of various municipal departments of the Town of Vinton, and thus avoid creating an emergency. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Vinton that a tax levy for the calendar year 2013 shall be one dollar ($1.00) per one hundred dollars ($100.00) of the assessed valuation of all personal property excepting therefrom household furnishings; and BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Vinton that a tax levy for the calendar year 2013 shall be fifty percent (50%) or fifty cents ($.50) per one hundred dollars ($100.00) of the assessed valuation of one motor vehicle owned and regularly used by a disabled veteran, subject to certain qualifications; and BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that a copy of this Ordinance be immediately forwarded by the Town Clerk to the Commissioner of Revenue for Roanoke County/Town of Vinton, and to the Finance Director/Town Treasurer of the Town of Vinton. This Ordinance adopted on motion made by Council Member _________________ and seconded by Council Member ______________, with the following votes recorded: AYES: NAYS: APPROVED: Bradley E. Grose, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk 1 Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Finance Issue Consider adoption of a Resolution setting the allocation percentage for Personal Property Tax Relief in the Town of Vinton for the 2013 tax year. Summary The Personal Property Tax Relief Act (PPTRA or the Act) of 1998 established a statewide program to provide relief to owners of personal use motor vehicles. The 1998 Act envisioned a five year phase-in of relief expressed as a percentage of the bill related to the first $20,000 of personal use vehicle value. Costs soared and percentage was frozen at 70% since 2001. In 2004 and 2005, additional legislation was passed to amend the original Act. This legislation capped PPTRA at $950 million for all Virginia localities for Tax Years 2006 and beyond. PPTRA funds are allocated to individual localities based on each government’s pro rata share of Tax Year 2004 payments from the Commonwealth. The Town’s share of the $950 million is $203,096. In order to put these changes into effect, the Town Council adopted an Ordinance that set the framework for the implementation and administration of the 2004-2005 changes to the Personal Property Tax Relief Act (PPTRA) of 1998. This ordinance was adopted on December 6, 2005. The Town uses The PPTRA Allocation Model developed by the State to calculate the effective reimbursement rate. This model uses historical trends and a five year rolling average to calculate the effective reimbursement rate. This same methodology for calculating the rate is used by many of our neighboring localities. In 2013, once again Town and County staff computed the effective reimbursement rate based upon the PPTRA allocation model. The percentage is similar to those localities that are ready to adopt their resolutions. The rate for the County is 61.34% and the Town of Vinton is 64.48%. Town Council Agenda Summary 2 Attachments Resolution Recommendations Motion to adopt Resolution 1 RESOLUTION NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 2013, AT 7:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA A RESOLUTION setting the allocation percentage for Personal Property Tax Relief in the Town of Vinton for the 2013 Tax Year. WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 58.1-3524 (C) (2) and Section 58.1-3912 (E) of the Code of Virginia, as amended by Chapter 1 of the Acts of Assembly and as set forth in item 503.E (Personal Property Tax Relief Program or “PPTRA”) of Chapter 951 of the 2005 Acts of Assembly, a qualifying vehicle with a taxable situs within the Town commencing January 1, 2013, shall receive personal property tax relief; and WHEREAS, this Resolution is adopted pursuant to Vinton Code § 86-58 enacted by the Council of the Town of Vinton on December 6, 2005. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VINTON, VIRGINIA, as follows: 1. That tax relief shall be allocated so as to eliminate personal property taxation for qualifying personal use vehicles valued at $1,000 or less. 2. That qualifying personal use vehicles valued at $1,001-$20,000 will be eligible for 64.48% tax relief. 3. That qualifying personal use vehicles valued at $20,001 or more shall only receive 64.48% tax relief on the first $20,000 of value. 4. That all other vehicles which do not meet the definition of “qualifying” (for example, including but not limited to, business use vehicles, farm use vehicles, motor homes, etc.) will not be eligible for any form of tax relief under this program. 5. That the percentages applied to the categories of qualifying personal use vehicles are estimated fully to use all available PPTRA funds allocated to the Town of Vinton by the Commonwealth of Virginia. 