HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/2/2025 - Joint1
Vinton Town Council
Joint Public Hearing
Council Chambers
311 South Pollard Street
Tuesday, December 2, 2025
AGENDA
Consideration of:
A. 6:00 p.m. - ROLL CALL AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A QUORUM AND
CITIZEN GUIDELINES
B. MOMENT OF SILENCE AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE U.S. FLAG
C. COMMUNITY EVENTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/COUNCIL ACTIVITIES
D. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
E. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Consider approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting on November 18, 2025
2. Consider a motion to adopt a Resolution to amend the Town Holiday Schedule to
close Town Offices on January 2, 2026.
F. AWARDS, INTRODUCTIONS, PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS
1. New employee introductions – Fabricio Drumond, Chief of Police
G. CITIZENS’ COMMENTS AND PETITIONS - This section is reserved for comments and
questions for issues not listed on the agenda
H. BRIEFING
1. 2025 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Hazard Mitigation Plan to be
adopted and incorporated as an amendment to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan -
Amanda McGee, Director of Community Development – Roanoke Valley-Alleghany
Regional Commission
I. ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION
J. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
Laurie J. Mullins, Vice Mayor
Keith N. Liles, Council Member
Sabrina M. McCarty, Council Member
Michael W. Stovall, Council Member
Vinton Municipal Building
311 South Pollard Street
Vinton, VA 24179
540) 983-0607
2
1. Consideration of public comments regarding a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a
proposed medical clinic, located at 600 South Pollard Street, Vinton, Virginia, tax map
number 060.19-03-21.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District.
a. Open Public Hearing
Report from Staff – Nathan McClung, Assistant Director of
Planning and Zoning
Receive petitioner’s comments
Receive public comments
Council discussion and questions
b. Close Public Hearing
c. Consider the adoption of an Ordinance to allow the Special Use Permit
2. Consideration of public comments regarding amendment to the Vinton Zoning
Ordinance: adding a new use type of commercial or commissary kitchens to the use
table in Article IV (District Regulations) and adding a definition for these use types in
Article XI (Definitions); and amending multiple provisions and requirements for Planned
Unit Development (PUD) Districts in Article IV, Division 4 (Planned Unit Development
Districts).
a. Open Public Hearing
Reports from Staff – Nathan McClung, Assistant Director of
Planning and Zoning
Receive public comments
Council discussion and questions
b. Close Public Hearing
c. Consider the adoption of an Ordinance amending Appendix B, Zoning, Article
IV, District Regulations, Division 2, Multiple Purpose Districts, Section 4-5; Division 4,
Planned Unit Development Districts, and Article XI, Definitions, Sec. 11-2 of the Vinton
Town Code.
J. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
1. Public Works Committee – William Herndon, Director of Public Works
K. TOWN ATTORNEY
L. TOWN MANAGER’S PROJECT UPDATES/COMMENTS
M. COUNCIL AND MAYOR
N. ADJOURNMENT
NEXT COMMITTEE/TOWN COUNCIL MEETINGS AND TOWN EVENTS:
December 4, 2025 – 6:00 p.m. – Tree Lighting with Christmas Parade to Follow at 7:00 p.m.
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.
3
December 6, 2025 – 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. The Holiday Shoppe will be open at the Vinton
History Museum
December 9, 2025 – 5:30 p.m. – Santa Crawl
December 10, 2025 – 9:00 a.m. – Community Development Committee Meeting – TOV Annex
December 16, 2025 – 3:00 p.m. – Finance Committee Meeting – TOV Annex
December 16, 2025 – 6:00 p.m. – Regular Council Meeting – Council Chambers
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Town Clerk
Issue
Consider approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 18, 2025
Attachments
November 18, 2025, minutes
Recommendations
Motion to approve the consent agenda as presented
Town Council
Agenda Summary
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL HELD AT 6:00
P.M. ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2025, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE
VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON,
VIRGINIA
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
Laurie J. Mullins, Vice Mayor
Keith N. Liles
Sabrina M. McCarty
Michael W. Stovall
STAFF PRESENT: Richard Peters, Town Manager
Cody Sexton, Deputy Town Manager
Megan Lawless, Town Clerk/Admin. Operations Manager
Jeremy Carroll, Town Attorney
Andrew Keen, Town Treasurer/Director of Finance
Fabricio Drumond, Chief of Police
Donna Collins, Director of Human Resources & Risk
Management
Nathan McClung, Assistant Director of Planning and Zoning
Mayor Grose called the meeting to order at 6:00
p.m. The Town Clerk called the roll with Council
Member Liles, Council Member McCarty, Council
Member Stovall, Vice Mayor Mullins, and Mayor
Grose present.
Roll call
After a Moment of Silence, Council Member
McCarty led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Under Upcoming Community
Events/Announcements, and Council Activities,
Council Member McCarty announced the following
events: November 26 – Town Offices will close at
12:00 p.m. in observance of Thanksgiving and will
remain closed on the 27th and 28th; December 4 –
The Tree Lighting Ceremony will take place at 6:00
p.m. with the Christmas Parade to follow at 7:00
p.m.; December 9 – The Santa Crawl will begin at
5:30 p.m. and will end at 9:00 p.m.; December 11
Vinton Area Chamber of Commerce is hosting a
Holiday Open House at 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
Vice Mayor Mullins announced the following
Council Activities: October 23 – Council Member
Liles attended the RVTPO meeting; October 23 –
Mayor Grose, Council Member Liles and Council
Member Stovall attended Visit Virginia’s Blue
Ridge Annual meeting; October 27 – Council
Member Liles attended the Vinton Planning
Commission meeting; October 30 – Mayor Grose
2
attended the Ribbon Cutting ceremony for Big Lots;
October 30 – Mayor Grose, Council Member Liles
and Council Member Stovall attended Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission’s 56th
Annual dinner; November 1 – Mayor Grose
attended the Veterans Annual Ruck; November 5
all members of Council attended the Council
Retreat; November 6 – Mayor Grose attended the
Roanoke Regional Partnership Board of Directors
meeting; November 6 – Mayor Grose attended the
Field of Honor Dedication ceremony; November 17
Council Member Liles attended the Vinton
Planning Commission Work Session; November
18 – Mayor Grose and Council Member Stovall
attended the Finance Committee meeting.
Under requests to postpone, add to, or change,
Council Member Stovall made a request to add to
the consent agenda as item E5 to consider a
Resolution appropriating funds in the amount of
993.00 from the sale of scrap metal.
Council Member Stovall made a motion to
approve the Consent Agenda as presented; the
motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Mullins and
carried by the following vote, with all members
voting: Vote 5-0; Yeas (5) -Liles, McCarty, Stovall,
Mullins, Grose; Nays (0) – None.
Approved minutes of the Regular Meeting from
October 21, 2025; approved minutes from
Council Retreat from November 5, 2025,
approved Resolution No. 2654 appropriating
funds in the amount of $2,500.00 for receipt of
deductible from the insurance claim made on a
traffic signal pole that was damaged by a motor
vehicle; approved Resolution No. 2655
appropriating funds in the amount of $450.00 for
the receipt of an insurance claim made on a piece
of Public Works equipment; approved Resolution
No. 2656 appropriating funds in the amount of
993.00 from Revenue Account 10035003-
190204, Recoveries and Rebates to the Public
Works Operating Budget Account Number
10041104-505040, Maintenance Highways,
Streets and Bridges Admin Other Maintenance
Cost.
Under awards, introductions, and
presentations, Ms. Collins recognized November
as National Veterans and Military Families month
and honored the veterans within the Town of
Vinton workforce – Mayor Grose, Chief Drumond,
Sergeant Brandon Alterio, and Corporal Jesse
Dibble. Each veteran was presented with a small
gift.
Other employees who are veterans but not present
at the meeting are Detective Jake Miller, Officer
Sean McKittrick, Code Enforcement Officer Scott
3
Stephenson, Jr., and Equipment Operator II Tim
Perdue.
Ms. Collins then recognized The Veterans of
Foreign Wars, Post 4522 of Vinton on their 80th
anniversary. She called all members who were in
attendance to come to the podium to accept an
accolade as appreciation for their dedicated
service.
A member from The Veterans of Foreign Wars
Post 4522 shared appreciation for the
acknowledgement.
Mayor Grose thanked the group for their dedication
and service and presented the accolade.
Under citizens’ comments and petitions, no one
offered any comments.
Under briefings, Mr. McClung provided details
about a Special Use Permit application for
proposed medical clinic located at 600 South
Pollard Street. He shared that this building is
already in place so there is no concern for off-street
parking. The applicant provided a letter that listed
all of the services that will be provided at the clinic.
This letter is in the posted agenda packet and is on
file at the Town Clerk’s office. Action for the
approval of this Special Use Permit will take place
at the Town Council meeting on December 2,
2025, in the form of a public hearing.
Under briefings, Mr. McClung advised that
Director of Community Development Amanda
McGee with Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission will provide a presentation at the next
Town Council meeting on December 2, 2025, on
the 2025 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission Hazard Mitigation Plan to be adopted
and incorporated as an amendment to the Town’s
Comprehensive Plan. Action for adopting this plan
should take place sometime in January 2026.
Under briefings, Mr. McClung shared proposed
amendments to the Vinton Zoning Ordinance,
which include adding a new use type of commercial
kitchens and commissary kitchens to the use table
in Article IV (District Regulations) and add a
definition for these use types in Article XI
Definitions) and amending multiple provisions and
requirement for Planned Unit Development
Districts in Article IV, Division 4 (Planned Unit
4
Development Districts). Action for this amendment
will take place at the next Town Council meeting on
December 2, 2025, in the form of a public hearing.
There were no questions from Council.
Under Items Requiring Action, there were no
items requiring action.
Under reports from committees, Mr. Keen
provided an update from the Finance Committee.
Mr. Keen recapped the Resolutions that were
reviewed in the Finance Committee meeting and
then approved at tonight’s Town Council meeting
under the Consent Agenda section.
Mr. Keen shared the highlights from the October
Financial Statements that showed revenue trends
remaining strong. The second half of real-estate
billing was mailed out at the end of October; the
bulk of the collections from this billing will arrive in
November with a payment deadline of December
5, 2025.
He continued by sharing that personal property tax
collection is just over 10% and vehicle license tax
collection is around 17%. Our state sales tax
collection is 34%, and the meals tax collection is
37%. He then shared that current pari-mutual tax
collection is at 41%, and cigarette stamp collection
is 47%.
Mr. Keen advised that at this point in the budget
year we would like to see revenues at 33% and
acknowledged that many of the individual revenues
are 10% over budget.
We are starting to draw some of the investment
funds down to fulfill performance agreement
payments and capital projects expenses. We are
still collecting around $35,000.00 on interest
earnings per month; however, we expect to see
that go down as we spend from the accounts and
interest rates decrease.
Mr. Keen shared that we are implementing a fuel
card process and hope to have cards by mid to the
end of December with a go-live date of January 1,
2026. This will eliminate liability that comes with the
underground fuel storage tanks that no longer can
be used.
5
Last, Mr. Keen stated that the last penny was
minted in the United States. There will be some
discussion on implementing a rounding system to
accommodate situations where they cannot
provide change.
There were no questions or comments.
Mr. Keen then asked for approval for the October
31, 2025, Financial Statements.
Council Member McCarty made a motion to
approve the October 31, 2025, Financial
Statements; the motion was seconded by Council
Member Liles, and carried by the following vote,
with all members voting: Vote 5-0; Yeas (5) – Liles,
McCarty, Stovall, Mullins, Grose; Nays (0) – None.
Under Town Attorney, Mr. Carroll shared that
the pennies and nickels issue has come up and
that his legal partner, Mr. Michael Luckaby, will be
at the next Town Council meeting filling in for Mr.
Carroll and will be able to answer any questions
about this issue.
Under Town Manager’s Projects Updates, Mr.
Peters had no announcements and wished
everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.
Under Council and Mayor comments, Mayor
Grose commented on how busy our staff is and
shared appreciation for their work.
Council Member Liles shared excitement over the
concrete footers being poured for the hotel and the
progress on the Vinton War Memorial Community
Park. He wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.
Council Member McCarty shared appreciation to
everyone who worked on the Field of Honor. She
complimented the Downtown Trick-or-Treat event.
She shared her appreciation for the Vinton family
and wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.
Vice Mayor Mullins shared appreciation for the
Council Retreat and wished everyone a Happy
Thanksgiving.
Council Member Stovall shared appreciation for
the staff and their support in recognizing veterans
the Field of Honor. He shared excitement for the
Vinton Café opening and the progress on the hotel.
Approved October 31, 2025, Financial
Statements.
6
Next, he thanked the Town Clerk for the work she
has done thus far in her new role.
Mayor Grose shared appreciation for Chief
Drumond and his speech at the Field of Honor
ceremony. He then wished everyone a Happy
Thanksgiving.
No other comments were offered.
Council Member Liles made a motion to adjourn
the meeting; the motion was seconded by Council
Member McCarty and carried by the following vote
5-0; Yeas (5) – Liles, McCarty, Stovall, Mullins,
Grose; Nays (0) – None.
ATTEST:
Megan K. Lawless, Town Clerk
Meeting Adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
APPROVED:
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Town Clerk
Issue
Adding January 2, 2026, as a Town holiday.
Summary
January 2, 2026, falls during a period of statewide and national holiday observances. Granting this
date as a holiday will support operational continuity and employee wellness.
Attachments
Resolution
Recommendations
Consider a motion to adopt a Resolution to amend the Town Holiday Schedule to close Town
Offices on January 2, 2026.
Town Council
Agenda Summary
1
RESOLUTION NO.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2025, AT 6:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF
THE VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON,
VIRGINIA 24179.
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vinton recognizes the value of providing residents,
employees, and the community with designated holidays that support rest, observance, and the well-
being of the public; and
WHEREAS, January 2, 2026, falls during a period of statewide and national holiday observances,
and the Town Council finds that granting this date as a holiday will support operational continuity,
and employee wellness.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Vinton hereby
designates January 2, 2026, as an official Town Holiday; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all Town offices and non-essential municipal operations
shall be closed on this date, except those required for public safety or essential services; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption.
Adopted this ___ day of _______________, 2025.
This Resolution was adopted on motion made by Council Member ____________, seconded by
Council Member _________________, with the following votes recorded:
AYES:
NAYS:
APPROVED:
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
Megan K. Lawless, Town Clerk
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Police
Issue
New employee introductions
Summary
Chief Drumond will introduce two new police department employees.
Rachel Slate – Police Records Manager
Dustin Bray – Police Officer
Attachments
None
Recommendations
No Action Required
Town Council
Agenda Summary
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Planning and Zoning
Issue
Briefing on the 2025 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Hazard Mitigation Plan to be
adopted and incorporated as an amendment to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan.
Summary
The Hazard Mitigation Plan fulfills the Federal requirements for the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The
plan identifies hazards; estimates losses; and establishes community goals, objectives and mitigation
activities that are appropriate for the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region and the various organizations which
are represented in the plan. The plan was last updated and adopted in 2019. These plans must be updated
every five years. The 2019 plan expired in September 2024.
An adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan allows local governments to apply for disaster mitigation funds which
become available following a natural disaster. In September 2024 Hurricane Helene struck Virginia and
received a federal disaster declaration. Quick adoption of this plan update is important for those local
governments which are applying for funds associated with the Hurricane Helene disaster.
A member of the RVARC staff will conduct a presentation on this Plan during the December 2nd Council
meeting.
Attachment
Staff Report
Hazard Mitigation Plan Draft
Recommendations
No action needed
Town Council
Agenda Summary
Executive Summary 1
2025 Hazard Mitigation Plan Staff Report
and Executive Summary
The Hazard Mitigation Plan fulfills the Federal requirements for the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000. The plan identifies hazards; estimates losses; and establishes community goals,
objectives and mitigation activities that are appropriate for the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region
and the various organizations which are represented in the plan. The plan was last updated and
adopted in 2019. These plans must be updated every five years. The 2019 plan expired in
September 2024.
An adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan allows local governments to apply for disaster mitigation
funds which become available following a natural disaster. In September 2024 Hurricane Helene
struck Virginia and received a federal disaster declaration. Quick adoption of this plan update is
important for those local governments which are applying for funds associated with the
Hurricane Helene disaster.
This plan incorporates the following jurisdictions. All of these jurisdictions have been active
participants in the plan.
Botetourt County
Craig County
Roanoke County
City of Covington
City of Roanoke
City of Salem
Town of Buchanan
Town of Fincastle
Town of Vinton
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
Western Virginia Water Authority
The plan also covers the geographic area of the Towns of New Castle and Iron Gate. While New
Castle and Iron Gate did not meet the threshold of participation in this plan, their emergency
services efforts operate jointly with Craig County and Alleghany County respectively.
Required Action
This plan requires adoption through resolution. Resolution text is enclosed.
Executive Summary 2
Executive Summary
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan
This chapter provides a summary of the planning process and outlines opportunities for
improvement in future iterations of the plan. Planning efforts began in 2024 and were completed
in late 2025, with adoption expected in December 2025. One round of public input was held
which included a public online survey and direct stakeholder outreach.
The chapter also lays out the adoption and implementation process. Participating governments
agree to an annual update of project progress which will be facilitated by the Regional
Commission.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile
This chapter describes the planning region. Key factors included in the chapter are existing
infrastructure, topography, and economic factors as well as a definition of critical and vulnerable
facilities.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification
Hazards identified in this chapter include:
While many of these definitions are clear, some are not.
Extreme Temperature: This hazard includes extreme heat and extreme cold.
Geologic Hazards: This includes karst, which gives rise to sinkholes, and landslides.
Wind Event: This includes straight line winds and tornadoes.
Additionally, two hazards are not assessed in the risk assessment but are outlined in this
chapter. These are drought, which is addressed through state-mandated water supply plans;
and pandemic.
Historical events are surveyed in this chapter. High hazard potential dams are also inventoried
in this chapter.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment
This chapter contains the risk assessment model for the plan, which guides future
recommendations and priorities. Outcomes from the model are included in the table below.
More detail regarding each hazard and the logic for the rankings is included in the relevant
Executive Summary 3
subsections of the chapter. Flooding and Wind Events were the two highest ranked hazards
across the region.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment
This chapter contains individual sections for each participating local government and details of
their budgets, their staffing relevant to disaster mitigation and response, and their participation
in the National Flood Insurance Program. Mutual aid agreements and other resources are also
captured.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Goals and Strategies
This chapter outlines the goals and strategies for mitigation efforts in the region. In developing
mitigation strategies for the region, a wide range of activities were considered in order to
achieve the goals and to lessen the vulnerability of the area to the impact of natural hazards.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans
This chapter includes individual mitigation action plans for each participating jurisdiction. All
identified projects are dependent upon funding availability.
Appendices
The plan contains supporting documentation in multiple appendices. Supporting documentation
includes: outputs from public engagement efforts; flood modeling; critical and vulnerable
facilities lists; wildfire incidence reports and modeling; dam inundation mapping and dam safety
data; worksheets from steering committee members; and other documentation.
HAZARD
MITIGATION
PLAN
2025 UPDATE
blank]
i
Staff Contributors:
Amanda McGee, Director of Community Development
Jon Stanton, Transportation Planner II
Shira Goldman, Regional Planner I
Kevin Jenks, Regional Planner I
With special thanks to:
Cole Taggart, VDEM
Daniel Murray, Botetourt County
ii
Terms and Definitions
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
The codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the
departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
Community Rating System (CRS)
A voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain
management practices that exceed the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP).
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000)
This act requires state and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition
for federal grant assistance.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
A United States government agency that helps people before, during, and after disasters. FEMA's
mission is to improve the nation's ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from all hazards.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
Official map of a community on which FEMA has delineated the Special Flood Hazard Areas
SFHAs), the Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) and the risk premium zones applicable to the
community.
National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI)
A United States government agency that manages and archives environmental data. NCEI's data
includes information about the climate, oceans, coasts, and the Earth's surface.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
A United States government agency that studies and predicts changes in the weather, climate,
oceans, and coasts. A branch of the Department of Commerce.
National Weather Service (NWS)
A United States government agency that provides weather forecasts and warnings. The NWS is
part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is a branch of the
Department of Commerce.
Roanoke Valley – Alleghany Regional Commission (RVARC)
One of 21 Virginia Planning District Commissions established by the General Assembly to
promote regional cooperation between local governments. RVARC members include the counties
of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, and Franklin, the cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem, and
the towns of Clifton Forge, Vinton, and Rocky Mount.
