HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/3/2013 - Regular1
Vinton Town Council
Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
311 South Pollard Street
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
AGENDA
Consideration of:
A. 6:30 p.m. - ROLL CALL AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUORUM
B. CLOSED MEETING
1. Request to Convene in Closed Meeting, Pursuant to § 2.2-3711 (A) (7) of the 1950 Code
of Virginia, as amended, for consultation with legal counsel regarding possible disposition
of real property.
C. RECONVENE AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED MEETING
D. MOMENT OF SILENCE
E. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE U. S. FLAG
F. UPCOMING COMMUNITY EVENTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
G. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Consider approval of minutes for:
a. Joint Council/Planning Commission/Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of October
29, 2013.
b. Regular Council meeting of November 5, 2013.
H. AWARDS, RECOGNITIONS, PRESENTATIONS
I. CITIZENS’ COMMENTS AND PETITIONS - This section is reserved for comments and
questions for issues not listed on the agenda.
J. TOWN ATTORNEY
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
K. TOWN MANAGER
ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION
1. Presentation of the June 30, 2013 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report by Brown
Edwards & Company, LLP and consider adoption of a Resolution approving and
accepting said Report.
2. Consider adoption of a Resolution authorizing the transferring of funds in the amount of
$7,250.00 to pay the Berkley Group for the development of a park master plan.
BRIEFING
1. Briefing on application by adjoining property owners for abandonment, vacation and
deeding of undeveloped right-of-way known as Daleview Drive.
2. Briefing on the final draft of Town of Vinton/Roanoke County Stormwater Management
Ordinance as required under the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP)
Permit Regulations and the Virginia Stormwater Management Act § 62.1-44.15:27 of the
Code of VA, as amended.
UPDATE ON OLD BUSINESS
1. Consider request for transfer of ownership to the Town of a 2002 Ford Crown Vic
previously transferred to the Volunteer First Aid Crew in 2012.
L. MAYOR
M. COUNCIL
1. Financial Report for October 2013.
N. 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/EVENTS:
December 2, 2013 - 5:30 p.m., Finance Committee Meeting – Finance Conference Room
December 3, 2013 – 5:00 p.m., Public Safety Committee Meeting – Town Conference Room
December 5, 2013 – 10:30 a.m., Vinton Branch Library Construction Launch – new Vinton Library site
December 10, 2013 – 8:00 a.m., Breakfast followed by Chamber Membership/State of the Town
Meeting – Vinton War Memorial
December 17, 2013 – 6:00 p.m., Work Session followed by Regular Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. –
Council Chambers
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Council
Issue
Request to Convene in Closed Meeting, Pursuant to § 2.2-3711 (A) (7) of the 1950 Code of
Virginia, as amended, for consultation with legal counsel regarding possible disposition of real
property.
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,
DECEMBER 3, 2013, AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON
MUNICIPAL BUILIDNG, 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
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Town Clerk
Issues
1. Consider approval of minutes for:
a. Joint Council/Planning Commission/Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on October
29, 2013.
b. Regular Council meeting on November 5, 2013.
Summary
None
Attachments
October 29, 2013 minutes
November 5, 2013 minutes
Recommendations
Motion to approve minutes
Town Council
Agenda Summary
1
MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, VINTON PLANNING
COMMISSION AND VINTON BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HELD AT 6:00 P.M. ON
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2013, AT THE VINTON WAR MEMORIAL, 814 WASHINGTON
AVENUE, VINTON, VIRGINIA.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
William W. Nance, Vice Mayor
I. Douglas Adams, Jr.
Robert R. Altice
Matthew S. Hare
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMBERS PRESENT: David R. Jones, Chairman
Dawn M. Michelsen
Robert A. Patterson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul R. Mason, Vice Chairman
William E. Booth
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert R. Benninger, Chairman
Allen S. Kasey, Vice Chairman
Sabrina Weeks
Frederick J. Michelsen
Donald R. Altice
MEMBERS ABSENT: Debra P. Hagins
STAFF PRESENT: Christopher S. Lawrence, Town Manager
Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk
Ryan Spitzer, Assistant to the Town Manager
Anita McMillan, Planning & Zoning Director
Joey Hiner, Assistant Public Works Director
Mary Beth Layman, Special Programs Director
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. The Town Clerk called the roll with
Council Member Adams, Council Member Altice, Council Member Hare, Vice Mayor Nance
and Mayor Grose present. Anita McMillan called the roll with Planning Commission Members
Jones, Michelsen and Patterson present and Board of Zoning Appeals Members Michelsen,
Kasey, Weeks, Benninger and Altice present.
The Mayor made opening comments and expressed thanks to all in attendance. He then
turned the meeting over to the Town Manager. The Town Manager commented that there
were two discussion points to bring before the group and at the end of the meeting there would
be time for discussion of other issues that the group might have. He then introduced staff that
was present at the meeting.
The Town Manager next commented that staff has been working for four years on the
Downtown Revitalization Grant. Mr. Spitzer has been tasked with managing and coordinating
the entire project and tonight he will be presenting design work to get your feedback. There
will be a public meeting to sharing all of the designs before construction drawings are
prepared.
2
Mr. Spitzer commented that it has been a little over four months since we were actually given
the go-ahead from the State to proceed with the project. He began his Power Point
presentation showing a map of the original proposed grant area and commented that it will
now extend to the Municipal Building and include the new library.
The Project Scope will consist of
• design work at the intersection of Washington and Pollard to improve the intersection
and to put in handicapped-accessible sidewalks
• landscaping and some sign and road work at Virginia and Pollard
• a greening of the area at the Farmer’s Market and a more cohesive look
• streetscaping with benches, updating some sign posts through the Downtown and
lighting
• rehabilitation of the old garage site behind the Municipal Building
• façade improvements downtown with 12 properties being identified
• business development such as branding and marketing
The current projects underway are street lighting, Farmer’s Market Design Plan, Post Office
Site Plan Concept, façade improvements and the Virginia/Pollard intersection improvements.
The street lights have to be designed to catch the entire roadway with some overlap. To give
a perspective, the current cobra head lights are about 32 feet tall and the banners on those
poles are 20 feet tall. Through AEP’s design, acorn lights have to be between 14 and 18 feet
tall which are the more traditional lights you see in downtown Roanoke and other areas. A
teardrop light has to be about 22 feet tall. He then showed two simulation photos which
showed what the two types of lights would look like in the downtown area. The Downtown
Management Team has decided on the teardrop light which will have places for the banners,
flower baskets and electrical outlets.
Mr. Benninger asked what was the costs differential. Mr. Spitzer responded that we have
$3,000 set aside for each light. The teardrop lights are approximately $2,200 each and the
acorn lights run a little less per light. Mr. Jones asked about the lighting ability and the
response was as far as casting, the current design is for 39 of the teardrop lights throughout
the downtown. If we go with the acorn light, there will be 45 to 50 lights because they had to
be closer together.
Mr. Benninger asked if we would have to tear up the sidewalks again to put a conduit in and
the response was that we have found the plans from 1989 showing that AEP and the town put
conduit in this area. Ms. Michelsen asked what would be the advantage over this style as
opposed to the acorn style and the response was this style would set the town apart from
other areas because most towns have the acorn lights.
Mr. Kasey asked if these lights will be energy efficient and the response was in order to lease
the lights from AEP, they have to be 100 watt metal high pressure sodium lights. If we wanted
to use LED lights, we would have to buy them ourselves. The Town Manager gave an
explanation that AEP has a program that if a locality has the ability to maintain its street lights,
then you can buy them outright and have them installed. Since we do not have that capacity
in Public Works, we can lease the lights from AEP and the maintenance is handled by AEP.
Mr. Spitzer continued by commenting that we have 42 lights budgeted at $3,000 each.
Through the current design, it appears that we will only need 32 lights for the downtown area,
so the remaining balance could be used for other accessories to the lights or moved into other
areas of the grant. There is $45,000 to remove the existing cobra light poles and AEP has
3
indicated they will remove a lot of them for little or no costs, so this would also be a savings.
We have $44,000 for conduit which we probably will not have to use since we found the 1989
plans; $6,100 for site furnishings downtown and $19,000 for upgrading of existing signs and
for way finding.
The Town Manager commented that we are getting inquiries from other property owners
outside the grant area who are interested in street lights. Since we cannot spend any grant
money outside the grant area, a consideration in the future might be a partnership or cost
sharing with those property owners or use of more town funds.
Mr. Spitzer continued his presentation with the Farmer’s Market Concept Plan. The idea is to
green up the space and make it cohesive through connecting the stage with the Farmer’s
Market visually. He showed a drawing which added decking to extend the stage area out
into the side of the street. This would be some type of stamped concrete to create the visual
that this is an event area. The parking spaces there now will be replaced with green pavers,
some walls will be added that can also be used as seating. There will also be some type of
anchoring tree in the area and an extension of the street lights.
Mr. Jones stated we need to expand the rules regarding who can use the Farmer’s Market
because there is one vendor in town who cannot use the Market. Mr. Hare asked what rule
keeps him out and Mr. Jones responded that you have to grow your product in town. The
Town Manager further commented that the rules state you have to be at least a Virginia
grower or somewhat local. Ms. Layman responded the preference is 50 to 60 miles and
most of the produce should be grown by the vendor selling it. It is not any different than the
rest of the markets in the area. The vendor that Mr. Jones is speaking of buys his produce
either in Hillsville or another place and then re-sells. We allow some to be purchased from
someone else and be resold, but his 100 percent. Mr. Jones further commented he has never
seen the Farmer’s Market 100 percent full. We are selling ourselves as a business friendly
community, but we have a solid rule that is working against us.
Mr. Spitzer continued with another drawing that shows removing the current entrance to the
Farmer’s Market, extending the parking spaces down and putting the entrance on the side to
control traffic flow and make it look more inviting. Mr. Jones asked about a lease with some
of the Farmer’s Market property. Ms. McMillan responded that it does not exist anymore.
When Mr. Boggess was the Town Manager all the property was purchased by the Town.
Mr. Spitzer continued by stating that the bollards shown can be used for seating. One
suggestion has been to make the bollards different heights so people can sit and place food
on them. A suggestion has also been made to extend the roof line of the pavilion further out
towards the street so the bands can get closer to the Market area.
The Town Manager commented that we have a venue that we are trying to enhance and
invest in and so are other surrounding areas such as Daleville and the City of Roanoke with
Elmwood Park. We are not trying to compete with Elmwood Park, but we are competing with
other events in the area. A member of our Downtown Management Team asked if there is
something we can do to add value to the pavilion, so the architect did a rendering to show the
extended roof. The pavilion is a very good structure for its purpose and is user friendly for the
events we have had, but if we are centering all this work around the Farmer’s Market, maybe
we should give more attention to the pavilion as well. The expansion of the pavilion is not
part of the grant. It would have to be a community project and determination would need to
be made if the expansion would add value, be worth the money and are there sponsorship
opportunities. .
4
Mr. Hare asked if there is any screening behind the pavilion and the response from Mr. Spitzer
was there is no screening in our current grant, but trees could be planted there.
Mr. Adams asked if the western exit to the Farmer’s Market would be closed and the response
was no. Mr. Spitzer stated that we are also considering the way the traffic flows into the Post
Office. Right now vehicles that turn left into the Post Office block the road and cause a lot of
congestion. We have looked at moving the stop bar to reverse the flow of traffic in the parking
lot. Mr. Jones asked what if the parking lot was made for parking only on one side and we
opened the other side of the building. Mr. Spitzer responded that was a good suggestion.
The caveat we have is that everything has to be approved by the Post Office first. We want to
engage your interest in even proceeding with this idea. Further comments and discussion
were had regarding the issues of the parking at the Post Office and other parking issues
downtown. The Town Manager commented that we have spoken to the owner of the
building, but the approval must come from the Greensboro, North Carolina office. Mr. Spitzer
stated that the current design plan has been sent to the Greensboro office and we are waiting
for a response from them.
The grant funds available to upgrade to the Farmer’s Market without the pavilion and some
parking spaces is about $100,000 for site improvements, $14,000 for the design plan and
$2,500 for survey work of that area. In order to get the expanded pavilion, the architect has
estimated that the cost would be $29,000 to move the roof line out, $19,000 for additional
lighting and a $14,000 contingency. Mr. Hare asked if we only spent $70,000, could we use
the other $30,000 to make the pavilion bigger and Mr. Spitzer responded it is possible. In our
grant application we only stated that we were going to do some improvements to the Farmer’s
Market. We never specified what those improvements would be. Our premise for applying
for this grant and what DCHD wants from us is to revitalize downtown. As long as we can
show improvement towards that, we can do the specific projects how we want.
The Town Manager said there may be money in the grant budget for the street lights that we
may be able to use somewhere else. Also, there may be a company that would want to put
money toward the pavilion or fund raising opportunities to leverage the grant money with our
money to be able to do the pavilion. Mr. Jones said he would be willing to ask his company if
they would fund a small piece of it.
Mr. Spitzer continued by commenting that we have $5,000 in the grant for trees for the area
and green/pervious parking in the amount of $30,000.
Mr. Jones further commented we need to look at fixing the storm water problem at D & R
Music while we are fixing the lights.
Mr. Spitzer stated that he would be glad to talk further with anyone in the group either in his
office or at their office. Also, as we look at the area behind Town Hall, we can use some of
the $30,000 to improve the parking there and to fix that site as we move forward even if some
other use were to go there. The Town Manager commented there has been conversation
about a skate park there, but regardless, something will have to be done with that property.
Mr. Jones asked whatever happened to the equipment from the former skate park and the
response was it was donated to Renewanation about four years ago. That organization
indicated they were going to create their own indoor skate park, but it never happened. They
still have the equipment. When asked if we could approach them to have it back for the
space behind Town Hall. The Town Manager responded that based on a recommendation
from a professional that does skate parks and from our insurance carrier, in order to manage
and reduce our risks, anything we buy for a skate park should be done by a professional.
5
Those ramps at that time were very appropriate when built, but they are not up to today’s
standards.
Mr. Spitzer said the next project is our façade improvements. We were designed for 12
facades throughout the downtown and we currently have nine in progress. They have met
with our architect and are doing the renderings for what they want their facades to look like
and what will match our façade for downtown. We have funds to match three more and after
we get the nine that we are committed to, we will open the program back up. There were
three completed previous to the grant that were used as a match—Neely’s Accounting,
Creative Occasions and IDK. They are a 50/50 match, the grant puts up 50 percent and the
owner puts up 50 percent. There is $191,000 in the grant for these 12 facades and we are
using $136,000 of those funds for the current nine. There will be $89,000 left over to do other
facades in the downtown or we can transfer that money to other areas. There was $22,200
that we had to pay up front for the architect to look at the designs. Slides showing the façade
improvements planned for the Post Office, Cornerstone Antiques, Azteca de Oro Tienda y
Taqueria and Allstate were shown to the group.
Ms. Michelsen commented on some awnings in town that are starting to look shabby and how
are the property owners going to deal with them. Maybe we should not encourage them to put
up awnings, but some other façade. Mr. Spitzer responded that a couple of property owners
have discussed putting up metal awnings instead of the cloth ones or some type of more
durable material. We will take these comments back to the architect. Our downtown façade
program states that they have to keep within the character that defined Vinton in the 50s-60s.
The Virginia/Pollard intersection project will include upgrades to the landscaping and signage.
One idea that has surfaced is making 1st Street two ways up to the laundry mat and then
putting some type of barrier so vehicles can enter, but not come out to the road. There are
various options to use for the barrier.
Mr. Spitzer closed by commenting on our branding and marketing strategy. He said that many
of the group had already met with the firm. They will be calling citizens in the town to solicit
input on what they view Vinton as now and in the future, so if you get a call, please respond.
We are also considering sending a survey out to the high school to get that younger
demographics input.