6. That entitlement to personal property tax relief for qualifying vehicles for tax year 2005 and all prior tax years shall expire on September 1, 2006, or when the state funding for tax relief is exhausted or depleted. Supplemental assessments for tax years 2005 and prior that are made on or after September 1, 2006 shall be deemed ‘non-qualifying’ for 2 purposes of state tax relief and the local share due from the taxpayer shall represent 100% of the assessed personal property tax. This resolution shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. This resolution adopted on motion made by Council Member ____________, and seconded by Council Member _______________, with the following votes recorded: AYES: NAYS: APPROVED: ___________________________________ Bradley E. Grose, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________________ Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Administration Issue Briefing on Town branding/marketing initiative Summary Town staff would like Council to look at the branding of the Town again. The Town already has a good backbone of information from the previous study done by Arnett Muldrow & Associates in reference to the Economic Restructuring Plan for the town. We should build on this to perfect the outcome and deliverables to produce a brand that will carry Vinton into the future while not compromising our past and where the Town is today. The focus should be to create a brand that enhances the identity of the community as seen by its citizens, businesses, staff and Council. This will be done by discovering what differentiates Vinton and its assets from the region and boosts our core competences and strengths. Staff recommends Council focus on three areas of Town: 1. Town and its corridors 2. War Memorial Complex 3. Downtown/Farmer’s Market Attachment Town of Vinton Branding Initiative Proposal Recommendations 1. Consensus of Council to proceed with Request for Proposals for Professional Services for Town Planning and Branding 2. Council to form a Project Committee of Council, staff and citizen stakeholders by April 16th. Town Council Agenda Summary Town of Vinton Branding Initiative Proposal General Information: The Town has a bedrock of information from the previous study conducted by Arnette Muldrow & Associates in reference to the Economic Restructuring Plan for the town. We should build on this to perfect the outcome and deliverables and to produce a brand that will carry Vinton into the future while not compromising our past. This will save time and money and produce a strong brand and marketing scheme. The focus should be to create a brand that enhances the identity of the community as seen by its citizens, businesses, visitors, staff and Council. This will be accomplished by discovering what differentiates Vinton and its assets from the region and boosts our core competences and strengths by looking at our location in reference to the Roanoke Valley, Parkway, Smith Mountain Lake, etc. Scope: The project will look at three distinct areas in Town. These areas are: 1. Town and its corridors 2. War Memorial Complex 3. Downtown/Farmer’s Market The Committee will be charged with providing a brand for each of these while at the same time weaving the three into a complete, adaptable and over arching brand. The brand for Downtown and the War Memorial Complex should be complementary to the brand for the Town. They should be able to stand alone and have a link that harmonizes all three in order to be identifiable as the Town of Vinton. The challenge will be to determine which should come first and lead into the others. The brand and marketing schemes should also include distinct characteristics of the Town such as the new library. Timeframe: We expect to have a finished product within five (5) months of accepting a bid. This means a plan will be ready for implementation and roll-out by mid September. The roll-out phase will probably take a month. There are several factors that contribute to the timeframe such as advertising, corridor improvements, grant constraints and Town purchases. Ryan Spitzer Assistant to the Town Manager Town of Vinton 311 S. Pollard Street Vinton, VA 24179 Phone (540) 983-0607 Fax (540) 983-0626 The advertising season for weddings at the War Memorial begins in mid-September for the upcoming wedding season which starts in January. A coordinated campaign that uses a new marketing scheme would have to be ready for the new season. In addition, print material and the website would need to reflect the change in vision for the War Memorial. Weddings are not the only events that take place at the War Memorial - opportunities to host meetings, conferences, galas and other events are advertised year round, which contributes to the need to proceed quickly, but efficiently and effectively. The Town also plans corridor improvements on Walnut, Virginia, Washington and Hardy to alert the traveling public that they have entered Vinton. A defined brand and way-finding