iii
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1. THE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN ................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 OVERVIEW OF THE PLAN .............................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 PLANNING PROCESS ................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.3 ADOPTION OF THIS PLAN .............................................................................................................. 1-6
1.4 FUTURE UPDATES ....................................................................................................................... 1-7
1.5 IMPLEMENTATION OPPORTUNITIES .................................................................................................. 1-8
CHAPTER 2. THE REGIONAL PROFILE ............................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 THE PLANNING REGION ............................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL FACILITIES..................................................................................... 2-11
CHAPTER 3. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION .......................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 HAZARDS FOR ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 EARTHQUAKE ............................................................................................................................ 3-5
3.3 EXTREME TEMPERATURE ............................................................................................................. 3-11
3.4 FLOODING ............................................................................................................................. 3-15
3.5 HURRICANE AND TROPICAL STORM ............................................................................................... 3-39
3.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................ 3-42
3.7 WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................................... 3-45
3.8 WIND EVENT ........................................................................................................................... 3-46
3.9 WINTER STORM ....................................................................................................................... 3-51
3.10 HAZARDS NOT ASSESSED ........................................................................................................... 3-53
CHAPTER 4. RISK ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 DISASTER RANKINGS ................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 EARTHQUAKE ............................................................................................................................ 4-6
4.3 EXTREME TEMPERATURE ............................................................................................................. 4-11
4.4 FLOODING ............................................................................................................................. 4-16
4.5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................ 4-23
4.6 WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................................... 4-30
4.7 WIND EVENT ........................................................................................................................... 4-36
4.8 WINTER STORM ....................................................................................................................... 4-39
CHAPTER 5. CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 5-1
5.1 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 5-1
5.2 ALLEGHANY COUNTY .................................................................................................................. 5-3
5.3 CITY OF COVINGTON ................................................................................................................... 5-6
5.4 TOWN OF CLIFTON FORGE ............................................................................................................ 5-8
5.5 BOTETOURT COUNTY................................................................................................................. 5-10
5.6 TOWN OF BUCHANAN ............................................................................................................... 5-13
5.7 TOWN OF FINCASTLE ................................................................................................................. 5-14
5.8 TOWN OF TROUTVILLE ............................................................................................................... 5-15
5.9 CRAIG COUNTY ....................................................................................................................... 5-16
5.10 ROANOKE COUNTY ................................................................................................................... 5-18
5.11 CITY OF ROANOKE .................................................................................................................... 5-22
iv
5.12 CITY OF SALEM ........................................................................................................................ 5-29
5.13 TOWN OF VINTON .................................................................................................................... 5-32
5.14 ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION .................................................................... 5-36
5.15 ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY ...................................................................................... 5-40
5.16 WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY .......................................................................................... 5-41
CHAPTER 6. MITIGATION GOALS AND STRATEGIES ........................................................................ 6-1
6.1 IDENTIFIED GOALS ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 REGIONAL STRATEGIES ................................................................................................................ 6-2
6.3 ALL HAZARDS ........................................................................................................................... 6-2
6.4 EARTHQUAKE ............................................................................................................................ 6-4
6.5 EXTREME TEMPERATURE ............................................................................................................... 6-4
6.6 FLOODING ............................................................................................................................... 6-5
6.7 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .................................................................................................................. 6-7
6.8 WIND...................................................................................................................................... 6-7
6.9 WILDFIRE ................................................................................................................................. 6-8
6.10 WINTER STORM ......................................................................................................................... 6-8
CHAPTER 7. MITIGATION ACTION PLANS ....................................................................................... 7-1
7.1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION .................................................................................... 7-1
7.2 ALLEGHANY COUNTY .................................................................................................................. 7-2
7.3 CITY OF COVINGTON ................................................................................................................... 7-5
7.4 TOWN OF CLIFTON FORGE ............................................................................................................ 7-8
7.5 BOTETOURT COUNTY................................................................................................................. 7-11
7.6 TOWN OF BUCHANAN ............................................................................................................... 7-15
7.7 TOWN OF FINCASTLE ................................................................................................................. 7-17
7.8 TOWN OF TROUTVILLE ............................................................................................................... 7-19
7.9 CRAIG COUNTY ....................................................................................................................... 7-20
7.10 ROANOKE COUNTY ................................................................................................................... 7-23
7.11 CITY OF ROANOKE .................................................................................................................... 7-29
7.12 CITY OF SALEM ........................................................................................................................ 7-36
7.13 TOWN OF VINTON .................................................................................................................... 7-40
7.14 ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION .................................................................... 7-43
7.15 ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY ...................................................................................... 7-45
7.16 WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY .......................................................................................... 7-47
REFERENCES
APPENDIX LIST
v
Figures
Figure 1: Timeline of the Plan .................................................................................................. 1-2
Figure 2: Concern About Future Disaster Events .................................................................... 1-5
Figure 3: The Planning Region ................................................................................................ 2-1
Figure 4: River Basins and Flood Areas .................................................................................. 2-3
Figure 5: Regional Topography ............................................................................................... 2-3
Figure 6: NRI Social Vulnerability Rating ................................................................................. 2-5
Figure 7: Regional Transportation Facilities ..............................................................................12
Figure 8: Regional Transit Connections ....................................................................................12
Figure 9: Modified Mercalli Intensity Levels\ ............................................................................ 3-6
Figure 10: Virginia Seismic Zones, Virginia Department of Energy .......................................... 3-7
Figure 11: Community Intensity Map, New Castle Earthquake 2019 ....................................... 3-8
Figure 12: Community Intensity Map, Roanoke County Earthquake 2021 ............................... 3-9
Figure 13: Community Intensity Map, North Carolina Earthquake 2020 ................................ 3-10
Figure 14: WBGT vs Heat Index, Weather.gov ....................................................................... 3-11
Figure 15: WBGT and Safety ................................................................................................ 3-12
Figure 16: Extreme Cold Days by Year, Roanoke, VA ........................................................... 3-14
Figure 17: Extreme Heat Days by Year, Roanoke, VA ........................................................... 3-14
Figure 18: Dam Classifications, FEMA .................................................................................. 3-33
Figure 19: Karst Map, VDEQ ................................................................................................. 3-42
Figure 20: EF Ratings Definitions, Weather.gov .................................................................... 3-46
Figure 21: Tornado Paths, NOAA .......................................................................................... 3-49
Figure 22: NESIS Scale ........................................................................................................ 3-51
Figure 23: Water Supply Planning Areas, DEQ ..................................................................... 3-53
Figure 24: Earthquake Risk Mapping, USGS .......................................................................... 4-8
Figure 25: Urban Heat Island Effect, City of Roanoke ........................................................... 4-13
Figure 26: Landslide Susceptibility Model in the Region ........................................................ 4-26
Figure 27: USGS Sinkhole Hotspots, Accessed 2025 ........................................................... 4-27
Figure 28: Characteristic Fire Intensity Scale, VDOF ............................................................ 4-30
Figure 29: Total Mileage by Locality in 2024, VDOT .............................................................. 4-41
vi
Tables
Table 1: Steering Committee ................................................................................................... 1-3
Table 2: Average High and Low Temperatures ........................................................................ 2-4
Table 3: Population Projections by Locality, CEDS 2025 ......................................................... 2-6
Table 4: Population Distribution by Age, CEDS 2025 .............................................................. 2-6
Table 5: Median Household Income, American Community Survey ......................................... 2-6
Table 6: 50 Largest Regional Employers ................................................................................. 2-7
Table 7: Number of Licensed and Staffed Beds in Area Hospitals, 2025 ................................. 2-8
Table 8: Priority Project Categories, CEDS 2025 ..................................................................... 2-8
Table 9: Regional Sewer and Septic Needs, VDH .....................................................................14
Table 10: 2023 Tax Revenues from Travel, VTC .......................................................................15
Table 11: Hazard Events and Locations .................................................................................. 3-2
Table 12: FEMA Disaster Declarations since 2018 .................................................................. 3-4
Table 13: Flood Events per the NCEI Database, 2019-2024 ................................................. 3-18
Table 14: High Hazard Dams ................................................................................................ 3-36
Table 15: Infections, Hospitalizations, and Deaths due to COVID-19, 2020-2021 .................. 3-55
Table 16: All Hazards Ranking Table .......................................................................................... 4
Table 17: Expected Annual Loss and Exposure Values for Earthquake, NRI ........................... 4-6
Table 18: Annualized Frequency Values for Earthquakes, NRI ................................................ 4-7
Table 19: Homes Built Before 1970, ACS 5-Year Estimate 2023 ............................................. 4-9
Table 20: Hazard Ranking for Earthquake ............................................................................. 4-10
Table 21: Expected Annual Loss for Cold Wave, NRI ............................................................ 4-12
Table 22: Annualized Frequency of Cold Waves, NRI ........................................................... 4-14
Table 23: Social Vulnerability, NRI ......................................................................................... 4-14
Table 24: Hazard Ranking for Extreme Temperature ............................................................. 4-15
Table 25: Estimated Annual Loss for Flooding, NRI ............................................................... 4-17
Table 26: WVWA Facilities in the Floodplain .......................................................................... 4-18
Table 27: Annualized Frequency for Flooding, NRI ................................................................ 4-18
Table 28: Repetitive Loss Structures by Locality, FEMA ........................................................ 4-20
Table 29: Expected Annual Loss, NRI ................................................................................... 4-24
Table 30: Events on Record 2010-2021, NRI ........................................................................ 4-25
Table 31: Hazard Ranking for Geologic Hazards ................................................................... 4-29
Table 32: Characteristic Fire Intensity, VDOF ........................................................................ 4-31
Table 33: Expected Annual Loss for Wildfire, National Risk Index ......................................... 4-32
Table 34: Annualized Frequency Value for Wildfire, NRI ........................................................ 4-33
Table 35: Housing Unit Risk, Virginia Department of Forestry ............................................... 4-34
Table 36: Hazard Ranking Table for Wildfire .......................................................................... 4-35
Table 37: Expected Annual Loss for Wind Events, NRI ......................................................... 4-36
Table 38: Annualized Frequency Value for Wind Events, NRI ................................................ 4-37
Table 39: Hazard Ranking for Wind Events ........................................................................... 4-38
Table 40: Costs of a Winter Weather Event ........................................................................... 4-39
Table 41: Hazard Ranking for Winter Storm .......................................................................... 4-42
Table 42: Comparison of Revenue Across RVARC Member Local Governments .................... 5-2
Table 43: Alleghany County Budget 2023, Commonwealth of Virginia ..................................... 5-3
Table 44: City of Covington Budget 2024 ................................................................................ 5-6
vii
Table 45: Adopted Budget Town of Clifton Forge, 2025 ........................................................... 5-8
Table 46: Botetourt County Budget, 2024 .............................................................................. 5-10
Table 47: Craig County Budget 2024 ..................................................................................... 5-16
Table 48: Roanoke County Revenues, 2024 ......................................................................... 5-18
Table 49: City of Roanoke Revenues 2023 ........................................................................... 5-22
Table 50: City of Salem Revenues 2024................................................................................ 5-29
Table 51: RVARC Budget FY2026 ......................................................................................... 5-37
viii
blank]
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-1
Chapter 1. The Hazard Mitigation Plan
1.1 Overview of the Plan
The purpose of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Hazard Mitigation Plan is to
fulfill the Federal requirements for the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The plan identifies hazards;
estimates losses; and establishes community goals, objectives and mitigation activities that are
appropriate for the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region and the various organizations which are
represented in this document.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requires that local governments, as a condition
of receiving federal disaster mitigation funds, have a mitigation plan that: describes the process
for identifying hazards, risks and vulnerabilities; identifies and prioritizes mitigation actions;
encourages the development of local mitigation; and provides technical support for those efforts.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines pre-disaster mitigation as any
sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard
event. Mitigation, also known as prevention, encourages long-term reduction of hazard
vulnerability. Mitigation should be cost-effective, appropriate for the community, and
environmentally sound. Mitigation activities can protect critical and vulnerable community
facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize community disruption resulting from natural
disasters. The goal of mitigation is to save lives and reduce property damage, which in turn can
reduce the cost and impact of disasters across communities.
This plan incorporates the following jurisdictions. All of these jurisdictions have been active
participants in the plan.
Alleghany County
Botetourt County
Craig County
Roanoke County
City of Covington
City of Roanoke
City of Salem
Town of Buchanan
Town of Clifton Forge
Town of Fincastle
Town of Vinton
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
Western Virginia Water Authority
The plan also covers the geographic area of the Towns of New Castle and Iron Gate. While New
Castle and Iron Gate did not meet the threshold of participation in this plan, their emergency
services efforts operate jointly with Craig County and Alleghany County respectively.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-2
1.2 Planning Process
The Steering Committee for this effort was made up of jurisdiction representatives and state and
federal agency representatives. However, consultation with numerous community stakeholders
occurred during planning. Public input was also a key element of the plan. The full details of
steering committee meetings, stakeholder engagement, and broader public input efforts are
available in Appendix A: Public Engagement and Appendix B: Survey Results.
Figure 1: Timeline of the Plan
Update Priorities
Proposed timelines for this process originally began in August 2023. However, numerous staffing
challenges delayed the start of work on this effort until August 2024 – one month before the
expiration of the 2019 plan. Additionally, new and more rigorous federal guidelines for document
development meant that large sections of this plan were developed from scratch. Additional
changes in local and regional staffing continued throughout the planning process.
Additionally, in September 2024, at the same time that the first stakeholder meeting was being
convened, Hurricane Helene struck Southwest Virginia. While most of the localities represented
by this plan sustained minimal damage, regional stakeholders were heavily involved in disaster
response efforts.
As a result of all of these challenges, the primary focus of this update is in right-sizing a new
regional vision of pre-disaster hazard mitigation and rebuilding programs and relationships
between jurisdictions and stakeholders.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-3
Table 1: Steering Committee
Locality Representatives City of Roanoke Dwayne D'Ardenne
Locality Representative Ian Shaw
Alleghany County Jonathan Fitch Laura Schmidt
Melissa Munsey Leigh Anne Weitzenfeld
City of Covington Allen Dressler Mckenzie Brocker
Christopher Smith Ross Campbell
Town of Clifton Forge Chuck Unroe Trevor Shannon
Maria Saxton City of Salem Jeff Ceaser
Town of Iron Gate Kawhana Persinger Mary Ellen H Wines
Botetourt County Daniel Murray Robert Paxton
Jason Ferguson Sam Driscoll
Nicole Pendleton William L. Simpson, Jr
Matt Lewis Town of Vinton Anita McMillan
Nick Baker Nathan McClung
Town of Buchanan Jon Elistad
Angela Lawrence Special Districts
Town of Fincastle Melanie Young McFadyen Organization Representative
Town of Troutville Michael Mansfield Western Virginia Water Authority Roger Blankenship
Craig County Dan Collins Tesha Okioga
Darryl Humphreys Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Jon Lanford
Roanoke County Tarek Moneir
David Henderson State/Federal Agency Representatives
Cindy Linkenhoker Agency Representative
Butch Workman NOAA Phil Hysell
Dustin Campbell Nicholas Fillo
Nickie Mills VDOF Dennis McCarthy
Philip Thompson Rachel Kim
Ross Hammes
VDEM
Cole Taggart
Jonathan T. Simmons
Mike Guzo
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-4
Steering Committee
Between September 2024 and September 2025, the steering committee guided development of
the Hazard Mitigation Plan through a series of meetings focused on timeline management, plan
content, and stakeholder engagement. The process began with a kickoff meeting to discuss the
plan framework, timeline, and outreach strategy. Following Hurricane Helene, FEMA and VDEM
emphasized the urgency of applying for disaster mitigation funding. This prompted the committee
to prioritize eligibility requirements and expand participation requirements. Meetings which
occurred early in 2025 focused on public engagement and outreach while spring sessions
reviewed stakeholder input, survey results, and drafts of chapters. By May 2025, the committee
began to finalize chapter updates, preparing the plan for locality review and submission to VDEM
and FEMA ahead of the federal funding deadline in early December. Due to staffing constraints,
VDEM regional staff played a critical role in finalizing the plan, conducting final meetings with
locality staff which are documented later in this section. The final steering committee meeting was
held in September.
Stakeholder Engagement
In order to maximize stakeholder engagement, staff worked with various stakeholder groups
already convening in the region before engaging in some individual outreach. Membership of
these groups is included in Appendix A.
Groups Consulted
Southwest Virginia Public Works Academy
Roanoke Valley Collective Response Stakeholder Group
Roanoke Foodshed Network
Roanoke Regional Housing Network
Roanoke Valley Transportation Technical Committee
Individual Organizations
Alleghany Highlands Chamber of Commerce and Tourism
CHIP of Roanoke Valley
Roanoke Valley Rescue Mission
Many additional stakeholders could have been consulted in this planning process. In future
updates to the plan, the following stakeholders are recommended for outreach. Some of these
stakeholders may be interested in participating as special districts.
Area hospitals, especially Roanoke Memorial Hospital
Alleghany Highlands Economic Development Corporation
Alleghany Highlands Public Schools
Craig-Botetourt Electric Co-op
Local Area Office on Aging
RVARC Committee on Economic Development Strategies
Roanoke Regional Airport
Soil and Water Conservation Districts
Valley Metro
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-5
Public Input
Staff worked with the Steering Committee to design an electronic survey that was open from
February through March of 2025. Full details of survey responses are available in Appendix B.
The survey received 251 responses, a marked improvement from the 2019 plan. Ninety-five
percent of respondents identified as White. Only about 1.5 percent of respondents identified as
Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish in origin. Response by household income was more varied, about
13 percent of households reporting an income of less than $50,000. Responses were spread
across zip codes, but the vast majority of responses were seen in the City of Salem (zip code
24153) with 81 responses. Only 5 respondents stated they relied on public transit. Most of the
respondents owned their own home, with about 13 percent renting their home.
Flood was the greatest disaster of concern, followed by wind. This echoes results of the
vulnerability assessment. Earthquake, Karst and Landslide (the latter two collectively assessed)
were marked as of least concern.
Generally, respondents expressed increased concerns about natural disasters in the region
compared to five years ago.
Figure 2: Concern About Future Disaster Events
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-6
1.3 Adoption of this Plan
The Virginia Department of Emergency Management (VDEM) was an active participant in
development of this plan and a key funding partner. VDEM representatives have reviewed this
plan and provided input on compliance with the 2025 Local Mitigation Policy Guide in the hopes
of streamlining the federal approval process.
The Policy Guide Checklist with relevant page numbers for each element is included in Appendix
I.
The plan was submitted for federal approval on October 10, 2025. Approval documentation is
included in Appendix J.
Resolutions by participating jurisdictions are included in Appendix J.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-7
1.4 Future Updates
This plan will be reviewed every year for project progress and opportunities for implementation.
Immediate opportunities for implementation are described in Section 1.5.
Annual review will be initiated by Regional Commission staff. Project updates will be provided
promptly by representatives from the respective jurisdictions incorporated into this plan.
The annual review will result in a project progress document which will be posted on a designated
Regional Commission public engagement site and shared with the participating jurisdictions and
the Regional Commission board. Public engagement around specific projects that reach
implementation stage will be provided by request of the jurisdiction that is primary on the project.
Future five-year updates offer opportunities for planning process improvements. While many of
the complications in the planning process for this update were due to staffing issues experienced
at the Regional Commission, some other areas for improvement in the next plan update include:
Expanding outreach to unreached stakeholders identified in this planning process and
considering the creation of a formal stakeholder committee to inform the plan.
Incorporating new special districts where appropriate and where interest exists.
Increasing public input around project development and offering more consistent outreach
throughout the planning process, including at least two community meetings.
Targeting broader public engagement efforts to underrepresented populations and census
tracts in innovative ways, including direct mailers and pop-ups in community spaces.
Streamlining the project update process which can be facilitated by annual updates and
reviews of this document.
In addition, some potential improvements to the vulnerability assessment have been included as
projects in Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-8
1.5 Implementation Opportunities
Many of the localities within the planning region may have capacity issues which challenge their
ability to implement this plan, as discussed in Chapter 5. One way to address these challenges
is to proactively identify projects which could benefit from technical assistance through the
Regional Commission.
The Regional Commission creates an annual budget and workprogram each year to identify
projects of regional significance or which are high priority for local technical assistance. Projects
identified in this plan as either of regional significance or as critical to a local government’s ability
to address hazards should be considered on an annual basis for incorporation into that document.
In the first round of project updates, the Regional Commission will work with member localities to
identify candidates for the FY2028 workprogram. This list will be updated annually.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile 2-1
Chapter 2. The Regional Profile
2.1 The Planning Region
The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission service area lies in western Virginia and
includes the counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke; the cities of
Covington, Roanoke and Salem; and the towns of Boones Mill, Buchanan, Clifton Forge,
Fincastle, Iron Gate, New Castle, Rocky Mount, Troutville, and Vinton. The localities of Franklin
County, Boones Mill and Rocky Mount, are also served by West Piedmont Planning District
Commission, and are covered by that district’s plan. All other localities within the Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany service area will be covered by this document. These are the same localities that
participated in the 2006 and 2013 and 2019 iterations of this plan.
Communities within the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region may have vastly different capacities
and planning ability, which is reflected in this plan. Unincorporated areas within broader
jurisdictions may be referenced where appropriate.
Figure 3: The Planning Region
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile 2-2
Location and Topography
The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region (the region) is on the eastern border of the Appalachian
Plateau and the western slope of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Two major river basins characterize
the region. The James River, flowing east through Botetourt County, ultimately reaches the
Chesapeake Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. The Roanoke River flows through the district in a
southeasterly direction to North Carolina before reaching the Atlantic. Both river basins serve as
development corridors. Although the planning area includes the Roanoke metropolitan area,
much of the region is rural. Approximately 212,039 acres of federal land lies within the National
Forest and Blue Ridge Parkway system.
The predominant physical characteristic of the region is the mountainous terrain. Forty-eight
percent of the land area has slopes of 25 percent or greater. Within the region, mountain ridges
run southwest to northeast. There are large concentrations of steep land in northern Botetourt
County and Alleghany County. A broken ring of steep lands surrounds the Roanoke metropolitan
area. Past development has been influenced greatly by topographic characteristics. The higher
elevations have remained in open or forest use while the more moderate foothills and river valleys
have been developed.
Floodplains impose considerable restraints on land development activities. In the past, heavy
flooding has caused considerable property damage to existing development in floodplains. The
region has several major floodplain areas along the Roanoke, James and Jackson Rivers, and
the Peters, Mason, Carvin, Tinker, Glade, Mud Lick and Smith Creeks.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile 2-3
Figure 5: Regional TopographyMap2-2: River Basins and Flood AreasFigure4: River Basins and Flood Areas
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-4
Climate
The region is located in agricultural zones 7a and 7b and is characterized by hot, wet summers,
cold winters with mild to moderate precipitation, and fluctuating shoulder seasons. Summer high
temperatures average around the mid-80s across the region, with higher temperatures in the
urbanized areas of the Roanoke Valley. Winter low temperatures average in the 40s in the coldest
months of December and January, with colder temperatures felt in the higher elevations of the
Alleghany Highlands. The area receives significant annual rainfall, with annual averages in the
Roanoke Valley typically around 40 inches per year according to National Weather Service
records.
Table 2: Average High and Low Temperatures
Daily average high and low temperatures (°F)
High
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Roanoke 46 50 59 69 76 83 86 85 78 68 58 49
Covington 43 46 56 66 74 80 84 82 76 66 56 46
Low
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Roanoke 30 32 40 48 56 64 68 67 60 49 40 34
Covington 27 29 37 46 54 62 66 65 58 47 38 31
Data from Weatherspark.com, accessed 5/15/25.
Population
In 2023, the overall population of the region was around 280,000 people, with the majority of
residents located in the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County. Key demographic factors to assess
in a community’s resilience to hazards include age and income. These factors can indicate
vulnerability to shocks – for example, a family with children may have a harder time relocating or
require more services at a public shelter; the elderly often have special medical needs; and
households with low income can face inhibited options post-disaster and require more public
assistance. Tables 3 through 5 show basic population data for the region.
Much of the population in Alleghany County, Botetourt County, and the Town of Clifton Forge is
aging, with the median age being 48 years or older. This is ten years older than the median age
across the Commonwealth. As this trend progresses over the lifetime of this planning document,
it will likely have impacts on how hazard mitigation and response are carried out in these localities.
There is a projected increase in population across the region in the next 25 years. However, some
localities, including Alleghany and Craig Counties, are projected to see a fall in population, likely
due to aging and internal migration.
The National Risk Index displays information about social vulnerability based off the CDC Social
Vulnerability Index. Highest levels of social vulnerability occur in the Cities of Roanoke and
Covington.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-5
Figure 6: NRI Social Vulnerability Rating
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-6
Table 3: Population Projections by Locality, CEDS 2025
Locality 2023 2030 2040 2050
Alleghany County* 11,479 13,993 12,805 11,809
Botetourt County 33,875 33,556 34,588 36,138
Craig County 4,881 4,528 4,363 4,264
Roanoke County* 89,755 100,027 104,046 109,621
City of Covington 5,671 5,434 5,075 4,792
City of Roanoke 98,677 101,514 102,529 105,079
City of Salem 25,477 25,519 25,438 25,737
Town of Clifton Forge 3,483 - - -
Town of Vinton 8,038 - - -
RVARC Region 280,336 284,571 288,844 297,440
Virginia 8,657,499 9,129,002 9,759,371 10,535,810
Excludes Town of Clifton Forge. Excludes Town of Vinton population.
Table 4: Population Distribution by Age, CEDS 2025
Locality Median
Age
Under
5
5 to
19
20 to
34
35 to
54
55 to
64
65 and
over
Alleghany
County* 48.1 603 2,268 2,420 3,211 2,338 3,801
Botetourt County 48.1 1,437 5,648 4,960 8,306 5,519 8,005
Craig County 46.1 359 999 551 1,112 921 939
Roanoke County 43.7 3,891 15,682 14,649 22,772 12,188 19,573
Covington City 41.5 332 1,238 927 1,242 829 1,103
Roanoke City 38.0 6,353 17,891 20,304 24,421 12,481 17,227
Salem City 40.3 1,039 4,958 5,093 6,047 3,375 4,965
Town of Clifton
Forge 53.5 231 607 589 640 524 892
Town of Vinton 39.7 431 11,478 1,570 1,833 1,165 1,531
Virginia 38.8 495,281 1,638,6
40
1,737,4
62
2,255,5
22
1,120,4
34 1,410,160
Table 5: Median Household Income, American Community Survey
Locality Median Household Income
Alleghany County $ 52,546.00
Botetourt County $ 77,680.00
Craig County $ 66,286.00
Covington City $ 45,737.00
Roanoke City $ 51,523.00
Roanoke County $ 80,872.00
Salem City $ 68,402.00
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-7
Development Trends
The region contains a significant portion of the Roanoke, Virginia Metropolitan Statistical Area,
which includes the counties of Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Franklin, the Cities of Roanoke and
Salem. This is the fourth largest MSA in Virginia and the largest in the western half of the state.
Most of the region’s largest employers are in the industries of government, healthcare, education,
banking and insurance, and retail.
Table 6: 50 Largest Regional Employers
1. Roanoke Memorial Community Hospital 26. City of Salem School Board
2. HCA Virginia Health System 27. Carter Machinery Company
3. Roanoke County School Board 28. Marvin Windows
4. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 29. Yokohama Tire Corp.
5. Wal Mart 30. Roanoke College
6. Carilion Services 31. YMCA
7. City of Roanoke 32. Lake Region Medical
8. Roanoke City School Board 33. County of Franklin
9. Kroger 34. VDOT
10. Wells Fargo Bank NA 35. Alleghany Highlands Public Schools
11. County of Roanoke 36. Carilion Healthcare
12. Cornerstone Building Brands Service 37. Dynax America Corporation
13. U.P.S. 38. Adams Construction Company
14. Franklin County School Board 39. Davis H. Elliot Company, Inc.
15. Alliance Group Rock Tenn 40. Steel Dynamics Roanoke Bar Div
16. Altec Industries Inc 41. Coca Cola Bottling Company
17. Friendship Manor 42. Bimbo Bakeries USA INC
18. Postal Service 43. Paychecks Plus
19. Advance Auto Parts 44. Virginia Western Community College
20. Botetourt County School Board 45. Branch Highways
21. Virginia Transformer Corporation 46. County of Botetourt
22. Food Lion 47. Franklin Memorial Hospital
23. Lowes' Home Centers, Inc. 48. US Foodservice
24. Elbit Systems of America - Night Vision 49. Metalsa Roanoke
25. City of Salem 50. Mcdonald’s
Source: Virginia Employment Commission, Economic Information & Analytics, Quarterly Census of Employment and
Wages (QCEW), 3rd Quarter (July, August, September) 2024. Note: Data includes all localities within Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission service area.
Of particular interest to this planning effort is the importance of healthcare to the regional
economy. Carilion Medical Center (also known as Roanoke Memorial Hospital) is one of only six
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-8
Level I Trauma Centers in the Commonwealth. It is also one of only three Level I Pediatric Trauma
Centers. Disruptions to service at Roanoke Memorial Hospital can have far-reaching effects
across the Southwest Virginia region. Nearby LewisGale Medical Center in Salem is a Level II
Trauma Center. Both facilities may provide critical services in disaster events to communities
outside of the Roanoke Valley – Alleghany Region. Table 7 shows staffed and licensed beds for
area hospitals, which can be used to assess capacity in disaster events. Nearby hospitals outside
of the service area include Carilion New River Valley Medical Center, LewisGale Montgomery,
Carilion Franklin Memorial, and Carilion Rockbridge Community, and, further afield, Centra
General Hospital and UVA Medical Center.
Table 7: Number of Licensed and Staffed Beds in Area Hospitals, 2025
Hospital Number of Staffed Beds Number of Licensed Beds
Carilion Medical Center 694 752
LewisGale Salem 321 506
LewisGale Alleghany 110 205
Totals 1,125 1,463
The RVARC produces a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy document every five
years which should be referenced to better understand the economic picture of the region. Key
project areas from the 2025 CEDS are included in Table 8. A full list of projects can be found in
the CEDS document.
Table 8: Priority Project Categories, CEDS 2025
Priority Project Categories
1. Develop regional broadband infrastructure and increased connectivity.
2. Encourage and develop advanced manufacturing facilities
3. Focus for workforce development programs to meet needs in target industry
sectors.
4. Focus on transportation infrastructure: Roanoke-Blacksburg Regional Airport,
Amtrak, highways, and commuting
5. Continue success in outdoor tourism with regional and local greenway systems,
Explore Park
6. Support and encourage industrial site development and upgrades.
7. Develop a wider range of homeownership and rental housing opportunities.
8. Promote and encourage attraction of biotech and life sciences clusters
9. Support local agriculture, growers, and producers.
10. Perform a gap analysis to develop regional quality of life amenities.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-9
Local governments were asked to provide building permit data to help clarify development
patterns in the region. The following overview reflects building trends including new construction,
demolitions, and improved parcels from 2019 to September 2025.