The Town Manager made opening comments that we have a lot of codes that help to protect
our neighborhoods and in a lot of cases we do a very good job of enforcing them. However,
there are some properties that we cannot seem to address because current code does not
give us enough authority to deal with the real problem. One of the ideas that our Planning
staff has researched and wants to brief you on tonight concerns spot blight abatement. We
want to make you aware of what the State will allow us to do and get some direction from
Council as to whether you want to pursue this or not.
Anita McMillan began by commenting that we have an agreement with Roanoke County to
handle all our building code requirements review and determine when a house can be
condemned. The City of Roanoke has a maintenance code, but Roanoke County and the
Town do not have such a code, so since 2009 we have had properties that continue to be a
problem.
In 2005 when we did the comprehensive plan, we identified a list of house in neighborhoods in
Vinton that can be defined under dilapidated and with structural deficiency and many of these
houses that are vacant we have received complaints about. Since 2009 the State Code has
provided ways that localities can address these issues with such properties called spot blight
6
abatement. One example is the property at 123 Gus Nicks Boulevard. We have been
working with the County Building Official since 2009 and based on his inspection, it cannot be
condemned. He indicated we can ask that it be secured, but he does not have the authority to
say that this property is at the point that we have to demolish it. He does not feel comfortable
because just looking at the outside, it only needs to be secured. However, those that live
adjacent to this property and for those of us who have been receiving the complaints, know
that a tree is growing from that house. Tonight we want to give you some information
regarding a policy to address spot blight abatement. Ms. McMillan then showed pictures of
houses at 308B 9th Street, 522 5th Street and 856 Chestnut Street.
Ms. McMillan next commented that property can be considered blight if it meets any of the
following:
• vacant for at least one year;
• subject of documented complaints;
• no longer maintained for useful occupancy;
• dilapidated or lacks normal maintenance and upkeep;
• subject of nuisance abatement actions undertaken by the Town;
• Any buildings or improvements which are detrimental to the safety, health, morals or
welfare of the community.
Mr. Hare asked if any one of those criteria is met, can it be considered blight and the response
was yes. Mr. Hare then asked if he went on a long-term assignment for work, say for two
years, but he is still having his lawn mowed and his house maintained, would it be considered
blighted because it is vacant? Ms. McMillan responded that there would be a thorough
investigation of the property and other factors would need to be present before property can
be determined to not be safe and it should be demolished.
There are other potential conditions that may cause a property to be considered blighted such
as a condemned structure, rat and rodent infestation, previous citations or inadequate facilities
such as sewage, septic, plumbing, well or heating facilities. Other conditions could be
potential trespass, nuisance to children, a fire hazard or substantial dilapidation of buildings or
structures.
The proposed procedure would be to have a Town Team made up of representatives from the
Planning, Police, Fire Marshal and Public Works Departments. This team will do the initial
investigation and discuss complaints received about specific properties in order to build a good
case. We do not want to consider property blighted just because it is not being mowed, but if
it has been a constant problem in other areas for an extended period of time. Once we make
that determination, we will contact the Building Official for his determination if the building is
also structurally deficient.
The next step would be to notify the property owner and give them 30 days to respond with a
plan. Upon approval of the plan by the team and/or Building Official, the owner would have
90 days to complete the work. If the owner fails to notify the town within the 30 day period,
then the Town Manager can present it to Council for determination if they want to proceed with
a public hearing. Prior to a public hearing, the owner will again be notified and the appropriate
advertising will be placed in The Messenger. If Council approves the repair or demolition,
bids will be solicited from contractors to abate the blight and carry out the approved plan to
repair or dispose of the property.
Ms. McMillan commented further on the property at 123 Gus Nicks and the fact that we did
receive a bid from a contractor to demolish the house for $12,000. However, we found out
7
that our existing code does not have a policy to define the process. This will also require an
amendment to our current building code. We will work with Roanoke County’s Building
Official since the County amended their code in April. Other demolition prices were $7,000
for the property on Hardy Road and $8,000 for the one on Chestnut (before purchased by a
developer).
The Town Manager commented that the government does have certain powers to control or
regulate properties through our zoning code. In this case, one of the most powerful things the
government can do is take your house. Anything related to this has to be treated with the
highest level of responsibility from the government side. That is why we are recommending a
team approach for a thorough investigation so that everything is documented. Staff is not
taking this lightly; this is the ultimate tool to tear down someone’s house. This at least allows
us an avenue to try and address those properties that we do have.
A question was asked if any taxes are being paid on these properties. Ms. McMillan
responded that back in 2005 when our comprehensive plan was updated, we listed houses in
five neighborhoods which was Cleveland, Gladetown, Vinyard, Midway and part of downtown.
The criteria we used back then were major deficiencies, dilapidated, received complaints and if
utility costs and taxes were being paid. In every neighborhood we have at least three or four
houses that have always been a problem and there are a lot more problems when the house
is vacant.
The Mayor commented that the process to condemn a house in a neighborhood is very, very
difficult and it should be. However, he does believe there comes a time when it is the
responsibility of the government to help its citizens. If we have a team and it is structured in
this way, he would be in favor of us adopting this policy.
Vice Mayor Nance commented that this has to be the statute of last resort. He wants a
statute in place that even in the future when staff and elected officials are different that it can
only be enforced when there is a property that is actually impacting neighbors in a negative
and unhealthy fashion. There will be some subjective issues, but there needs to be some
objective criteria for it to meet the definition of blighted. The State code is pretty flexible, but
he thinks we need something inflexible that will take a lot for us to get to it. There needs to be
at least multiple tiers of attempted notification and the first few should actually point out
abatement possibilities for those landowners. If they have gotten to the point that they are an
absentee landowner or a landowner that does not have the physical ability to right the
problem, that we suggest maybe some faith based or civic organizations that can help them
get their property back into compliance or we consider using the statute. He would like to see
it proceed, but wants to hold that statute to a very high standard.
Mr. Hare commented that before his family moved into his grandparents’ house in Dillon
Woods, it met four of the criteria, it was vacant, had mice, problems with the HVAC and rotten
materials on the outside, but he would not put it in the same category as Gus Nicks. The bar
for him is really high on this issue. Mr. Hare asked does this cover just residential or also
commercial and Ms. McMillan responded it would cover everything.
Mr. Adams commented that looking at the time frames and the different notices and waiting
time, this is not going to be something that will happen in two months. This is going to take six
months to a year. But he agreed that meeting only one of the criteria should not allow us to do
anything. There has to be a comprehensive investigation and multiple tries to fix the situation
before we act under this statute.
8
Mr. Hare asked if they would go before the Planning Commission at all and Ms. McMillan
responded that there are localities that take it before their Planning Commission. If that is the
process that Council would want us to follow, we can go through the Planning Commission
first. The Town Manager commented that it would add value to the credibility of the
investigation by having a public review. Mr. Nance also commented that you could go through
Planning and Zoning and the Town Manager as a gate keeper. There will have to be
procedural hoops that we jump through that are documented and a system of checks and
balances whether that is through another citizen commission or board or through different
levels of government before it gets to the elected officials. The Mayor agreed with the idea of
using the Planning Commission and their traditional role of making a recommendation. He
really considers the BZA, Planning Commission and Council as a team and we value input
from other members of the team and actually we count on it.
Mr. Altice said this is not something new. This issue was the topic of a round table discussion
at the Virginia Municipal League conference several years ago with about six localities of
elected officials and it is not an easy thing. Regarding the Planning Commission, he indicated
he makes a motion a lot of times based on their recommendation because they did a good job
and he thinks that is the best you can do.
Mr. Jones commented that there are times that people feel more comfortable at different
levels. Generally people feel comfortable coming to a public hearing for the Planning
Commission and speaking their peace about an issue and do not feel they know how to talk in
front of Council. Often things can be handled at the lower level and resolved, the more levels
an issue goes through, the less likely everybody is wrong. It is not going to keep getting
passed along if everybody is looking at it the wrong way. Mr. Altice commented that a lot of
times the Planning Commission takes the edge off something and it gets done.
Mr. Jones commented that there may be reasons why these houses are in the shape they are
in that can be determined through this process. The ultimate purpose is to get it fixed or get it
cleaned up. If you get it fixed, you get the taxes paid and you have something good. It may
be that some of these houses need to be sold and somebody else would take it and do it.
Ms. Weeks commented that Valley Bank participates in the Rebuilding Together program
which is an outreach program for employees and it would be great if we were able to include
that information in the letter to the property owner to give them an opportunity to ask for help.
Maybe if they do not have the financial ability to tear the house down, we could give them
more insight from a financial view. If these properties are causing us to have a bad
appearance to others, after we have done all our homework we need to go ahead and move
forward instead of waiting four or five years.
Mr. Kasey commented that if they find a homeowner that is up in age and cannot afford to
repair the place or tear it down there ought to be some kind of way to get an offer to purchase
it from these people for an investment. A lot of these old places would cost more to repair
than to tear it down and build brand new ones. Mr. Jones then commented that if you had a
lot leveled and you could build a house on it, it would be worth more than $1,000. Ms. Weeks
asked if the property owners are local and the response was the one for the Gus Nicks
property is local.
The Town Manager commented that unless that are other comments and questions it appears
that there is enough interest from Council for staff to move forward with drafting the policy and
code amendment and bring back to Council for further consideration. We will also share with
the Planning Commission.
9
The Town Manager asked if there was anything further from the group. Mr. Kasey brought up
the issue regarding the widening of Giles Avenue and the Town Manager responded that staff
would look into the matter. Mr. Jones thanked Council and staff for the format of the meeting.
In closing, Ms. McMillan commented that we need to review our entire zoning ordinance
because in the past few years we have just been making changes as the State Code requires.
Also, the comprehensive plan will need to be reviewed in 2014 as well.
On motion by Vice Mayor Nance, seconded by Mr. Hare, with a vote of 5-0, Council adjourned
the meeting at 9:27 p.m.
APPROVED:
________________________________
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF VINTON TOWN COUNCIL HELD AT 7:00 P.M.
ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 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
William W. Nance, Vice Mayor
I. Douglas Adams, Jr.
Robert R. Altice
Matthew S. Hare
STAFF PRESENT: Christopher S. Lawrence, Town Manager
Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk
Ryan Spitzer, Assistant to the Town Manager
Gary Woodson, Public Works Director
Joey Hiner, Assistant Public Works Director
The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The
Town Clerk called the roll with Council Member Adams,
Council Member Altice, Council Member Hare, Vice Mayor
Nance, and Mayor Grose present. After a Moment of Silence
Mr. Altice led the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. Flag.
Roll Call
Under the upcoming community events/announcements,
the Mayor announced a neighborhood meeting concerning the
future of the former Roland E. Cook School on November 20th
at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. The Roanoke State of the
County address is tomorrow, November 6th, at 7:30 a.m. at
Green Ridge Recreation Center. The Blue Ridge Veterans
Association event is this Sunday from 12 Noon to 4:00 p.m. at
the War Memorial.
The Mayor also announced a ribbon cutting on November 7th
at 11:00 a.m. at Flowers by Eddie, a new business on King
Street.
The Town Manager announced that the State of the Town
address will be Tuesday, December 10th, at 7:30 a.m. for
breakfast followed by the presentation. RVTV-3 will be
recording the event for replay four times on Channel 3.
Mr. Adams announced a fundraising event for Dedrick Rose,
the UPS driver who is paralyzed, on Saturday, November 9th
at 6:00 p.m. at the Woodland Place.
Mr. Adams made a motion that the consent agenda be
approved as presented; the motion was seconded by Mr.
Hare and carried by the following vote, with all members
voting: Vote 5-0; Yeas (5) – Adams, Altice, Hare, Nance,
Grose; Nays (0) – None.
Approved minutes of the
meeting of October 1, 2013 and
the Council Retreat of October
11, 2013
The Town Manager announced that the Town Attorney
was absent due to her handling of a case in Court today.
2
The next item on the agenda was a briefing on a new
initiative by the United Way of Roanoke Valley known as the
Bank On Roanoke Valley (BORV) Project. The Town
Manager began by commenting that he had received a letter
from the Chris Morrill, Roanoke City Manager, who is also
the Chair of the Bank On Roanoke Valley Steering
Committee. This is a project developed through the United
Way focusing on educating local citizens who are unbanked
and underbanked citizens. The Cities of Roanoke and
Salem are on board with the program and Roanoke County
will be considering at their meeting next week. The Town
Manager then introduced Abby Verdillo and Nate Schuckers
from United Way.
Ms. Verdillo commented that the project began by reviewing
data on unbanked individuals who are not connected with a
financial institution and those who are underbanked that
may have a financial institution but are not using them
properly and are depending on alternative streams of
financing. There are approximately 6,500 households in
the category of unbanked and research shows that an
average individual will spend around $1,000 a year in fees
to alternative streams of financing. These fees can be used
to pay down debts or meet other expenses and that is where
this motivation is coming from. Ms. Verdillo provided
Council with a profile showing the specific data for Vinton.
There are 14 local financial institutions that have come
together for this Bank On Roanoke Valley Project which will
be launched on January 1, 2014. The goal in a two-year
time period is to open approximately 1,000 new accounts in
the Valley and to be able to monitor and track them to be
sure they stay open and active and they translate to the
changes we want to see. The financial institutions are also
working together to create a common financial education
curriculum which they can share and will be implemented
throughout the Roanoke Valley.
Ms. Verdillo stated that the United Way is requesting
Council to support the project financially and to partner with
them to specifically to target the neighborhoods and to offer
or sponsor financial education classes in Vinton. With the
financial investment and based on the data for the town, it
would only take two individuals to actually open a bank
account and change the way they are living to make that
investment pay off. Mr. Adams asked what the funds from
the town would be used for and Ms. Verdillo responded for
outreach and marketing efforts and to support the data
tracking portion of the program so that we know on a
quarterly basis if we are hitting the targets we are supposed
to be hitting and to report back to the localities.
The Mayor commented that he supports the program, but
Council is very careful on how we spend taxpayers’ money.
3
However, he likes the program for its partnership with United
Way and the fact that the program is teaching financial
management and stability. Vice Mayor Nance commented
that he likes the idea of United Way partnering with banks to
assist in an educational forum. However, there are other
avenues for financial education and the town should do what
it can to help foster this relationship in ways other than using
taxpayer dollars. We do still have a tight budget and need
to be careful what we commit to since this suggests an
annual financial commitment.
Mr. Hare commented that he too thinks it is a great idea.
However, although the United Way does a lot of good work,
people give to the United Way voluntarily. Taking taxpayer
money and giving it to United Way is not voluntary. He feels
this is something the banks can do on their own without the
help of governments and he cannot support it.
Mr. Adams asked if we were to join at this time and after a
year, we do not feel it is the right thing for us what our
options would be. Ms. Verdillo responded there is a clause
at the end of the agreement that allows either party to
terminate by providing a 30-day advance written notice. Mr.
Altice commented that he does not feel we can commit to it
for more than a year.
The next item on the agenda was to consider adoption
of a Resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute a
Local Government Memorandum of Understanding for the
Bank On Roanoke Valley (BORV) Project and approve the
transfer of funds in the amount of $1,500.00 as the Town of
Vinton’s commitment level for the 2014 program year. Mr.
Adams made a motion that the Resolution be adopted as
presented; the motion was seconded by Mr. Altice and carried
by the following roll call vote, with all members voting: Vote 3-
2; Yeas (3) – Adams, Altice, Grose; Nays (2) – Hare, Nance.
Adopted Resolution No. 2041
authorizing the Town Manager
to execute a Local Government
Memorandum of Understanding
for the Bank On Roanoke Valley
(BORV) Project and approve the
transfer of funds in the amount
of $1,500.00 as the Town of
Vinton’s commitment level for
the 2014 program year
The next item on the agenda was to consider adoption
of a Resolution awarding a bid and authorizing the Town
Manager to execute a contract with Sawyer Paving in the
amount of $135,795.36 for street resurfacing.