signage need to be implemented before this occurs. Corridors are seen as an integral part of the Town’s economic restructuring and vitality. Another factor is the downtown grant. The CDBG budget includes funds for branding. Plans exist to create a printed and digital guide that will educate visitors and potential customers regarding the downtown area of Vinton. It will also include information on upcoming downtown improvements and enhancements. This needs to be done before the project is complete in two years. Finally, the Town departments need to consider the new branding prior to ordering new equipment and supplies. If the Town happens to decide on a new logo or message this will need to go on letterhead and any new vehicles or equipment that may be purchased. Method: The following is the proposed procedure for the branding process: 1. Form a Committee of Council, Staff and local stakeholders 2. Advertise the RFP 3. Develop a process for the new brand/marketing scheme 4. Hold Community Meetings for citizen input 5. Have the Committee bring back ideas for Council to review 6. Launch Deliverables: Listed below are the deliverables the Town believes should come out of the process. This will be the work of the Committee and Branding/Marketing Consultant. Many of the items listed have been started by the previous Economic Restructuring Plan. Some will clarify what might not have been apparent during the initial process and some will be new concepts. The process that is used will be very important in cementing the deliverables that are decided upon and having them embraced by the community. 1. Logo vs. Town Seal – Is there a difference in the two? Should the current Town Seal stay as it is and be the official logo of the Town? Can the Town have a separate marketing logo that will show off the amenities the Town has to offer and its values. 2. Branding Slogan – During departmental discussions, it is believed a branding slogan or tag line would be helpful in marketing. It could serve as a common thread for all three areas. 3. Branding Identifiers and Branding Associations – We need to identify what sets Vinton apart. Is it our location to Smith Mountain Lake? Is it our location to the Parkway? Do we increase outdoor focused economic development through boat ramps, greenway construction? How do we define Vinton’s family focus? 4. Specific plans for the three (3) identified areas – The three main areas for rebranding is the Town, War Memorial Complex and Downtown/Farmer’s Market area. 5. Way-finding signage plan – This was included with the previous plan. The Town needs to update this and move forward. This could include a different look for signs as they lead you to downtown and not through Town. Do the Town’s entrance signs need to be changed? 6. Corridor enhancements – Everyone needs to know when they are in Vinton! We need to differentiate ourselves from the Roanoke City line. We also, as a collective Town staff, need to focus on the major intersections in Town to make them compatible with attracting businesses. 7. Marketing process and launch – The launch of the brand is the most important part. It has to be cohesive versus a piecemeal approach. Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Administration Issue Briefing on Downtown Grant budget recommendation from Project Management Team. Summary The Project Management Team voted to accept the budget and send it to Council for approval. There are only two adjustments that may happen for the good. I am still negotiating with Hill Studio on their fees. The other item that could be changed is street lights for downtown. AEP may be able to supply the poles and lighting, which would decrease the cost. We are in the process of contacting AEP to see if it is feasible and the look it would produce. Staff would like for Council to examine the document and be prepared to vote on changing or accepting it at the April 2, 2013 Council Meeting. After the budget is adopted the overall numbers cannot change. If, towards the end of the grant period, it is seen that the money will not be used for the intended purpose as applied to the budget document monies can be moved around to where it will be leveraged and used more effectively. The budget needs to be adopted before Council signs the contract agreement through DHCD. Attachments Downtown Grant Budget Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Applicant: Town of Vinton; Project: Downtown Vinton Business District Revitalization Project 2012 CDBG Competitive Grant Project Revised 3/12/2013 TOTAL COST CDBG Other Funding Notes Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Milling and Paving 21,684$ 21,684$ -$ Pavement Imprinting 23,760$ 23,760$ -$ Traffic Loop Detectors Replacement 3,520$ 3,520$ -$ Pavement Striping & Markings 500$ 500$ -$ Handicap Ramps and Sidewalk Improvements 2,544$ 2,544$ -$ Subtotal: 52,008$ 52,008$ -$ Architect/Engineering