Internal tracking systems vary widely among jurisdictions, and in some cases, data are incomplete
or inconsistent across time periods. Some localities do not distinguish between types of structures
when measuring improvements (e.g. homes vs. mobile home hookups vs. storage units). Others
provided only parcel data while some reported only structures built before a certain time, current
occupied housing units, or buildings which receive refuse collection. Some localities were not able
to provide this data. As a result, the dataset may not capture the full extent of building activity and
development across years or jurisdictions.
Alleghany County
o 7,123 buildings recorded in the 2019 refuse collection file; 6,439 in the 2025 refuse
collection file.
o 65 demolitions recorded in this period.
Clifton Forge
o There has been very little growth since 1990.
o Residential Historic Overlay District with 730 contributing structures; Commercial
Historic Overlay District with 77 contributing structures.
o Currently 13 churches, 109 commercial buildings, and 140 vacant buildings.
Craig County
o 232 building permits from 2019-2025 (over 256 sq ft).
o 34 units were demolished in this period.
Roanoke County
o 67,425 buildings before 2019.
o 72,832 buildings in 2025.
o 203 demolitions recorded in this period.
City of Roanoke
o 1,018 building permits issued for new residential and commercial structures
including accessory structures and 82 demolitions) since January 1, 2020.
City of Salem
o 10,582 parcels (9,565 improved) in 2019.
o 10,650 parcels (9,690 improved) in 2025.
o 20 demolitions recorded in this period.
Town of Vinton
o Steady decline in building permits since 2008.
o As of 2022, there were 3,686 occupied housing units.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-10
Historic and Cultural Resources
Virginia has a deep cultural history, and this portion of Virginia is no exception. The service area
is located within Southwest Virginia and shares cultural ties to the wider Appalachian region. For
many communities, historic and cultural resources are a catalyst for economic development and
source of pride for residents. Historic properties can be located throughout a locality and the
number of structures varies widely. The potentially devastating effects that flooding and other
disasters can have on historic properties are not always considered in mitigation planning. More
information about specific considerations of hazard mitigation on historic properties is included in
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment.
Local governments should work with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, VDEM, and
local preservation groups to identify historic buildings and sites in need of hazard mitigation.
These efforts should follow the guidance in Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource
Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning (FEMA 386-6).
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-11
2.2 Infrastructure and Critical Facilities
Infrastructure
Several infrastructure elements contribute to a robust regional socioeconomic space. These
elements affect how people get around, how they meet basic needs, and how they access
employment.
Transportation
Interstate 64 bisects Alleghany County in an east-west direction while passing through the City of
Covington and Town of Clifton Forge. Interstate 81 crosses Botetourt and Roanoke counties in a
northeast-southwest direction and includes an urban connector I-581 that links I-81 to the central
business district of the City of Roanoke. Other arterial routes in the area include US 11 in Botetourt
and Roanoke counties; US 60 in Alleghany County; US 220 passing through Alleghany, Botetourt,
and Roanoke counties; US 221 and 460 in Roanoke County; and State Primary Route 311 in
Alleghany and Craig counties.
Air service is available at the Roanoke Regional Airport that provides nonstop service from
Roanoke, Virginia to nine major cities. Rail service for freight is provided by the Buckingham
Branch Railroad, CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern Railway. Passenger train service is
available from Amtrak at stations in the Town of Clifton Forge and City of Roanoke, and an
additional passenger rail station is planned in Christiansburg, with rights-of-way managed by the
Virginia Passenger Rail Authority. There are also several fixed-route bus lines in the region.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 12
Figure 7: Regional Transportation Facilities Figure 8: Regional Transit Connections
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 13
Housing
The region faces a housing shortage as the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Housing Market
Study Analysis (2021). The biggest challenges to the regional housing market are identified as
follows:
The Region's population has been slowly but consistently growing over the last 50 years,
with the percentage of the elderly population increasing.
One, two, and three-person households comprise the largest share of households in the
Region, but over the last five years, more growth has occurred in larger households of four
or more people.
The number of vacant units has been increasing in the Region. This, in part, has been
driven by the seasonal home market, which accounts for 30% of all vacant units.
Nearly 82% of housing units in the Region were constructed before 1980, leaving the
Region with a much older housing stock than what is found in many other parts of the
Commonwealth.
Over the last five years, the median gross rent in the Region increased by 14%. The
average rent for a single-family home is around $1,000 per month, while rent in multifamily
buildings averaged $1,200 per month.
There are significant differences in the percentage of renter of owner households
classified as cost burdened across the Region. Approximately 20% of owner households
are experiencing some level of cost burden compared to 41% of renters. It is typical to see
a broad difference between these two groups, but it also speaks to the need for affordably
priced housing for renter households.
The number of renter households that qualify for affordable rental housing at the 30% of
AMI level exceeds the number of units available at that price point. There is a projected
deficit of 5,324 units, meaning many extremely low-income households are having to
spend more than is recommended on housing costs. This further exacerbates housing
affordability and cost burden challenges.
The CEDS offers a more updated overview of housing statistics, including annual home sales and
estimated vacancy rates.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 14
Utilities
The region contains three major electricity providers, Appalachian Power, Dominion Power, and
Craig-Botetourt Electric Co-op. The City of Salem also operates a substation. Roanoke Gas and
Columbia Gas are other major energy service providers in the region. This form of infrastructure
relies on long, linear facilities often bracketed by substations. The location of these facilities can
impact development in the region. Major energy production projects such as large-scale wind and
solar are a new type of development that continues to expand in the area. Mountain Valley
Pipeline is another key infrastructure project which has provided additional natural gas service to
the region.
Disruptions to energy can have disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations. Energy
service provision is a key first step in post-disaster response, and future involvement of these
stakeholders in hazard mitigation plans is recommended.
Clean water and sanitation are also key concerns following a disaster event. While regional water
supply planning is mandated by the state, a high level overview of drought as a hazard is included
in Chapter 3: Hazard Identification. Key players in the provision of water and sanitation include
the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), which provides water and sewer services to much
of the service area, including the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, Botetourt County, the Town
of Fincastle, and the Town of Vinton. Additionally, the Craig-New Castle PSA, which provides
water and sewer services to Craig County and the Town of New Castle, has recently entered into
an administration agreement with WVWA. WVWA is a special district included in this plan.
Additional water and sewer provision is provided by Alleghany County, the Cities of Covington
and Salem, and the Towns of Buchanan, Clifton Forge, Iron Gate, and Troutville. Small private
service providers also exist in the region.
In December of 2023 the Virginia Department of Health published a report on infrastructure needs
which focuses on sewer and on-site facilities such as septic. This report estimates that $288
million of investment are needed to maintain or improve current systems across the RVARC
service area. Many sewage processing facilities are located near rivers and streams. Septic
systems are also vulnerable to flooding, which can have downstream impacts on water quality
and cause ripple effects for the community. These cost estimates are valuable data points in
posing future projects and solutions for the region, including hazard mitigation projects.
Table 9: Regional Sewer and Septic Needs, VDH
Locality Community Needs Onsite Needs Total Needs
Alleghany $ 9,344,076.00 $ 18,631,769.00 $ 27,975,845.00
Botetourt $ 6,857,960.00 $ 44,805,866.00 $ 51,663,826.00
Covington $ 5,605,860.00 $ 207,632.00 $ 5,813,492.00
Craig $ - $ 6,752,172.00 $ 6,752,172.00
Roanoke County $ - $ 168,614,006.00 $ 168,614,006.00
Roanoke City $ - $ 9,335,610.00 $ 9,335,610.00
Salem $ 17,593,337.00 $ 569,056.00 $ 18,162,393.00
Total $ 39,401,233.00 $ 248,916,111.00 $ 288,317,344.00
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 15
Outdoor Recreation Facilities
Outdoor recreation is a key part of the regional economy with more than $42 million in local tax
revenue coming from visitors to the region. Greenways and trails are often located in areas
particularly vulnerable to disaster events, such as on steep slopes or in floodplains. The
Appalachian Trail is a key draw to the region, but other facilities of note include Carvins Cove, the
Explore Park, the Roanoke Valley greenway network, the Jackson River Trail, Douthat State Park,
the Blue Ridge Parkway, and the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
Table 10: 2023 Tax Revenues from Travel, VTC
Locality 2023 Tax Revenue
Alleghany $ 1,236,865.00
Botetourt $ 3,104,204.00
Covington $ 719,478.00
Craig $ 145,191.00
Roanoke $ 6,785,403.00
Roanoke City $ 24,463,510.00
Salem $ 5,746,444.00
While much of the public lands in the area are managed by federal and state partners, local
governments maintain numerous parks and trails in the region, including the Explore Park,
Carvins Cove, and the greenway network. Managing these facilities is a significant part of local
budgets, and even relatively mild storm events can have a disproportionate impact on staff time
and materials costs. In some cases, greenway and park networks serve as transportation
infrastructure for those who use alternative transportation to commute.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 16
Critical and Vulnerable Facilities
Critical Facilities are those that provide services to the public during an emergency. Examples
of this include Public Safety structures, Public Assembly Sites & Shelters, Medical Structures,
Utility Structures, and Transportation Structures.
Vulnerable Facilities are those that will require special attention during an emergency. Examples
of this include Large Scale Housing Complexes of 50 or more total units or those with elderly or
sick residents, Child / Day Care Facilities, Manufacturing Sites / Warehouses, and Tier 2 Facilities.
These definitions collectively fulfill the requirement for critical facilities listings for pre -disaster
hazard mitigation planning and the community rating system program.
A full listing of Critical and Vulnerable Facilities identified in this plan is included in Appendix G.
High hazard dams are also included in this plan and references to these facilities are located in
Chapter 3, Section 3.4; Chapter 4, Section 4.3; and Appendix H.
Critical Facilities Vulnerable Facilities
Public Safety: Fire & Rescue, Law
Enforcement, etc.
Public Assembly & Shelters: Schools,
Government Buildings, Community
Centers, etc.
Medical Structures: Hospitals, Clinics,
Pharmacies etc.
Utility Structures: Pumps, Wells, Water
Treatment, Power Generation, etc.
Transportation Structures: Airports,
Transit Hubs, Evacuations Routes,
etc.
Large-Scale Housing Complexes (50
or more total units), Nursing & Assisted
Living Homes, Recovery Care, etc.
Child / Day Care Facilities
Manufacturing Sites / Warehouses:
Potential for dangerous Materials
Tier 2 Facilities
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-1
Chapter 3. Hazard Identification
3.1 Hazards for Assessment
The region is subject to a variety of hazard events, many of which will be assessed in this
document. The following kinds of hazard events have been documented through the NCEI
database maintained by NOAA.
Debris Flow
Drought
Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Flash Flood
Flood
Hail
Heavy Rain
Heavy Snow
High Wind
Lightning
Strong Wind
Thunderstorm Wind
Tornado
Winter Storm
Winter Weather
The locations and number of events for each of these hazard events is visible in Table 1: Hazard
Events and Locations.
The Steering Committee identified several hazards for assessment in the plan based off of this
data, federal disaster declarations included in Table 2, and historic hazard assessments.
Extreme Temperature
Flooding
Hurricane and Tropical Storm
Wind Event
Winter Storm
Additional hazards which will be assessed will include:
Earthquake
Karst
Landslide
Wildfire
Hazards not assessed in this document include drought and pandemics. High hazard potential
dams are assessed under flooding unless otherwise noted, with supplementary materials
contained in Appendix H.
The 2019 Plan details all historic disaster declarations and disaster events by hazard. This
document will only provide details around disaster events which have occurred since the data
collected in the 2019 Plan, or historic events which can provide key learning for hazard mitigation.
A comprehensive record of all events since data collection began is not the aim of this chapter.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-2
Table 11: Hazard Events and Locations
Event Types
Number of
Events Event Types
Number of
Events
Debris Flow 1 Heavy Snow 2
ROANOKE CITY 1
BOTETOURT
ZONE) 1
Drought 11
ROANOKE
ZONE) 1
ALLEGHANY (ZONE) 3 High Wind 33
BOTETOURT (ZONE) 3
ALLEGHANY
ZONE) 5
CRAIG (ZONE) 3
BOTETOURT
ZONE) 5
ROANOKE (ZONE) 2 CRAIG (ZONE) 3
Extreme Cold/Wind
Chill 3
ROANOKE
ZONE) 20
BOTETOURT (ZONE) 1 Lightning 4
CRAIG (ZONE) 1 ALLEGHANY CO. 1
ROANOKE (ZONE) 1 BOTETOURT CO. 1
Flash Flood 21 ROANOKE CITY 1
ALLEGHANY CO. 2
COVINGTON
CITY 1
BOTETOURT CO. 7 Strong Wind 6
CRAIG CO. 1
BOTETOURT
ZONE) 2
ROANOKE CO. 4 CRAIG (ZONE) 1
ROANOKE CITY 6
ROANOKE
ZONE) 3
COVINGTON CITY 1
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-3
Event Types
Number of
Events Event Types
Number of
Events
Flood 37
Thunderstorm
Wind 168
ALLEGHANY CO. 2 ALLEGHANY CO. 21
BOTETOURT CO. 9 BOTETOURT CO. 54
CRAIG CO. 2 CRAIG CO. 15
ROANOKE CO. 11 ROANOKE CO. 71
ROANOKE CITY 10 ROANOKE CITY 1
SALEM CITY 3 SALEM CITY 4
Hail 27
COVINGTON
CITY 2
ALLEGHANY CO. 4 Tornado 2
BOTETOURT CO. 7 BOTETOURT CO. 1
CRAIG CO. 1 SALEM CITY 1
ROANOKE CO. 11 Winter Storm 28
ROANOKE CITY 2
ALLEGHANY
ZONE) 6
SALEM CITY 2
BOTETOURT
ZONE) 7
Heavy Rain 17 CRAIG (ZONE) 8
ALLEGHANY CO. 1
ROANOKE
ZONE) 7
BOTETOURT CO. 3 Winter Weather 3
CRAIG CO. 3
ALLEGHANY
ZONE) 2
ROANOKE CO. 4
ROANOKE
ZONE) 1
ROANOKE CITY 4 All Hazard Events 363
SALEM CITY 1
COVINGTON CITY 1
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-4
Table 12: FEMA Disaster Declarations since 2018
Declaration Date Incident Type Title or Name Affected Areas
Friday, April 4, 2025 Severe Storm
SEVERE
WINTER
STORMS AND
FLOODING
Craig (County)
Tuesday, October 1, 2024 Tropical Storm TROPICAL
STORM HELENE
Botetourt (County)
Craig (County)
Covington
Roanoke
Roanoke (County)
Sunday, September 29, 2024 Tropical Storm
POST-TROPICAL
CYCLONE
HELENE
Craig (County)
Covington
Thursday, April 2, 2020 Biological COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Alleghany (County)
Botetourt (County)
Craig (County)
Roanoke (County)
Covington
Roanoke
Salem
Friday, March 13, 2020 Biological COVID-19
Alleghany (County)
Botetourt (County)
Craig (County)
Roanoke (County)
Covington
Roanoke
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-5
3.2 Earthquake
Definition of Hazard
An earthquake is a sudden, rapid shaking of the Earth caused by the breaking and shifting of rock
beneath the Earth's surface. Ground shaking from earthquakes can collapse buildings and
bridges; disrupt gas, electric, and phone service; and sometimes trigger landslides, avalanches,
flash floods, and fires. Buildings with foundations resting on unconsolidated landfill and other
unstable soil as well as trailers and homes not tied to their foundations are at risk because they
can be shaken off their mountings during an earthquake. When an earthquake occurs in a
populated area, it may cause deaths and injuries and extensive property damage.
Ground movement during an earthquake is seldom the direct cause of death or injury. Most
earthquake-related injuries result from falls, collapsing walls, flying glass, and falling objects.
Much of the damage in earthquakes is predictable and preventable. Primary impacts from
earthquakes are structural damage and loss of life.
There are two common ways of measuring earthquake intensity. The Modified Mercalli Intensity
Scale, composed of 12 increasing levels of intensity that range from imperceptible shaking to
catastrophic destruction, is a value assigned to a specific site after an earthquake has occurred,
and is assigned based on the severity of the effects of the event. The lower numbers of the
intensity scale generally deal with the way the earthquake is felt by people. The higher numbers
of the scale are based on observed structural damage. Structural engineers usually contribute
information for assigning intensity values of VIII or above. In contrast, the more common Richter
scale is used to scientifically measure an earthquake’s magnitude, regardless of impact, based
on the energy released by the event.
The Virginia Tech Seismological Observatory (VTSO) operates a digital seismic network with
stations in Virginia and southern West Virginia. Along with other southeastern regional seismic
networks and the U.S. National Seismic Network (USNSN), VTSO contributes to earthquake
monitoring, information dissemination and seismic hazard assessment objectives in the
southeastern United States. In 1991, Virginia Tech combined with other institutions in North
Carolina and Tennessee to form the Southern Appalachian Cooperative Seismic Network to
coordinate earthquake monitoring and data exchange.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-6
I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions.
II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings.
III. Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings. Many
people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly.
Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.
IV. Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened.
Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck
striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable
objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI. Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen
plaster. Damage slight.
VII. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate
in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed
structures; some chimneys broken.
VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary
substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of
chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.
IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame
structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial
collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures
destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.
XI. Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Rails bent
greatly.
XII. Damage total. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the air.
Figure 9: Modified Mercalli Intensity Levels\
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-7
Historic Event Descriptions
The southern portion of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region is part of the Giles County Seismic
Zone, including the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the Counties of Craig, Roanoke, and the
southern portion of Botetourt, and the Town of Vinton. Map 1 shows data collected by the Virginia
Department of Emergency Management, where historical event information was used to
approximate the three seismic zones across the Commonwealth.
Figure 10: Virginia Seismic Zones, Virginia Department of Energy
Since 1774, the year of the earliest documented Virginia earthquake, there have been over 300
earthquakes in or near the Commonwealth. Of those, 18 earthquakes had reports of intensity VI
or higher. The largest earthquake in Virginia was the 1897 Giles County shock which registered
an intensity of VIII. It was felt over 11 states (approximately 280,000 square miles). The estimated
magnitude for this event was 5.8, making it the third largest earthquake in the eastern United
States in the last 200 years (second largest in the southeastern U.S.). On August 23, 2011, a
magnitude 5.8 earthquake occurred 5 miles south-southwest of Mineral, Virginia (150 miles
northeast of Roanoke). The Mineral event was Virginia’s strongest earthquake in over a century.
While several small quakes have occurred, no major earthquakes have occurred in Virginia since
2011.
There have only been two earthquakes with epicenters in the planning area since the last update
of this plan. One occurred near New Castle at a magnitude of 2.5 in December of 2019. The
second occurred near the Roanoke County and Montgomery County border at a magnitude of
2.6 in September of 2021. Neither registered as higher than III or IV on the Mercalli Intensity
Scale. One earthquake affected the region with an epicenter outside of the region. On August 9,
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-8
2020 a magnitude 5.1 earthquake struck near the Virginia border of North Carolina, with effects
felt throughout the study area.
There has not been a Presidential or State Disaster Declaration in the planning region for
earthquakes.
Figure 11: Community Intensity Map, New Castle Earthquake 2019
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-9
Figure 12: Community Intensity Map, Roanoke County Earthquake 2021
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-10
Figure 13: Community Intensity Map, North Carolina Earthquake 2020
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-11
3.3 Extreme Temperature
Definition of Hazard
As described in Section 3.1, for the purposes of this plan Extreme Temperature will mean both
extreme heat and extreme cold. While some strategies to address extreme heat and extreme cold
may differ, the general strategies of weatherization, temperature control in the home, and
emergency shelters remain consistent across these disaster events.
There is no unified definition of extreme heat, and there are numerous ways to evaluate potential
heat stress. The wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) is an international standard of measurement
that is often utilized by athletic programs and is best suited for those performing strenuous activity
outside. This measurement factors in solar radiation, temperature, relative humidity, and wind
speed. The heat index, more commonly seen in cell phone applications available to average
citizens, does not factor in solar radiation or wind speed, but does factor in relative humidity. This
is a more suitable temperature for assessing impacts of heat on indoor, unconditioned spaces.1
The climate of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region is subject to high levels of humidity, meaning
that actual WBGT is likely higher than both the measured temperature and the heat index. Studies
of heat impacts do exist in the study area and focus primarily on urban heat island effect.
Figure 14: WBGT vs Heat Index, Weather.gov
Per the EPA, heat is the leading cause of weather-related death in the United States.2 Further
methods of evaluating heat and heat impacts should be assessed. For the purposes of this plan,
extreme heat will be defined as daytime high temperatures in excess of 90 degrees Fahrenheit.
Extreme heat most often affects individual health, especially of the elderly, children, homeless
populations, and people with underlying health issues, but may also affect worker productivity,
infrastructure such as roads and the electric grid, and cause excess energy consumption. Such
impacts are further assessed in Chapter 4.
1 (National Weather Service)
2 (Environmental Protection Agency, 2025)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-12
Figure 15: WBGT and Safety
Similar to extreme heat, there is no unified definition of extreme cold. The way heat or cold is felt
likely depends on a variety of factors, including acclimatization of the individual. Factors such as
wind speed and humidity can affect how cold is felt in the body the same way that they can
exacerbate high temperatures. Extreme cold can have additional impacts on infrastructure
beyond those experienced with extreme heat, including most commonly frozen pipes. Frozen
pipes can cause a lack of access to clean, potable water, as seen in Richmond in January of
2025, and extensive property damage if not quickly identified and addressed. More information
on impacts of extreme cold is available in Chapter 4.
For the purposes of this plan, extreme cold will be defined as daytime high temperatures of 32
degrees or less.
Collectively, extreme temperature will be defined as days when high temperatures are greater
than 90 degrees or less than 32 degrees Fahrenheit. As this is the first time this hazard has been
assessed in an RVARC plan, all historic instances for which there is existing data are included in
this section.
Historic Event Descriptions
Historical temperature data is available from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) going back to 1948. Since that time, the Roanoke region has experienced
1,855 days of temperatures above 90 degrees Fahrenheit and 510 days of highs at or below 32
degrees Fahrenheit. Extreme heat days average around 24 days per year over this time period.
In the last ten years, extreme heat days have averaged 32 days per year. In contrast, the annual
average number of extreme cold days has been only 7 days per year, with the number dropping
to 5 days a year in the past ten years.
The Commonwealth has declared a state of emergency in the past due to winter weather, but no
declarations in the past five years dealt solely with extreme cold. Winter weather is further
analyzed later in this chapter.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-13
Average daily lows can better reflect extreme heat in some cases, especially in urban areas. The
City of Roanoke undertook a heat island mapping study which provided more insight into the
effects of heat on City residents. More details of this mapping can be found on the Urban Heat
Island Effect page of the City’s website. Further discussion of the City’s work in this area will be
included in Chapter 4: Risk Assessment.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-14
Figure 16: Extreme Cold Days by Year, Roanoke, VA
Figure 17: Extreme Heat Days by Year, Roanoke, VA
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
19
4
8
19
5
1
19
5
4
19
5
7
19
6
0
19
6
3
19
6
6
19
6
9
19
7
2
19
7
5
19
7
8
19
8
1
19
8
4
19
8
7
19
9
0
19
9
4
19
9
7
20
0
0
20
0
4
20
0
8
20
1
1
20
1
4
20
1
7
20
2
2
Extreme Cold Days by Year
Extreme Cold Days Number of Days
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
19
4
8
19
5
1
19
5
4
19
5
7
19
6
0
19
6
3
19
6
6
19
6
9
19
7
2
19
7
5
19
7
8
19
8
1
19
8
4
19
8
7
19
9
0
19
9
3
19
9
6
19
9
9
20
0
2
20
0
5
20
0
8
20
1
1
20
1
4
20
1
7
20
2
0
20
2
3
Extreme Heat Days by Year
Number of Hot Days
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-15
3.4 Flooding
Definition of Hazard
Widespread flooding or flash flooding impacts a large portion of the region. Watersheds in the
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region are typical of the Blue Ridge region in which smaller streams
collect water which then flows through steep terrain, picking up velocity, and into the valleys and
flatlands along major rivers where development has occurred. The flood plains throughout these
mountainous areas are narrow, averaging less than 250 feet in most areas. These are also the
only flat areas where development could take place in this mountainous region. Most flood-
producing storms generally occur in the winter and spring. However, flooding due to intense local
thunderstorms or tropical disturbances can occur in any season.
Flood hazard areas, along with repetitive loss clusters, dams, flood prone roads, rain gauges and
other relevant spatial information for each jurisdiction participating in the plan are mapped in
Appendix D: Flood Hazard Areas.
Historic Event Descriptions
Alleghany County has experienced floods since its original settlement. Large floods occurred in
1877, 1913, 1936, 1969, 1972, 1973 and 1985. Hurricane Jeanne caused severe storms and
flooding in October 2004. Flood damage in the area is typically concentrated in and near
Covington and Clifton Forge. Because of the rural nature of the county, damages from flooding
are widespread. Damage occurs to roads, bridges, and public facilities such as schools.
The Jackson River flows through the City of Covington, towns of Clifton Forge and Iron Gate and
the communities of Low Moor and Selma. Gathright Dam, constructed in 1974, partially controls
flooding along the Jackson River. Despite this, floods still occur. Covington experienced large
floods on November 1877, March 1913, March 1936, March 1967, August 1969 (Hurricane
Camille), 1972 (Tropical Storm Agnes), March and December 1973, and November 1985. Tropical
Storm Agnes was the most severe of the events with as much as one-third of the city underwater.