Gary Woodson commented that with last year’s funds, the
east section of Virginia Avenue was resurfaced. We wanted
to take this year’s funding and try to get the other half of
Virginia Avenue from the westbound side from Pollard to the
City line resurfaced. We solicited bids and received one bid
from Sawyer Paving, the contractor that has done the
paving for the past several years in the town. The balance
of the paving funds will be used once we take an
assessment of the town’s roadway systems. There is also
the possibility of doing the intersection of By-Pass and
Washington and some improvements on Mountain View
Road.
4
Mr. Woodson said the plan is to try and get this work done
within the next couple of weeks. If the weather changes we
will pull it and get them to honor the contract price and have
it done in the Spring. Mr. Hare asked if there would be any
risk that they would mill it and then the weather turn and not
get the paving done and the response was absolutely not.
On this stretch of roadway they should be able to mill and
lay down at the same time.
The Town Manager commented that this is a lot of money
and weather is very important to the long-term quality of that
kind of investment and if it is not right, there is nothing
wrong with doing it in the Spring. Mr. Woodson said he
tried to get it in a month or so earlier, but the way the
process and procurement of bids, it did not happen. Vice
Mayor Nance made a motion that the Resolution be
approved as presented; the motion was seconded by Mr.
Altice and carried by the following roll call vote, with all
members voting: Vote 5-0; Yeas (5) – Adams, Altice, Hare,
Nance, Grose; Nays (0) – None.
Adopted Resolution No. 2042
awarding a bid and authorizing
the Town Manager to execute a
contract with Sawyer Paving in
the amount of $135,795.36 for
street resurfacing
The next item on the agenda was update on old
business. The Town Manager commented that we have
been working pretty diligently on the buzzard problem that
has attempted to roost in the Gladetown area. Two primary
tactics are being used—a noise maker, which is like a cap
gun or roman candle type of flare gun is being used early
morning to try and scare them to move and a propane air
can that makes a really loud noise on a consistent
frequency. Since the buzzards are a protected species you
have to have a permit to kill one. The Police Department
has applied to the State to receive a permit to kill one and
place it in a location where they are nesting. They do not
like to be around their dead. We are aware of the
neighbors’ complaints and are doing as much as we are
allowed without a permit. Vice Mayor Nance asked how
long it would be to hear back from the State and the Town
Manager responded he did not know, but he would find out.
The Town Manager further commented that PFG has
complained that they have thousands of dollars in damage
to their roof and we believe we have developed a good case
for property damage and tree damage. A resident of
Gladetown in the audience stated they have been on his
new roof, but he has not seen any damage. He hears the
noise makers in the morning, but they are welcomed. The
Mayor asked him to take the information provided by the
Town Manager back to his neighbors.
The Town Manager excused himself to attend the
Volunteer Fire Department’s business meeting to discuss
our efforts for 24-hour fire coverage.
5
The Mayor commented about the election and how
important it is to exercise this right to vote. He holds this
Council up as an example of how government should work.
Vice Mayor Nance agreed that there is something missing in
other levels of government that is present here.
Mr. Hare reviewed the Financial Report for September
2013. The Finance Committee met and reviewed this report
before the Council meeting. At this point we are pretty
close to our budget revenue number. For the General Fund,
we are off just shy of $80,000 and on the expenditure side
we are underspent. The cigarette tax is under budget
$2,000. We knew there would be a buy ahead of the
stickers, but this is evidence of purchasing happening on a
monthly basis and it is possible that could last. On the Utility
side, we are pretty close to being on budget, just shy of
$33,000 and underspending again for various reasons. We
were a little bit further behind earlier but we have caught
back up. We are hovering about where we think we should
be even though from a volumetric standpoint, the volume of
water and sewer is down. Cash from August to September
is up about $300,000.
We reviewed the financials for the War Memorial and what
events they have booked so far. They have around
$160,000 in bookings for the rest of the year which is above
our budget of $146,000. However, the $160,000 does have
a lot of re-sale items figured in, but if you compare every
month year-to-year from 2013 to 2012, in some cases, we
have doubled the amount of events. There is a positive
momentum.
Mr. Hare further commented that we have just entered into a
new debt structuring agreement regarding the Pound.
Essentially the localities had to pay off the debt that
Botetourt County had for the previous facility and we were
able to get a lower interest rate which gave lower payments
over all and saved about $40,000.
Further comments were made regarding the Finance
Committee continuing to work with the War Memorial staff to
create a better financial report because it has never been
tracked in this much detail before. We are trying to get
everyone on the same page so that the numbers coming
into the Finance Department from the War Memorial are to a
degree that they can be interpreted properly.
Mr. Hare made a motion that the September financial report
be accepted as presented; the motion was seconded by
Vice Mayor Nance and carried by the following vote, with all
members voting: Vote 5-0; Yeas (5) – Adams, Altice, Hare,
Nance, Grose; Nays (0) – None.
Accepted financial report for
September 2013
6
Comments from Council Members: Mr. Hare
congratulated our new representative for the Vinton
Magisterial District, Jason Peters. Thanks to Public Works
for the work they have done on the Wolf Creek Greenway.
Our members of the Greenway Commission as well as Liz
Belcher will be at the next Council meeting to update us on
some future considerations for maintaining the Greenways.
Vice Mayor Nance reminded everyone that he will not be at
the November 19th Council meeting and apologized that he
did not get to attend the Zombie Walk on Saturday night.
Mr. Altice commented that the employees’ luncheon at
Public Works he attended was well received and the Mayor
agreed. Mr. Adams commented that the Zombie Walk was
a success and the money went to the Vinton Needy Family
program. He expressed thanks to the Police Department
for their assistance. Also, he commented that Mountain
View Road is looking better and expressed thanks to Public
Works.
Vice Mayor Nance made a motion to adjourn the meeting;
the motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and carried by the
following vote, with all members voting: Vote 5-0; Yeas (5)
– Adams, Altice, Hare, Nance, Grose; Nays (0). The
meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
APPROVED:
________________________________
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Finance/Treasurer
Issue
Presentation of the June 30, 2013 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report by Brown Edwards &
Company, LLP and consider adoption of a Resolution approving and accepting said Report
Summary
Representatives of Brown Edwards have been working with the Town Manager and Finance
Director/Treasurer in order to prepare the audited financial statements for the Town. The firm’s
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on their audit.
In their opinion, the general purpose financial statements present fairly in all material respects,
the financial position of the Town as of June 30, 2013 and the results of its operations and cash
flows of proprietary fund types for the year ended in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles.
Attachments
Resolution
Recommendations
Motion to adopt Resolution
Town Council
Agenda Summary
RESOLUTION NO.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY,
DECEMBER 3, 2013 AT 7:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE VINTON
MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, section 15.2-2511 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, requires that the Town
issue annually a report on its financial accounts and records by a third party certified
public accountant, and
WHEREAS, the Finance Director/Treasurer’s Department worked with an independent third
party accounting firm of Brown Edwards & Company, L.L.P., and
WHEREAS, John Aldridge of Brown Edwards & Company has forwarded his firm’s 2013 audit
to the Town Council for review, and
WHEREAS, the firm’s opinion letter stated that the financial statements present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of the Town as of June 30, 2013, and the
results of the Town’s operations and cash flows of proprietary fund types for the
year just ending on June 30, 2013, is in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Vinton Town Council does hereby receive
and accept the Town’s June 30, 2013 audit.
This Resolution adopted on motion made by Council Member _______, seconded by Council
Member_______________, with the following votes recorded:
AYES:
NAYS:
APPROVED:
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Administration
Issues
Consider adoption of a Resolution authorizing the transfer of funds in the amount of $7,250.00 to
pay the Berkley Group for the development of a park master plan.
Summary
Over the past year, there has been a great deal of discussion in the community as well as within
the Town organization regarding recreational opportunities in downtown. The revitalization
efforts and development of the new Vinton Library have generated discussion of two types of
recreational amenities: (1) children’s pocket park, and (2) skate/bicycle park.
Each park represents different clientele and can be worked on independently. However, a
focused planning effort is needed to engage the public and develop alternatives for each. The
success of each of these projects will be greatly enhanced by conducting a formal master
planning process and the direct involvement and buy in from the public and local civic groups
such as the Vinton Lion’s Club.
Staff has completed an initial land availability assessment which was presented to Town Council
on October 1, 2013. Based on this assessment, Town Council directed staff to develop a scope
of work and solicit proposals from consultants. After reviewing this with our on-call consultants,
staff selected the Berkley Group. The scope of work and detailed proposal are included. Based
on the deliverables, public meetings, and travel expenses, a cost of $7,250.00 is proposed for a
master plan for both parks. These key tasks and deliverables are needed to produce a positive
project package to submit as part of any applications this spring to civic organizations, state
recreational agency grants, and other private funding.
Attachments
Proposal for Park Master Planning Services by Berkley Group, dated October 28, 2013
Resolution
Recommendations
Motion to adopt Resolution
Town Council
Agenda Summary
RESOLUTION NO
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL HELD ON
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2013, AT 7:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF
THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON,
VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton recognizes the need and value that recreational amenities bring
to the quality of life of the community; and
WHEREAS, the community and civic organizations have expressed interest in studying the
feasibility of developing a skate and bicycle park as well as a pocket park serving
children and families; and
WHEREAS, the Berkley Group has submitted a proposal for the development of a master plan
through a public engagement process at a cost of $7,250.00; and
WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $7,250.00 will come from the existing budget in
200.8900.407 Reserve for Contingency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Vinton Town Council does hereby approve
the following transfer:
FROM: 200.8900.407 General-Reserve for Contingencies $7,250.00
TO: 200.8150.722 Economic Development–Special Projects $7,250.00
This Resolution adopted on motion made by Council Member ________________, seconded by
Council Member_______________, with the following votes recorded:
AYES:
NAYS:
APPROVED:
___________________________
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Susan N. Johnson, Town Clerk
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Planning and Zoning
Issue
Briefing on application by adjoining property owners for abandonment, vacation and deeding of
undeveloped right-of-way known as Daleview Drive.
Summary
This briefing relates to a request by Robert O. and Linda M. Quam, owners of Lot 1, Block 12;
and Sherman E. and Barbara B. Sligh; owners of Lot 7, Block 9, of Plat Book 6, Page 30
showing Map of Section Number 4, Bali Hai Subdivision, property of W.E. and Olney G.
Cundiff, prepared by C. B. Malcolm & Son and dated August 31, 1964, recorded in the Clerk’s
Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, on January 5, 1965, to abandon,
vacate and deed a fifty (50) foot wide by approximately one hundred and fifty (150) foot long
undeveloped right-of-way, known as Daleview Drive, to the adjoining property owners.
The Planning Commission will hold its public hearing for the request on Tuesday, December 10,
2013. The Town Council will hold a work session on Tuesday, December 3, and a public hearing
on Tuesday, December 17, 2013, for the request, respectively.
Attachments
Staff memo with supporting documents – 9 Pages.
Recommendations
No action required
Town Council
Agenda Summary
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Planning & Zoning
Issue
Briefing on the final draft of Town of Vinton/Roanoke County Stormwater Management
Ordinance as required under the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit
Regulations and the Virginia Stormwater Management Act § 62.1-44.15:27 of the Code of VA,
as amended.
Summary
In March 2003, in compliance with the provisions of the EPA NPDES and VA State Water
Control Law and Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit Regulations, the
Town was required to submit a Stormwater Management Program Report. Each permit cycle
covers a five-year period, and it must be renewed every five years. A stormwater management
program report must be submitted on an annual basis.
Staff has continued to work cooperatively with Roanoke County staff on the implementation of
the stormwater management program including the development and adoption of the stormwater
management ordinance and construction manuals.
On November 20, 2007, Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 865 to adopt by reference
Chapter 23, Stormwater Management, introduction and sections 23-1 et seq., of the Roanoke
County Code; as such the chapter may from time to time be amended.
In August 2012, localities were informed of the changes of the VA State Water Control Law and
VSPM permit regulations, including the administration of the VSMP being transferred from
DCR to DEQ as of July 1, 2013. Additionally, by July 1, 2014, localities will be responsible for
accepting and administering the VSMP permit applications for the state. By December 13, 2013,
a final draft of the stormwater ordinance must be submitted to Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ).
Attachments
VA Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Local Ordinance Checklist
Final Draft of the Town of Vinton/Roanoke County Stormwater Management Ordinance
Recommendations
No action required
Town Council
Agenda Summary
VIRGINIA STORMWATER MANANGEMENT PROGRAM (VSMP) LOCAL ORDINANCE CHECKLIST
Locality
Reviewer:
Date:
Virginia local governments that adopt a Virginia State Water Control Board (Board) approved Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) must develop
local ordinances that incorporate specific components of the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP)
Regulations. The Department has developed this VSMP Local Ordinance Checklist as a tool to assist Regional Office staff and local governments in the
development and review of local SWMP ordinances. It was developed using the DCR Stormwater Management Model Ordinance as a template for organization
and minimum requirements. We recommend that the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and the VSMP Permit Regulations be used when reviewing local
stormwater ordinances. The relevant code and/or regulatory citations are included to provide the reviewer with the actual regulatory requirement and language.
1-1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
1 4VAC50-60-20 Purpose: Describes purpose of
local VSMP ordinance.
Verify that purpose of the ordinance is described
and provides the framework for the
administration, implementation and enforcement
of the provisions of the Virginia Stormwater
Management Act and to delineate the
procedures and requirements to be followed in
connection with permits issued by a the local
VSMP authority.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
2 62.1-44.15:27
Establishes requirement for
localities to establish a
stormwater management
program.
Ensure reference to 62.1-44.15:27 is given. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-2. DEFINITIONS
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
3 4VAC50-60-10 Definitions: The Model
Ordinance includes 33
definitions necessary for
The reviewer should ensure that these 33
definitions are included in the local ordinance.
Additional definitions may be included but
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
2
inclusion in a local storm water
ordinance.
should be reviewed against the Regulations. All
definitions should be consistent with the
Regulations. Ensure that any references to DCR
are changed to DEQ.
1-3. STORMWATER PERMIT REQUIREMENT; EXEMPTIONS
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
4 62.1-44.15:34 A Requires a VSMP authority
permit to be issued prior to the
commencement of land
disturbance.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
5 4VAC50-60-51
4VAC50-60-103
Outlines specific technical
criteria and administrative
requirements land disturbing
activities subject to the
Chesapeake Bay Preservation
Act must meet.
Ensure ordinance states that Chesapeake Bay
Act land disturbing activities do not require
completion of a registration statement or require
coverage under the General Permit but shall be
subject to the technical criteria and program and
administrative requirements in 4VAC50-60-51.
Determine if all 10 technical
criteria/administrative requirements are specified
in the local ordinance:
1. Erosion and sediment control plan
2. Stormwater management plan
3. Exceptions may be requested
4. Long-term maintenance of stormwater
management facilities
5. Water quality design criteria
6. Water quality compliance
7. Channel protection and flood protection
8. Offsite compliance options available
9. Subject to design storm and hydrologic
methods, linear development controls, and
criteria associated with stormwater
impoundment structures or facilities
10. Provisions for inspections
Provision met?
Yes No
Technical critieria/administrative
requirements specified?
1. Yes No
2. Yes No
3. Yes No
4. Yes No
5. Yes No
6. Yes No
7. Yes No
8. Yes No
9. Yes No
10. Yes No
Comments:
6 62.1-44.15:34 C Lists 8 activities that are
exempt under the Regulations.
Must be phrased exactly like the Code to ensure
proper interpretation. Determine if all 8
activities are specified in the local ordinance:
1. Permitted surface or deep mining operations
and projects, or oil and gas operations and
Exempt activities specified?