Services (10%)5,201$ 5,201$ -$ Negotiated based on DHCD fee schedule TOTAL 57,208$ 57,208$ -$ Virginia Avenue/Pollard Street Gateway Improvements Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Landscaping: low shrubs 15 ea 45$ 675$ 675$ -$ Potential match: Town/volunteer labor (plantings) Landscaping: groundcover/grasses 250 sf 6$ 1,500$ 1,500$ Landscaping: fine grading/seeding 224 sf 0.50$ 112$ 112$ Gateway Signage 1 ls 5,500$ 5,500$ 5,500$ Gateway signage lighting 1 allow 2,640$ 2,640$ 2,640$ Subtotal: 10,427$ 10,427$ Design Services (10%)1,043$ 1,043$ -$ Negotiated based on DHCD fee schedule TOTAL 11,470$ 11,470$ -$ Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Farmers market improvements: green pave parking, lighting, landscaping 1 ls 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ Subtotal:100,000$ 100,000$ Arch/Eng Design Services (14%)14,000$ 14,000$ 14% based on DHCD fee schedule TOTAL - FARMERS MARKET 114,000$ 114,000$ General Surveyor allowance (additional topo, easement plats, etc)1 allow $2,500 $2,500 -$ $2,500 up to and as needed TOTAL 116,500$ 114,000$ 2,500$ Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Remove Existing Utility Poles and Cobra Lights 18 pole 2,500$ 45,000$ 45,000$ -$ Conduit for Lighting 2000 lf 22$ 44,000$ 44,000$ -$ Streetlights - 2 Blocks of Pollard St, 2 Blocks of Lee Ave, & Farmers Mkt 42 light 3,000$ 126,000$ 126,000$ -$ Site furnishings (benches, trash receptacles)1 allow 6,100$ 6,100$ 6,100$ Allowance for upgrading posts/frames for existing signage 1 allow 12,000$ 12,000$ 12,000$ Directional and Wayfinding Signage 1 l.s.7,000$ 7,000$ 7,000$ -$ estimate down due to signage being in from washington/pollard currently? Subtotal:240,100$ 228,100$ 12,000$ Arch/Eng Design Services (14%)33,614$ 31,934$ 1,680$ 14% based on DHCD fee schedule TOTAL 273,714$ 260,034$ 13,680$ Miscellaneous Improvements Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Canopy Trees for Parking Lots 1 allow 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ -$ Town Hall parking lots Demolition of Town-owned Storage Buildings - Completed October 2011 2 l.s.9,000$ 18,000$ -$ 18,000$ Town Fund Rehabilitation of Former Storage Buildings Site 20,000$ -$ 20,000$ Town Fund Retaining Wall 1 l.s.5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ -$ Green/Pervious Parking Areas 20 space 1,500$ 30,000$ 30,000$ -$ Subtotal:78,000$ 40,000$ 38,000$ Arch/Eng Design Services (10%: canopy trees, retaining wall, green parking)4,000$ 4,000$ TOTAL 82,000$ 44,000$ 38,000$ Washington Avenue/Pollard Street Intersection and Gateway Improvements: Install New Crosswalks at the Intersection of Washington Avenue and Pollard Street Vinton Farmers Market Area Streetscape Improvements- 2 blocks of Pollard and 2 blocks of Lee Façade Improvements Description Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost 107 W. Lee Avenue - Vinton Hair Stylists: Completed in Sept. 2010 1 allow 7,068$ 7,068$ -$ 7,068$ Town/County Fund 105 W. Lee Avenue - IDK Restaurant: Completed in December 2010 1 allow 15,192$ 15,192$ -$ 15,192$ Town/County Fund 212 S. Pollard Street - Neely's Accounting: Completed in Feb 2011 1 allow 10,873$ 10,873$ -$ 10,873$ Town/County Fund 301 South Pollard Street - Charity Cottage 1 allow 21,776$ 21,776$ 10,888$ 10,888$ Town/County/Owner Fund 113 W. Lee Avenue - Christ Fellowship Church 1 allow 2,500$ 2,500$ 1,250$ 1,250$ Town/County/Owner Fund 117 W. Lee Avenue - Charme Beauty Shop 1 allow 2,900$ 2,900$ 1,450$ 1,450$ Town/County/Owner Fund 119 W. Lee Avenue - Allstate Insurance 1 allow 3,500$ 3,500$ 1,750$ 1,750$ Town/County/Owner Fund 123 W. Lee Avenue - Cornerstone Antique 1 allow 11,500$ 11,500$ 5,750$ 5,750$ Town/County/Owner Fund 107 South Pollard Street - (front façade)1 allow 14,000$ 14,000$ 7,000$ 7,000$ Town/County/Owner Fund - cost to be determined by program 109 South Pollard Street - OMA Training 1 allow 5,850$ 5,850$ 2,925$ 2,925$ Town/County/Owner Fund 111 South Pollard Street - United Pentecostal Church 1 allow 7,950$ 7,950$ 3,975$ 3,975$ Town/County/Owner Fund 119 South Pollard Street - US Post Office 1 allow 9,600$ 9,600$ 4,800$ 4,800$ Town/County/Owner Fund 217 South Pollard Street - Azteca de Oro Tienda y Taqueria 1 allow 13,000$ 13,000$ 6,500$ 6,500$ Town/County/Owner Fund 303 South Pollard Street - Angelo's Restaurant 1 allow 18,600$ 18,600$ 9,300$ 9,300$ Town/County/Owner Fund Bank of America 1 allow 25,000$ 25,000$ 12,500$ 12,500$ Subtotal:169,309$ 68,088$ 101,221$ Design Services 12 façade 1,850$ 22,200$ 22,200$ TOTAL 191,509$ 90,288$ 101,221$ Future Roanoke County Vinton Branch Library Development Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Real Estate Acquisitions: Completed June 2011 2 1,255,000$ -$ 1,255,000$ Town of Vinton: $627,500/Roanoke County: $627,500 Fund TOTAL 1,255,000$ 1,255,000$ Business Development Description of Work Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost Business