In all, one church, three public buildings, two industrial plants, 8 commercial buildings, and 490
private residences were damaged. In November 1985, a 100-year frequency rainstorm caused a
reported $17 million in damages in the City of Covington.
The US Army Corps of Engineers, 1986 report titled Flood Control Study, Jackson River, Lower
Jackson Street Residential Area, Covington, provides information about the major flood that
occurred in November 1985. An approximate 90-year flood event resulted in residential,
commercial, and municipal damage in the lower Jackson Street / Rayon Terrace neighborhood.
Residential losses included yard, basement, and first-floor damage in sixty-four (64) homes and
four (4) businesses. Municipal damage included debris in the city park, a sewage pump station
and damage to a storm sewer. Total residential, commercial and municipal damage were
estimated at $544,000. Structural and non-structural alternatives for this section of the city were
explored in a cost-benefit analysis and found to be infeasible.
Floods used in the 1978 Federal Insurance Administration study to describe the impact on the
town of Clifton Forge include the Flood of 1950 and Flood of 1969 - both of which occurred prior
to construction of Gathright Dam. The 1950 flood included the flooding of basements, a
lumberyard, and the armory. The town’s water supply was cut off when two water mains were
washed away.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-16
Smith Creek flows north to south though the residential and commercial center of the Town of
Clifton Forge. In Clifton Forge, residential, public, and commercial development are concentrated
on both sides of Smith Creek. A number of large commercial buildings in the downtown area have
been constructed directly over Smith Creek. Floods have inundated portions of this land in the
past, and a substantially greater area is within reach of larger floods in the future. The 1969 Smith
Creek flooding caused the evacuation of 40 families and caused over $200,000 in damage to
town owned property.
Numerous flood events have been recorded in the Upper James River Basin in the counties of
Alleghany, Botetourt and Craig. The following water bodies in the basin have flooded: Dunlap
Creek, Potts Creek, Cowpasture River, Johns Creek, Craig Creek, and Catawba Creek. Records
show a history of major and frequent flooding. One of the worst floods to occur in Tinker Creek in
Botetourt County was in 1940. Another large flood occurred in 1961 along Buffalo Creek in what
is considered to be one of the worst storms of record. The unincorporated communities of Eagle
Rock, Glen Wilton, and Gala located in Botetourt County along the James River have all
experienced flooding. One of the worst floods for the James River occurred as a result of Tropical
Storm Agnes in 1972. Glen Wilton was isolated in 1972 due to floodwaters covering the only road
access to the community. The Botetourt Communities of Strom, Lithia, Cloverdale, and Coyner
have also been victims of floodwaters. A 1940 event caused severe damage in the Tinker Creek
basin. Buffalo Creek was impacted by a flood in 1961.
Historic floods in the community of Eagle Rock occurred in November 1985, November 1877,
March 1913, June 1972, April 1978, March 1936, and August 1969. The November 1985 and April
1978 floods were the only two significant flood events to affect the Eagle Rock area since the
completion of Gathright Dam. The community of Eagle Rock was severely flooded during the
November 1985 storm causing substantial damage to the commercial district and to many
residences. The 1985 storm was the storm of record with an exceedance frequency of 460 years.
Seventeen commercial properties and about 16 residences were damaged during the November
1985 flood.
The Town of Troutville has been damaged by flooding from Buffalo Creek several times in the
past. The flood in August 1961 was one of the worst floods in this basin, when “after two hours of
intense downpour, Buffalo Creek overflowed its banks. Several homes and basements were
flooded and travel on Highway 11 was hazardous due to excessive water. Also, there was about
2 feet of water around Rader Funeral Chapel in the major commercial area of the town”.3
Like other communities, the Town of Fincastle experienced extensive flooding as a result of
tropical storm Agnes in 1972. Town Branch overflowed its banks and, due largely to insufficient
bridge capacity at Highway 606, flooded the area between U.S. Highway 220 and Factory Street.
Neither discharges nor frequencies are currently available.
The James River in Botetourt County has experienced large floods in 1877, 1913, 1936, and
1969. The remains of hurricane Camille in 1969 caused flooding that destroyed homes, roads,
railroads, and bridges along the James River.
River stages and discharges on the James River at Buchanan have been recorded since 1895
by the USGS. Since 1877, the bank at full stage of 15 feet has been exceeded at least 60 times.
The greatest flood known to have occurred in Buchanan was in November 1877 and measured
3 (Roanoke Times, 1961).
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-17
34.9 feet at the USGS gage. Other large floods occurred in April 1886, March 1889, March 1902,
March 1913, January 1935, March 1936, March 1963, and August 1969. Tropical Storm Agnes in
1972 was the second highest storm of record. Few flood related problems have occurred on
Purgatory Creek in the Town of Buchanan because of lack of development in its watershed.
The Town of Buchanan has a primary sewage treatment plant on the James River. The plant is
subject to flooding and during the November 1985 flood was out of operation for 6 months. The
historic flood of record in Buchanan occurred in November 1985 (after completion of Gathright
Dam). The Town of Buchanan was devastated during the November 1985 storm which produced
the Flood of Record with an exceedance of 600 years. The river caused water damage and
structural damage to numerous buildings. Some buildings were completely washed away. The
railroad station was washed off its foundation and the historic footbridge was washed
downstream. People who expected their basements to be flooded had water up to their ceilings.
The history of flooding in the Roanoke Valley has been well documented since records were kept.
The flood of record was the November 1985 event. The most severe flooding on the Roanoke
River is usually the result of heavy rains associated with tropical storms, while tributary stream
flooding is usually the result of local thunderstorms or frontal systems. Flooding along tributaries
is compounded when the streams in lower elevations back-up into feeder streams.
Major floods in the area have occurred in 1940 and 1972 with discharges of 24,400 and 28,800
cfs, respectively, as measured at the USGS gage on the Roanoke River at Niagara Dam. On
Tinker Creek at Dale Avenue, the August 1940 storm produced a discharge of 9,000 cfs. The flood
damage from the August 1940 event was extensive and resulted in major damage to buildings,
roads, bridges, and agricultural crops. The 1972 flood on the Roanoke River, which was the result
of Tropical Storm Agnes, was estimated as a 50-year flood. The Roanoke River crested at 19.6
feet as measured at Walnut Avenue. Approximately 400 homes were damaged by flooding from
Hurricane Agnes in the Roanoke-Salem area. On April 22, 1992, the river once again exceeded
its banks and spread floodwaters in the Valley when it crested at 18.1 for the second time during
the century.
The flood of record occurred in November of 1985 when rains from Hurricane Juan caused the
Roanoke River to rise and crest at a level of 23.4 feet from the bottom of the River, as measured
from Walnut Avenue. A total of 11 inches of rain fell between Thursday October 31 and the
following Monday. The last six inches fell during the last 24 hours of that five -day period. The
result of that single weather event created floodwaters in downtown Roanoke that rose over five
feet inside some businesses. Ten lives were lost and damage to property cost $520,000,000.4
This was estimated as a 130-year flood event. The 1985 spurred major work along the corridor,
sparking the creation of the greenway system.
Since 2018, 58 flood events have occurred in the region. It should be noted that quantified
damages are largely self-reported and may not reflect the full damages that occurred from a given
flood event.
4 The Roanoke Times, November 1985.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-18
Table 13: Flood Events per the NCEI Database, 2019-2024
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
BOTETOURT
CO. 2/23/2019
Heavy Rain
Snow Melt
The James River at Buchanan (BNNV2) reached flood stage of 17 feet
on the 24th, cresting at 17.92 feet shortly thereafter. Several roads were
closed including Thrasher Road and River Road due to flooding. The
peak discharge of 35300 cfs at the gage was very close to a 2.33-year
annual recurrence interval (0.43 annual chance of exceedance)
according to USGS data. This is also close the bankfuli stage.
BOTETOURT
CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain 33,000.00
Tinker Mill Road was closed due to high water and several other roads
in the Buchanan area. Poor Farm Road near Fincastle was also reported
to be underwater. There was some damage to roads in the county per
VDOT.
CRAIG CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain 12,000.00
Route 614 was flooded by Craig Creek with over six inches of water
reported across the bridge. The IFLOWS stream gage at this location
was out of service at the time, but the upstream IFLOWS gage on Craig
Creek near Abbott (ABBV2) crested at 11.6 feet. This was over the flood
stage of 10 feet and the 2nd highest (highest is 11.9 feet in Oct. 2018
with remains from Hurricane Michael) in a fairly short period of record
back to 2010). A water rescue was also preformed in the Abbott area,
where a car drove into flood waters.
ROANOKE
CITY 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
The Roanoke River at Roanoke crested at 11.74 feet (10,500 cfs) on the
afternoon of the 13th, above the Minor flood stage of 10 feet. Several low
water bridges were flooded along with the Roanoke Greenway.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-19
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain 25,000.00
There were several reports of flash flooding around Roanoke City
including a car that was submerged in flood waters covering the
intersection of Walnut Avenue and 4th Street. The intersection was
closed. Social media photos showed flooding on Franklin Road at Wonju
Street. A mudslide at a car dealership caused two cars to slide into the
resulting sinkhole with some damage to the vehicles.
ROANOKE
CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
The Roanoke River at Glenvar (GNVV2) crested at 13.14 feet (11700
cfs) in the early afternoon of the 13th. Flood stage is 9 feet. Several roads
were closed near the river including Southwest River Road. Bohon
Hollow Road bridge (Route 734) about 1 mile upstream from gage was
overtopped.
ROANOKE
CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain 5,000.00
Numerous roads were flooded and some damage reported in Roanoke
County.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
Wise Avenue was closed due to overflow from Tinker Creek. This is a
low-water bridge that is inundated below flood stage on the creek. The
gage height on the USGS Tinker Creek above Glade Creek gage was
around 7 feet at the time of this report. The stream crested at 14.77 feet
on the afternoon of the 21st.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-20
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
Tinker Creek was reported to be flooding portions of 13th Street from
Eastgate Avenue to Mason Mill Road. The gage height on the USGS
Tinker Creek Upper near Columbia gage was around 9 feet at the time
of this report. The stream crested twice during the event, at 12.58 feet
late on the 20th and 13.49 on the afternoon of the 21st. Per USGS data,
the peak discharge of 3920 cfs was slightly below a 5-year flood event
0.20 annual chance of occurrence) on upper Tinker Creek.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
A spotter reported water several inches deep on Bennington Street from
the Roanoke River around 850 PM EST on May 20th. The stage at the
time of the report was around 13 feet on the Roanoke River gage at
Walnut Street (RONV2). Several hour later the footbridge to the Carilion
Hopsital was overrun and inaccessible. Several roads around the
hospital were under varying amounts of water, up to a depth of a few
feet. The reading on the Roanoke River gage was around 15.7 feet at
the time of this report. The river crested at 15.89 feet at 310 PM EST on
the 21st. Moderate flood stage is currently 12 feet and Major flood stage
is 16 feet. This was the 8th highest stage on record at this gage, with
records back to 1899. According to USGS statistics it was slightly under
a 10-year event (0.1 annual chance of occurrence). Social media images
also showed floodwaters from the Roanoke River covering several feet
of the parking lot of the Ramada Inn and water entering the hotel,
although this may have been backup along Ore Branch.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-21
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
BOTETOURT
CO. 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain 15,000.00
The intersection of Craig Creek Road and Roaring Run Road was closed
due to high water. The gage on Craig Creek at Parr (CRGV2) was around
13.3 feet at the time of the report. Minor flood stage is 12 feet. The stream
crested at a stage of 16.20 feet (16200 cfs), the highest level since
September 2004 (19.87 feet) when the remains of Hurricane Jeanne
plowed through the area. It was the 7th highest on record at the gage
since 1925 and was slightly below a 10-year flood event (0.1 annual
chance of occurrence). Moderate flood stage is 15 feet and several roads
were flooded.
BOTETOURT
CO. 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain 10,000.00 Tinker Mill Road was flooded and Tinker Creek reported out of its banks.
BOTETOURT
CO. 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain 13,000.00
Catawba Creek Road was reported to be flooded with water of unknown
depth. The USGS gage on Catawba Creek near Catawba (CTWV2)
crested at 7.87 feet (3660 cfs)|early on the 21st. This was the 8th highest
stage on record at this gage with data back to 1954. Only Hurricane
Michael in October 2018 has had a higher stage (7.98 feet) in the past
15 years, dating back to September 2004. According to USGS data this
was close to a 5-year recurrence interval flood (0.2 annual chance of
occurrence).
SALEM CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
The Mill Lane low water bridge in Salem was entirely underwater and
portions of W. Riverside Drive was flooded and closed along with several
other roads in Salem. The nearby Salem Pump Station IFLOWS gage
SPSV2) crested at around 9.1 feet. Minor flood stage is 7 feet.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-22
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CO. 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
The Roanoke River at Glenvar (GNVV2) crested at 14.14 feet (13400
cfs) in the early afternoon of the 21st. Flood stage is 9 feet. It was the 9th
highest stage on record but data only extends back to 1992 at this gage.
Several roads were closed near the river including Southwest River
Road. Bohon Hollow Road bridge (Route 734) about 1 mile upstream
from gage was overtopped. According to USGS statistics it was near a
5-year flood event (0.2 annual chance of occurrence).
CRAIG CO. 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain 50,000.00
The Craig Creek at Abbott (ABBV2) IFLOWS gage crested at 10.6 feet
around midday on May 21st. This was the 3rd highest crest in the fairly
short (since around 2010) and erratic history at this gage site. Some
roads were flooded and partially damaged Craig County according to
VDOT information.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain 5,000.00
Media reports showed water overtopping a portion of Spring Valley Dam
in Roanoke leading to the evacuation of 13 homes due to the potential
risk of a dam failure.
ROANOKE
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
Walnut Avenue near Glade Creek was closed due to water flowing over
it. Flooding also occurred along Tinker Creek where the USGS gage near
the confluence of Glade Creek crested at 16.96 feet in the afternoon of
the 17th. No flood stage has been set at this relatively new gaging
station, but Tinker Creek overflows the low-water bridge on Wise Avenue
at a stage of around 7 feet.
BOTETOURT
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
A social media post showed the road completely flooded in front of the
Cloverdale Post Office.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-23
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
BOTETOURT
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
Flood waters were reported to have reached some mobile homes in the
Wildwood Mobile Home Park. Some evacuations were conducted in the
area.
ROANOKE
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
Bonsack Road and Glade Creek Road were closed due to flooding, most
likely from nearby Glade Creek.
ROANOKE
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
A portion of 13th Street in Roanoke was closed due to urban flooding
with water flowing over the road.
COVINGTON
CITY 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
Numerous roads were flooded and closed in Covington including South
Craig Avenue, South Royal Avenue and and South Highland Avenue.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
Up to a foot of water was observed flowing over Valley Ridge Road at
the corner of Woodland Road and Magnolia Street.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 6/19/2020 Heavy Rain
Water over six inches in depth was seen flowing over portions of Highway
159 after 1.5 inches of rain fell in a short duration. The water was not
from Dunlap Creek itself which had returned to below flood stage from
the previous day.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
The USGS gage on Dunlap Creek (DLPV2) rose briefly above minor
flood stage of 9 feet early on the 18th, cresting at 9.16 feet. Several roads
very close to the creek may have been flooded.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-24
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
CRAIG CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
The USGS gage on Johns Creek at New Castle (JCRV2) crested at
11.03 feet on the afternoon of June 17th after heavy rains the previous
two days. This was the highest stage reached at this site since
September 28, 2004 when it reached 12.87 feet and the 6th highest since
records began in 1927. The 3-day rainfall at the nearby NWS COOP site
at New Castle was 4.12 inches.
BOTETOURT
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
The gage on Craig Creek at Parr (CRGV2) crested at a stage of 14.24
feet (12500 cfs) very early on June 18th. It was the 8th highest on record
at this gaging station since 1925 and was approximately a 5-year flood
event (0.2 annual chance of occurrence) according to USGS studies. A
road or two was likely affected.
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
The Roanoke River at Roanoke (RONV2) crested at 11.91 feet, above
the Minor flood stage of 10 feet early in the morning of June 18th. Several
roads and low water bridges were flooded.
SALEM CITY 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
The IFLOWS stream gage at Salem Pump Station (SPSV2) crested
above Minor flood stage of 7 feet early on the 18th, cresting at 7.60 feet
and closing several roads in Salem, including the Mill Lane Bridge.
ROANOKE
CITY 11/12/2020 Heavy Rain
The Roanoke River at Roanoke, VA (RONV2) was above flood stage (10
feet) on November 12th, and crested at the moderate flood stage of
14.07 feet (14,000 cfs) at 12:35 PM EST on November 12th, the 13th
highest crest on record for this gauge. This was between a 5- and 10-
year Average Return Interval per the USGS StreamStats website.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-25
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 5/4/2021 Heavy Rain
About 1.5 inches of rain from a thunderstorm fell during a 45 minute
period. Runoff from the rainfall caused water to pond 12-18 inches deep
at the intersection of Campbell Avenue and 10th Street SW, an
intersection known to flood during heavy rainfall. The intersection closed
by police, but was reopened after the water receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/4/2021 Heavy Rain 2,500.00
Rain amounts between 1.5 and 1.75 inches fell from a thunderstorm
within a 45 minute period across portions of the downtown area in the
City of Roanoke. Runoff from this rainfall resulted in about three feet of
standing water near the intersection of Salem Avenue and 1 1/2 Street.
At least one car became stranded in the flood waters, though it is
unknown if the occupant(s) required rescue. The road was reopened to
traffic after the flood waters receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/19/2021 Heavy Rain 25,000.00
Portions of Salem Avenue and Campbell Avenue were flooded with up to
4 feet of standing water as heavy rain overwhelmed the storm sewer
system. Five water rescues were performed as cars drove into the flood
waters, causing the vehicles to stall. No injuries were reported.
Broadcast media reported that multiple cars parked along Salem Avenue
experienced water intrusion into the vehicle passenger compartments
and exhaust systems, with some of the vehicle needed to be towed.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain 20,000.00
Runoff from heavy rain caused Renick Run to flood out of its banks and
flow across Indian Rock Road. The bridge crossing Renick Run was
damaged and impassible by the flooding, and required repair before
being eventually reopened.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
Runoff from heavy rain caused Purgatory Creek to flood out of its banks
around one foot deep across both Greyledge and Frontage Roads. The
roads reopened after flooding subsided. No damage was reported.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-26
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain 15,000.00
Runoff from heavy rain caused Jennings Creek to flood out of its banks
and across Jennings Creek Road, both of which are located in the bottom
of a valley with steep sides. Occupants from a vehicle caught in the
flooding were able to abandon the vehicle to safety, however the vehicle
was reportedly washed down the creek.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
Runoff from heavy rain caused Laurel Run to flood out of its banks across
Pico Road, causing the road to be impassible until the flooding receded.
The road was reopened afterward.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
Heavy rain caused ponding of water of up to a foot deep along portions
of Main Street in the community of Buchanan, making the road
impassible. Main Street was passable again once the flooding receded.
No damage was reported.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
Runoff from heavy rain caused Dry Run to flow out of its banks, flooding
the railway tunnel on 19th Street and across Highway 11 a few hundred
feet further downstream. No damage was reported and the roads were
passable again after the flooding receded.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
Runoff from heavy rain caused a tributary of Ellis Run to flow out of its
banks, flooding across portions of Mountain Valley Road. No damage
was reported and the road was passable again after the flooding
receded.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-27
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CO. 8/25/2022 Heavy Rain
The stream gauge at Tinker Creek Upper Above Columbia Street
TKRV2) recorded Tinker Creek rising more than 8 feet within 2 hours to
crest at 10.67 feet, before stream levels quickly receded. This was
caused by 2 to more than 4 inches of rainfall from a thunderstorm near
the Botetourt County border.
ROANOKE
CO. 8/25/2022 Heavy Rain
The stream gauge at Tinker Creek Above Glade Creek recorded Tinker
Creek cresting at 7.95 feet. This was caused by 2 to more than 4 inches
of rainfall from a thunderstorm near the Botetourt County border.
BOTETOURT
CO. 8/25/2022 Heavy Rain 15,000.00
Runoff from heavy rainfall overwhelmed an underground storm water
pipe, which created a sinkhole in a portion of Highland drive near
Sanderson drive.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 2/17/2023
Heavy Rain
Burn Area
The Cowpasture River near Clifton Forge, VA crested at 10.40 feet
Flood stage is 10 feet). This was a little over a 2-year event (50% AEP)
per USGS Streamstats. The flooding was caused by between 1.5 and
2.75 inches of rain over a 24-25 hour period. No snow melt or frozen
ground was involved, but the ground was moist from widespread rainfall
on the 12th and 13th a few days prior. Minor lowland flooding was the
only impact observed.
ROANOKE
CITY 7/23/2023 Heavy Rain
The intersection of Jamison Avenue and 9th Street is flooded and
impassible by several inches of flowing water caused by 3 to 4 inches of
rainfall, with rates as high as 6 inches per hour. No damage was reported
at the intersection, and the road was reopened to traffic after the flooding
receded. MRMS FLASH CREST Unit Streamflow was estimated to be
between 600 and 800 cfs per mile^2, while FLASH 1-hour ARIs indicated
that rainfall amounts were as high as a 100-year event in spots around
the City of Roanoke during this event.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-28
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 7/23/2023 Heavy Rain
Shafer���s Crossing between 24th Street and Boulevard Street
is flooded and impassible due to 2 to 3 inches of rainfall within a 90-
minute period, with rainfall rates ranging from 4 to 5 inches per hour per
MRMS estimates. CREST Unit Streamflow was estimated to be between
400 and 600 cfs per mile^2 for this event. No damage was reported to
the road, and it was reopened to traffic after the flooding receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 7/23/2023 Heavy Rain
Glade Creek was observed out of its banks and flowing across Walnut
Avenue at least 6 inches deep due to between 3 and locally 5 inches of
rainfall within a 2-hour period falling in the basin. Rainfall rates were
observed to be as high as 5 inches per hour at times. No damage was
reported to the road, and it was reopened to traffic after the flooding
receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2024 Heavy Rain
Poor drainage due to around 1.5 inches of rainfall within an hour caused
standing water near within the 4800 block of Valley View Boulevard,
making the road impassible for a brief period of time. The road was
reopened after the flooding receded, with no damage reported.
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2024 Heavy Rain
Standing water due to between 1.25 and 1.5 inches of rainfall within an
hour was reported at the intersection of Peters Creek Road NW and
Melrose Avenue, making the intersection impassible for a brief period of
time. Rainfall rates briefly reached up to 3 inches per hour in the area.
The intersection was reopened after the flooding receded, with no
damage reported.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-29
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2024 Heavy Rain
Poor drainage due to around 1.5 inches of rainfall within an hour caused
standing water near near the 900 block of Van Buren Street NW, making
the street impassible for a brief period of time. Rainfall rates briefly were
estimated to be around 3 inches per hour.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024
Heavy Rain
Tropical
System
Runoff from heavy rain caused the railroad underpass along Wiley Drive
to become flooded with about two feet of standing water and impassible
until the water drained away. No damage was reported.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024
Heavy Rain
Tropical
System
A poor drainage issue during heavy rain caused Campbell Avenue to
become flooded by several inches of standing water. The road was open
to traffic after the drain blockage was cleared.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024
Heavy Rain
Tropical
System
The low water crossing on Wise Street at Tinker Creek became partially
submerged as Tinker Creek rose to a crest of 5.85 feet, which is well
within its banks. No damage to the road was reported as it is designed
to begin becoming flooded at this stage.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024
Heavy Rain
Tropical
System
Portions of Boulevard Street and 24th Street were flooded between three
and four feet deep in spots by runoff from heavy rain. No damage was
reported to the roads, which were reopened to traffic after the flooding
receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024
Heavy Rain
Tropical
System
Runoff from heavy rainfall was observed pooling several inches deep
across the intersection of Walnut Avenue and 8th Street. No damage to
the roadways was reported.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-30
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 9/19/2024 Heavy Rain 15,000.00
The Roanoke City Emergency Manager reported that flooding was
observed at the intersection of 10th Street and Campbell Street
Southwest near downtown Roanoke, an area that frequently floods
during periods of heavy rain. Multiple vehicles were stranded in standing
water that rose to nearly 3 feet deep as a result of poor drainage. Six
individuals had to be assisted from their vehicles in the flood waters by
emergency personnel. The damage estimate is the estimated damage to
the vehicles due to water intrusion.
SALEM CITY 9/25/2024 Heavy Rain
Heavy rainfall, combined with poor drainage, caused standing water
around 2.5 feet deep to pool along Kessler Mill Road. No damage was
reported to the road, which was open to traffic after the water receded.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-31
Additional flood damage has been recorded from Hurricane Helene which was not included in the
NCEI data. As this was a major federal disaster, impacts from this event will be quantified further
in section 3.5: Hurricane and Tropical Storm. However, it is worth noting that flooding is so
frequent in the region that the NCEI data may not be comprehensive in terms of the impacts of
this disaster.
CRS Communities: Special Considerations
Three communities within the region currently have a Community Flood Rating System (CRS)
designation. Roanoke County entered the CRS program in October 1991 and has a rating of 8
10% discount). The Town of Vinton entered the CRS program in October 1, 2016 and has a class
8 rating. The City of Roanoke entered the CRS program in 1996 and maintains a class 6 rating
20% discount on flood insurance premiums for parcel owners within City limits).