1. Yes No
2. Yes No
3. Yes No
4. Yes No
3
projects conducted under the provisions of
Title 45:1;
2. Clearing of lands specifically for agricultural
purposes and the management, tilling,
planting or harvesting of agricultural,
horticultural, or forest crops, livestock feedlot
operations, or as additionally set forth by the
Board in regulations, including engineering
operations as follows: construction of
terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting
basins, dikes, ponds, ditches, strip cropping,
lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour
furrowing, land drainage, and land irrigation;
however, this exception shall not apply to
harvesting of forest crops unless the area on
which harvesting occurs is reforested
artificially or naturally in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 11 (§ 10.1 – 1100 et
seq.) or is converted to bona fide agricultural
or improved pasture use as described in
subsection B of §10.1-1163;
3. Single-family residences separately built and
disturbing less than one acre and not part of a
larger common plan of development or sale,
including additions or modifications to
existing single-family detached residential
structures. However, localities subject to the
Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (§ 10.1 –
2100 et seq.) may regulate these single family
residences where land disturbance exceeds
2,500 square feet;
4. Land disturbing activities that disturb less
than one acre of land area except for land
disturbing activity exceeding an area of
2,500 square feet in all areas of the
jurisdictions designated as subject to the
Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area
Designation and Management Regulations (9
VAC 10-20) adopted pursuant to the
Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (§10.1 –
2100 et seq.) or activities that are part of a
5. Yes No
6. Yes No
7. Yes No
8. Yes No
Comments:
4
larger common plan of development or sale
that is one acre or greater of disturbance;
however, the governing body of any locality
that administers a VSMP may reduce this
exception to a smaller area of disturbed land
or qualify the conditions under which this
exception shall apply;
5. Discharges to a sanitary sewer or combined
sewer system;
6. Activities under a State or federal reclamation
program to return an abandoned property to
an agricultural or open land use;
7. Routine maintenance that is performed to
maintain the original line and grade,
hydraulic capacity, or original construction of
the project. The paving of an existing road
with a compacted or impervious surface and
reestablishment of existing associated ditches
and shoulders shall be deemed routine
maintenance if performed in accordance with
this subsection;
8. Conducting land-disturbing activities in
response to a public emergency where the
related work requires immediate
authorization to avoid imminent
endangerment to human health or the
environment. In such situations, the VSMP
authority shall be advised of the disturbance
within seven days of commencing the land-
disturbing activity and compliance with the
administrative requirements of subsection A
is required within 30 days of commencing the
land-disturbing activity.
1-4. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ESTABLISHED; SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL OF PLANS
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
7 62.1-44.15:34
4VAC50-60-54.A-C
4VAC50-60-59
Requires an approved erosion &
sediment control plan,
stormwater management plan,
Verify these 3 requirements are specified in the
local ordinance, where required.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
5
and general permit registration
statement prior to issuance of a
VSMP authority permit.
8 62.1-44.15:34
Allows for issuance of VSMP
authority permit only after
evidence of general permit
coverage is obtained.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance,
where required.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
9 4VAC50-60-750.A Requires fees to be paid before
issuance of VSMP authority
permit.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
10 62.1-44.15:34 A
Requires approval of a VSMP
authority permit prior to
issuance of grading, building or
other local permit.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-5. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP); CONTENTS OF PLAN
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
11 4VAC50-60-54.A
4VAC50-60-1170,
Section II
Requires SWPPP to be in
compliance with state
regulations and general permit
requirements.
Ensure references to 4VAC50-60-54 and 1170
are included. SWPPPs must include:
1. Approved erosion and sediment control plan
2. Approved stormwater management plan
3. Pollution Prevention Plan for regulated land
disturbing activities
4. Description of any additional control
measures necessary to address a TMDL
(Not required to be listed in local ordinance as
long as regulatory reference is given.)
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
12 4VAC50-60-54.G Describes conditions under
which a SWPPP must be
amended by the operator.
Verify local ordinance states that SWPPP must
be amended when there is a change in design,
construction, operation or maintenance that has
significant effect on discharge of pollutants not
addressed by existing SWPPP.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
13 4VAC50-60-54.G Describes conditions under
which SWPPP must be
maintained by operator.
Verify local ordinance states that the SWPP
must be maintained at a central location onsite.
If an onsite location is unavailable, notice of the
SWPPP’s location must be posted near the main
entrance at the construction site.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
6
1-6. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT (SWM) PLAN; CONTENTS OF PLAN
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
14 4VAC50-60-55.A Requires SWM plan to apply
technical criteria and consider
all sources of surface runoff and
subsurface and groundwater
flows converted to surface
runoff.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
15 4VAC50-60-55.B 1-8 Lists 8 required SWM plan
elements.
Determine if all 8 elements are specified in the
local ordinance:
1. Information on type/ location of stormwater
discharges, information on features to which
stormwater is being discharged, including
surface waters or karst features if present, and
predevelopment/post development drainage
areas;
2. Contact information including name, address,
telephone number and parcel number of the
property or properties affected;
3. Narrative that includes a description of current
site conditions and final site conditions or if
allowed by the VSMP authority, the
information provided and documented during
the review process that addresses the current
and final site conditions;
4. General description of the proposed
stormwater management facilities and
mechanism through which the facilities will be
operated/ maintained after construction is
complete;
5. Information on proposed stormwater
management facilities, including (i) type of
facilities; (ii) location, including geographic
coordinates; (iii) acres treated; and (iv) surface
waters or karst features into which facility will
discharge;
6. Hydrologic/hydraulic computations, including
runoff characteristics;
All elements specified?
1. Yes No
2. Yes No
3. Yes No
4. Yes No
5. Yes No
6. Yes No
7. Yes No
8. Yes No
Comments:
7
7. Documentation /calculations verifying
compliance with water quality and quantity
requirements of the regulations;
8. Map or maps of site that depicts topography of
the site and includes:
a. Contributing drainage areas;
b. Existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches,
wetlands, other water bodies, floodplains;
c. Soil types, geologic formations if karst
features are present in the area, forest cover,
other vegetative areas;
d. Current land use including existing
structures, roads, locations of known utilities
and easements;
e. Sufficient information on adjoining parcels
to assess impacts of stormwater from the site
on these parcels;
f. Limits of clearing and grading, proposed
drainage patterns on the site;
g. Proposed buildings, roads, parking areas,
utilities, stormwater management facilities;
h. Proposed land use with tabulation of
percentage of surface area to be adapted to
various uses, including but not limited to
planned locations of utilities, roads and
easements.
16 4VAC50-60-55.B 9 Letter of availability required for
use of off-site compliance
options.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
17 4VAC50-60-55.C Requires elements of SWM
plans that include activities
regulated under Chapter 4 of
Title 54.1 of the Code of
Virginia be appropriately sealed
and signed by professional
registered in the Commonwealth
of Virginia.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
18 4VAC50-60-55.D Requires construction record
drawing be submitted to VSMP
authority. Must be appropriately
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
8
sealed and signed by a
professional registered in the
Commonwealth of Virginia
certifying that the SWM
facilities have been constructed
in accordance with approved
plan.
1-7. POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (PPP); CONTENTS OF PLAN
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
19 4VAC50-60-56 Requires PPP which details
design, installation,
implementation and maintenance
of pollution prevention measures
in accordance with Regulations.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance
or is included by reference.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
20 4VAC50-60-56.A 1-3,
B 1-4 and C
Lists PPP requirements as
outlined in the Regulations.
Determine if all 8 requirements are specified in
the local ordinance or are included by reference:
1. Minimize discharge of pollutants from
equipment and vehicle washing, wheel wash
water and other wash waters. Wash waters
must be treated prior to discharge;
2. Minimize exposure of all materials on site to
precipitation and stormwater;
3. Minimize discharge of pollutants from spills
and leaks and implement chemical spill and
leak prevention and response procedures;
4. BMPs to prohibit wastewater from washout of
concrete, unless managed by appropriate
control;
5. BMPs to prohibit wastewater from washout
and cleanout of stucco, paint, form release
oils, curing compounds, and other
construction materials;
6. BMPs to prohibit discharges of fuels, oils or
other pollutants used in vehicle/equipment
operation/ maintenance;
7. BMPs to prohibit discharges of soaps or
solvents used in vehicle/equipment washing;
8. Discharges from dewatering activities are
All requirements specified?
1. Yes No
2. Yes No
3. Yes No
4. Yes No
5. Yes No
6. Yes No
7. Yes No
8. Yes No
Comments:
9
prohibited unless managed by appropriate
controls.
1-8. REVIEW OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT (SWM) PLAN
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
21 4VAC50-60-108.A Requires the VSMP authority to
review and approve SWM plans.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance.
May include “or any duly authorized agent of the
Administrator”.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
22 4VAC50-60-108.B Establishes time frame for
review of SWM plans and
requirement for communication
of decision to applicant.
Ensure all review period benchmarks are
included:
1. Completeness of plan must be determined and
applicant notified of determination within 15
days of receipt.
a. If incomplete, applicant must be notified in
writing.
b. If determination of completeness is made,
60 days from date of communication is
allowed for review.
c. If determination of completeness is not
made and communicated within 15 days, plan
shall be deemed complete as of date of
submission and 60 days from date of
submission will be allowed for review.
d. Any plan previously disapproved must be
reviewed within 45 days of resubmission.
2. Decision to approve or disapprove plan must
be provided in writing; if not approved
reasons must be provided in writing.
3. If a plan meeting all requirements is submitted
and no action is taken within appropriate time
frame, the plan will be deemed approved.
(Note: Shorter time frames are acceptable.)
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
23 4VAC50-60-108.C Describes the conditions under
which modifications to approved
SWM plans may be allowed or
required.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
24 4VAC50-60-108.E Requires construction record
drawing for permanent BMPs.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
10
May elect not to require for
SWM facilities for which
maintenance agreements are not
required pursuant to 4VAC50-
60-112.
Comments:
1-9. TECHNICAL CRITERIA FOR REGULATED LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
25 4VAC50-60-62
4VAC50-60-63
4VAC50-60-65
4VAC50-60-66
4VAC50-60-69
4VAC50-60-72
4VAC50-60-74
4VAC50-60-76
4VAC50-60-85
4VAC50-60-92
Technical criteria for land
disturbing activities.
Technical criteria must be part of the VSMP,
but do not have to be included within the
ordinance. They may be contained within a
local document that is referenced within the
ordinance or the ordinance may reference
4VAC50-60-62 thru 92 of the Regulations.
State technical criteria or more stringent local
standards must be enforceable through the
ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
26 4VAC50-60-48 Describes conditions under
which grandfathering of projects
may occur.
Verify requirements exist in the local
ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
27 4VAC50-60-122 Describes conditions under
which exceptions to the technical
criteria may be granted.
Verify requirements exist in the local
ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-10. LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENT STORMWATER FACILITIES
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
28 4VAC50-60-58 Requires recorded instrument
for long term maintenance of
permanent BMPs.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
29 4VAC50-60-112.A Sets out specific requirements
for long term maintenance of
permanent BMPs.
Determine if all 5 requirements are specified in
the local ordinance:
1. Submitted prior to approval of stormwater
All requirements specified?
1. Yes No
2. Yes No
11
management plan
2. Stated to run with land
3. Provide necessary access to property for
maintenance and inspection
4. Provide for inspections and maintenance and
submission of reports
5. Be enforceable
3. Yes No
4. Yes No
5. Yes No
Comments:
30 4VAC50-60-112.B Allows option for localities to
not require a recorded BMP
maintenance agreement on
individual residential
instrument.
If locality desires to allow this option, verify
requirement exists in the local ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
31 4VAC50-60-114.D If individual residential BMPs
are not required to have
recorded instrument, localities
must develop strategy to address
maintenance.
Applicable only if individual BMPs are not
required to have recorded instrument.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-11. MONITORING AND INSPECTIONS
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
32 4VAC50-60-114.A Requires VSMP authority to
inspect for compliance 4 items
during construction.
Determine if all 4 required inspection items are
specified in the local ordinance:
1. Compliance with erosion and sediment
control plan
2. Compliance with stormwater management
plan
3. Development, updating, implementation of
pollution prevention plan
4. Development and implementation of
additional control measures to address a
TMDL
Inspection items specified?
1. Yes No
2. Yes No
3. Yes No
4. Yes No
Comments:
33 62.1-44.15:39 Allows entry onto property in
order to obtain information to
assist in the enforcement of
ordinance.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
34 62.1-44.15:40 Requires permitee to provide
information to VSMP authority
when requested.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
12
35 4VAC50-60-114.B 2 Requires post-construction
inspections to be conducted by
VSMP authority at least once
every 5 years.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-12. HEARINGS
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
36 62.1-44.15:44
4VAC50-60-118
Establishes right to hearing by
any permit applicant, permittee,
or person subject to state permit
requirements aggrieved by a
VSMP authority.
Verify requirement exists in the local ordinance.
(Note: Local Board of Zoning Appeals and
locality Program Administrators or his/her
designee cannot constitute the Appeals Board.
A separate Board or Commission must be
appointed to hear appeals.)
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
37 62.1-44.15:45
62.1-44.26
Establishes procedures for
hearings.
Verify that hearings held by local government
comply with the requirements of §62.1-44.26 A
– C:
1. Must be conducted by local governing or
appeals body at a regular or special meeting
or by at least one member designated to
conduct such hearings or at any other
authorized time and place.
2. Verbatim record of proceedings must be taken
and filed with local governing or appeals
body.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-13. APPEALS
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
38 62.1-44.15:46 Establishes right to appeals
process.
Pursuant to § 62.1-44.15:46, each locality must
adopt an appeals procedure, which should be
appropriate for the stormwater ordinance
provisions, and shall be conducted in
accordance with the locality’s existing appeals
procedures.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
13
1-14. ENFORCEMENT
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
39 62.1-44.15:37 A
4VAC50-60-116.A
Requires notice to be served if
Administrator determines there
is a failure to comply.
Verify requirement exists in the local
ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
40 62.1-44.15:37 A Requires compliance measures
to address permit conditions and
timeframe for completion.
Verify requirement exists in the local
ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
41 62.1-44.15:37 A Describes failure to comply
actions.
Ensure that the local ordinance states that an
order may be issued that ceases all land-
disturbing activities until corrected.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
42 62.1-44.15:37
4VAC50-60-116.A 1
Allows for informal and formal
proceedings if Administrator
determines that there is a failure
to comply.
Verify requirement exists in the local
ordinance.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
43 62.1-44.15:49
4VAC50-60-116
Provides enforcement authority
and schedule of civil penalties
for enforcement actions.
Criminal misdemeanor charges
are an option also.
Components from 4VAC50-60-116 A 1 & A 2
must be incorporated into the VSMP ordinance.
Ensure that the maximum penalty of $32,500
per violation per day is not exceeded and that
violations for which a penalty may be imposed
are given.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-15. FEES
(The inclusion of fees within the ordinance is optional. If they are not included within the ordinance, they should be documented elsewhere and must be submitted
to DEQ as part of the Local VSMP Application package.)
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
44 62.1-44.15:28 Establishes fees to cover costs
associated with implementation
of a VSMP.
Verify that the locality has either incorporated
the fee schedule into their ordinance or local
procedures. See Table 1 in SWM Model
Ordinance or regulatory citation. (Note:
Localities have ability to raise or lower fees.
May also utilize other sources of funding.)
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
45 4VAC50-60-820 Fees associated with coverage See Table 1 in SWM Model Ordinance or Provision met?
14
under the General Permit for
Discharges of Stormwater from
Construction Activities (CGP).
regulatory citation. Yes No
Comments:
46
4VAC50-60-825 Fees associated with
modification or transfer of CGP.
See Table 2 in SWM Model Ordinance or
regulatory citation.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
47 4VAC50-60-830 Maintenance fees. See Table 3 in SWM Model Ordinance or
regulatory citation.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
48 4VAC50-60-770 Specifies how incomplete and
late payments are handled.