Revolving Loan Pool 1 allow 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ Branding effort 1 ls 10,000$ 10,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ Town of Vinton to contract with firm Downtown Shopping and Dining Guide 1 ls 10,000$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ Town of Vinton Marketing/Promotional Events at the Farmers Market 1 ls 4,600$ 4,600$ -$ 4,600$ Foundation of Roanoke Valley/VA Farm Bureau TOTAL 124,600$ 105,000$ 19,600$ CDBG Grant Administration Grant and Program Administration Can be 10% of grant amount or up to $70,000 Execution of DHCD Contract 1 3,000$ 3,000$ 3,000$ -$ 15% of Admin total move 3k to other areas Execution of Project Contract(s)1 3,000$ 3,000$ 3,000$ -$ 15% of Admin total move 3 k to other areas Contract Monitoring 1 -$ -$ -$ -$ 20% of Admin total delete unless needed for engineering Construction Completion 1 -$ -$ -$ -$ 20% of Admin total delete unless needed for engineering Achievement of Benefits 1 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ -$ 25% of Admin total Administrative Project Closeout 1 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ -$ 5% of Admin total TOTAL 18,000$ 18,000$ 18,000$ -$ TOTAL COSTS:2,130,001$ 700,000$ 1,430,001$ Meeting Date March 15, 2013 Department Administration Issue Briefing on VHDA Feasibility Study for Roland E. Cook Elementary School Summary The Town, in partnership with the County and School System, applied for a Mixed-Use/Mixed Income planning grant through VHDA for the Roland E. Cook Elementary School. The Town was successful in getting the $10,000 planning grant to conduct a feasibility study for the property to determine its best use(s). This grant may also help determine the path to get the school on the Historic Register so potential buyers can apply for tax credits. The Town is working with the County and School Board to get supplemental funding for the project. The Ford Motors study cost $18,000, however the feasibility study for Roland E. Cook is not suggesting a dramatic shift the structure or use of the land. The Planning Grant for Roland E. Cook therefore should not cost as much. The Town will have to solicit A/E Services for the project after the agreement is signed between the Town and VHDA. Attachments Mixed-Use/Mixed-Income Planning Grant Submission Recommendations No action required Town Council Agenda Summary Roland E. Cook MUMI Planning Grant Application Partnership between: Town of Vinton, Roanoke County, Roanoke County Public Schools January 29, 2013 2 Date: 1/29/2013 Jurisdiction: Town of Vinton, Va. Total Grant Amount Requesting: $15,000 Locality Contact Person: Ryan Spitzer, Assistant to the Town Manager Town of Vinton 540-343-1508 Description of Locality Actions: The Town of Vinton has been working collaboratively with the Roanoke County School Board as well as Roanoke County to rehabilitate and redevelop the Roland E. Cook Elementary School in Vinton. The Town has also started to rehabilitate the downtown, central business district, adjacent to the School, which could potentially be a catalyst for the rehabilitation of Roland E. Cook. The school was closed in 1999 after being open since 1915. As Roland E. Cook Elementary School was closing the Roanoke County School Board commissioned a Blue Ribbon Study Group to develop a fact sheet for the property as well as a comprehensive facilities study. Meetings with stakeholders, spearheaded by the Town, began in 1999 to look at future desired uses of the school building. The Town and County involved local stakeholders such as citizens, the arts community and business representatives to develop a comprehensive look at how the structure could be utilized. The Roanoke County School Board also wrote to the Department of Historic Resources to try to get the building on the National Historic Register. The School missed the criteria by three points, mainly attributable to the upgrading of the windows. The Town of Vinton has just recently embarked on a $1.4 million project to revitalize the downtown business area which is adjacent to the Roland E. Cook Elementary School. This project consists of a $700,000 grant from DHCD through the CDBG program to revitalize the downtown area with increased landscaping, pedestrian friendly amenities, façade improvements and a $100,000 Revolving Loan Fund. The other portion of redevelopment in the downtown area is a new $8-10 million, 20,000 sq. ft., library being constructed, which will be a part of the Roanoke County Public Library System. The library is in design stage and is expected to be completed in three (3) years. This library will be state of the art and located on an entire Town block. The library design will mesh with the Downtown Revitalization Project, will be a gateway into the downtown business district and could serve as a gateway between the redevelopment of Roland E. Cook and the revitalization of downtown. The Town