Several additional localities have listed this as a desired goal in their project listings, though
capacity remains an inhibiting factor. Accordingly, this section specifically speaks to additive
requirements for CRS planning in the region’s jurisdictions.
Review of Existing Studies and Plans
The following existing studies and plans speak specifically to flooding. They are summarized and
recommendations are noted where appropriate. A general overview of existing plans and studies
consulted to develop project recommendations and guide planning implementation work is
contained in Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment. For the purposes of this section, only local
government entities are listed.
Alleghany County
Flood Insurance Study, Alleghany County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (2010): This study also
includes the incorporated areas of the City of Covington, and Towns of Clifton Forge and Iron
Gate.
Emergency Operations Plan (2021): This document details emergency operations procedures,
including operations in a flood event.
City of Covington
City of Covington Drainage Study (2025): This document, funded through the Community Flood
Preparedness Fund, includes a condition assessment of the storm sewer system and a hydraulic
and hydrologic model which will feed into a forthcoming Resilience Plan.
Botetourt County
Flood Insurance Study, Botetourt County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (2010): This study also
includes the incorporated areas of Botetourt County which include Buchanan, Fincastle, and
Troutville.
Botetourt County Emergency Operations Plan (2017): This document details emergency
operations procedures, including operations in a flood event.
Craig County
Flood Insurance Study, Craig County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (2009): This study also
includes the incorporated area of the Town of New Castle.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-32
Roanoke County
Flood Insurance Study, Roanoke County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (DATE): This study also
includes the incorporated areas of the Town of Vinton, City of Roanoke, City of Salem.
City of Roanoke
City of Roanoke Flood Resilience Plan (2023): This plan deals specifically with flooding and
flooding impacts within the City. Several of these recommendations will be incorporated into
Chapter 6 and Chapter 7.
NFIP Community Rating System Repetitive Loss Area Analysis (2021): This is an update of the
repetitive loss analysis for the City.
Emergency Operations Basic Plan (2020): This plan details emergency operations procedures
within the City.
Peters Creek Watershed Master Plan (2019): This plan is part of a series of master plans
conducted across the City each watershed. While the primary emphasis is on water quality, there
are flooding applications.
Trout Run Watershed Master Plan (2017): This master plan focuses on watershed management
of the Lick Run watershed through three implementation goals, which parallel those for the Trout
Run Watershed Master Plan.
Lick Run Watershed Master Plan (2017): This master plan focuses on watershed management of
the Lick Run watershed through three implementation goals, which parallel those for the Trout
Run Watershed Master Plan.
Tinker Creek and Tributaries Watershed Master Plan (2016): This master plan focuses on
watershed management of the Lick Run watershed through three implementation goals, which
parallel those for the Trout Run Watershed Master Plan.
Flooding Incident Annex (2007): This Annex to the Emergency Operations Basic Plan details
specific actions to take in flood situations.
Dam Safety Support Annex (2007): This Annex to the Emergency Operations Basic Plan details
specific actions to take in situations where key impoundment infrastructures become a safety risk.
City of Salem
Resilience Plan (2023): This plan was prepared through funding from the Virginia Flood
Preparedness Fund and deals directly with flooding impacts in the City of Salem. Several of these
recommendations will be incorporated into Chapter 6 and Chapter 7.
This section of the plan and other relevant sections were reviewed and discussed with the
Floodplain Program Planner at DCR.
High Hazard Potential Dam Inventory and Planning
Flooding due to dam failure is considered as part of overall flood mitigation assessment and
planning within this document. Within the region there are twenty-five known high hazard potential
dams per DCR.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-33
Figure 17 shows the Hazard Potential Classification for dams produced by FEMA. It is important
to note that even impoundment failure that impacts a lifeline (such as a water treatment plant or
key infrastructure element) does not per se result in a high hazard potential dam classification.
HHPD classification is focused on the probable loss of life in an impoundment failure.
DCR’s Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management administers the Virginia Dam Safety
Program, under the authority of the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board. Virginia’s Dam
Safety Regulations5 were last updated in 2016. The owner of each regulated high, significant, or
low hazard potential dam is required to apply to the board for an Operation and Maintenance
Certificate. The application must include an assessment of the dam by a licensed professional,
an Emergency Action Plan and the appropriate fee(s), submitted separately. An executed copy of
the Emergency Action Plan or Emergency Preparedness Plan must be filed with the appropriate
local emergency official and the Virginia Department of Emergency Management.
Figure 18: Dam Classifications, FEMA6
The City of Roanoke maintains a Dam Safety Support Annex to their Emergency Operations Plan.
The Western Virginia Water Authority also maintains required Emergency Action Plans specific to
operation of the dams owned by the Authority, one of which is Spring Hollow Lake Dam listed in
Table 2. Inundation maps for Spring Hollow Lake Dam are included in Appendix H.
The VSWCB issues Regular Operation and Maintenance Certificates to a dam owner for a period
of six years. If a dam has a deficiency but does not pose imminent danger, the board may issue
a Conditional Operation and Maintenance Certificate, during which time the dam owner is to
correct the deficiency. After a dam is certified by the board, annual inspections are required either
by a professional engineer or the dam owner, and the Annual Inspection Report is submitted to
the regional dam safety engineer.
There are no comprehensive databases of historical dam failures or flooding following a dam
failure in Virginia. Dam failure can be caused by a variety of scenarios. Thirty-four percent of all
dam failures are caused by overtopping, when water spills over the top of a dam. The majority of
dam failure incidents are driven by flooding due to excessive precipitation. Proper maintenance
of a dam structure is key to mitigating the impacts of flooding. DCR administers the Virginia Dam
5 (Commonwealth of Virginia, 2016)
6 (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2004)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-34
Safety, Flood Prevention, and Protection Assistance Fund. Other funding sources also exist for
dam failure mitigation.
The Association of State Dam Safety Officials maintains a voluntary database of dam safety
incidents, the ASDSO Dam Incident Database. Only one safety incident is recorded in this
database in the region, which references overtopping of Spring Valley Lake dam. However,
consultation with DCR clarifies the incident. Spring Valley Lake saw their emergency spillway
activated, and a Stage 3 emergency was declared in accordance with their Emergency Action
Plan in May 2020. There was no overtopping, and the dam was not in immediate danger of failure.
In the 2019 Plan, several Dam Safety Incidents and remediation efforts were documented. These
have been updated with more accurate information from DCR.
Rainbow Forest Lake Dam: In May 2011, DCR order the Rainbow Forest Recreation
Association (RFRA) in Botetourt County to reduce the pool level of Rainbow Forest Lake
in order to provide extra storage capacity behind the dam until the spillway could be
improved. The RFRA has been working with the state to address concerns about the
structure since 1997.
Gathright Dam: In May 2009, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) inspected the
Gathright Dam as part of Screening Portfolio Risk Analysis and routine inspections. Later
in the year on September 2, the USACE assigned the dam a Safety Action Classification
DSAC) II which is defined as "Urgent (Unsafe or Potentially Unsafe)". The rating is
attributed to concerns about possible increased seepage at the toe of the dam, and an
undetermined flow rate at the river spring a quarter mile downstream, and potentia l flow
channels through limestone below the spillway during pool events above 1,600 feet.
Because of this rating, the USACE has implemented risk reduction measures which
include increased monitoring, updating emergency operation plans and reducing the water
level in the reservoir. As of early 2010, the USACE has reduced and continues to maintain
the reservoir at an elevation of 1,562 ft above sea level compared to the normal level of
1,582 feet. Throughout 2010, the USACE conducted safety exercises with local/state
officials, conduct a series of investigations on the dam, update inundation mapping and
reevaluate the DSAC status. In November 2010, Lake Moomaw was restored to a level of
1,582 ft. and the DSAC will be reevaluated in the future.
Clifton Forge Dam: Clifton Forge Dam impounds a 12.5 square mile drainage area of
Smith Creek with an 11.5-acre normal pool. The dam is classified as a High Hazard Dam
by DCR and operates under a conditional 2-year, renewable, Operation and Maintenance
Certificate. It has been issued an alteration permit by DCR that will be used during
upgrades in 2018-19. A Dam Breach Inundation Zone Analysis was done in 2013 that
showed a failure would impact 650 residential units, 1,400 people and downtown
commercial, retail, public administration and infrastructure. An Emergency Action Plan
was completed in 2014 and a preliminary engineering report for proposed improvements
was done in 2016. Major improvements proposed include raising crest of non-overflow
sections; raise concrete core wall and surrounding earthfill; seal a leaking concrete joint;
remove spillway piers to expand spillway capacity; anchor the principal spillway; replace
spillway bridge; and repair the deteriorated concrete face. The estimated cost for this work
was approximately $4.3 million. The town worked with its consulting engineers to develop
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-35
a funding package from USDA Rural Development in cooperation with Alleghany County.
The proposed schedule anticipates construction to be complete by December 2019.
Johns Creek Watershed Dam #1 (McDaniel’s Lake): Craig County Board of Supervisors
and Mountain Castles Soil and Water Conservation District own and operate the Johns
Creek watershed Dam #1. Four floodwater-retarding structures were built in the Johns
Creek Watershed between 1966 and 1967.
The dam has a drainage area of 12,241 acres and a normal pool surface area of 28 acres.
It was designed to store runoff of 50-year storm. The dam was originally designed as
Significant” hazard and later reclassified to “High” hazard due to downstream
development that was allowed to occur. The dam operates under a conditional Operation
and Maintenance Certificate from DCR that expired in September 2018.
A breach inundation study for the dam was done in 2009 which concluded the dam is a
High Hazard Potential dam. The study found 68 occupied structures and 16 bridges within
the inundation zone below the dam. An additional study by URS Group completed in 2010
found the population at risk to be 150 people.
Mountain Castles SWCD has been working jointly with Virginia's DCR and federal partners
to facilitate a design to rehabilitate Johns Creek Dam #1 to increase spillway capacity for
future flooding. So far, the rehabilitation team has accomplished a wetland delineation
survey, riser condition survey, and a geotechnical investigation survey. A complete design
is expected by spring of 2026 that involves extending the embankment through the
existing auxiliary spillway, installing a new roller-compacted spillway, and installing a new
concrete riser to meet the new requirements.
Niagara Dam: Niagara Dam is one of two federally regulated dams in the region. The dam
was recently relicensed by the FERC in 2025. On November 4, 1985, high flows recorded
at 52,300 cfs resulted in the breach of the right abutment to the dam. Repairs to the right
abutment resulted in the Niagara Hydroelectric Project being taken out of service from
November 4, 1985 through March 17, 1986. The average flow of the river at this location
is 573 cfs. The same event affected Smith Mountain Lake dam downstream, a key
infrastructure asset for the region and also federally regulated. The reservoir elevation
increased from its normal operating limit of 795 NGVD to 799.5 NGVD. That elevation is
0.5 ft. below the emergency level of 800.0 NGVD allowed under the license for this
structure.
Three additional dams of interest may be high hazard dams but have not yet been classified as
such. These dams are listed in DSIS as High-Preliminary, which means that there has been a
preliminary study that raised concerns, but an inundation study has not been submitted by the
dam owner to properly establish the hazard classification yet.
Orchard Lake Dam – 023002
Wilburn Dam – 023010
Stokes Dam – 023013
This section of the plan was reviewed by the Regional Dam Safety Engineer at DCR.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-36
Table 14: High Hazard Dams
Federal
ID Dam Name
Alternate
Dam
Name
Dam
Type Owner Name Location
VA00500
3
Clifton Forge
Dam Gravity
Town of Clifton
Forge Alleghany
VA00500
4
Landfill No. 2
Dam
Westvaco
2 Flyash
Lagoon Earth
Westvaco/WestRoc
k Alleghany
VA00500
9
West
Virginia Pulp
Dam B Earth
Westvaco/West
Rock Alleghany
VA00500
1
Gathright
Dam
Lake
Moomaw Rockfill
USACE - Norfolk
District Alleghany
VA00501
3
Westrock #1
Embankmen
t Dam Earth
Westvaco/WestRoc
k
Alleghany/Covingto
n
VA02300
4
Blue Ridge
Estates Dam
Emerald
Lake Earth
Lake Forest
Homeowners
Association Botetourt
VA02300
5
Botetourt
Country
Club Dam Earth
Botetourt Country
Club Botetourt
VA02301
0 Wilburn Dam Earth
Vaughn E. & Anne P.
Wilburn;Vaughn E.
and Anne P. Wilburn Botetourt
VA02301
3 Stokes Dam Earth Sandra J Stokes Botetourt
VA02300
2
Orchard
Lake Dam Earth Dearl & Julie Fraze Botetourt
VA02300
3
Rainbow
Forest Dam Earth
Rainbow Forest
Recreational Assoc
Inc Botetourt
VA02300
1
Carvin Cove
Dam Masonry
Western Virginia
Water Authority Botetourt/Roanoke
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-37
Federal
ID Dam Name
Alternate
Dam
Name
Dam
Type Owner Name Location
VA04500
1
Johns Creek
Dam #2 Earth
Mountain Castles
Soil and Water
Conservation
District Craig
VA04500
2
Johns Creek
Dam #1
McDaniel
s Lake Earth
Mountain Castles
Soil and Water
Conservation
District Craig
VA04500
3
Johns Creek
Dam #3 Earth
Mountain Castles
Soil and Water
Conservation
District Craig
VA04500
4
Johns Creek
Dam #4
Dicks
Creek
Lake Earth
Mountain Castles
Soil and Water
Conservation
District Craig
VA01901
0
Falling
Creek
Reservoir
Dam Earth
Western Virginia
Water Authority Roanoke County
VA16100
1 Niagara Gravity
Appalachian Power
Company Roanoke County
VA16100
2
Loch Haven
Lake Dam Gravity
Bane International
Company LLC Roanoke County
VA16100
4
Clifford D.
Craig
Memorial
Dam
Spring
Hollow
Reservoir
Dam
Concret
e
Western Virginia
Water Authority Roanoke County
VA16100
5
Woods End
Dam
Hidden
Valley
High
School
Dam Earth Roanoke County Roanoke County
VA16100
8 Darr Dam
Hudick
Dam Earth
Richard C. & Norma
Lee Darr Roanoke County
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-38
Federal
ID Dam Name
Alternate
Dam
Name
Dam
Type Owner Name Location
VA16101
3
Roanoke
College Dam Earth
Roanoke College
Trustees C/O
Roanoke College
Roanoke
County/City of
Salem
VA77000
2
Spring
Valley Lake
Dam Earth
Spring Valley Lake
LLC;Spring Valley
Lake, LLC City of Roanoke
VA77000
1
Windsor
Lake Dam Earth
Windsor Lake
Corporation City of Roanoke
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-39
3.5 Hurricane and Tropical Storm
Definition of Hazard
Hurricanes, tropical storms, and tropical depressions occasionally strike the region, causing
multiple impacts, most often flooding and wind damage. While damages from these events are
referred to in other sections of this document, this section looks at past storm events more
holistically.
The National Weather Service offers the following definitions of these storm events:
Tropical Depression: Tropical cyclone with maximum sustained surface winds of 38 mph;
Tropical Storm: Maximum sustained surface winds of 39-74 mph;
Hurricane: Maximum sustained surface winds of 74+ mph.
While this hazard is discussed individually in this chapter, it is important to note that the primary
impacts of hurricane and tropical storm in the region are due to wind damage and riverine flooding
caused by excess precipitation. In Chapter 4, this hazard is assessed as part of section 4.4
Flooding and section 4.8 Wind Event.
Historic Event Descriptions
Virginia has been struck by 48 hurricanes from 1900 to 2018 according to records from the
National Hurricane Center. The Roanoke Valley – Alleghany region has not experienced a direct
hurricane in over 100 years. The region is impacted by the remnants of the hurricanes as tropical
depressions and subtropical storms bringing heavy rains and winds. The following major events
have occurred in the region.
August 20, 1969, Hurricane Camille: Camille made landfall as a Category 5 hurricane smashing
the Mississippi Coast with 200 mph winds on August 17. Camille was the strongest hurricane to
make landfall on the U.S. this century. The hurricane maintained force for 10 hours as it moved
150 miles inland. The storm tracked northward weakening and becoming less defined. It moved
toward Virginia on the 19th and was only a tropical depression. Moisture from the warm Gulf
Stream waters moved northwest toward the storm and new feeder bands formed. These
thunderstorms "trained" (one followed the other), into the Blue Ridge south of Charlottesville. In
just 12 hours, up to 31 inches of rain fell with devastating results (153 killed, most in Nelson
County). Major flooding followed as the bulge of water moved down the James River into
Richmond. Waynesboro on the South River saw eight feet of water in its downtown and Buena
Vista had five and one-half feet in its business section. Damage was estimated at 113 million
dollars (1969 dollars). The remains of this storm caused flooding that destroyed homes, roads,
railroads, and bridges along the James River in Botetourt County.
June 21, 1972, Hurricane Agnes. Agnes originated in the Gulf of Mexico and was downgraded to
a tropical storm by the time it reached Virginia, yet still caused 13 deaths in the Commonwealth.
The storm impacted the entire region. Tropical Storm Agnes was a severe event and resulted in
as much as one-third of the City of Covington under water where one church, three public
buildings, two industrial plants, 8 commercial buildings, and 490 private residences were
damaged. During the event, Glen Wilton was isolated due to floodwaters covering the only road
access to the community. The storm impacted communities along the James and Roanoke Rivers.
Tropical Storm Agnes was the second highest storm of record along the James River in
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-40
Buchanan. The storm caused a 50-year flood. The Roanoke Valley was hit with the effects of
Agnes, causing the Roanoke River to crest at 19.6 feet and approximately 400 homes were
damaged by flooding in the Roanoke-Salem area.
Sept. 28, 2004, Hurricane Jeanne. The remnants of Hurricane Jeanne, in the form of a tropical
depression, moved through the vicinities of Greenville, SC, Roanoke, VA and Washington, DC
and finally to the New Jersey coast on Tuesday, Sept. 28. Maximum sustained wind speeds
ranged from 25 mph to 30 mph near the storm's center. The primary impact on the Commonwealth
was flooding, although one F1 tornado touched down in Pittsylvania County. The heaviest rainfall
occurred from the New River Valley to the Southern Shenandoah Valley. Rainfall in this region
ranged from 3 inches to 7 inches, with the highest amounts falling in Patrick, eastern Floyd,
eastern Montgomery, Giles, Roanoke, Botetourt and Rockbridge counties.
September 14-16, 2018, Hurricane Florence. Hurricane Florence made landfall along the North
Carolina coast on September 14, and after slowly tracking westward through South Carolina, the
remnants of Florence did not reach western Virginia until September 16, accelerating again by
that time. The track of the remnant circulation through the southern Appalachians resulted in
heavy rain and flooding, and at least one landslide, over a large part of the NWS Blacksburg
forecast area, with especially heavy rain along portions of the Blue Ridge due to enhanced
upslope easterly flow. In addition to the heavy rain and flooding, gusty winds (although below
tropical storm force) combined with saturated ground to cause numerous uprooted trees and
some scattered power outages. Rainfall amounts across the area varied form less than 1 inch in
Eagle Rock, 2.6 inches at the Roanoke Regional Airport to 5.6 inches on Bent Mountain. Winds
were from 38 mph at the Roanoke Regional Airport to 13 mph at Springwood in Botetourt County.
The Roanoke River crested at 11.14 feet (0.5 feet above flood stage) and the James River in
Buchanan crested at 14.7 feet (2.3 feet below flood stage).
October 10-11, 2018, Hurricane Michael. Hurricane Michael made landfall along the Florida
panhandle as Category 4 hurricane on October 10, 2018, then tracked northeastward with the
northern portion of the storm circulation tracking across portions of Southside Virginia, Thursday
afternoon, the 11th. As the storm circulation approached on October 11th a cold front moving in
from the west and interacted with the storm and enhanced rainfall especially east of Interstate 81.
Widespread rainfall amounts of 4 to 8 inches were reported, along with local amounts over 10
inches, mainly from the mountains of North Carolina up through Southside Virginia. This resulted
in significant flash flooding with flash flood emergencies issued for the city of Roanoke, as well as
Roanoke County. Rainfall amounts ranged from 1.97 inches at Gathright Dam, 3.3 inches at
Daleville, 3.15 at the Roanoke Regional Airport to 7.16 inches in the Cave Spring area of Roanoke
County. The Roanoke River at Glenvar crested at 17.1 feet (8.1 feet above flood stage) and in
Roanoke at 16.4 feet (6.4 feet above flood stage).
September 27, 2024, Hurricane Helene: Helene made landfall in Florida as a powerful Category
4 hurricane late Thursday, September 26, and moved quickly northward into the southeastern
states, and then turned slightly northwestward towards the southern Appalachian Mountains
overnight into Friday morning, weakening as it moved over land. Helene’s intensity and fast
forward motion led to impacts being felt well inland, from the Florida Big Bend area into the
Appalachians only 12 hours after landfall, and there was extensive damage in southwest Virginia.
Widespread cellular service and power outages, some lasting for several days, occurred as high
winds downed thousands of trees across the region. Winds gusted as high as 55 mph to 65 mph
in southwest Virginia. There were three confirmed tornadoes associated with the remnants of
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-41
Hurricane Helene in the Piedmont region of Virginia. Flooding impacts from Hurricane Helene
were extensive across the area and were exacerbated by a predecessor rainfall event that
occurred a day before Helene reached the region, which brought six to eight inches of rain to the
mountains prior to the arrival of the remnants of Helene. The three-day rainfall totals associated
with the remnants of Hurricane Helene were highest in Grayson and Smyth Counties, where
observations of 10 to locally 15 inches of rain were recorded. The Piedmont of Virginia received
much less rain, between one and two inches, with a couple areas around three inches. Total
economic losses for Virginia, which include Virginia’s agriculture, forestry, and other industries,
are expected to range between $416 million and $630 million per an economic analysis released
by Virginia Tech researchers. Within the planning region, at least 20,000 people lost power due
to downed trees in Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, and Roanoke Counties. One woman was killed
when struck by a flying chicken coop. Others, including a postal worker and a police officer, were
injured by downed trees and flying debris. Total losses from agriculture damages in Craig County
were estimated at $85,000. In Troutville, twenty-one acres of sunflowers at Beaver Dam Farm
were flattened by strong winds.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-42
3.6 Geologic Hazards
Definition of Hazard
Karst is defined as a landscape with sinkholes, springs, and streams that sink into subsurface
caverns. In karst areas, the fractured limestone rock formations have been dissolved by flowing
groundwater to form cavities, pipes, and conduits. Sinkholes, caves, sinking streams, and springs
signal the presence of underground drainage systems in karst areas.
Sinkholes are natural depressions on the land surface that are shaped like a bowl or cone. They
are common in regions of karst, where mildly acidic groundwater has dissolved rock such as
limestone, dolostone, marble, or gypsum. Sinkholes are subsidence or collapse features that form
at points of local instability. Their presence indicates that additional sinkholes may develop in the
future. The probability for karst hazards cannot be determined as easily as other hazards due to
lack of accurate mapping and historical data.
The most notable karst related event in the region was a sinkhole in Botetourt County that
occurred on Route 670 in 2005. That hole eventually expanded to 50 feet deep and 75 feet wide.
Several smaller sinkholes have damaged Interstate 81 to the north in Augusta, Rockbridge and
Shenandoah counties and south in Washington County in the past along with damage to Route
460 in Bedford County to the east. To date, there have been no federal disaster declarations or
NCEI recorded events for karst related sinkhole events. Currently, there is no comprehensive
long-term record of past events in Virginia.
Figure 19: Karst Map, VDEQ
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-43
The term landslide describes many types of downhill earth movements, ranging from rapidly
moving catastrophic rock avalanches and debris flows in mountainous regions to more slowly
moving earth slides and other ground failures.
Though most landslide losses in the United States accrue from many widely distributed events,
landslides can be triggered by severe storms and earthquakes, causing spectacular damage in a
short time over a wide area. Some landslides move slowly and cause gradual damage, whereas
others move so rapidly that they can destroy property and take lives. Debris flows are a common
type of fast-moving landslide that generally occurs during intense rainfall on saturated soil. Their
consistency ranges from watery mud to thick, rocky mud (like wet cement) which is dense enough
to carry boulders, trees, and cars. Debris flows from many different sources can combine in
channels, where their destructive power may be greatly increased.7
Landslides can be triggered by both natural changes in the environment and human activities.
Inherent weaknesses in the rock or soil often combine with one or more triggering events, such
as heavy rain, snowmelt, and changes in groundwater level, or seismic activity. Erosion may
remove the toe and lateral slope support, triggering potential landslides. Human activities
triggering landslides are usually associated with construction and changes in slope and surface
water and groundwater levels. Changes in irrigation, runoff and drainage can increase erosion
and change groundwater levels and ground saturation.
Historic Event Descriptions
Historical records tell us that destructive landslides and debris flows in the Appalachian Mountains
occur when unusually heavy rain from hurricanes and intense storms soaks the ground, reducing
the ability of steep slopes to resist the downslope pull of gravity. For example, during Hurricane
Camille in 1969, such conditions generated debris flows in Nelson County, Virginia. The storm
caused 150 deaths, mostly attributed to debris flows, and more than $100 million in property
damage. Likewise, 72 hours of storms in Virginia and West Virginia during early November 1985
caused debris flows and flooding in the Potomac and Cheat River basins that were responsible
for 70 deaths and $1.3 billion in damage to homes, businesses, roads, and farmlands.
Most localities of the RVARC region have experienced small, localized landslide events,
especially areas in the valleys. The mountain slopes are characterized by the USGS as having a
high susceptibility but a low incidence, indicating that few events have occurred on the higher
slopes. Chapter 2: Regional Profile contains a topographic map of the region.