Verify local ordinance states that incomplete
payments deemed as nonpayments, interest may
be charged on late payments, and a 10% late
payment fee applied to delinquent accounts.
Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1-16. PERFORMANCE BOND
(This section is optional and is not required to be included in local ordinances.)
State Code/Regulation
Citation
Description Review Strategy Local Code
Citation
Review Results
49 62.1-44.15:34 A
4VAC50-60-104.D
Allows for bonds and sets out
criteria.
Not required in local ordinances. Provision met?
Yes No
Comments:
1
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance Novemeber 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
DRAFT
November 25, 2013
Stormwater Management Ordinance
From Chapter 23 of the County of Roanoke Code
Table of Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................3
Section 23-1 General Provisions .......................................................................................4
23-1.1 Title and Authority .......................................................................................4
23-1.2 Purpose .........................................................................................................4
23-1.3 Applicability .................................................................................................4
23-1.4 Compatibility with Other Requirements.......................................................6
23-1.5 Severability ...................................................................................................6
23-1.6 Stormwater Management Technical Criteria ................................................6
23-1.7 Stormwater Management Design Manual and Land Development
Procedures .....................................................................................................7
23-1.8 County Right of Entry ..................................................................................8
Section 23-2 Definitions .....................................................................................................9
Section 23-3 Program Permit Procedures and Requirements .....................................14
23-3.1 Permit Required ..........................................................................................14
23-3.2 Permit Application Contents ......................................................................14
23-3.3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans ......................................................15
23-3.4 Pollution Prevention Plans..........................................................................15
23-3.5 Stormwater Management Plans ..................................................................16
23-3.6 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plans and Regional
Stormwater Management Facilities ............................................................18
23-3.7 Stormwater Management Facility Maintenance Agreements ....................19
23-3.8 Special Provisions for Individual Residential Lot Stormwater
Management Facilities ................................................................................21
23-3.9 Performance Securities ...............................................................................21
23-3.10 Fees ...........................................................................................................22
23-3.11 Permit Application Procedure ..................................................................23
Section 23-4 Exceptions to Stormwater Management Requirements .........................26
23-4.1 Exceptions to Stormwater Management .....................................................26
23-4.2 Hearings and Appeals .................................................................................27
Section 23-5 Illicit Discharges .........................................................................................28
23-5.1 General........................................................................................................28
Section 23-6 Construction Inspection.............................................................................31
2
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
23-6.1 Notice of Construction Commencement ....................................................31
23-6.2 Periodic Construction Inspection................................................................31
23-6.3 Final Inspection and Record Documentation .............................................32
Section 23-7 Post Construction Inspection, Maintenance and Repair
Of Stormwater Management Facilities ....................................................33
23-7.1 Maintenance Inspections of Stormwater Management Facilities ...............33
23-7.2 Records of Inspection, Maintenance and Repair ........................................34
Section 23-8 Enforcement and Penalties ........................................................................35
23-8.1 Violations....................................................................................................35
23-8.2 Notice of Violation .....................................................................................35
23-8.3 Stop Work Orders .......................................................................................36
23-8.4 Civil and Criminal Penalties .......................................................................36
23-8.5 Restoration of Lands ...................................................................................38
23-8.6 Holds on Certificate of Occupancy ............................................................38
3
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Chapter 23
Stormwater Management Ordinance
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Introduction
The County of Roanoke is home to a vast array of scenic natural resources, from
the mountains that span our landscape to the streams that flow through our
valleys. This picturesque environment has embraced generations of citizens while
drawing in more newcomers every year. The continual increase in population
aids in the growth and development of this area, improving jobs and enhancing
economic stability. Yet, intensive development can degrade those beautiful
natural resources that make the county so special.
Inadequate management of stormwater runoff from land-disturbing activities and
development in watersheds increases flood flows and velocities, erodes and/or
silts stream channels, pollutes water, overloads existing drainage facilities,
undermines floodplain management in downstream communities, reduces
groundwater recharge, and threatens public safety. More specifically, surface
water runoff can carry pollutants into receiving waters.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2004 National Water
Quality Inventory, approximately 40 % of surveyed U.S. water bodies do not
meet basic water quality standards. The Roanoke River and many of its
tributaries inside the county are listed as impaired waters by the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality.
Many future problems can be avoided through proper stormwater management
and the county is dedicated to preventing the damaging effects that uncontrolled
stormwater may present. The lands and waters of Roanoke County are great
natural resources and need to be protected. The County finds that it is in the
public interest to establish a stormwater management program.
Pursuant to Code § 10.1-603.3, this chapter is part of an initiative to integrate the
County of Roanoke’s stormwater management requirements with the County of
Roanoke’s erosion and sediment control (Chapter 8.1) and flood plain
management (Section 30-74) requirements into a unified stormwater program.
The unified stormwater program is intended to facilitate the submission and
approval of plans, issuance of permits, payment of fees, and coordination of
inspection and enforcement activities into a more convenient and efficient manner
for both the County of Roanoke and those responsible for compliance with these
programs.
4
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 23-1.1 TITLE AND AUTHORITY
A. This chapter shall be known as the “Stormwater Management Ordinance of the
County of Roanoke, Virginia.”
B. The Virginia Stormwater Management Law (“Law”), Title 10.1, Chapter 6,
Article 1.1 (§ 10.1-603.1 et seq.) of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
enables localities to adopt, by ordinance, a stormwater management program
consistent with state regulations promulgated pursuant to the law.
C. Pursuant to § 10.1-603.3 of the Code of Virginia, the County of Roanoke, hereby
establishes a Virginia stormwater management program for land-disturbing
activities and adopts the applicable Regulations that specify standards and
specifications for VSMPs promulgated by the State Board for the purposes set out
in Section 23-1.2 of this Ordinance. The County of Roanoke hereby designates
the Director of Community Development as the Administrator of the Virginia
stormwater management program.
Section 23-1.2 PURPOSE
The purpose of this chapter is to promote and protect the general health, safety, and
welfare of the citizens of the county and to protect property, state waters, stream
channels, and other natural resources from the potential harm of unmanaged stormwater,
and to establish procedures whereby stormwater requirements related to water quality and
quantity shall be administered and enforced.
Section 23-1.3 APPLICABILITY
A. Except as provided herein, no person may engage in any land-disturbing activity
until a permit has been issued by the Administrator in accordance with the
provisions of this chapter.
B. All plans must be reviewed by the county to ensure that established water quality
standards will be maintained during and after development of the site and that
post construction runoff levels are consistent with any local and regional
watershed plans.
C. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the following activities are
exempt, unless otherwise required by federal law:
5
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
1.Permitted surface or deep mining operations and projects, or oil and gas
operations and projects conducted under the provisions of Title 45.1;
2.Clearing of lands specifically for agricultural purposes and the
management, tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural,
or forest crops, livestock feedlot operations, or as additionally set forth by
the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board in regulations, including
engineering operations as follows: construction of terraces ,terrace outlets,
check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds, ditches, strip cropping, lister
furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage, and land
irrigation; however, this exception shall not apply to harvesting of forest
crops unless the area on which harvesting occurs is reforested artificially
or naturally in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 11 (§ 10.1-1100
et seq.) or is converted to bona fide agricultural or improved pasture use as
described in subsection B of § 10.1-1163 of Article 9 of Chapter 11 of
Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia;
3.Single-family residences separately built and disturbing less than one acre
and not part of a larger common plan of development or sale, including
additions or modifications to existing single-family residential structures;
4.Other land disturbing activities that disturb less than one acre of land area,
except land disturbing activities that are part of a larger common plan of
development or sale that is one acre or greater of disturbance;
5.Discharges to a sanitary sewer or a combined sewer system;
6.Activities under a State or federal reclamation program to return an
abandoned property to an agricultural or open land use;
7.Routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and
grade, hydraulic capacity, or original construction of the project. The
paving of an existing road with a compacted or impervious surface and
reestablishment of existing associated ditches and shoulders shall be
deemed routine maintenance performed in accordance with this
subsection; and
8.Conducting land-disturbing activities in response to a public emergency
where the related work requires immediate authorization to avoid
imminent endangerment to human health or the environment. In such
situations, the Administrator shall be advised of the disturbance within
seven days of commencing the land-disturbing activity and compliance
with the administrative requirements of subsection A is required within 30
days of commencing the land-disturbing activity.
6
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Section 23-1.4 COMPATABILITY WITH OTHER REQUIREMENTS
This chapter is not intended to interfere with, abrogate, or annul any other
ordinance, rule or regulation, stature, or other provision of law. The requirements
of this chapter should be considered minimum requirements, and where any
provision of this chapter imposes restrictions different from those imposed by any
other ordinance, rule or regulation, or other provision of law, whichever
provisions are more restrictive or impose higher protective standards for human
health or the environment shall apply.
Section 23-1.5 SEVERABILITY
If the provisions of any article, section, subsection, paragraph, subdivision or
clause of this chapter shall be judged invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such order of judgment shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any article,
section, subsection, paragraph, subdivision or clause of this chapter.
Section 23-1.6 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL CRITERIA
A. The county hereby adopts the technical criteria for regulated land-disturbing
activities set forth in Part IIB of the Regulations, as amended, expressly to include
4 VAC 50-60-63 [water quality design criteria requirements]; 4VAC 50-60-65
[water quality compliance]; 4 VAC 50-60-66 [water quantity]; 4 VAC 50-60-69
[offsite compliance options]; 4 VAC 50-60-72 [design storms and hydrologic
methods; 4 VAC 50-60-74 [stormwater harvesting]; 4 VAC 50-60-76 [linear
development project]; 4 VAC 50-60-11 85 [stormwater management
impoundment structures or facilities]; and 4 VAC 50-60-92 [comprehensive
stormwater management plans], which shall apply to all land disturbing activities
regulated pursuant to this chapter, except as expressly set forth in subsection B of
this section. The county will utilize the policy, criteria and information, of the
county Stormwater Management Design Manual and the county Land
Development Procedures for the proper implementation of the requirements of
this chapter.
B. Until June 30, 2019, any land-disturbing activity for which a currently valid
proffered or conditional zoning plan, preliminary or final subdivision plat,
preliminary or final site plan or zoning with a plan of development, or any
document determined by the Administrator as being equivalent thereto, was
approved by the county prior to July 1, 2012, and for which no coverage under the
general permit has been issued prior to July 1, 2014, shall be considered
grandfathered by the Administrator and shall not be subject to the technical
criteria of Part II B of the Regulations, but shall be subject to the technical criteria
of Part II C of the Regulations and the stormwater management technical criteria
of the Stormwater Management Ordinance of the County of Roanoke, Virginia
7
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
that was in effect at the time of the plan approval, whichever is more stringent, for
those areas that were included in the approval, provided that the Administrator
finds that such proffered or conditional zoning plan, preliminary or final
subdivision plat, preliminary or final site plan or zoning with a plan of
development, or any document determined by the Administrator as being
equivalent thereto, (i) provides for a layout and (ii) the resulting land-disturbing
activity will be compliant with the requirements of Part II C, and the county
Stormwater Management Ordinance that was in effect at the time of the approval.
In the event that the county approved document is subsequently modified or
amended in a manner such that there is no increase over the previously approved
plat or plan in the amount of phosphorus leaving each point of discharge of the
land-disturbing activity through stormwater runoff, and such that there is no
increase over the previously approved plat or plan in the volume or rate of runoff,
the grandfathering shall continue as before.
C. Until June 30, 2019, for local, state, and federal projects for which there has been
an obligation of local, state, or federal funding, in whole or in part, prior to July 1,
2012, or for which the Department has approved a stormwater management plan
prior to July 1, 2012, such projects shall be considered grandfathered by the
county and shall not be subject to the technical requirements subsection A above,
but shall be subject to the technical requirements of subsection B of this section
for those areas that were included in the approval.
D. For land-disturbing activities grandfathered under this subsection, construction
must be completed by June 30, 2019, or portions of the project not under
construction shall become subject to the technical requirements of subsection A of
this section.
E. In cases where governmental bonding or public debt financing has been issued for
a project prior to July 1, 2012, such project shall be subject to the technical
requirements of subsection B of this section.
Section 23-1.7 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN MANUAL AND LAND
DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES
A. The county will utilize the policy, criteria and information contained within the
county Stormwater Management Design Manual, and the county Land
Development Procedures for proper implementation of the requirements of this
chapter.
B. The county Stormwater Management Design Manual and the county Land
Development Procedures may be updated and revised from time to time. The
Administrator shall recommend any updates, supplements, or modifications to the
county Stormwater Management Design Manual and the county Land
8
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Development Procedures subject to the authorization and approval by the Board
of Supervisors by resolution.
Section 23-1.8 COUNTY RIGHT OF ENTRY
A. The Administrator and/or duly authorized employees, agents, or representatives of
the county, bearing proper credentials and identification, may, at any reasonable
times and under reasonable circumstance, enter any establishment or upon any
property, public or private, which has a VSMP permit or a maintenance covenant,
for the purpose of enforcing this chapter, including, but not limited to:
1.Obtaining information or conducting surveys or investigations;
2.Taking samples of discharges;
3.Inspecting monitoring equipment;
4.Inspecting and copying documents relevant to the enforcement of this
chapter;
5.Initiating or maintaining appropriate actions which are required by the
permit conditions associated with a land-disturbing activity when a
permittee, after proper notice, has failed to take acceptable action within
the time specified;
6.Inspecting stormwater management facilities or other BMPs, or to initiate
or maintain appropriate actions which are required to restore proper
stormwater management facility or other BMP operation when a land
owner, after proper notice, has failed to take acceptable action within the
time specified;
7.And such other items as may be deemed necessary for the enforcement of
this chapter
9
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-2
DEFINITIONS
In addition to the definitions set forth in 4VAC50-60-10 of the Virginia Stormwater
Management Regulations, as amended, which are expressly adopted and incorporated
herein by reference, the following words and terms used in this chapter have the
following meanings unless otherwise specified herein. Where definitions differ, those
incorporated herein shall have precedence.
“Administrator” means the VSMP authority responsible for administering the VSMP
on behalf of the County of Roanoke. The Administrator shall be the Director of
Community Development or any duly authorized agent of the Director of Community
Development.
“Applicant” means any person submitting an application for a permit or requesting
issuance of a permit under this Ordinance.
“Best Management Practice or BMP” means schedules of activities, prohibitions of
practices, including both a structural or nonstructural practice, maintenance procedures,
and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of surface waters and
groundwater systems from the impacts of land-disturbing activities.
“Clean Water Act or CWA” means the federal Clean Water Act (33 United States Code
1251 et seq.), formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92-500, as amended by
Public Law 95-217, Public Law 95-576, Public Law 96-483, and Public Law 97-117, or
any subsequent revisions thereto.
“Common plan of development or sale” means a contiguous area where separate and
distinct construction activities may be taking place at different times on difference
schedules.
"Control measure" means any best management practice or other method used to
prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to surface waters.
“County” means the County of Roanoke, Virginia.
“Department” means the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
“Development” means land disturbance and the resulting landform associated with the
construction of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation
or utility facilities or structures or the clearing of land for non-agricultural or non-
silvicultual purposes.
10
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
“Executed Development Agreements” means documents that are executed by the
applicant and County that implements the various sureties.
“Fee in lieu” means a payment of money to the county for the use of a regional
stormwater management facility in place of meeting all or part of the storm water
performance standards required by this ordinance on the site.
"General permit" means the state permit titled GENERAL PERMIT FOR
DISCHARGES OF STORMWATER FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES found in
Part XIV (4VAC50-60-1100 et seq.) of the Regulations authorizing a category of
discharges under the CWA and the Act within a geographical area of the Commonwealth
of Virginia.