of Vinton, Roanoke County and Roanoke County School Board are still committed to finding an acceptable use for the Roland E. Cook Elementary School building that will be in congruence with the projects that will be getting underway and that will be a long-term benefit to the Town. 3 Area Profile/Description: The Roland E. Cook Elementary School has been vacant since 2009. It was first used as an elementary school from 1915 until 1999 and then as an alternative school for approximately 12 students until 2009. As an alternative school, it served children from Roanoke, Botetourt and Bedford Counties as well as Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton. After this, the alternative school was privatized and relocated to a different part of Roanoke County. The structure is deteriorating due to lack of maintenance while vacant for the past three (3) years. Because the School has been a fixture in the Town of Vinton since 1915 and is structurally sound, it should not be demolished, but rehabilitated into something the Town and its citizens can be proud of. The School is located adjacent to the Downtown Business District in a residential area of the Town with access to public transportation. The location of Roland E. Cook next to the redevelopment of downtown and the new library and ease of access to public transportation makes this a perfect project for a mixed-use development. Vinton has seen an increase in the senior population since the last census taken in 2000. The Town currently has a population of 8,098 with 21.7% being above 60 years of age and 52.8% being above the age of 55. This indicates a need for senior housing in the near future. Also, Vinton has an 8.1% family poverty rate that would indicate a possible need for low-moderate income housing. Provided are two attachments. Attachment A is a map of the area and Attachment B is the location of Roland E. Cook Elementary School in relation to the CDBG Project and the proposed Vinton Branch Library. Current Timeline for Plan: The Town, along with Roanoke County and the Roanoke County School Board began to look at alternatives for the Roland E. Cook site in 1999. The closing of the school was eminent at this time so in January of 1999 the Town held monthly stakeholder meetings to develop a plan for the use of the building. These meetings lasted through the end of 1999. After this, the Town has revisited redevelopment of the site as new and interested parties have shown interest. The Town hopes to build on work that has already been completed. Through using previous stakeholder and government meetings, the Town will build a profile of what the community wants. This will be refined through additional stakeholder meetings since it has been some time since meetings have been conducted. The Town would hope to have a finished product of mixed-use development strategies for the building within eight (8) months of issuance of the MUMI Grant. The first two months will be used to review the building and facility plan for a comprehensive analysis of the building as it currently stands. The next two months will be used to gain stakeholder recommendations for the building. After this, the remaining time will be used by the contractor to provide a PER with recommendations for the site. 4 Rationale for Planning Grant: The Town, County and School Board see the Roland E. Cook Elementary School building as a great potential site for mixed-used/mixed-income development. With its location to downtown and essential services it could bring a lot of benefits to the Town, residents and business community that will fit in with the comprehensive plan of the Town and the DHCD Downtown Revitalization and Economic Development Grant. Roland E. Cook was constructed in 1915 and updated in 1924. It remained in use as a school until 2009; first as an elementary school and then as an alternative education center. It is a 2.5 story structure with 22,987 square feet located on three (3) acres in Town. It has eleven (11) rooms with a community area on-site and is zoned R-2 (single family and Duplex). There is a large gymnasium on the second floor with a stage and a commercial grade kitchen in the basement. The rooms are of adequate size for differing types of uses, but the structure is not ADA compliant. This is an issue that the Planning Grant with have to address as well as the availability of off-street parking since there are currently only six (6) dedicated parking spaces. A floor plan of the school is included as attachment C. A list of alternatives based on the current structure and the recommended uses will need to be developed. As the Town of Vinton and Roanoke County commence on two different, but parallel projects the potential to meld the aesthetics of the Roland E. Cook Elementary School redevelopment and its uses with the other two projects is tremendous. As the Town moves forward with the Downtown Revitalization