The only documented concentration of landslides in the planning region has been along Smith
Creek in the Town of Clifton Forge. A State Emergency Declaration was issued in November of
1987 for the area. Heavy rain caused landslides along Smith Creek in Clifton Forge, the third
occurrence in the past decade. The area is landslide prone and structures are at risk from further
landslides. A study is warranted to determine scope of the problem and a method to stabilize the
area.
In 2008 a rockslide occurred on Route 220 just north of the City of Covington. No property damage
estimates were reported. In 2019, another event on Route 220 closed a section of the road north
of Covington for a two-week period. Small landslides just outside of Eagle Rock have closed
7 Debris Flow Hazards in the Blue Ridge of Virginia, USGS Fact Sheet 159-96P. L. Gori and W. C. Burton, 1996.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-44
Route 43 multiple times. Landslides on Route 220 south in the Bent Mountain area of Roanoke
County have resulted in closures of that road multiple times.
In 2021 a debris flow event triggered by heavy rain was reported in the City of Roanoke with
25,000 in damages. A car wash sustained severe structural damage when the hillside
immediately behind the building gave way and smashed through the rear wall of the building. No
deaths or injuries were reported.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-45
3.7 Wildfire
Definition of Hazard
Wildfire is a particularly pernicious natural disaster that can have wide effects across the region,
affecting air quality, property, and safety. A significant portion of the region is forested and
managed by public entities, including the National Park Service, National Forest Service, Virginia
Department of Forestry, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, and the Virginia
Department of Wildlife Resources.
Several factors affect wildfires, including meteorological factors such as temperature and wind,
and non-meteorological factors such as soil moisture, topography, debris accumulation of dead
or dying vegetation, and forest density and age. Wildfires across the state are primarily caused
by debris burning. Fire laws proscribe burning until after 4pm from February 15th to April 30th, the
major fire season across the Commonwealth. Other causes include powerlines, lightning,
campfires, and arson.
The Virginia Department of Forestry is the primary agency involved in wildfire education and
response in Virginia; however, other entities which may engage in wildfire response include local
EMS and federal entities. Data in this section comes from the VDOF unless otherwise noted.
Historic Event Descriptions
Historically, three major fire events have occurred in the region.
In 1999, Fort Lewis Mountain in the western part of Roanoke County burned out of control for a
week, endangering multiple homes before it was brought under control.
In April 2012, a series of wildfires burned more than 38,000 acres in western Virginia. One of the
largest fires impacting the region was in a remote area in Alleghany County 10 miles west of
Covington. The U.S. Forest Service reported the Alleghany Tunnel Fire burned 11,381 acres and
resulted in temporary closure of sections of routes 770 and 850. The largest fire originated in Rich
Hole Wilderness area of Alleghany County. This fire spread to private lands, grew to 15,454 acres,
and closed parts of Interstate 64 in both directions. 7,351 acres burned in the Barbers Creek Fire
in Alleghany and Craig counties. All fires posed threats to structures on private lands. Fires also
occurred in Page and Shenandoah counties.
On the first weekend of March 2018, VDOF responded to 127 wildfires spread by high winds.
Across the Commonwealth. These fires burned a total of 690 acres and impacted Botetourt
County and multiple other localities across the state. A month later in Roanoke County, several
fires ignited along the shoulder of Virginia Highway 311 on Catawba Mountain, near the highway’s
intersection with the Appalachian Trail. The fires grew quickly in dry and windy conditions. Several
of these fires merged into one fire which grew to 165 acres and threatened the safety of dozens
of hikers who were on the trail to McAfee Knob.
Since 2018, approximately 74 fires have occurred in the region, with 38 occurring in Alleghany
County, 18 occurring in Botetourt County, five occurring in Craig County, and 13 occurring in
Roanoke County. Of these the largest occurred in October of 2023, when 97 acres burned near
Penny Hollow and Cumberland Gap Road in Craig County. The threshold for a major fire is 100
acres. A full incident list is contained in Appendix E: Regional Wildfire Report.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-46
3.8 Wind Event
Definition of Hazard
For the purposes of this plan, wind events shall refer to straight line wind events such as derecho
or thunderstorm winds as well as other wind events such as tornadoes.
Straight line wind is a term used to define any thunderstorm wind that is not associated with
rotation and is used mainly to differentiate from tornadic winds. Most straight-line winds are a
result of outflow generated by a thunderstorm downdraft. High winds are also associated with
hurricanes, with two significant effects: widespread debris due to damaged and downed trees and
building debris; and power outages. Half of all severe weather reports in the lower 48 states are
due to damaging winds. Since most thunderstorms produce some straight-line winds as a result
of outflow generated by the thunderstorm downdraft, anyone living in thunderstorm-prone areas
is at risk for experiencing straight line winds. The majority of the wind events experienced in the
region are considered straight line wind events, with the vast majority of these driven by
thunderstorms.
Straight line wind events can occur anywhere in the planning region and have the potential to
impact all types of buildings, power and telecommunication transmission lines, and transportation
services.
Figure 20: EF Ratings Definitions, Weather.gov
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-47
A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud. It is spawned
by a thunderstorm (or as a result of a hurricane) and produced when cool air overrides a layer of
warm air, forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. The damage from a tornado is a result of the high
wind velocity and wind-blown debris. Tornado season is generally April through September,
although tornadoes can occur at any time of year.
In February 2007, the National Weather Service adopted the Enhanced Fujita scale to measure
tornadoes. The EF scale replaces the original Fujita scale that led to inconsistent tornado ratings
due to a lack of damage indicators, no account of construction quality and variability, and no
definitive correlation between damage and wind speed. For example, a weak structure combined
with a slow-moving storm could lead to a tornado’s rating being higher than it should be. The EF
scale accounts for these and other variables for a more accurate measurement.
Low-intensity tornadoes appear to occur most frequently in Virginia. Tornadoes rated EF2 or
higher are very rare, although EF2, EF3, and a few EF4 storms have occurred.
Historic Event Descriptions
In total, 242 wind events have occurred in the region since the last update of the plan (see Table
3-1). More events were reported in Roanoke County than in any other jurisdiction. Almost all of
these events resulted in some level of damages, with a total reported cost across all events of
2,223,850. Crop damage alone was reported at $140,000, though this number is likely
underreported. The average cost per wind event was $10,640. Sixteen events with damages
estimated at greater than $20,000 occurred in the region in this time period.
The largest scale event in the region was the derecho on June 29, 2012 that arrived with 80 mph
winds and left over a million people without power and caused extensive wind damage throughout
Virginia. The event was caused by a series of days with high temperatures in excess of 100
degrees created by a heat dome over the central and eastern US followed by a line of strong
thunderstorms that moved quickly from the Chicago area to the east on the afternoon of June
29th. Emergency services personnel dealt with fires caused by downed powerlines, collapsed
roofs, and wrecked vehicles. Many businesses in the area remained closed for an extended time
and lost revenue due to the power outages while hardware stores experienced a run on
generators and propane fueled grills. It took more than two weeks for utility companies to restore
power to all residents in the region. Recovery, including the clean-up of hundreds of downed trees,
roofs and building repairs lasted throughout July and August. A federal disaster declaration was
made for this event.
Significant straight line wind events have occurred since 2019. In February 2019, a strong cold
front passed over western and southwestern Virginia. In its wake, high winds intensified in the
overnight hours particularly along and west of the Blue Ridge. Impacts were amplified by
waterlogged soil, allowing trees to be uprooted or displaced more easily. At the peak of the event,
approximately 40,000 homes in Virginia were without power.
Thunderstorms struck in May of 2019 during the afternoon and evening hours. The storms
produced hail up to the size of half dollar coins and produced damaging winds that blew down
numerous trees and power lines. At least 4,000 people lost power due to trees falling on to power
lines, and a few structures also suffered damage. In June of the same year, multiple
thunderstorms developed, some of which intensified to severe levels and produced damaging
winds that knocked down numerous trees. Numerous trees and tree limbs, as well as power lines,
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-48
were blown down by straight line thunderstorm winds in eastern Roanoke and around the
community of Vinton. Siding panels from the Roanoke Times Newspaper office were blown down
onto the street. One tree fell onto a parked car on Underhill Avenue. Damage was most
concentrated along Shelbourne Avenue in Vinton; however, damage was observed from Hardy
Road to the Roanoke River, about a 3/4-mile-wide swath. Winds picked up a metal shed on
Shelbourne Avenue and blew it into a telephone pole. The damage resulted in a loss of
commercial power to about 2,000 customers in eastern Roanoke County.
On Halloween of 2019, a cold front brought strong winds both ahead and behind the frontal
passage during the afternoon and evening hours. These winds were not associated with any
thunderstorms, but they blew down trees and power lines in southwest Virginia, particularly
impacting Botetourt and Alleghany County.
In July of 2020, thunderstorm winds brought two trees down on Catawba Valley Road in Roanoke
County. One of the trees fell onto a home in the 3700 block. Damage values are estimated at
50,000.
A large thunderstorm complex moved east from the Ohio and Tennessee Valleys across
southwest Virginia in May of 2021. The system caused dozens of trees to be toppled across the
region particularly in Botetourt County. Heavy rainfall from these storms also caused localized
flooding in the City of Roanoke, where rainfall rates were in excess of 4 inches per hour at one
point, between a 5-year and 10-year rainfall event per NOAA Atlas 14 Point Frequency Estimates,
showing that weather events are complex and often create multiple hazards.
In June of 2022, numerous trees and power lines were downed by thunderstorm winds in
Botetourt County. Near Iron Gate, one tree fell onto a garage and damaged a vehicle.
April of 2023 saw a $60,000 estimated damage event when wind gusts resulted in many trees
and power lines down in the Cities of Salem and Roanoke and portions of Roanoke County. This
resulted in an estimated one to two thousand customers without power. Among the fallen trees,
one fell and destroyed a raptor enclosure at the Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center which cost
around $25,000 to replace. Additionally a power pole and a telephone pole were split in two.
In May of 2024, thunderstorm cells produced a tornado (discussed later in this section). In
September of 2024, Hurricane Helene caused widespread impacts across the region, with over
3,200 customers reported without power at the peak of the high winds. A peak wind speed of 68
mph was measured. There was one confirmed fatality. A woman was killed when struck by a
chicken coop that was lofted by the high winds. A deputy was also injured at the scene. Total
losses from agriculture damages were around $85,000, including losses from crops and
structures.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-49
Figure 21: Tornado Paths, NOAA
Several tornadoes have touched down in the planning region. On April 24, 1896, around 4:30 pm,
a tornado moved northeast from Salem into Roanoke destroying a bowling alley and several other
buildings. A framed home near the bowling alley was leveled, killing three of the eight-member
family in the house. The five others were injured.
In Bath and Alleghany counties, the Cowpasture Valley is at an elevation of 1,500 feet and lies
between two ridges that rise 1,000 feet above the valley. On May 2, 1929, a tornado struck around
6 pm. Property losses in the communities of Coronation and Sitlington were great. At least 10
people were injured, but none were killed. There were five tornadoes reported on that day. More
may have struck remote areas. Twenty-two people were killed and over 150 injured with at least
half a million dollars in damage in Alleghany and Bath counties.
April 3-4, 1974 is known as the "Super Outbreak" with 148 tornadoes, 315 people killed and 5,484
injured across the United States. It was the most tornadoes ever in recorded in a 24-hour period
and it was the worst tornado outbreak since February 19, 1884. In Virginia, eight tornadoes hit.
One person was killed and 15 injured, all in mobile homes. Over 200 homes and barns and over
40 mobile homes and trailers were damaged or destroyed. The Saltville area and Roanoke were
the hardest hit. An F3 tornado touched down on the west edge of Roanoke, near Salem around
5 a.m., and moved through the north part of Roanoke to Bonsack and into Botetourt County to
the Blue Ridge area. The path was initially a mile wide, but it continued to narrow to 75 yards
across near the end of its track of damage. It hit four schools (two lost portions of their roof and
two had windows broken out) and two apartment complexes, Grandview Village Apartments (18
buildings damaged) and Ferncliff Apartments (lost roof). The Red Cross reported 120 homes
damaged or destroyed in the Roanoke area. Trees were down on buildings and cars. Carports,
garages, and porches were flattened. Roofs were partly blown off several houses in Botetourt.
A small tornado struck northern Roanoke County on August 5, 2003. The storm had winds of 110-
113 miles per hour and caused damage to ITT Industries and Sunnybrook Garage on Plantation
Road in addition to damaging roofs, fences and a car in the area. No injuries were reported as a
result of the tornado.
A small tornado touched down in the City of Roanoke on June 4, 2008. The tornado was rated
EF-0 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale of tornado intensity. The National Weather Service reported
that the storm knocked down power lines and trees, including on houses along a 1.4-mile path.
Appalachian Power stated that the storm knocked out power to 4,000 customers.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-50
A tornado touched down just east of the Town of New Castle on April 15, 2018. Classified as an
EF-1, estimated windspeeds reached 105 mph and had a path length of 0.5 miles. The tornado
damaged 6 homes, several outbuildings and garages, and approximately 50 trees in the vicinity.
Three cars and a double axel trailer were moved including one truck that was flipped over. The
tornado was part of a wide regional outbreak made up of several supercells on April 15th
impacting communities in Virginia and North Carolina.
On August 1, 2020 an isolated storm produced an EF0 tornado, resulting in a discontinuous path
of damage with uprooted trees and small trees snapped aloft, with damages estimated at $3,500.
An EF-1 tornado touched down near the intersection of Karen Drive and Joan Circle, on May 26,
2024. Several tree trunks were snapped. Additional trees were snapped and uprooted as the
tornado moved east-northeast, with loss of roofing material noted at several homes and apartment
buildings just south of the Roanoke River. The tornado lifted just east of Electric Road near the
intersection of Midland and Easton Roads. The estimated peak wind speeds were 100 to 105
mph. Damage was estimated to be 1.17 million dollars. The same storm cells spawned straight
line winds which resulted in an estimated $22,000 worth of damages.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-51
3.9 Winter Storm
Definition of Hazard
Winter storms are events which create snow, freezing rain, or sleet. This frozen precipitation can
accumulate on powerlines, trees, roofs and roads and cause damage or fatalities through car
wrecks, loss of electricity, and, in extreme cases, damage to buildings. The planning region
experiences a handful of winter storm events each year.
Winter storms are commonly assessed with the Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale (NESIS). Some
Category 1 or 2 storms are recorded in the NESIS database which have a southern extent within
the planning region over the past five years. However, the core of these storms was not localized
in the planning region.
Figure 22: NESIS Scale
Historic Event Descriptions
While typical snow and ice events result in low accumulations, several larger winter storms have
been documented in the region.
February of 1960 found the area blanketed with 27.6 inches and March delivered 30.3 inches that
same year. The March storm registered as a Category 4 storm across the northeast. In January
of 1966, the area received a total of 41.2 inches of snow in a Category 3 storm. The second
greatest official snow accumulation in a single 24-hour period occurred on February 11th and 12th
of 1983 when 18.6 inches covered the region in another Category 3 storm. The storm resulted in
snowdrifts of up to three feet in height. This was the third heaviest snowfall in over 100 years.
The "Storm of the Century" hit the valley in March 1993, the first Category 5 since the NESIS
scale became commonly used to directly impact the region. With blizzard-like conditions and
nearly 30 inches of snow, this was the biggest winter storm in 10 years. Localities in the region
received a Presidential Declaration of Emergency and the National Guard was mobilized to help
with emergency transportation needs. Shelters were open for those without electricity.
A devastating storm struck the region and surrounding jurisdictions in February 1994, with one to
three inches of solid ice from freezing rain and sleet. Roads were blocked, electric and phone
lines were damaged, and a large portion of the valley was without electricity.
The “Blizzard of ’96,” also a Category 5, dropped 22.2 inches officially in 24 hours in early January
of 1996 and remains the current record 24-hour snowfall. Many areas of the region received more
than 36 inches during the same period.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-52
In March 2009 snowfall reports in the region ranged from 6 to 9 inches and were the largest snow
event since 2005. The Winter of 2009-2010 brought three major winter storms to the area. On
December 18th, with areas of Craig and Alleghany County reporting up to 23 inches, snow
continued to fall for the next 11 days. The first week of February 2010, saw another 8-10 inches
fall on top of an event in late January that had already dropped 10-12 inches causing power
outages, and dangerous driving conditions. The biggest snowstorm on record for the City was
December 18-19, 2009 with 17.8 inches.
The City of Roanoke’s snowiest single day in December occurred in 2018 with 15.2 inches.
Since the last iteration of this plan, 31 winter storm or winter weather events have been recorded
by NCEI in the planning region. These events are generally widespread and affect multiple
localities, meaning that it is more truthful to say that only about 11 individual events have occurred.
These events have mostly been characterized by snowfall of less than 10 inches or ice
accumulation, with the most widespread impacts being power outages.
In January of 2019, a winter storm event resulted in snow and ice across much of the region, with
snow accumulations of up to 4.8 inches in some places followed by slight ice accumulations from
sleet and freezing rain. In February, another storm affected the region, with around 4 inches of
accumulation.
The 2020-2021 winter storm season began early in December, when snow and ice accumulations
of a half inch to 2.5 inches were observed across the region. Another region-wide storm struck at
the end of January, with snowfall amounts of 4-7 inches recorded across the region. Two small
winter weather events struck Craig and Roanoke Counties respectively in February. These
episodes were brief and resulted in less than half inch accumulations of sleet. Another storm event
affected the whole region later in the month, with accumulations of less than 1.5 inches.
January of 2022 saw two regional winter storm events. Accumulations in the region ranged from
1.5 to 6.5 inches in the first storm event, and from 1 to 8 inches in the second storm event.
January of 2024 saw a small episode of winter weather in Alleghany, followed by an episode of
heavy snow in Botetourt and Roanoke Counties with accumulations of 4.8 and 3.5 inches
respectively in higher elevations.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-53
3.10 Hazards Not Assessed
Drought
Drought is defined by four factors: precipitation, groundwater levels, streamflow, and reservoir
levels. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality monitors drought across the state to
designate drought events.
Five major droughts affected Virginia in the 20th century, during 1930-32, 1938-42, 1962-71,
1980-82, and from 1998 to 2002. Following the 2002 drought, the Local and Regional Water
Supply Planning Regulation was established in Virginia, which required each locality to develop
and submit a plan by 2011, either alone or in collaboration with other localities. The Virginia State
Water Resources Plan (SWRP) was finalized and released to the public in October 2015. An
update of the document was conducted in 2020.
There are three water supply plans which overlap the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region included
in the 2020 SWRP:
The Upper James Water Supply Plan: this plan covers Alleghany, Bath, and Highland
Counties, as well as Lexington, Buena Vista, Covington, Clifton Forge and Iron Gate and
was produced in partnership with Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission.
The Roanoke River Water Supply Plan: this plan covers Roanoke, Bedford, Botetourt, and
Franklin Counties as well as the cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Towns of Boones
Mill, Buchanan, Fincastle, Rocky Mount, Troutville and Vinton.
The Craig County – Town of New Castle Regional Water Supply Plan: this plan covers
Craig County and the Town of New Castle.
Figure 23: Water Supply Planning Areas, DEQ
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-54
The Regional Commission is currently in the process of assisting with updates to regional Water
Supply plans following new watershed boundary guidance released in 20248. Two plans will be
completed for the Roanoke River basin and Upper James basin respectively. These will supply
data and information for a future iteration of the SWRP. Water supply planning includes
information concerning community water systems and self-supplied users, existing and potential
sources of water supply, existing use, and anticipated future water demand.
Pandemic
A pandemic is an epidemic that has reached a global level of spread. On January 30, 2020, the
World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency of Concern following
identification of the coronavirus COVID-19, followed by a declaration of pandemic on March 11th
of that year. The pandemic had harsh economic ripple effects across the Commonwealth and the
country. While this document does not assess future pandemic risk, a brief summary of local
impacts is included below as a learning opportunity for future disaster events.
In Virginia, a State of Emergency was declared on March 12th of 2020. On March 13th all K-12
schools in the Commonwealth were ordered closed. On March 23rd, businesses such as bowling
alleys, gyms, and theaters were also ordered closed. On March 24th, restaurants were ordered to
close dining rooms. On March 30th, a statewide Stay at Home order was issued. The Stay at
Home order remained broadly in effect until May 15th. During Phase One reopening, people were
still encouraged to maintain social distancing and mask fully in public. Social gatherings were
capped at 10 people, and outdoor dining was allowed at restaurants. On May 29th, Virginians
received an official order requiring all people to mask indoors. Phase Two reopening began on
June 5th, which allowed an increase in social gatherings from 10 to 50 people. Limited indoor
dining returned to restaurants and gyms were able to reopen. On June 8th, evictions proceedings
were suspended. On July 1st, Virginia entered Phase Three reopening, which further loosened
restrictions. On November 15th, new restrictions were placed limiting all indoor and outdoor
gatherings to 25 people due to surging case numbers. On December 14th, a universal stay-at-
home order was issued between 12 am and 5 am, along with a universal mask mandate. Social
gatherings were limited to 10 people.
A vaccine was first made available in Virginia in December of 2020, but was restricted to frontline
workers due to availability. As of April 2021, the vaccine was officially available to all Virginians
aged 16 or older. The universal indoor mask mandate was lifted in May of 2021, along with all
social distancing and venue capacity restrictions.
Economic impacts from the pandemic can be seen in a variety of data points, including
unemployment rates, spending and tax revenues, and business closures.9
Many community stakeholders found their operations directly affected by the pandemic. While a
full list of discussions can be found in Appendix A: Public Engagement Summary, a major
takeaway was that non-governmental organizations and nonprofits serving marginalized
communities found themselves quickly adapting in order to meet sharp increases in demand for
services which government programs were not able to fully cover. This shows that, while NGO
and nonprofit aid programs cannot replace government assistance, they are a pivotal part of the
8 (Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, n.d.)
9 (Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, 2025)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-55
post-disaster response, in many cases providing immediate emergency aid while other, longer-
term aid was being processed.
Hospitals were additionally a frontline for disaster response. Hospitalizations and deaths from the
pandemic in the years of 2020-2021 are captured in Table 15. Data comes from Virginia’s Open
Data Portal.
Table 15: Infections, Hospitalizations, and Deaths due to COVID-19, 2020-2021
Locality Total Cases Hospitalizations Deaths
Alleghany 2,512 87 87
Botetourt 4,825 105 66
Craig 761 22 11
Roanoke County 14,245 281 195
Covington 818 34 19
Salem 4,396 108 83
Roanoke City 14,290 335 272
Total 41,847 972 733
The total number of deaths reported per the Virginia Department of Health and Human Services
was 5,000 for the year 2020, 614 more than were observed in 201910. The total number of deaths
reported due to COVID-19 in 2020 was 560. It is safe to assume that deaths and hospitalizations
due to COVID-19 represent an increased burden on hospital and health services staff. Bed
capacity at area hospitals is included in Chapter 2: Regional Profile.11.
In 2025, there are 1,463 licensed beds in three area hospitals within the service area. Hospitals
outside of the service area may receive patients in a diversion event. In the case of the COVID-
19 pandemic, lockdown and social distancing measures reduced spread sufficiently to allow for
the care of all patients. In a more acute disaster, hospital bed capacity may be a limiting factor to
disaster response, causing a greater loss of life. In the case of Hurricane Helene, further
discussed in Section 3.5 in this chapter, diverted patients from Asheville, North Carolina reached
Roanoke’s area hospitals in cases where specific treatments were needed for patients (e.g. in
high-risk pregnancies) as reported in stakeholder interviews with CHIP. Further study of hospital
capacity in disaster situations is recommended but could not be encompassed fully in this plan.
10 (Division of Health Statistics, Virginia Department of Health, n.d.)
11 (Virginia Health Information, 2021)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-56
blank]
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-1
Chapter 4. Risk Assessment
4.1 Disaster Rankings
Hazards assessed in this chapter include all listed hazards from Chapter 3 with the exception of
section 3.11 Hazards Not Assessed and 3.5 Hurricane and Tropical Storm. While the region
experiences the impacts of a few tropical storms or depressions and remnants of hurricanes,
these impacts are experienced as flooding and wind events, and assessment of these two events
reasonably addresses risk from Hurricane and Tropical Storm.
This section summarizes the contents of the following sections of the chapter. For more
information on what data was used for individual hazard assessment, please refer to the relevant
section of this chapter. Definitions of ranking methodology are included for reference.
Projected Scale of Event: Hazard events may occur on site-specific, community, or regional
scales. Estimated scale of event is derived from the impacts of historic events and the projected
likelihood of events to remain substantially similar in the future. Scores are defined by the
approximate land area affected by a single event.
Projected Scale of Event
Local Effects Jurisdiction-Wide Effects Region-Wide Effects
Effects of an event are
localized to a parcel or
neighborhood.
Effects of an event affect a
substantial portion of the jurisdiction.
Effects of an event affect multiple
jurisdictions or the region as a
whole.
Projected Costs per Annum: Costs are a concrete way to estimate impact from a hazard event.
Costs have been derived where possible from NRI and NCEI data, HAZUS modeling, and other
sources. Costs are represented as high, medium, and low based off of thresholds defined by the
individual jurisdictions. This may mean that costs that are considered high for one jurisdiction are
low for another jurisdiction.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-2
Projected Costs per Annum
Low Medium High
Alleghany County Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
City of Covington Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Town of Clifton Forge Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Town of Iron Gate Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Craig County Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Town of New Castle Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Botetourt County Under $50,000 $50,000-$200,000 $200,000 or higher
Town of Buchanan Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Town of Fincastle Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Town of Troutville Under $50,000 $50,000-$200,000 $200,000 or higher
Roanoke County Under $200,000 $200,00-$1.5 million $1.5 million or higher
Town of Vinton Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
City of Roanoke Under $200,000 $200,00-$1.5 million $1.5 million or higher
City of Salem Under $200,000 $200,00-$1.5 million $1.5 million or higher
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Western Virginia Water Authority Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Projected Frequency of Events: This takes into account the data accumulated in Chapter 3
regarding historical events. Frequent small to medium events can be just as impactful as a single
large event, and more costly over the long term for communities.