“Illicit discharge” means any discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer that is not
composed entirely of stormwater, except discharges pursuant to a VPDES or VSMP
permit (other than the VSMP permit for discharges from the municipal separate storm
sewer), discharges resulting from fire fighting activities, and discharges identified by and
in compliance with 4VAC50-60-1220 C 2.
“Land disturbance” or “Land-disturbing activity” means a manmade change to the
land surface that potentially changes its runoff characteristics including any clearing,
grading, or excavation, except that the term shall not include those exemptions specified
in Section 23-1.3 of this Chapter.
“Layout” means a conceptual drawing sufficient to provide for the specified stormwater
management facilities required at the time of approval.
"Minor modification" means an amendment to an existing general permit before its
expiration not requiring extensive review and evaluation including, but not limited to,
changes in EPA promulgated test protocols, increasing monitoring frequency
requirements, changes in sampling locations, and changes to compliance dates within the
overall compliance schedules. A minor general permit modification or amendment does
not substantially alter permit conditions, substantially increase or decrease the amount of
surface water impacts, increase the size of the operation, or reduce the capacity of the
facility to protect human health or the environment.
“Municipal separate storm sewer system” or “MS4” means all separate storm sewers
that are defined as “large” or “medium” or “small” municipal separate storm sewer
systems or designated under 4VAC50-60-380 A 1.
“Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Management Program” or “MS4 Program”
means a management program covering the duration of a permit for a municipal separate
storm sewer system that includes a comprehensive planning process that involves public
participation and intergovernmental coordination, to reduce the discharge of pollutants to
the maximum extent practicable, to protect water quality, and to satisfy the appropriate
water quality requirements of the CWA and regulations and the Act and attendant
11
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
regulations, using management practices, control techniques,, and system design and
engineering methods, and such other provisions that are appropriate.
“Off-site facility” means a stormwater management measure located outside the subject
property boundary described in the permit application for land-disturbing activity.
“Operator” means the owner or operator of any facility or activity subject to regulation
under this Ordinance.
“Permit or VSMP Authority Permit” means an approval to conduct a land disturbing
activity issued by the Administrator for the initiation of a land-disturbing activity, in
accordance with this Ordinance, which may only be issued after evidence of general
permit coverage has been provided by the Department.
“Permittee” means the person to whom the VSMP Authority permit is issued.
“Person” means any individual, corporation, partnership, firm, association, joint venture,
public or private or municipal corporation, trust, estate, commission, board, public or
private institution, utility, cooperative, county, city, town or other political subdivision of
the Commonwealth, any interstate or governmental body or any other legal entity, or any
agent or employee of any such person.
“Regional stormwater management facility” or “Regional facility” means a facility
or series of facilities designed to control some or all of the adverse impacts from
stormwater runoff from two or more parcels or lots, located in the same watershed,
although only portions of the area may experience development.
“Regulations” means the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit
Regulations, 4 VAC 50-60-10 e. seq, as amended.
“Site” means the land or water area where any facility or land-disturbing activity is
physically located or conducted, including adjacent land used or preserved in connection
with the facility or land-disturbing activity.
“State” means the Commonwealth of Virginia
“State Board” means the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board.
“State Permit” means an approval to conduct a land-disturbing activity issued by the
State Board in the form of a state stormwater individual permit or coverage issued under
a state general permit or an approval issued by the State Board for stormwater discharges
from an MS4. Under these state permits, the Commonwealth imposes and enforces
requirements pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act and regulations, the Virginia
Stormwater Management Act and the Regulations.
12
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
“State Water Control Law” means Chapter 3.1 (§62.1-44.2 et seq.) of Title 62.1 of the
Code of Virginia.
“State waters” means all water, on the surface and under the ground, wholly or partially
within or bordering the Commonwealth or within its jurisdiction, including wetlands.
“Stormwater” means precipitation that is discharged across the land surface or through
conveyances to one or more waterways and that may include stormwater runoff, snow
melt runoff, and surface runoff and drainage.
“Stormwater facility maintenance agreement” means a legally binding agreement
between the owner of a property and the county regarding long-term maintenance of
stormwater management facilities.
“Stormwater management plan” means a document(s) containing material for
describing methods for complying with the requirements of Section 23-3.5 of this
chapter.
“Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan” or “SWPPP” means a document that is
prepared in accordance with good engineering practices and that identifies potential
sources of pollutants that may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater
discharges from the construction site, and otherwise meets the requirements of this
Ordinance. In addition the document shall identify and require the implementation of
control measures, and shall include, but not be limited to the inclusion of, or the
incorporation by reference of, an approved erosion and sediment control plan, an
approved stormwater management plan, and a pollution prevention plan.
“Subdivision” means the division of a parcel of land into two (2) or more parcels of any
size by the establishment of new boundaries lines or by the adjustment, relocation, or
vacation of existing boundary lines, for the purpose whether immediate or future, of
transfer of ownership or building development. A subdivision includes all changes in
street or lot lines, and any portion of any such subdivision previously recorded in which
building development or street creation occurs, or is required, subsequent to such
recordation. The transfer of ownership of land to the Commonwealth of Virginia or a
political subdivision thereof and the division of lands by court order or decree shall not
be deemed a subdivision as otherwise herein defined.
“Total Maximum Daily Load or TMDL” means the sum of the individual wasteload
allocations for point sources, load allocations for nonpoint sources, natural background
loading and a margin of safety. TMDLs can be expressed in terms of either mass per
time, toxicity, or other appropriate measures. The TMDL process provides for point
versus nonpoint source trade-offs.
“Town” means the incorporated Town of Vinton.
13
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
“Virginia Stormwater Management Act” or “Act” means Article 1.1 (§10.1-603.2 et
seq.) of Chapter 6 of Title 10.1 of the Code of Virginia.
“Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse website” means a website that contains
detailed design standards and specifications for control measures that may be used in
Virginia to comply with the requirements of the Virginia Stormwater Management Act
and associated regulations.
“Virginia Stormwater Management Program” or “VSMP” means a program
approved by the State Board after September 13, 2011, that has been established by a
locality to manage the quality and quantity of runoff resulting from land-disturbing
activities and shall include such items as local ordinances, rules, permit requirements,
annual standards and specifications, policies and guidelines, technical materials, and
requirements for plan review, inspection, enforcement, where authorized in this article,
and evaluation consistent with the requirements of this article and associated regulations.
“Virginia Stormwater Management Program authority” or VSMP authority” means
an authority approved by the State Board after September 13, 2011, to operate a Virginia
Stormwater Management Program.
14
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-3
PROGRAM PERMIT PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS
Section 23-3.1 PERMIT REQUIRED
A. No grading, building, or other local permit shall be issued for a property until a
VSMP authority permit has been issued by the Administrator, unless the activity
is specifically exempted from VSMP permitting by this ordinance.
B. No VSMP authority permit shall be issued unless and until the permit application
and attendant materials and supporting documentation demonstrate that all land
clearing, construction, disturbance, land development and drainage will be done
according to the requirements of this chapter.
C. No VSMP authority permit shall be issued until evidence of general permit
coverage is obtained.
Section 23-3.2 PERMIT APPLICATION CONTENTS
A. Unless specifically exempted by this chapter, any land owner or operator desiring
a permit for a land disturbance activity shall submit to the county a permit
application on a form provided by the county for that purpose. Permit
applications shall comply with the requirements contained within the county
Stormwater Management Design Manual and the county Land Development
Procedures that are available from the Department of Community Development
office.
B. No VSMP authority permit shall be issued by the Administrator, until the
following items have been submitted to and approved by the Administrator as
prescribed herein.
1.A permit application that includes a general permit registration statement;
2.A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) that meets the
requirements of Section 23-3.3;
3.An erosion and sediment control plan approved in accordance with the
county Erosion and Sediment Control ordinance [chapter 8.1];
4.A stormwater management plan that meets the requirements of Section 23-
3.5
5.Maintenance agreements in accordance with Section 23-3.7;
6.Performance bonds in accordance with Section 23-3.9;
15
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
7.Fees in accordance with Section 23-3.10; and,
8.Executed Development Agreements
Section 23-3.3 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANS
A. The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the general
permit, must comply with the requirements set forth in 4VAC50-60-54 and must
also comply with the requirements and general information set forth in Section
4VAC50-60-1170, Section II [stormwater pollution prevention plan] of the
general permit.
At a minimum the SWPPP must include:
1.An erosion and sediment control plan;
2.A stormwater management plan;
3.A pollution prevention plan; and
4.Any additional control measures necessary to address a TMDL.
B. The SWPPP shall be amended, by the operator, whenever there is a change in
design, construction, operation, or maintenance that has a significant effect on the
discharge of pollutants to state waters which is not addressed by the existing
SWPPP.
C. The SWPPP shall be maintained at a central location onsite. If an onsite location
is unavailable, notice of the SWPPP's location must be posted near the main
entrance at the construction site. Operators shall make the SWPPP available for
public and county review in accordance with Section II of the general permit,
either electronically or in hard copy.
Section 23-3.4 POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANS
A. A Pollution Prevention Plan, required by 4VAC50-60-56, shall be developed,
implemented and updated as necessary and must detail the design, installation,
implementation, and maintenance of effective pollution prevention measures to
minimize the discharge of pollutants.
B. At a minimum, such measures must be designed, installed, implemented, and
maintained to:
1.Minimize the discharge of pollutants from equipment and vehicle washing,
wheel wash water, and other wash waters. Wash waters must be treated in a
sediment basin or alternative control that provides equivalent or better
treatment prior to discharge;
16
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
2.Minimize the exposure of building materials, building products, construction
wastes, trash, landscape materials, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides,
detergents, sanitary waste, and other materials present on the site to
precipitation and to stormwater; and
3.Minimize the discharge of pollutants from spills and leaks and implement
chemical spill and leak prevention and response procedures.
C. The pollution prevention plan shall include effective best management practices
to prohibit the following discharges:
1.Wastewater from washout of concrete, unless managed by an appropriate
control;
2.Wastewater from washout and cleanout of stucco, paint, form release oils,
curing compounds, and other construction materials;
3.Fuels, oils, or other pollutants used in vehicle and equipment operation and
maintenance; and
4.Soaps or solvents used in vehicle and equipment washing.
D. Discharges from dewatering activities, including discharges from dewatering of
trenches and excavations, are prohibited unless managed by appropriate controls.
Section 23-3.5 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS
A. No application for land development, land use conversion, or land-disturbing
activity will be approved unless it includes a stormwater management plan, as
required by this ordinance, detailing how runoff and associated water quality
impacts resulting from the activity will be controlled or managed.
B. Submittal, review, approval, and resubmittal of stormwater management concept
and design plans shall comply with the requirements set forth in the county
Stormwater Management Design Manual and county Land Development
Procedures.
C. If an operator intends to meet the water quality and/or quantity requirements set
forth in 4VAC 50-60-63 or 4 VAC 50-60-66 through the use of off-site
compliance options, where applicable, then a letter of availability from the off-site
provider must be included. Approved off-site options must achieve the necessary
nutrient reductions prior to the commencement of the applicant's land-disturbing
activity except as otherwise allowed by §10.1-603.8:1 of the Code of Virginia.
D. Elements of the stormwater management plans that include activities regulated
under Chapter 4 (§54.1-400 et seq.) of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia shall be
appropriately sealed and signed by a professional registered in the
17
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to Article 1 (§ 54.1-400 et seq.) of Chapter 4
of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia.
E. A construction record drawing for permanent stormwater management facilities
shall be submitted to the Administrator and approved prior to the release of bonds.
The construction record drawing shall be appropriately sealed and signed by a
professional registered in the commonwealth, certifying that, based on sufficient
inspections during construction to adequately document compliance, the
stormwater management facilities, including but not limited to storm drain
structures, storm drain pipes, culverts, BMPs, and any other facility used to
control or treat stormwater have been constructed in accordance with the
approved plan.
F. The stormwater management plan shall include the following information:
1.Information on the type and location of stormwater discharges;
information on the features to which stormwater is being discharged
including surface waters or karst features, if present, and the
predevelopment and postdevelopment drainage areas;
2.Contact information including the name, address, and telephone number of
the owner and the tax reference number and parcel number of the property
or properties affected;
3.A narrative that includes a description of current site conditions and final
site conditions;
4.A general description of the proposed stormwater management facilities
and the mechanism through which the facilities will be operated and
maintained after construction is complete;
5.Information on the proposed stormwater management facilities, including:
(i) The type of facilities;
(ii) Location, including geographic coordinates;
(iii) Acres treated; and
(iv) The surface waters or karst features, if present, into which the
facility will discharge.
6.Hydrologic and hydraulic computations, including runoff characteristics;
7.Documentation and calculations verifying compliance with the water
quality and quantity requirements.
8.A map or maps of the site that depicts the topography of the site and
includes:
18
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
(i) All contributing drainage areas;
(ii) Existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, wetlands, other water
bodies, and floodplains;
(iii) Soil types, geologic formations if karst features are present in the
area, forest cover, and other vegetative areas;
(iv) Current land use including existing structures, roads, and locations
of known utilities and easements;
(v) Sufficient information on adjoining parcels to assess the impacts of
stormwater from the site on these parcels;
(vi) The limits of clearing and grading, and the proposed drainage
patterns on the site;
(vii) Proposed buildings, roads, parking areas, utilities, and stormwater
management facilities; and
(viii) Proposed land use with tabulation of the percentage of surface area
to be adapted to various uses, including but not limited to planned
locations of utilities, roads, and easements.
G. The Stormwater Management Plan must apply the stormwater management
technical criteria set forth in Section 23-1.6 of this chapter to the entire land-
disturbing activity, consider all sources of surface runoff and all sources of
subsurface and groundwater flows converted to surface runoff.
Section 23-3.6 COMPREHENSIVE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANS
AND REGIONAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
A. The county may develop comprehensive stormwater management plans in
accordance with 4VAC50-60-92 as a means to more effectively and efficiently
address water quality objectives, quantity objectives, or both; through the
implementation of regional stormwater management facilities.
B. Once a comprehensive stormwater management plan is adopted by the county and
approved by the Director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, it
is enforceable under this chapter.
C. Stormwater management plans for land disturbing activities located in areas that
have a comprehensive stormwater management plan, adopted by the county, and
approved by the Director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality,
shall comply with the requirements of the comprehensive stormwater
management plan.
D. If a proposed regulated land-disturbing activity is located in a watershed that has a
regional stormwater management facility currently constructed or scheduled to be
constructed prior to the completion of the proposed regulated land-disturbing
activity, and if the regional stormwater management facility is in accordance with
19
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
a comprehensive stormwater management plan , the county shall have the option
to require the payment of a fee-in-lieu of providing a portion or all of the
proposed regulated land-disturbing activities stormwater management
requirements. The fee-in-lieu shall be based on the reasonable proportion of
stormwater impacts from the proposed regulated land-disturbing activity
compared to the total stormwater impacts that the regional stormwater
management facility is designed to mitigate multiplied by the total estimated
project costs. The reasonable proportion of project costs shall be solely
determined by the county. Project costs include, but are not limited to, the costs
of land, professional services for investigations, studies, design, environmental
permitting, survey, construction phase services and legal services; construction,
county staff costs for project development, design, construction, permitting,
oversight, or other project activities; and other direct costs. Project costs shall
also include the present value of the estimated operation and maintenance costs
for the next 20-years, if the county is responsible for the regional stormwater
management facility’s operation and maintenance.
E. The county and any other party(ies) may mutually agree to share the costs of a
regional stormwater management facility, in the absence of a comprehensive
stormwater management plan. The fee-in-lieu shall be based on project costs
apportioned to each party in reasonable proportion of each parties contribution to
the total stormwater impacts that the regional stormwater management facility is
designed to mitigate as mutually negotiated.
F. Paying a fee-in-lieu of stormwater management practices does not relieve the
developer of meeting any requirements of this stormwater ordinance other than
the negotiated relief. The developer remains responsible for ensuring that
downstream properties are not negatively impacted by stormwater flow, velocity,
or quality leaving the developed site.