Grant and the County begins the Architectural and Engineering work for the new Vinton Branch of the Public Library, design and potential use information needs to be developed for Roland E. Cook. A coherent look between the School and Downtown and a list of complementary uses of the School will benefit the Town, its citizens and potential users of the building. A thoughtful and detailed holistic look at the area needs to considered and discussed and a planning report needs to be established. This would be a great use of the MUMI Grant. Estimated Total Cost of Plan: The estimated total cost of the study is $20,000. This will allow a consultant to conduct site visits, planning documents, architectural renderings and various options for the use of the Roland E. Cook Elementary School property. Anticipated Outcome for Area: With the MUMI Grant the Town in partnership with Roanoke County and the School System hopes to develop a holistic plan for utilization of the space as a mixed-use development for either low-to- moderate income or senior residents or a combination of both that will be complementary to the work 5 being initiated through the CDBG Project and new library. The Town hopes this will help to revitalize the downtown area by bringing people, businesses and activities. The Town will pay for a Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) to be performed with the MUMI Grant that will consider the previous recommendations as well as new recommendations and ranking of the potential outcomes that will be congruent with the other projects the Town is developing and with the Comprehensive Plan. A site development rendering will also be a product of the PER. The projects that have been discussed in the past are creating a senior housing unit, an incubator and/or an expanded site for the Town Museum. The two types of incubators that have been discussed are arts or business. The arts incubator would be a place for local artists to learn and develop their trades as well as have a space to do art and to create a creative space for collaboration. The business incubator would serve the same purpose for small businesses. Finally, the current Town of Vinton Museum is expanding and running out of space. A part of the building could be a great place for either relocation of the Museum or use as an annex by the Vinton Museum. Roland E. Cook needs to be developed to fit into the use of the surrounding landscape and to reflect the look of the downtown business district and new library. With the help of the MUMI Grant this can be accomplished through a Professional Community Development Company. A list of uses with the pros and cons can be established as well as a site plan that will use the land available to its best extent and fit in with the surrounding fabric of Vinton. 6 Attachment A Topological Map: Roland E. Cook in yellow with the CDBG area in red. 7 Attachment B Map of Downtown Revitalization in relation to Roland E Cook. Roland E. Cook property highlighted in green in bottom right of picture. 8 Attachment C Floor plan of Roland E. Cook (three floors) 9 10 Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Finance/Treasurer Issue Financial Report for January 2013 Summary The Financial Report for the period ending January 31, 2013 has been placed in the Town’s Dropbox. The Finance Committee met on Monday, March 11, 2013 at 5:30 pm to discuss the report and will make a presentation of the report to Council during the Council Comment Section of the Regular Meeting. Attachments Report in Financial folder in Dropbox Recommendations Motion to approve the Financial Report Town Council Agenda Summary Meeting Date March 19, 2013 Department Council Issue Request to Convene in Closed Meeting, Pursuant to § 2.2-3711 A (6) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, for discussion or consideration or the investment of public funds. Summary None Attachments Certification of Closed Meeting Recommendations Reconvene and adopt Certification of Closed Meeting Town Council Agenda Summary AT A CLOSED MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 2013, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDNG, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA. CERTIFICATION THAT A CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vinton, 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 Vinton Town Council that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia Law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Vinton Town Council hereby certifies that to the best of each member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from opening meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification 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 Town Council. Motion made by Council Member _______________ and seconded by Council Member ______________, with all in favor. ___________________________________ Clerk of Council