Projected Frequency of Event
Less than Annual Annual Multiple Times per Year
An event occurs once every
two or more years.
An event occurs on average once a
year.
An event occurs on average
multiple times a year.
Projected Local Vulnerabilities: This is the most individual of the rankings. Projected local
vulnerability to a hazard may be dependent on many factors, including the location of critical and
vulnerable facilities, age of population, and other specific vulnerabilities which may be important
to modeling impacts of that hazard. For example, certain hazards become more critical in areas
with steeper slopes, or with increased impervious surfaces. When possible, NRI data will inform
this ranking.
Projected Local Vulnerability
Low Medium High
Thresholds for these rankings are defined for each hazard.
Rankings are made for each locality, using a variety of data sources as appropriate or available.
Rankings have then been consolidated for the region.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-3
Sections of this chapter will specifically cite annual probability and expected annual loss provided
by the National Risk Index when available and appropriate. When not available, the closest
reasonable estimate will be supplied for comparison purposes.
In the case where HAZUS modeling or other improved local estimates of loss or risk exist, those
numbers will be given preference. It is understood that the regional agencies that operate in the
region are impacted by the hazards equivalent to the jurisdictions wherein they operate. Further
discussion of regional entities included in this plan will occur in Chapter 6: Regional Mitigation
Action Plan and Chapter 7: Jurisdiction-Specific Mitigation Action Plans.
Once values are assigned to each of these elements, the total score is ranked on the following
scale:
Hazard of Low Concern (4 to 6 points)
Hazard of Medium Concern (7 to 9 points)
Hazard of High Concern (10 to 12 points)
A regional score and a locality specific score are assigned for each hazard.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4
All Hazard Ranking Table
Table 16: All Hazards Ranking Table
Hazard Ranking Table: All Hazards
Locality Earthquake
Extreme
Temperatures Flooding
Geologic
Hazards Wildfire Wind Event Winter Storm
Alleghany County Medium Medium High Medium Medium High Medium
City of Covington Medium Low Medium Low Low High Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge Medium Low High Low Medium High Medium
Town of Iron Gate Low Low High Low Medium High Medium
Craig County Low Low Medium Low Low High Medium
Town of New Castle Low Low Medium Low Low High Medium
Botetourt County Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Town of Buchanan Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Town of Fincastle Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Town of Troutville Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Roanoke County Medium Medium High Medium High Medium Medium
Town of Vinton Medium Medium High Low Low Medium Medium
City of Roanoke Medium High High Low Low Medium Medium
City of Salem Low Medium High Low Low Medium Medium
Regional Score Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-5
High Hazard Potential Dams
High hazard potential dams are a unique structure within the region which may complicate hazard
events. Key risks to dam structures include flooding, earthquake, and geologic hazards. Flooding
is one of the most commonly occurring hazards in the region, and improving structures to
withstand increased flooding frequency and increasingly high flood events is important in reducing
risk of dam failure and downstream inundation. Further analysis is needed to assess structural
vulnerability to increased rain and flood events and potential downstream impacts; however,
efforts have been made to collect emergency action plans, inundation maps, and dam safety fact
sheets where available.
Earthquakes may negatively impact dam structures, which can cause the loss of water supply for
a community, loss of energy generation, and downstream flooding resulting in loss of life and
property damage. Earthquakes may also cause landslides or trigger other geologic hazards which
can negatively affect both water quality in the reservoir and impoundment structure access. In
1979, the first Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety. However, further documentation in the form of
the Earthquake Analyses and Design of Dams guidance was not completed until May 2005. This
indicates that dams within the region, largely built before that time, may be susceptible to
earthquakes. Further analysis is needed to determine the compounding risk factors of
earthquakes on high hazard potential dams in the region.
A comprehensive list of High Hazard Potential Dams in the region is located in Chapter 3. Dam
safety fact sheets and select inundation maps are located in Appendix H.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-6
4.2 Earthquake
Earthquake is a rare hazard in the region, but several factors make a potential occurrence
concerning. The age of housing stock, social vulnerability factors, steep slopes and the lack of
experience with this hazard could make a large earthquake deadly in the planning region.
Projected Scale of Event
In Chapter 3, historic events were discussed. Generally, earthquakes are considered a wide-
ranging event which ignore geographic boundaries. The 2020 earthquake was felt throughout
most of the service area, despite originating in North Caroline, and was only measured at a V to
VI at its epicenter. It is reasonable to expect that a larger earthquake anywhere across the western
portion of Virginia or North Carolina could have effects in the region. A large earthquake with an
epicenter in the region would likely be felt across the region even if it were a smaller event. The
small 2021 earthquake which occurred on the Montgomery County border was felt through parts
of Roanoke County, the City of Salem, and the City of Roanoke.
Projected Costs of Event
Expected losses for this event are difficult to quantify. No historical loss information was found to
support this plan.
Table 17: Expected Annual Loss and Exposure Values for Earthquake, NRI
Locality Expected Annual Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany County $ 27,538.00 179,683,942,000.00
City of Covington $ 12,797.00 67,930,465,000.00
Botetourt County $ 58,140.00 395,469,648,000.00
Craig County $ 10,382.00 57,657,907,000.00
Roanoke County $ 293,168.00 1,141,602,462,000.00
City of Roanoke $ 454,632.00 1,181,643,712,000.00
City of Salem $ 116,212.00 300,396,037,000.00
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-7
Projected Frequency of Event
The USGS Hazard Mapping for earthquakes shows that the region has a 5-25% chance of an
earthquake measuring VI or greater on the Mercalli Intensity scale in the next 100 years. This is
a relatively low probability consistent with much of Virginia and the east coast. The nearest higher
risk center for earthquakes is located on the far side of Kentucky and Tennessee.
NRI data indicates the following annual probability and expected annual loss for earthquakes in
the region. Towns are included in counties for the purposes of this analysis.
Table 18: Annualized Frequency Values for Earthquakes, NRI
Locality Annualized Frequency Value (%)
Alleghany County 0.03
City of Covington 0.03
Botetourt County 0.03
Craig County 0.04
Roanoke County 0.039
City of Roanoke 0.048
City of Salem 0.04
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-8
Figure 24: Earthquake Risk Mapping, USGS
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-9
Projected Local Vulnerability
Eighty percent of the housing stock in the region was built prior to 1980. These structures are
likely not protected from earthquakes. Per FEMA, existing buildings are the biggest contributor to
seismic risk in the United States today. Building codes prior to 1970 may not have included
seismic design, which is a key factor in mitigating possible damage from earthquakes. A deeper
look at the numbers shows that residences in Alleghany County, the City of Covington, and the
City of Roanoke may be uniquely vulnerable to earthquakes. In the City of Covington, three out
of four dwelling units are likely at risk from earthquakes.
Table 19: Homes Built Before 1970, ACS 5-Year Estimate 2023
Housing Units Built before 1970 Percentage built before 1970
Virginia 1,080,622 30%
Alleghany County 4,082 52%
City of Covington 2,341 77%
Botetourt County 4,119 27%
Craig County 803 34%
Roanoke County 14,370 34%
City of Roanoke 31,496 64%
City of Salem 5,406 49%
The 2024 Edition of FEMA’s Seismic Design Category Maps show designations for the
International Building Code and the International Residential Code regarding seismic design12.
The majority of the planning region is located in category B of the International Residential Code.
Other factors that are worth assessing in future plans may include soil composition, building
height, and number of manufactured homes. Soil composition is directly considered in the
applicability the 2024 Edition of FEMA’s Seismic Design Category Maps. High risk soils must do
site specific assessment.
For the local vulnerability score, designations of low, medium and high were assigned at natural
thresholds of under 50 percent of aged dwellings, 50-75 percent of aged dwellings, and 75 percent
or more of aged dwellings. Towns share the same score as the county in which they are located.
This is not a perfect methodology and should be revisited in future iterations of the plan. Age of
housing or building stock in towns may trend significantly higher than that of the enclosing county.
12 (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2024)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-10
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 20: Hazard Ranking for Earthquake
Hazard Ranking
Table: Earthquake
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
City of Covington
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
Town of Iron Gate
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Craig County
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of New
Castle
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Botetourt County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of
Buchanan
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of Fincastle
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of Troutville
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Roanoke County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of Vinton
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
City of Roanoke
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
City of Salem
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Regional Score
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-11
4.3 Extreme Temperature
Many models project an increase in extreme weather conditions in the coming years, particularly
in experiences of heat waves. While the thresholds used to attempt to analyze historical events
are detailed in Chapter 3, these measurements are not perfect comparisons to the national
definitions for a cold wave and a heat wave. NRI uses these terms to describe extreme
temperature.
Heat wave: a period of abnormally and uncomfortably hot and unusually humid weather
typically lasting two or more days with temperatures outside the historical averages for a
given area.
Cold wave: a rapid fall in temperature within 24 hours and extreme low temperatures for
an extended period. The temperatures classified as a cold wave are dependent on the
location and defined by the local National Weather Service (NWS) weather forecast office.
While having a national standard for temperature is important, localized conditions can create
very different experiences of temperature, as discussed in the previous chapter. Additionally,
changing norms in the region due to increased impervious surfaces and general trends in weather
conditions can mean that heat events in particular are perceived as more critical by a given
region’s residents even when actual temperatures are less than in neighboring regions.
Generally, more data is needed to fully support this section. However, an initial attempt to assess
impacts of extreme temperatures is included below.
Projected Scale of Event
Generally, weather-based hazards tend to be the most boundary-crossing. However, land use
and elevation vary widely throughout the planning area. Temperatures in the rural and higher
elevations of Craig County, northern Botetourt County, and the Alleghany Highlands trend slightly
lower than temperatures in the Roanoke Valley.
Case Studies of Extreme Temperature Impacts
Two case studies of extreme heat and extreme cold incidents are worth looking at to guide this
assessment: the heat dome in Seattle, Washington, and the cold wave in Richmond, Virginia.
These are extreme events which show the scale of potential damage for this hazard should
compounding factors occur. Both of these studies highlight impacts on critical infrastructure as
being a compounding factor for extreme temperatures as well as other hazards. Specifically,
power grids, healthcare facilities, and water utilities may be at risk from these events.
Richmond, Virginia Cold Wave of 2025
On January 6, 2025, residents across Richmond lost access to water during a cold wave that
caused major failures to water infrastructure. Specifically, power was lost to the main water
treatment plant. Backup battery power failed, the facility flooded and submerged critical electrical
systems. There was a complete water treatment plant power outage for nearly 36 hours.13 Water
production was restored on January 9th, but a boil water notification was in place until January
11th. Water losses affected area hospitals and other critical facilities.
13 (HNTB Corporation, 2025)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-12
Power failure at the water treatment plant occurred during a prolonged cold wave and concurrent
winter storm event which caused power loss. An article in The Richmonder on January 1st
predicted around two weeks of below average temperatures driven by a polar vortex event.14
The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin modeled economic and fiscal costs of a
water supply disruption in the National Capital Region. Notable economic losses from water
disruption begin in as little as two hours from the event, with impacts disproportionately felt by
small businesses.15
Seatle, Washington Heat Wave of 2021
In the summer of 2021 Seattle, Washington experienced a heat dome event. This area of the
country does not have typically hot summers – however, triple digit temperatures were recorded.
The Washington Department of Health tracked 136 heat-related deaths across the state from
June 26 through July 6, 2021. No planning was done for an event of that scale, because no
models predicted it. Many of the care facilities in the region did not have air conditioning, making
them particularly vulnerable. Power outages occurred due to the stress on the grid, and critical
equipment such as imagining and laboratory equipment overheated.16
Impacts from this event were largely felt in healthcare facilities, which were already strained by
COVID-19, and in the power grid. Vulnerable populations including the elderly, homeless, and
those in healthcare facilities or otherwise lacking mobility to evacuate were especially impacted.
Projected Costs of Event
Costs of opening shelters, mortality costs and crop damage may all be important costs to consider
when assessing the costs of extreme temperature events. For example, consistent temperatures
over 90 degrees reduce or halt the growth rate of most grasses used for cattle feed in this region,
increasing costs of meat production for farmers and reducing their margins. Higher temperatures
result in increased energy costs for home owners, and higher demand on the grid can have
complicating factors for utility service providers. These costs are hard to quantify in assessing the
impacts of this hazard.
Table 21: Expected Annual Loss for Cold Wave, NRI
Locality
Expected Annual
Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany County $42,546 $179,478,356,906
City of Covington $9,600 $67,930,487,195
Botetourt County $36,708 $394,929,053,010
Craig County $8,338 $57,558,866,073
Roanoke County $65,026 $1,141,152,733,759
City of Roanoke $100,139 $1,181,121,995,799
City of Salem $25,405 $300,396,106,588
14 (Sublette, 2025)
15 (Tonya E. Thornton, 2024)
16 (ASPR TRACIE, 2023)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-13
This hazard is one of the main hazards for which shelters are regularly opened in the planning
region. Shelters serve as heating and cooling centers when other weather events cause power
outages, or simply when temperatures become extreme enough that those without reliable shelter
have need. Further plan iterations should seek to quantify the cost of opening shelters for extreme
heat and extreme cold to close the gap in national data, as well as the cost of illness and mortality
in the housing insecure via coordination with EMS staff, local area hospitals, and local area
homeless shelters.
Figure 25: Urban Heat Island Effect, City of Roanoke
Projected Frequency of Event
Annual average of extreme heat and extreme cold historically are discussed in Chapter 3, with 32
extreme heat days and 5 extreme cold days by definitions used in that chapter. Annual frequency
by that definition is multiple times per year. NRI data which is based off of different definitions,
contests this. The annualized frequency value for cold waves remains low in the region, at
between 0.1 and 0.3 events per year.
No annualized frequency data is available for heat wave in the planning region. However, heat
waves occur and multiple heat advisories were issued in the region during the writing of this plan.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-14
Table 22: Annualized Frequency of Cold Waves, NRI
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value
Alleghany County 0.3
City of Covington 0.3
Botetourt County 0.1
Craig County 0.3
Roanoke County 0.1
City of Roanoke 0.1
City of Salem 0.1
The City of Roanoke conducted urban heat island mapping to capture the risks of extreme heat
within this locality. Mapping from this study recorded a variation in temperature of up to 15 degrees
Fahrenheit across the City, with temperatures highest in downtown and low-income
neighborhoods. Late evening temperatures of greater than 89 degrees were observed in these
areas.
Projected Local Vulnerability
Factors that can increase vulnerability to extreme temperature include the weatherization rate of
buildings, impervious surfaces ratios, and age of residents. For very few other hazards is social
vulnerability, including factors of age, health and well-being, and poverty, such a key marker of
risk. For this reason, social vulnerability numbers from the NRI are a key indicator of local
vulnerability for this hazard.
Table 23: Social Vulnerability, NRI
Locality Social Vulnerability
Alleghany
County Relatively Low
City of
Covington Very Low
Botetourt
County Very Low
Craig County Very Low
Roanoke County Very Low
City of Roanoke Very High
City of Salem Relatively Low
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-15
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 24: Hazard Ranking for Extreme Temperature
Hazard Ranking
Table: Extreme Temperatures
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
City of Covington
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Clifton
Forge
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Iron Gate
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Craig County
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of New
Castle
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Botetourt County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of
Buchanan
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of Fincastle
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Town of Troutville
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Roanoke County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual Low Medium
Town of Vinton
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual Low Medium
City of Roanoke
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual High High
City of Salem
Region-Wide
Effects Low Annual Medium Medium
Regional Score
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual Low Medium
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-16
4.4 Flooding
Flooding is one of the most impacting hazards to the region. All of the jurisdictions and special
districts within this plan have to deal directly with flooding on at least an annual basis. The HAZUS
model for flooding in the region includes a 100-year and 500-year model. All reports are located
in Appendix D. Flood Hazard Areas are also mapped in Appendix D.
There are two types of flooding of concern in the region. Riverine flooding is most common. Most
of the data in this chapter will focus on riverine flooding. Flooding due to failed infrastructure is
also an issue across the planning region, specifically failure of culverts and other stormwater
detention or diversion infrastructure, and failure of dams.
Stormwater infrastructure failure is an issue in some localities, most commonly in more urbanized
areas including in the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem. Infrastructure typically fails when
not designed to transmit the volume of water produced by a given precipitation event. Culverts,
which allow stormwater to pass under roads or railways, are designed for 100-year events in most
cases, though some may be designed for higher flow where safety impacts are of particular
concern.17 Documenting failed or overwhelmed stormwater infrastructure, especially where it can
directly impact critical facilities beyond roadways, is an important potential project for local
governments. The City of Covington recently received funding from the Community Flood
Preparedness Fund to complete their Drainage Study mentioned in Chapter 3. Resilience Plans
from the City of Roanoke and the City of Salem also address this kind of flooding.
A flood prone roadway study was completed by the Regional Commission in 2005. The outcomes
of the study were documented in the 2019 Plan. This study has not been updated.
One of the most common drivers of extreme precipitation events which produce flooding in the
region is hurricanes. For this reason, hurricane hazards are considered included for assessment
in this section. The history of hurricane events and hurricane-derived flooding is included in
Chapter 3.
Several localities in the region are CRS communities. Other localities have indicated interest.
Where appropriate information in this section will support this designation.
Projected Scale of Event
The frequency of large-scale flood events is projected via the 100-year and 500-year floodplain
for given parcels. The majority of flood events are more likely to be smaller, semi-local events
driven by precipitation.
Because riverine flooding specifically is tied to streams which flow through multiple localities, a
flood in a specific watershed also usually affects multiple localities in the planning region. For
example, a flood of the Roanoke River would affect Roanoke County, the City of Salem, the City
of Roanoke, and the Town of Vinton to varying degrees. Similarly, a flood event on the James
River could affect Botetourt County and the Town of Buchanan, or, if the entire Upper James
watershed is impacted, the Alleghany Highlands localities. Flooding is largely driven by
precipitation. Changes in precipitation patterns in the region have resulted in stronger individual
precipitation events over the last several years, which increase flooding impacts.
17 (Virginia Department of Transportation, 2002)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-17
As discussed in Chapter 3: Hazard Identification, multiple high hazard dams exist in the region.
Specific known structural vulnerabilities and safety incidents are documented in that chapter.
Although flood inundation maps are a requirement of the current Impounding Structure
Regulations, Virginia DCR does not currently have this information available in a digital form.
Were these maps available, they would illustrate the probable area of flooding downstream of a
dam in the event of failure.
Projected Costs of Event
For this plan, a HAZUS model was run for riverine flooding at the 100-year and 500-year
thresholds. The full reports are contained in Appendix D: Flooding HAZUS Reports.
Table 25: Estimated Annual Loss for Flooding, NRI
Locality Expected Annual Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany County $1,269,955 $16,809,384,028
City of Covington $175,909 $6,391,387,076
Botetourt County $504,537 $16,236,678,289
Craig County $31,287 $3,055,738,660
Roanoke County $600,519 $26,537,346,445
City of Roanoke $752,345 $38,605,696,944
City of Salem $621,251 $34,391,371,524
While the estimated annual loss for flooding is already high for many localities, a 100-year flood
event could have catastrophic impacts to the region. The following include possible outcomes of
a 100-year flood event. An event is unlikely to occur across the entire region at the same time, as
multiple watersheds are represented. However, as Hurricane Helene showed in western North
Carolina, this is not an impossible scenario.
Damage to Roanoke Memorial hospital resulting in the loss of 703 beds in the region.
11,401 people living in the region displaced; 1,632 people requiring temporary shelter.
Significant damage to transportation systems across the region.
Damage to water and wastewater systems in Alleghany County and City of Salem, and
damage to wastewater systems in Botetourt, Covington, Craig, and Roanoke County and
the City of Roanoke.
Damage to public schools in Covington, Craig, and Salem.
Damage to two emergency operations centers and two fire stations in Covington.
Damage to one fire station in the Roanoke area.
Damage to police stations in Alleghany, Covington, and the Roanoke area.
Mitigation of these facilities for a 100-year or greater flood event is a desirable outcome of this
plan.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-18
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
The following vulnerabilities were identified by Roanoke Valley Resource Authority staff.
Smith Gap Landfill: The landfill is outside of the 100-year floodplain but the initial portion
of the access road located off the Exit 128 of I-81 would be impacted by the 100-year flood
based on current FEMA mapping.
Tinker Creek Transfer Station: Much of this facility is located in the 100-year floodplain,
though the main operations building is located outside the floodplain.
Salem Transfer Station: This facility is located entirely in the 100-year floodplain.
Western Virginia Water Authority
Several facilities owned and operated by the Western Virginia Water Authority are within the 100-
year floodplain.
Table 26: WVWA Facilities in the Floodplain
Facility Location Address
Muse Spring Water Treatment
Facility
Roanoke
City
2135 MOUNT PLEASANT BLVD SE,
Roanoke, VA, 24014
Roanoke Regional Wastewater
Treatment Facility
Roanoke
City
1502 Brownlee Ave, Roanoke SE, VA
24014
Eagle Rock Wastewater Treatment
Facility
Botetourt
Co. 14501 Church St. Eagle Rock, VA 24085
Mount Pleasant Water Pump Station
Roanoke
City
2135 MOUNT PLEASANT BLVD SE,
Roanoke, VA, 24014
3rd Street Sewer Pump Station Vinton Across from 804 3rd St, Vinton
Projected Frequency of Event
Overall frequency of flood events by locality is best assessed through the National Risk Index. A
definition for the threshold of riverine flooding captured by the NRI (e.g. 2-year flood, 5-year flood,
etc.) was not readily available. However, more frequent flood events do directly impact operations
for many localities in the region, specifically outdoor recreation operations and roadways.
Table 27: Annualized Frequency for Flooding, NRI
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value (Events per Year)
Alleghany County 1.1
City of Covington 0.3
Botetourt County 1.7
Craig County 0.6
Roanoke County 2.1
City of Roanoke 1.6
City of Salem 0.9
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-19
Projected Local Vulnerability
One way to demonstrate specific local vulnerability is by looking at the number of repetitive loss
structures in the locality. Repetitive loss structures are defined as a structure that has had two or
more claims within any 10-year period since 1978 of more than $1,000 paid by the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). Identifying repetitive loss structures is one of the ways to receive
points in the CRS program.
As a point-to-point comparison the most effective way to assess local vulnerability would be to
assess the percentage of structures that are repetitive loss structures within the locality. However,
for the purposes of this plan comparison will be made between real count of structures.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-20
Table 28: Repetitive Loss Structures by Locality, FEMA
Locality
NFIP
Repetitive
Loss
Structures
NFIP
Serious
Repetitive
Loss
Structures
Federal
Mitigation
Assistance
Repetitive
Loss
Federal
Mitigation
Assistance
Serious
Repetitive
Loss
Primary
Residences
ALLEGHANY COUNTY 27 0 1 0 13
Single Family Dwelling 22 0 1 0 12
Single Family Residential
Building 3 0 0 0 1
Non Residential Building 2 0 0 0 0
BOTETOURT COUNTY 28 6 1 6 5
Single Family Dwelling 19 3 1 3 5
Non Residential Building 8 2 0 2 0
Non Residential Building B 1 1 0 1 0
COVINGTON CITY 5 0 0 1 1
Single Family Dwelling 4 0 0 1 1
Non Residential Building 1 0 0 0 0
CRAIG COUNTY 6 0 0 1 3
Single Family Dwelling 4 0 0 1 3
Non Residential Building 2 0 0 0 0
ROANOKE CITY 85 11 2 16 32
Single Family Dwelling 47 4 2 5 26
2-4 Unit Residential Building 2 0 0 0 0
Residential Building More
than 4 Units 7 0 0 0 0
Non Residential Business 1 0 0 0 0
Single Family Residential
Building 6 0 0 0 6
Non Residential Building 22 7 0 11 0
ROANOKE COUNTY 41 3 1 5 32
Single Family Dwelling 29 1 1 3 23
Residential Building More
than 4 Units 1 0 0 0 0
Single Family Residential
Building 9 1 0 1 9
Non Residential Building 1 1 0 1 0
Non Residential Building B 1 0 0 0 0
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-21
Locality
NFIP
Repetitive
Loss
Structures
NFIP
Serious
Repetitive
Loss
Structures
Federal
Mitigation
Assistance
Repetitive
Loss
Federal
Mitigation
Assistance
Serious
Repetitive
Loss
Primary
Residences
SALEM CITY 90 29 5 35 50
Single Family Dwelling 56 9 4 15 41
2-4 Unit Residential Building 5 1 0 1 1
Residential Building More
than 4 Units 12 12 0 12 0
Non Residential Business 2 2 0 2 0
Single Family Residential
Building 8 4 1 4 7
Residential Manufactured
Home 1 0 0 0 1
Non Residential Building 6 1 0 1 0
Grand Total 282 49 10 64 136
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-22
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 29: Hazard Ranking Table for Flooding
Hazard Ranking
Table: Flooding
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local
Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany
County
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
City of Covington
Region-Wide
Effects High Less than Annual Low Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of Iron Gate
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Craig County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Less than Annual Low Medium
Town of New
Castle
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Less than Annual Low Medium
Botetourt County
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of
Buchanan
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of
Fincastle
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of
Troutville
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Roanoke County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of Vinton
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
City of Roanoke
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year High High
City of Salem
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual High High
Regional Score
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-23
4.5 Geologic Hazards
For the purposes of this assessment, landslide and karst have been grouped under geologic
hazards. Both of these hazards include often localized sudden ground movement.