Section 23-3.7 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENTS
A. Prior to the issuance of any permit that has a stormwater management facility as
one of the requirements of the permit, except as provided herein in Section 23-3.8,
the land owner of the site must execute an access easement agreement and a
formal maintenance covenant that shall be binding on all subsequent owners of
land served by the stormwater management facility.
B. The access easement agreement shall provide for access to stormwater
management facilities at reasonable times for periodic inspection by the county,
or their contractor or agent, to ensure that the facility is maintained in proper
working condition to meet design standards and any other provisions established
by this chapter. The easement agreement shall be recorded by the county in the
land records.
20
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
C. Maintenance of all stormwater management facilities shall be ensured through the
creation of a formal maintenance covenant, except as provided herein in Section
23-3.8, which must be approved by the county and executed prior to final plan
approval.
D. Responsibility for the operation and maintenance of stormwater management
facilities, unless assumed by a governmental agency, shall remain with the
property owner and shall pass to any successor or owner. If portions of the land
are to be sold, legally binding arrangements, acceptable to the county, shall be
made to pass the responsibility to successors in title. These arrangements shall
designate for each land owner, governmental agency, or other legally established
entity to be permanently responsible for maintenance.
E. As part of the covenant, a schedule shall be developed for when and how often
routine maintenance shall occur to ensure proper function of the stormwater
management facility. The covenant shall also include a schedule for periodic
inspections to ensure proper performance of the facility between scheduled
routine maintenance and shall require repairs when needed for proper function.
The covenant shall also include "failure to maintain" provisions.
F. In the event that maintenance or repair is neglected, or the stormwater
management facility becomes a danger to public health, safety, or the
environment, the county reserves the authority to perform the necessary
maintenance or repair work and to recover the costs from the land owner.
G. Prior to the release of the performance security or bond provided in Sec. 23-3.9,
the developer shall either (1) Transfer the Maintenance Responsibilities of the
storm water management facilities to the Home Owners Association or (2)
provide the county with a Maintenance Security.
1.Requirements for Transfer of Maintenance Responsibilities to the Home
Owners Association
i.Successful final inspection of the stormwater management facility
by the county.
ii.Transfer of the necessary property to the Home Owners
Association
iii.Provide a copy of the recorded documents establishing the Home
Owners Association to the county.
iv.Provide the county with evidence that the Home Owners
Association is funded. Minimum funding shall be based on the
following schedule:
1-20 lots = $1,000
21-50 lots = $1,500
51 and over = $1500 + $30 per lot over 50
v.Organize and hold a meeting attended by the developer, the county
and Home Owners Association.
21
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
2.Requirements for Posting Maintenance Security.
i.The county shall require a maintenance guaranty in the amount of
twenty (20%) percent of the construction costs of the stormwater
management facility.
ii.The maintenance security shall contain forfeiture provisions for
failure, after proper notice, to complete work within the time
specified, or to initiate or maintain appropriate actions which may
be required of the permittee in accordance with the approved
stormwater management plan.
iii.If the county takes such action upon such failure by the permittee,
the county may collect from the permittee the difference should the
amount of the reasonable cost of such action exceed the amount of
the security held.
iv.The maintenance covenant and security will be the responsibility
of the permittee or owner until such time as the permittee or owner
provides the county with the necessary requirements for Transfer
of Maintenance Responsibilities to the Home Owners Association
as outlined above in (1).
Section 23-3.8 SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL LOT
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
(TO BE DEVELOPED)
Section 23-3.9 PERFORMANCE SECURITIES
A. The county may, at its discretion, require the submittal of a performance security
or bond with surety, cash escrow, letter of credit or other acceptable legal
arrangement, all of which shall be in a form approved by the county, prior to
issuance of a permit in order to ensure that the stormwater practices are installed
by the permittee as required by the approved stormwater management plan.
22
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
B. The amount of the performance security shall be the total estimated construction
cost of the storm drainage systems and stormwater management facilities
approved under the permit, plus 10%.
C. The performance security shall contain forfeiture provisions for failure, after
proper notice, to complete work within the time specified, or to initiate or
maintain appropriate actions which may be required of the permittee in
accordance with the approved stormwater management plan.
D. If the county takes such action upon such failure by the permittee, the county may
collect from the permittee the difference should the amount of the reasonable cost
if such action exceeds the amount of the security held.
E. Within 60 days of the completion of the requirements of the permit conditions,
such bond, cash escrow, letter of credit or other legal arrangement, or the
unexpended or unobligated portion thereof, will be refunded to the permittee or
terminated.
Section 23-3.10 FEES
A. Fees to cover costs associated with implementation of a VSMP related to land
disturbing activities and issuance of general permit coverage and VSMP authority
permits shall be imposed in accordance with the fee schedule established by the
county Board of Supervisors as amended. VSMP costs include county costs
associated with stormwater management plan review, VSMP registration
statement review, permit issuance, state-coverage verification, inspections,
reporting, and compliance activities associated with land-disturbing activities as
well as state program oversight costs. When a site or sites has been purchased for
development within a previously permitted common plan of development or sale,
the applicant shall be subject to fees in accordance with the disturbed acreage of
their site or sites according to the fee schedule established by the county Board of
Supervisors as amended.
B. Fees for the modification or transfer of registration statements from the general
permit issued by the State Board shall be imposed in accordance with the fee
schedule established by the county Board of Supervisors as amended. If the
permit modifications result in changes to stormwater management plans that
require additional review by the county, such reviews shall be subject to the fee
schedule established by the county Board of Supervisors as amended. The fee
assessed shall be based on the total disturbed acreage of the site. In addition to
the general permit modification fee, modifications resulting in an increase in total
disturbed acreage shall pay the difference in the initial permit fee paid and the
permit fee that would have applied for the total disturbed acreage in accordance
with the fee schedule established by the county Board of Supervisors as amended.
23
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
C. Permit maintenance fees: Annual permit maintenance fees required by 4 VAC50-
60-830 shall be imposed in accordance with the fee schedule established by the
county Board of Supervisors as amended, including fees imposed on expired
permits that have been administratively continued. With respect to the general
permit, these fees shall apply until the permit coverage is terminated.
D. General permit coverage maintenance fees shall be paid annually to the county,
by the anniversary date of general permit coverage. No permit will be reissued or
automatically continued without payment of the required fee. General permit
coverage maintenance fees shall be applied until a Notice of Termination is
effective.
E. The fees set forth in Sections A – D, above shall apply to:
1)All persons seeking coverage under the general permit.
2)All permittees who request modifications to or transfers of their existing
registration statement for coverage under a general permit.
3)Persons whose coverage under the general permit has been revoked shall
apply to the Department for an Individual Permit for Discharges of
Stormwater from Construction Activities.
4)Permit and permit coverage maintenance fees may apply to each general
permit holder.
F. No permit application fees will be assessed to:
1)Permittees who request minor modifications to permits as defined in
Section 23-2 of this chapter. Permit modifications at the request of the
permittee resulting in changes to stormwater management plans that
require additional review by the Administrator shall not be exempt
pursuant to this section.
2)Permittees whose permits are modified or amended at the initiative of the
Department or Administrator, excluding errors in the registration
statement identified by the Administrator or errors related to the acreage
of the site.
G. All incomplete payments will be deemed as nonpayments, and the applicant shall
be notified of any incomplete payments. Interest may be charged for late
payments at the underpayment rate set forth in §58.1-15 of the Code of Virginia
and is calculated on a monthly basis at the applicable periodic rate. A 10% late
payment fee shall be charged to any delinquent (over 90 days past due) account.
The county shall be entitled to all remedies available under the Code of Virginia
in collecting any past due amount.
Section 23-3.11 PERMIT APPLICATION PROCEDURE
24
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
A. Permit applications and the stormwater management plan shall include all of the
information required by this chapter, the county Stormwater Management Design
Manual and county Land Development Procedures.
B. No VSMP authority permit shall be issued until the fees required to be paid
pursuant to section 23-3.10, are received, and a performance bond required
pursuant to section 23-3.9 of this chapter has been submitted and accepted.
C. All applications will be processed in accordance with procedures set forth in the
county Stormwater Management Design Manual and Land Development
Procedures. The county intends to review plans in a shorter time period than the
maximum set herein. See the county Land Development Procedures for the
county’s plan review policy.
1.The Administrator shall determine the completeness of a plan in accordance
with section 23-3.2 of this chapter and shall notify the applicant, in writing, of
such determination, within 15 calendar days of receipt. If the plan is deemed
to be incomplete, the above written notification will contain the reasons the
plan is deemed incomplete.
2.The Administrator shall have an additional 60 calendar days from the date of
the communication of completeness to review the plan, except that if a
determination of completeness is not made within the time prescribed above,
then plan shall be deemed complete and the Administrator shall have 60
calendar days from the date of submission to review the plan.
3.The Administrator shall review any plan that has been previously
disapproved, within 45 calendar days of the date of resubmission.
4.During the review period, the plan shall be approved or disapproved and the
decision communicated in writing to the applicant or his designated agent. If
the plan is not approved, the reasons for not approving the plan shall be
provided in writing. Approval or denial shall be based on the plan’s
compliance with the requirements of this chapter.
5.If a plan meeting all requirements of this chapter is submitted and no action is
taken within the time provided above, the plan shall be deemed approved.
D. Approved stormwater management plans may be modified as follows:
1.Modification to an approved stormwater management plan shall be allowed
only after review and written approval by the Administrator. The
Administrator shall have 60 calendar days to respond in writing either
approving or disapproving such request.
25
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
2.The Administrator may require that an approved stormwater management plan
be amended, within a time prescribed by the Administrator, to address any
deficiencies noted during inspection.
E. The Administrator shall require the submission of a construction record drawing
for permanent stormwater management facilities. The Administrator may elect
not to require construction record drawings for stormwater management facilities
for which recorded maintenance agreements are not required pursuant to section
23-3.8.
26
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-4
EXCEPTIONS TO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
REQUIREMENTS
Section 23-4.1 EXCEPTIONS TO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
A. The Administrator may grant exceptions to the technical requirements of Part II B
or Part II C of the Regulations, provided that (i) the exception is the minimum
necessary to afford relief, (ii) reasonable and appropriate conditions are imposed
so that the intent of the Act and this chapter are preserved, (iii) granting the
exception will not confer any special privileges that are denied in other similar
circumstances, and (iv) exception requests are not based upon conditions or
circumstances that are self-imposed or self-created. Economic hardship alone is
not sufficient reason to grant an exception from the requirements of this chapter.
1.Exceptions to the requirement that the land-disturbing activity obtain the
required VSMP authority permit shall not be given by the Administrator,
nor shall the Administrator approve the use of a BMP not found on the
Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse Website or any other measure
not duly approved by the Director.
2.Exceptions to requirements for phosphorus reductions shall not be allowed
unless offsite options otherwise permitted pursuant to 4 VAC 50-60-69
have been considered and found not available.
3.Nothing in this section shall preclude an operator from constructing to a
more stringent standard at their discretion.
B. Requests for an exception to the stormwater technical requirements shall be
submitted in writing to the Administrator for consideration.
C. The Administrator may grant an exception from strict compliance with
stormwater management provisions when not reasonably achieved, provided that
acceptable mitigation measures are provided. However, to be eligible for an
exception, the applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Administrator
that the downstream waterways will not be subject to:
1.Deterioration of existing culverts, bridges, dams, and other structures;
2.Deterioration of biological functions or habitat;
3.Accelerated streambank or streambed erosion or siltation;
4.Increased threat of flood damage to public health, life and property.
27
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Section 23-4.2 HEARINGS AND APPEALS
A. Any permit applicant or permittee, or person subject to the requirements of this
chapter, who is aggrieved by any action or by inaction, of the county in approving
or disapproving any plans required by this chapter, or by any enforcement action
taken pursuant to Sec. 23-8, shall have the right to demand in writing an appeal to
the county Board of Supervisors provided a petition requesting such hearing is
filed with the Administrator within 30 days after notice of such action is given by
the Administrator.
B. The hearing shall be held either at a regular or special meeting of the Board of
Supervisors provided that the Board of Supervisors and the aggrieved party has at
least thirty (30) days prior notice.
C. The Board of Supervisors, shall have power to issue subpoenas and subpoenas
duces tecum, and at the request of any party shall issue such subpoenas. The
failure of any witness without legal excuse to appear or to testify or to produce
documents shall be acted upon by the Board of Supervisors whose actions may
include the procurement of an order of enforcement from the circuit court.
Witnesses who are subpoenaed shall receive the same fees and reimbursement for
mileage as in civil actions.
D. During its review, the Board of Supervisors shall consider evidence presented by
all parties. After considering the evidence the Board of Supervisors’ decision
shall be final.
E. Final decisions of the Board of Supervisors or Administrator under this chapter
shall be subject to judicial review by the Roanoke County Circuit Court, provided
an appeal is filed within thirty (30) days from the date of any written decision
adversely affecting the rights, duties, or privileges of any permit applicant,
permittee, or person subject to any enforcement action under this chapter.
28
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-5
ILLICIT DISCHARGES
23-5.1 GENERAL
A. It shall be unlawful and a violation of this chapter to allow any discharge to a
municipal separate storm sewer or public watercourse that is not composed
entirely of stormwater, except as described in subsection C below.
B. Illicit discharges include, but are not limited to:
1.Discharging, or causing or allowing to be discharged, sewage, industrial
wastes, or other wastes, into the storm sewer system, or any component
thereof, or onto driveways, sidewalks, parking lots, or any other areas
draining to the storm sewer system.
2.Connecting, or causing or allowing connection of any sanitary sewer to the
storm sewer system, including any sanitary sewer connected to the storm
sewer as of the date of the adoption of this ordinance.
3.Connecting, or causing or allowing any connection to the storm sewer
system, without a valid VSMP, VPDES or NPDES permit, any structure
that conveys any liquid other than stormwater or discharges listed in
subsection C, including, but not limited to, pipes, drains, sanitary sewer
lines, washing machine drains, or floor drains.
4.Prohibitions 2 and 3 listed in this subsection expressly include, without
limitations, illicit connections made in the past, regardless of whether the
connection was permissible under law or practices applicable or prevailing
at the time of the connection.
5.Throwing, placing, or depositing, or causing to be thrown, placed, or
deposited in the storm sewer system anything that impedes or interferes
with the free flow of stormwater therein, or adversely effects water
quality.
C. The following nonstormwater discharges are allowable under this ordinance:
1.Discharges or flows covered by a separate individual or general VPDES or
VSMP permit for nonstormwater discharges;
2.Individual nonstormwater discharges or flows that have been identified in
writing by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality as de
minimis discharges that are not significant sources of pollutants to state
waters and do not require a VPDES permit;
3.Nonstormwater discharges or flows in the following categories, unless
they are identified by the Administrator, Virginia Water Control Board, or
29
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board, as significant contributors of
pollutants to the MS4.
a.Water line flushing;
b.Landscape irrigation;
c.Diverted stream flows or rising groundwater;
d.Uncontaminated ground water infiltration;
e.Uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
f.Discharges from potable water sources;
g.Foundation drains;
h.Air conditioning condensate;
i.Irrigation water;
j.Springs;
k.Water from crawl space pumps;
l.Footing drains;
m.Lawn watering;
n.Individual residential car washing;
o.Flows from riparian habitats and wetlands;
p.Dechlorinated swimming pool discharges;
q.Street wash water; and
r.Fire fighting activities.
4.The discharge of material resulting from a spill that is necessary to
prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage. The
responsible party shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent
any adverse effect on human health or the environment. This provision
does not transfer liability for the spill itself from the party(ies) responsible
for the spill, nor relieve the party(ies) responsible for a spill from the
reporting requirements of 40 CFR Part117 and 40 CRF Part 302 (2001).
D. In the event any of the activities listed in subparagraph C.3 of this section are
found to be a significant contributor of pollutants to be discharged into the storm
sewer system, the Administrator shall so notify the person performing such
activities, and shall order that such activities be ceased or conducted in such a
manner as to avoid the discharge of pollutants into the storm sewer system. The
failure to comply with any such order shall constitute a violation of the provisions
of this chapter.
E. No person shall sweep, wash, or otherwise place dirt, trash, debris, yard wastes, or
other materials that could be picked up and carried by stormwater runoff, in
gutters, streets, ditches, or elsewhere, where they could reasonably be expected to
be carried off by stormwater runoff to a municipal separate storm sewer, public
watercourses or other storm drainage systems.
F. Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes, or such
person’s lessee, shall keep and maintain that part of the watercourse within the
30
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
property free of trash, debris, yard wastes, and other obstacles that would pollute,
contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse.
G. The owner or such person’s lessee shall not remove, or allow removal of, healthy
bank vegetation beyond that necessary for maintenance, nor remove said
vegetation in such a manner as to increase the vulnerability of the watercourse to
erosion. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and stabilizing
that portion of the watercourse that is within their property lines in order to
protect against erosion and degradation of the watercourse originating or
contributed from their property. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain
existing privately owned structures within or adjacent to the watercourse, so that
such structures will not become a hazard to the use, function, or physical integrity
of the watercourse.
31
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-6
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
Section 23-6.1 NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION COMMENCEMENT
A. The permittee shall notify the county in advance before the commencement of
land disturbing activities. In addition, the permittee shall notify the county in
advance of construction of critical components of a stormwater management
facility.
Section 23-6.2 PERIODIC CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
A. The Administrator shall periodically inspect the land-disturbing activity during
construction for:
1.Compliance with the approved erosion and sediment control plan;
2.Compliance with the approved stormwater management plan;
3.Compliance with the approved pollution prevention plan;
4.Development and implementation of any additional control measures
necessary to address a TMDL.
B. If the county inspections find any violations, the permittee shall be notified in
writing of the nature of the violation and the required corrective actions. No
additional construction or land-disturbing activity in the area of the violation shall
proceed until any violations are corrected and all work previously completed has
received approval from the county. The permittee is responsible for maintenance
and repair for all stormwater management facilities during construction.
C. The person responsible for implementing the approved the plan is required to
provide adequate inspection monitoring and reports to ensure compliance with the
approved plan, to determine whether the measures required in the plan provide
effective stormwater management and to allow the registered professional to
certify the record documents in accordance with Section 23-3.5. All permittee
inspections shall be documented and written reports prepared that contain the
following information:
1.The date and location of the permittee inspection;
2.Whether construction is in compliance with the approved stormwater
management plan;
32
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
3.Variations from the approved construction specifications;
4.Corrective actions that have been taken to correct previous violations;
5.Any violations that exist; and.
6.The name and signature of the person who performed the inspection.
Permittee inspection documentation shall be kept with the SWPPP.
D. If the county determines that there is a failure to comply with the plan, notice
shall be served upon the permittee or person responsible for carrying out the plan
in accordance with Section 23-8 of this chapter.
E. Pursuant to § 10.1-603.12:2 of the Code of Virginia, the Administrator may
require every VSMP authority permit applicant or permittee, or any such person
subject to VSMP authority permit requirements under this chapter, to furnish
when requested such application materials, plans, specifications, and other
pertinent information as may be necessary to determine the effect of his discharge
on the quality of state waters, or such other information as may be necessary to
accomplish the purposes of this chapter.
Section 23-6.3 FINAL INSPECTION AND RECORD DOCUMENTATION
A. The permittee shall submit record drawings and supporting documentation for all
stormwater management facility and storm drainage system associated with the
project before final county inspection. Record drawings and supporting
documents shall comply with the requirements contained in the county
Stormwater Management Design Manual.
B. Receipt of record drawings and supporting documentation, final inspection and
approval by the county is required before the release of performance securities.
C. If it is determined from the record drawings, or inspections, that the storm
drainage systems and the stormwater management facilities have not been
constructed in accordance with the approved stormwater management plan, then
corrective action will be taken to comply with the approved Plan or the permittee
shall provide studies and information required by the county to demonstrate that
the constructed system will function equivalent to the approved Stormwater
Management Plan, and that all regulatory requirements are met.
33
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-7
POST CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE AND
REPAIR OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITES
Section 23-7.1 MAINTENANCE INSPECTIONS OF STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
A. Following the completion and acceptance of construction, the landowner is
responsible for the maintenance and repair of stormwater structures and
stormwater management facilities. The landowner shall ensure that proper
maintenance and repair of stormwater structures and stormwater management
facilities occur and that periodic inspection, maintenance, and repair are
performed so that the structures and facilities operate properly. All inspection,
maintenance, and repair activities shall be documented and reported to the county.
B. Stormwater structures and stormwater management facilities that have recorded
stormwater facility maintenance agreements shall be operated, inspected,
maintained and repaired in conformance with the applicable performance
requirements contained in the approved stormwater facility maintenance
agreement.
C. Existing stormwater structures and stormwater management facilities that do not
have a recorded stormwater facility maintenance agreement shall be operated,
inspected, maintained and repaired as required for proper operation of the
structures and facilities. Following are the minimum requirements for stormwater
structures and stormwater management facilities that do not have a recorded
stormwater facility maintenance agreement:
1.Stormwater structure and management facilities shall be inspected by the
property owner annually.
2.All structures and slopes shall be kept in a safe condition.
3.Grass clippings, cut brush, and other debris shall not be placed into
stormwater structures or stormwater management facilities.
4.All pipes and structures shall be kept clean and clear of debris that could
decrease flow capacity.
5.Sediment and silt that washes into stormwater management facilities shall be
removed and properly disposed of when the sediment and silt builds up to the
point that they adversely impact the facility’s proper operation.
6.Trees and other woody plants shall be cut and removed from embankment
slopes annually.
34
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
7.Trees and woody plants shall be cut and removed from stormwater
management facilities’, non-embankment areas, as needed to avoid build up of
debris in the facility and to avoid a nuisance. Periodic cutting and brush
removal shall occur at a frequency of at least once in three years.
8.Landscaping and grass cover shall be maintained for proper operation and
erosion control. Replace landscaping as required. Repair erosion and replace
grass cover as required.
9.Owner inspection and maintenance reports shall be submitted to the county
Department of Community Development as required in Section 23-7.2 below.
D. In addition to the inspections performed by the land owner, the county shall
periodically inspect stormwater management facilities. In the event that the
stormwater management facility has not been maintained and/or becomes a
danger to public safety, public health, or the environment, the county shall notify
the landowner by registered or certified mail. The notice shall specify the
measures needed to comply and shall specify the time within which such
measures shall be completed. If the responsible party fails or refuses to correct the
violation, the county, after reasonable notice, may correct a violation of the design
standards or maintenance needs by performing all necessary work to place the
facility in proper working condition, and recover the costs from the land owner.
E. The county will conduct post-construction inspections of stormwater management
facilities pursuant to the county’s developed, and State Board’s approved
inspection program, and shall inspect each stormwater management facility at
least once every five (5) years except as may otherwise be provided for in Section
23-3.8.
Section 23-7.2 RECORDS OF INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR
A. Landowners responsible for the operation and maintenance of stormwater
management facilities shall make records of all inspections, maintenance and
repairs, and shall retain the records for at least five (5) years.
B. Records of inspection and maintenance by the landowner shall be submitted to the
county Department of Community Development by April 1st of each year.
35
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
SECTION 23-8
ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES
Section 23-8.1 VIOLATIONS
Any land-disturbance activity that is commenced or is conducted contrary to this chapter
or the approved plans and permit, may be subject to the enforcement actions outlined in
this section and the state Stormwater Management Law.
Section 23-8.2 NOTICE OF VIOLATION
A. If the Administrator determines that there is a failure to comply with the VSMP
authority permit conditions or determines there is an unauthorized discharge,
notice shall be served upon the permittee or person responsible for carrying out
the permit conditions by any of the following: verbal warnings and inspection
reports, notices of corrective action, consent special orders, and notices to
comply.
B. Written notices shall be served by registered or certified mail to the address
specified in the permit application or by delivery at the site of the development
activities to the agent or employee supervising such activities.
C. If there is no permittee, the notices shall be issued to the landowner.
D. The notice of violation shall contain:
1.The name and address of the permittee, or if there is no permittee, the
landowner;
2.The address when available or a description of the building, structure or
land upon which the violation is occurring;
3.A statement specifying the nature of the violation;
4.A description of the remedial measures necessary to bring the land-
disturbing activity into compliance with this chapter and a time schedule
for the completion of such remedial action;
5.A statement of the penalty or penalties that may be assessed against the
person to whom the notice of violation is directed;
6.A statement that the determination of violation may be appealed by filing
a written notice of appeal within 30 days of service of notice of violation.
36
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
Section 23-8.3 STOP WORK ORDERS
A. If a permittee fails to comply with a notice issued in accordance with Section 23-
8.2 within the time specified, the Administrator may issue an order requiring the
owner, permittee, person responsible for carrying out an approved plan, or the
person conducting the land-disturbing activities without an approved plan or
required permit to cease all construction land-disturbing activities until the
violation of the permit has ceased, or an approved plan and required permits are
obtained, and specified corrective measures have been completed.
B. However, if the Administrator finds that any such violation presents an imminent
and substantial danger of causing harmful erosion of lands or sediment deposition
in waters within the watersheds of the Commonwealth or otherwise substantially
impacting water quality, it may issue, without advance notice or hearing, an
emergency order directing such person to cease immediately all land-disturbing
activities on the site and shall provide an opportunity for a hearing, after
reasonable notice as to the time and place thereof, to such person, to affirm,
modify, amend, or cancel such emergency order. If a person who has been issued
an order is not complying with the terms thereof, the Administrator may request
the County Attorney to institute a proceeding for an injunction, mandamus, or
other appropriate remedy.
C. This “stop work order” shall be in effect until the county confirms that the land-
disturbing activity is in compliance with the requirements of this ordinance and
the violation has been satisfactorily addressed. Upon failure to comply within the
time specified, the permit may be revoked and the applicant shall be deemed to be
in violation of this article and upon conviction shall be subject to the penalties
provided by this ordinance.
Section 23-8.4 CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES
A. Any person violating or failing, neglecting, or refusing to obey any rule,
regulation, ordinance, order, approved standard or specification, or any permit
condition issued by the Administrator may be compelled in a proceeding
instituted in the Roanoke county circuit court to obey same and to comply
therewith by injunction, mandamus or other appropriate remedy.
B. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter or who fails, neglects, or
refuses to comply with any order of the Administrator, shall be subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $32,500 for each violation within the discretion of the court.
Each day of violation of each requirement shall constitute a separate offense.
C. Violations for which a penalty may be imposed under this Subsection include, but
are not limited to the following:
37
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
1.No state permit registration;
2.No SWPPP;
3.Incomplete SWPPP;
4.SWPPP not available for review;
5.No approved erosion and sediment control plan;
6.Failure to install stormwater BMPs or erosion and sediment controls;
7.Stormwater BMPs or erosion and sediment controls improperly installed or
maintained;
8.Operational deficiencies;
9.Failure to conduct required inspections;
10.Incomplete, improper, or missed inspections; and
11.Discharges not in compliance with the requirements of Section 4VAC-50-60-
1170 of the general permit.
D. The Administrator may issue a summons for collection of the civil penalty and the
action may be prosecuted in the appropriate court.
E. In imposing a civil penalty pursuant to this Subsection, the court may consider the
degree of harm caused by the violation and also the economic benefit to the
violator from noncompliance.
F. Any civil penalties assessed by a court as a result of a summons issued by the
county shall be paid into the county treasury to be used for the purpose of
minimizing, preventing, managing, or mitigating pollution of the waters of the
county and abating environmental pollution therein in such manner as the court
may, by order, direct.
G. With the consent of any person who has violated or failed, neglected or refused to
obey this ordinance or any condition of a permit, the county may provide, in an
order issued by the county against such person, for the payment of civil charges
for violations in specific sums, not to exceed the limit specified in subdivision B
of this section. Such civil charges shall be instead of any appropriate civil penalty
which could be imposed under subdivision B.
H. Notwithstanding any other civil or equitable remedy provided by this Section or
by law, any person who willfully or negligently violates any provision of the
38
DRAFT Stormwater Management Ordinance November 25, 2013
County of Roanoke, Virginia
ordinance, any order of the Administrator, any condition of a permit, or any order
of a court shall, be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail for
not more than 12 months or a fine of not less than $2,500., or both.
Section 23-8.5 RESTORATION OF LANDS
A. Any violator may be required to restore land to its undisturbed condition or in
accordance with a notice of violation, stop work order, or permit requirements.
B. In the event that restoration is not undertaken within a reasonable time after
notice, the county may take necessary corrective action, the cost of which shall be
covered by the performance security, or become a lien upon the property until
paid, or both.
Section 23-8.6 HOLDS ON CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
A. Final certificates of occupancy will not be granted until corrections to all
stormwater practices have been made in accordance with the approved plans,
notices of violation, stop work order, or permit requirements, and accepted by the
county.
1
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Administration
Issues
Consider request for transfer of ownership to the Town of a 2002 Ford Crown Vic previously
transferred to the Volunteer First Aid Crew in 2012.
Summary
History
The Town of Vinton transferred title of a 2002 Ford Crown Victoria to the Vinton First Aid
Crew (VFAC) in July 2012. The vehicle was at the end of its useful life for the town and rather
than purchase a new vehicle, Town Council agreed to a vehicle allowance for the Town
Manager, and staff would be reimbursed for mileage incurred while conducting town business.
The VFAC took title with the agreement that maintenance, repairs, gasoline, and insurance
would be their responsibility and the town would incur no cost.
The VFAC has used the Crown Vic for non-emergency uses such as training trips, meetings, or
other local and out of town trips that did not require an emergency response vehicle. It has been
driven approximately 9,000 in 18-months.
The VFAC has found it very difficult, expensive, and limiting to hold insurance on this vehicle.
This is the only vehicle in the Fire/EMS fleet that is insured through the volunteers. Insurance is
limited to a very small (3-4) drivers which creates limitations on its available use.
Expense Evaluation
Town staff has reviewed all recorded expenses since purchasing the vehicle in 2001. The
summaries are attached. In general, it has cost approximately $1200 per year to maintain, fuel,
and insure the vehicle under town ownership. Maintenance $200; Fuel $700; Insurance
$300/Year
Town Council
Agenda Summary
2
Options
As presented there are three basic options:
(1) Town of Vinton accepts the vehicle back in to the public fleet and pays for maintenance,
fuel, and insurance. It is agreed that if major mechanical failure occurs the vehicle would
be placed out of service and auctioned. Estimate annual cost - $1,200.00
(2) Town of Vinton accepts the vehicles back into the public fleet and charges VFAC for
maintenance, fuel, and insurance.
(3) VFAC responsible for maintenance, fuel, and insurance, Town does not accept vehicle
back into fleet.
Attachments
Maintenance, Service, Repair History
Recommendations
Motion to approve Option 1: Town of Vinton accepts the vehicle back into the public fleet and
pays for maintenance, fuel, and insurance (approx. $1200). It is agreed that if major mechanical
failure occurs the vehicle would be placed out of service and auctioned.
Meeting Date
December 3, 2013
Department
Finance/Treasurer
Issue
Financial Report for October 2013
Summary
The Financial Report for the period ending October 31, 2013 has been placed in the Town’s
Dropbox and on the Town’s Website.
The Finance Committee will meet on Tuesday, December 2, 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
Financial Report Summary
Recommendations
Motion to approve the October 2013 Financial Report
Town Council
Agenda Summary