Landslide is most common in areas with high slopes, which includes much of the planning region.
In Chapter 3, only one historic landslide of note was recorded in the past five years. However, the
region has many characteristics which make landslides a hazard of concern.
Karst is a hazard unique to particular geologies. As such it is difficult to find national resources for
assessing this hazard. Data in this section comes from the Virginia Department of Energy,
Department of Conservation and Recreation, and Department of Emergency Management.
The major risk for karst areas is the development of sinkholes that directly or indirectly affect
critical infrastructure. The Virginia Department of Energy began mapping karst via KarstView
along the I-81 corridor following several sinkhole events that directly affected this interstate.18
However, this mapping is somewhat opaque in terms of capturing likelihood of a sinkhole or
potential costs.
The second impact from karst is pollution of groundwater. In the planning region, groundwater
remains a major source of water supply for several localities, including the Western Virginia Water
Authority service area and the Alleghany Highlands. A full list of known wells is included in the
Critical Facilities Inventory in Appendix F. This hazard impact is not fully explored in this plan.
Both of these hazards show a relationship with high rain events.
Projected Scale of Event
Sinkhole events are highly localized events, usually affecting a specific facility or lot. Most
landslide events are also localized, some impacting as little as one parcel. In extreme conditions,
such as Hurricane Helene in Asheville, multiple landslides may occur. Sometimes landslides can
build upon one another as was the case in Nelson and Albemarle Counties.
Case Study: Past Landslides in Nelson and Albemarle Counties
Nelson and Albemarle Counties share similar topographic characteristics to the region. In August
1969, an extreme rainfall event instigated by Hurricane Camille caused over 7,800 landslides,
which created approximately 2,000 acres worth of impact. One hundred and twenty-five people
died in Nelson County alone from impacts of this storm system, which included flooding and
landslide impacts.19 This was a similar event to Hurricane Helene, which struck western North
Carolina and Southwest Virginia in September of 2024.
Geology and Mineral Services received funding through VDEM and FEMA in 2017 and 2020 to
complete a landslide hazard mapping study for Nelson and Albemarle Counties. This kind of local
study can have greater accuracy than national models. The events in 1969 and in 2024 highlight
the importance of having good information to plan emergency response to and mitigation efforts
for this hazard.
18 (Virginia Department of Energy, n.d.)
19 (Landslide Hazard Mapping, n.d.)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-24
Projected Costs of Event
Costs of sinkholes can range depending on the location of the sinkhole. A sinkhole directly
affecting a major roadway is probably one of the most costly events. Costs come from direct
damage to infrastructure at inception and then include stabilization efforts for the sinkholes once
established. The largest of the three sinkholes which affected I-81 in Augusta County cost over
100,000 to repair. It measured 20 feet by 11 feet and 22 feet deep.20
Many sinkholes open up in fields and other open spaces, and therefore have limited and localized
costs, if any.
Expected annual loss for landslide is available in the National Risk Index. Costs are generally low,
but it is important to note that the cost of landslides varies widely depending on location. Because
this is such a localized event, impacts can be quite targeted. The landslide recorded in 2021
included $25,000 in damages from a single building. Widespread events in more populated areas
could quickly accrue costs.
Table 30: Expected Annual Loss, NRI
Locality
Expected Annual
Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany
County $46,739 $140,941,177,976
City of
Covington $21,900 $48,638,641,691
Botetourt
County $37,168 $226,916,018,449
Craig County $21,900 $38,621,453,915
Roanoke County $333,796 $653,035,188,326
City of Roanoke $122,400 $679,915,744,515
City of Salem $21,900 $198,922,958,937
Projected Frequency of Event
There is no good data on the frequency of sinkholes for each separate jurisdiction. The closest
comparison may be to the expected annual frequency of landslides in the area, which, despite
the increased susceptibility to landslides shown in the topographic data, is relatively low.
The National Risk Index measures projected landslide frequency based off of the number of
landslides recorded over a twelve-year period between 2010 and 2021. All of the localities in the
region showed a projected frequency of zero landslides per year, despite some localities having
events on record during that time period. The landslide noted in Chapter 3 was not captured in
this dataset.
20 (Virginia Department of Emergency Management, 2023)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-25
Table 31: Events on Record 2010-2021, NRI
Locality Events on Record (2010-2021)
Alleghany County 1
City of Covington 0
Botetourt County 1
Craig County 0
Roanoke County 5
City of Roanoke 0
City of Salem 0
Despite the NRI data, the USGS Landslide Susceptibility model shows strong landslide
vulnerability in the area. Darker red indicates increased vulnerability to landslides. Steep slopes
mean that most of the region is vulnerable to landslides in the right conditions, though notable the
more populated areas show less vulnerability.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-26
Figure 26: Landslide Susceptibility Model in the Region
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-27
Projected Local Vulnerability
Local vulnerability to karst is poorly understood – it is unknown what factors may make a
jurisdiction more or less vulnerable to karst. One potential factor for consideration is the number
of households using unmonitored groundwater wells – this could show a locality specific
vulnerability to this particular hazard. Alternatively, karst may be more prevalent in climates where
long dry spells are followed by periods of intense rain. Further assessment is needed to
understand the unique factors that predispose jurisdictions to karst damage.
A small portion of the planning region is located inside of a USGS recognized sinkhole hotspot,
mostly in Craig and northern Roanoke Counties. Less populous portions of Alleghany and
Botetourt Counties may also be at risk. A full definition of a sinkhole hotspot is not readily available
on the USGS website.
Figure 27: USGS Sinkhole Hotspots, Accessed 2025
Landslides are also difficult to quantify. During Hurricane Helene, one of the complicating factors
experienced by neighboring communities in North Carolina and far Southwest Virginia was
landslides caused by extreme rain.
The Virginia Department of Energy recommends identifying areas prone to future landslide
hazards in order to target evacuation orders during severe rainstorm events, defined as greater
than 5 inches in 24 hours.
The NOAA Atlas shows projected rainfall event frequency. Rainfall data for the City of Covington,
Craig County, and the City of Roanoke show that 5 inches in 24 hours is more or less a 25-year
storm in Covington and Craig, but closer to a 10-year storm in the City of Roanoke. A framework
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-28
based on rainfall frequency could be a valid way to assess potential landslide risk in future updates
of this plan.
Projected Local Vulnerability for this hazard is determined by a visual assessment of the landslide
and karst vulnerability map. However, future projections around this hazard should take into
account more advanced analysis of vulnerability to landslides via GIS manipulation and analysis
of rainfall probability as a major determinant of likelihood of landslides.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-29
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 32: Hazard Ranking for Geologic Hazards
Hazard Ranking
Table:
Geologic
Hazards
Locality
Scale of
Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany County Local Effects High
Less than
Annual High Medium
City of Covington Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Clifton
Forge Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Iron Gate Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Craig County Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Low
Town of New
Castle Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Botetourt County Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of
Buchanan Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Fincastle Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Troutville Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Roanoke County Local Effects Medium
Less than
Annual High Medium
Town of Vinton Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
City of Roanoke Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
City of Salem Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Regional Score Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-30
4.6 Wildfire
Wildfire risk analysis benefits from some of the most robust data available. Data in this section
comes from the National Risk Index to establish easy points of comparison for risk ranking, and
from the Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment tool. Assistance was provided by VDOF staff in
gathering the data for this section. The entire regional report for wildfire risk is available in
Appendix E: Wildfire Reports.
Projected Scale of Event
The VDOF and the Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment tool provides a Characteristic Fire Intensity
Scale, which uses data on significant fuel hazards, wind, and weather conditions in a WildEST
framework to provide a standard scale to measure potential wildfire intensity.
Figure 28: Characteristic Fire Intensity Scale, VDOF
This evaluation varies by locality. Data is available for Clifton Forge in this model.
Class 1, Very Low:
Very small, discontinuous flames, usually less than 1 foot in length; very low rate of spread; no
spotting. Fires are typically easy to suppress by firefighters with basic training andnon -
specialized equipment.
Class 2, Low:
Small flames, usually less than two feet long; small amount of very short range spotting possible.
Fires are easy to suppress by trained firefighters with protective equipment and specialized
tools.
Class 3, Moderate:
Flames up to 9 feet in length; short-range spotting is possible. Trained firefighters will find these
fires difficult to suppress without support from aircraft or engines, but dozer and plows are
generally effective. Increasing potential for harm or damage to life and property.
Class 4, High:
Large Flames, up to 40 feet in length; short-range spotting common; medium range spotting
possible. Direct attack by trained firefighters, engines, and dozers is generally ineffective,
indirect attack may be effective. Significant potential for harm ordam age to life and property.
Class 5, Very High:
Flames exceeding 200 feet in length; expect extreme fire behavior
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-31
Table 33: Characteristic Fire Intensity, VDOF
Alleghany County City of Covington Clifton Forge Botetourt County
Scale Category Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
0 12,813 4% 1,887 52% 930 47% 28,661 8%
1 8,755 3% 308 8% 233 12% 10,930 3%
1.5 19,694 7% 218 6% 67 3% 35,497 10%
2 77,686 27% 422 12% 277 14% 84,988 24%
2.5 117,072 41% 480 13% 368 19% 102,757 29%
3 33,840 12% 185 5% 31 2% 65,435 19%
3.5 7,383 3% 117 3% 28 1% 11,030 3%
4 6,119 2% 12 0% 41 2% 7,634 2%
4.5 1,858 1% 2 0% 8 0% 2,433 1%
5 8 0% 0 0% 0 0% 37 0%
Greater than 5 - 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Total Acreage 285,227 3,630 1,981 349,400
Craig County Roanoke County City of Roanoke City of Salem
Scale Category Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
0 8,381 4% 27,374 17% 21,475 78% 7,134 76%
1 4,872 2% 8,320 5% 2,080 8% 859 9%
1.5 10,334 5% 10,114 6% 291 1% 164 2%
2 48,606 23% 32,438 20% 1,352 5% 566 6%
2.5 90,580 43% 52,508 33% 1,363 5% 360 4%
3 34,794 16% 19,715 12% 817 3% 217 2%
3.5 6,349 3% 4,895 3% 38 0% 11 0%
4 4,759 2% 2,066 1% 33 0% 23 0%
4.5 2,778 1% 2,884 2% 15 0% 2 0%
5 144 0% 355 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Greater than 5 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Total Acreage 211,596 160,668 27,464 9,337
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-32
Projected Costs of Event
Expected Annual Loss and Exposure Value are not particularly high for this hazard. However,
some context is missing from the NRI data.
Table 34: Expected Annual Loss for Wildfire, National Risk Index
Locality
Expected Annual
Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany
County $2,536 $3,900,729,935
City of
Covington $194 $1,969,158,111
Botetourt
County $8,737 $10,057,952,335
Craig County $784 $1,237,584,666
Roanoke County $4,347 $62,863,692,940
City of Roanoke $3,671 $62,717,344,368
City of Salem $1,285 $17,697,712,831
Roanoke County Fire & Rescue (RCFRD) has demonstrated a substantial financial commitment
to wildland fire protection, ensuring the community is safeguarded against the growing risks of
brush and wildland-urban interface fires. The County’s Wildland Fire Team responds to
approximately 80 calls for service annually, deploying 33 specially trained personnel in wildland
fire suppression. This capability is supported by a dedicated fleet of eight brush trucks, one
Wildland Fire Engine, and one deployable trailer equipped with specialized resources. In addition
to serving local needs, Roanoke County maintains a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the Federal Forestry Department, enabling the department to provide mutual aid on federal
property within the County and to deploy trained personnel and assets to assist in wildfire
suppression efforts in other states. This dual capability reflects both a strong local investment and
a regional commitment to public safety, resource protection, and interagency cooperation.
Projected Frequency of Event
The NRI Annualized Frequency Value for this hazard is low throughout the planning region. It is
important to note that while wildfires do occur frequently in the planning region, the majority of
fires are small, with negligible risk and impact. The threshold for a major fire cited in Chapter 3 is
100 acres. One major fire has occurred in Roanoke County in the past five years, which implies
a 20 percent chance of a major fire in a given five-year period. More data is needed to assess,
but the frequency value for Roanoke County’s assessment was adjusted up in the risk
assessment.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-33
Table 35: Annualized Frequency Value for Wildfire, NRI
Locality Annualized Frequency Value (%)
Alleghany County 0.027
City of Covington 0.001
Botetourt County 0.047
Craig County 0.008
Roanoke County 0.002
City of Roanoke 0.001
City of Salem 0.001
Projected Local Vulnerability
Housing Unit Risk represents the relative potential risk to housing units. This allows for an
estimate of how many housing units are at a high risk of wildfire damage. This metric is used to
estimate the acreage at a risk of 4 to 6 within each of the available localities for, and that
percentage value is ranked as high, medium, or low in the vulnerability table.
Another factor that may affect local vulnerability is the percentage of federal forest land and the
topography. Rural areas of Roanoke County, Craig County, and Alleghany County are federally
managed. Local vulnerability has been adjusted to account for that factor.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-34
Table 36: Housing Unit Risk, Virginia Department of Forestry
Alleghany County City of Covington Clifton Forge Botetourt County
Risk Ranking Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
1 2 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 0%
2 180 0% 21 1% 4 0% 312 0%
3 11,411 4% 430 12% 149 7% 30,108 9%
4 33,308 12% 1,617 45% 832 42% 75,424 22%
5 5,820 2% 761 21% 683 34% 7,258 2%
6 - 0% 0 0% 12 1% 0 0%
Total Acreage 285,227 3,630 1,981 349,400
No Risk 234,506 82% 801 22% 301 15% 236,293 68%
Risk Greater than 4 39,128 14% 2,378 34% 1527 77% 82,682 24%
Craig County Roanoke County City of Roanoke City of Salem
Risk Ranking Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
1 0 0% 42 0% 322 1% 116 1%
2 5 0% 495 0% 857 3% 498 5%
3 16,588 8% 15,771 10% 5,165 19% 2,592 28%
4 23,711 11% 59,729 37% 7,527 27% 4,543 49%
5 686 0% 9,941 6% 1,794 7% 595 6%
6 0 0% 17 0% 1 0% 0 0%
Total Acreage 211,596 160,668 27,464 9,337
No Risk 170,607 81% 74,673 46% 11,798 43% 993 11%
Risk Greater than 4 24,397 12% 69,687 43% 9,322 34% 5,138 55%
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-35
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 37: Hazard Ranking Table for Wildfire
Hazard Ranking
Table: Wildfire
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local
Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Medium
City of Covington
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of Clifton
Forge
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Medium
Town of Iron
Gate
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Medium
Craig County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of New
Castle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Botetourt
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of
Buchanan
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of
Fincastle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of
Troutville
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Roanoke County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High Annual High High
Town of Vinton
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
City of Roanoke Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
City of Salem Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Regional Score
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-36
4.7 Wind Event
Wind events are one of the most frequent hazards in the planning region. They can also be costly.
This section looks at data from the National Risk Index, National Centers for Environmental
Information, and other sources to evaluate risk of wind events including straight line winds and
tornados.
One major cause of extreme wind in the region is hurricanes. Effects from hurricanes generally
spawn straight line winds, but may occasionally spawn tornado winds.
Projected Scale of Event
Generally, the majority of events experience in the region are straight line winds. Wind events
often spawn from bands of storm cells which cut across the region. Most wind events are multi-
jurisdictional within a given 24-hour period, though individual impacts are usually most localized.
Projected Costs of Event
Costs for wind events can vary greatly. In Chapter 3, one of the most expensive wind events
documented, an F1 tornado which damaged a local business, resulted in over a million dollars of
damages. However, the majority of wind event records in the past five years do not contain
damage estimates. In fact only eight percent of the records in the NCEI database for the planning
region contained damage estimates. The average cost across events with recorded damages
was $112,906, but the average across all wind events was only $10,640. This makes it difficult to
estimate the probable economic impact of a given event for the region.
The National Risk Index tracks two wind event categories relevant to this hazard (excluding
hurricanes, which also spawn wind damages). The Expected Annual Loss for Strong Wind and
Tornado are included in the table below.
Table 38: Expected Annual Loss for Wind Events, NRI
Locality
Expected Annual Loss -
Strong Wind
Expected Annual Loss -
Tornado
Alleghany County $ 172,445.00 $ 45,378.00
City of Covington $ 110,402.00 $ 20,258.00
Botetourt County $ 361,702.00 $ 106,201.00
Craig County $ 84,036.00 $ 14,927.00
Roanoke County $ 1,018,060.00 $ 352,206.00
City of Roanoke $ 1,043,952.00 $ 409,594.00
City of Salem $ 344,362.00 $ 114,772.00
Projected Frequency of Event
Wind events occur more than annually around the region. The highest number of occurrences are
projected in the Roanoke Valley, which includes the City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Roanoke
County, and the Town of Vinton.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-37
Table 39: Annualized Frequency Value for Wind Events, NRI
Events per Year
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value - Strong Wind
Annualized Frequency
Value - Tornado
Alleghany County 2.3 0.1
City of Covington 2.5 0
Botetourt County 2.7 0.1
Craig County 2.6 0
Roanoke County 3.4 0
City of Roanoke 3.4 0
City of Salem 3.4 0
Projected Local Vulnerability
Wind events can compound other hazards, including winter weather and extreme cold. Wind is
often a primary factor in power loss following storm events, as strong winds blow down trees and
impact powerlines. Power lines are generally privately owned and maintained. Strong winds can
also negatively affect RVs and other outdoor recreation users, who can be particularly vulnerable
in an event. Further analysis is needed to develop specific nuance in local vulnerability. One
potential factor for further development is topography.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-38
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 40: Hazard Ranking for Wind Events
Hazard Ranking
Table: Wind Event
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local
Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
City of
Covington
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of Clifton
Forge
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of Iron
Gate
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Craig County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of New
Castle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Botetourt
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of
Buchanan
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of
Fincastle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of
Troutville
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Roanoke County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Town of Vinton
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
City of Roanoke
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
City of Salem
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Regional Score
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year To be developed High
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-39
4.8 Winter Storm
Winter storm is another frequent hazard in the area. Localities and the Virginia Department of
Transportation spend money every winter preparing the transportation network for winter storm
events and ice and snow accumulation. These events also impact powerlines and the electrical
grid, similar to wind events and extreme cold. The National Risk Index includes two event types
of relevance: ice storm, a freezing rain event with significant ice accumulations of .25 inches or
greater; and winter weather, which includes winter storm events in which the main types of
precipitation are snow, sleet, or freezing rain.
Projected Scale of Event
As discussed in Chapter 3, events are generally wide-spread and affect multiple jurisdictions.
While effects may vary across the jurisdictions, winter storms are generally a region-wide event.
Projected Costs of Event
Generally, expected annual loss is higher for winter weather generally than for ice storms
specifically, which makes sense given the relative frequency of these events. However, NRI
numbers for Craig County are reversed. This may reflect an inaccuracy in the national database.
The higher value will be used in ranking this element of the hazard impact.
Table 41: Costs of a Winter Weather Event
Locality
Expected Annual Loss -
Winter Weather
Expected Annual Loss - Ice
Storm
Alleghany
County $ 11,190.00 $ 1,819.00
City of
Covington $ 6,372.00 $ 3,081.00
Botetourt
County $ 19,959.00 $ 6,391.00
Craig County $ 3,092.00 $ 20,097.00
Roanoke
County $ 103,699.00 $ 2,120.00
City of Roanoke $ 135,292.00 $ 20,524.00
City of Salem $ 37,482.00 $ 6,921.00
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-40
Projected Frequency of Event
Winter storms occur frequently, several times a year. Ice storms with greater than .25 inches of
accumulation are less frequent but still occur at least every other year across the planning region,
more frequently than many other hazards.
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value - Winter Weather
Annualized Frequency
Value - Ice Storm
Alleghany
County 3.8 0.5
City of
Covington 3.8 0.5
Botetourt
County 3.5 0.6
Craig County 3.3 0.5
Roanoke County 3.4 0.6
City of Roanoke 3.4 0.6
City of Salem 2.4 0.6
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-41
Projected Local Vulnerability
Some localities specifically maintain their roads and winter storm response vehicles. Others are
dependent on the Virginia Department of Transportation. Extensive roadway mileage in rural
areas combined with topography challenges mean that rural localities are much more sensitive to
winter storm events. Accumulations are generally higher, and roadways are generally impacted
longer, especially non-arterial feeder roads.
For the purposes of this assessment, the factor assessed will be limited to roadway mileage.
However, alternative factors for evaluation to include in future plans may include average
precipitation accumulation per event, cost of transit interruptions, or cost of roadway maintenance.
Data for mileage was taken from the 2024 VDOT Mileage Table Book. Localities with an asterisk
maintain their own roads in whole or in part.
Figure 29: Total Mileage by Locality in 2024, VDOT21
21 (Virginia Department of Transportation, 2024)
878.18
41.44
23.2
1527.61
480.57
1530.71
490.68
135.59
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
ALLEGHANY COUNTY
CITY OF COVINGTON*
TOWN OF CLIFTON FORGE*
BOTETOURT COUNTY
CRAIG COUNTY
ROANOKE COUNTY
CITY OF ROANOKE*
CITY OF SALEM*
Total Mileage
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-42
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 42: Hazard Ranking for Winter Storm
Hazard Ranking
Table: Winter Storm
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local
Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year High Medium
City of
Covington
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of Iron
Gate
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Craig County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Medium Medium
Town of New
Castle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Botetourt
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year High Medium
Town of
Buchanan
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of
Fincastle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of
Troutville
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Roanoke County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year High Medium
Town of Vinton
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
City of Roanoke
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Medium Medium
City of Salem
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Regional Score
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-1
Chapter 5. Capabilities Assessment
5.1 Capability Assessment Framework
While Chapter 2: Regional Profile contains a general picture of the region, including of the local
jurisdictions served by this document, this chapter will build on that baseline information. The
following sections contain a more detailed analysis of the capacity of each of the jurisdictions in
this planning effort.
Each section will include the following elements:
A general assessment of budget and resources, including staffing.
A list of plans the jurisdiction has or maintains, when they were last updated if that
information is available, and which of these plans address hazards.
A list of ordinances and policy mechanisms which can be used to assist with
implementation of the Hazard Mitigation Plan, and any barriers that may exist to their use.
Additional NFIP compliance documentation.
Other factors that may help with mitigation efforts.
Plans and documents previously discussed in Chapter 3: Hazard Identification to meet the
goals of the CRS program are marked with an asterisk. Responses to worksheets provided by
the localities, which contain more in-depth information about their capabilities and their NFIP
programs, are included in Appendix G: Jurisdiction Capability Assessment Surveys.
The table below explores one of the best points of comparison between the localities in the region
by showing overall revenues and revenues per capita. This clearly illustrates capacity to operate
key government services, including mitigation services and disaster response. Data in this chapter
comes from a variety of sources. Where possible, data is provided by the Auditor of Public
Accounts to the Commonwealth of Virginia. This data reflects real budgets in the years 2024 if
available and 2023 if 2024 data was not available. Where neither dataset is available, 2025 or
2026 adopted budgets have been referenced. These budgets are adopted based off of best
available information regarding revenues and expenses.
In Section 4.3: Extreme Temperature, the NRI Social Vulnerability Index for larger localities within
the region was examined. The City of Roanoke was the only locality which ranked Very High in
terms of social vulnerability. All other localities ranked Relatively Low or Very Low.
Population numbers may vary in this chapter. These were taken from two separate sources, one
provided by the Commonwealth’s Auditor of Public Accounts, one provided by the CEDS. Sources
are noted as appropriate.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-2
Table 43: Comparison of Revenue Across RVARC Member Local Governments
Locality Populationa Total Revenue Total Revenue per Capita
Alleghany County* 14,898 $81,004,953.00 $5,437.30
City of Covington 5,567 $32,225,593.00 $5,788.68
Town of Clifton Forge** 3,483 $5,613,161.00 $1,611.59
Botetourt County 33,466 $139,116,476.00 $4,156.95
Craig County 4,855 $18,953,496.00 $3,903.91
Roanoke County 96,519 441,121,263.00 $4,570.30
City of Roanoke* 99,634 $603,957,800.00 $6,061.76
City of Salem 24,985 $164,155,327.00 $6,570.16
Town of Vinton** 8,038 $15,756,600.00 $1,960.26
Data comes from the 2023 Comparative Report
Data comes from the website or adopted budget
a Data comes from the 2023 and 2024 Comparative Report where available. Where unavailable data
comes from the 2025 CEDS.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-3
5.2 Alleghany County
Alleghany County is the northernmost county in the service area, characterized by largely rural
development patterns. Approximately half of the locality is federal forest land, and state-owned
lands are also present. The population of the County was 11,479 in 2023 excluding the Town of
Clifton Forge and is projected to be 13,993 in 2030. The median age is high for the region, at 48.1
years. Median household income is low at $52,546. One small rural hospital provides the majority
of medical emergency capacity for the locality.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Comparative Report of Local Government Revenues and Expenditures shows the following
general information about Alleghany County’s real budget for the year 2023. Alleghany County
staffs a Chief Building Official and an Emergency Manager. The Zoning Administrator serves as
a combined Community Planner, Floodplain Manager, and GIS coordinator.
Federal share of revenue in the 2023 budget was over 14 percent. Revenue from the
Commonwealth was close to 50 percent, showing a significantly high vulnerability to outside
funding sources.
Table 44: Alleghany County Budget 2023, Commonwealth of Virginia
Alleghany County Budget 2023
Population 14,898
Local Revenue $ 29,205,904.00
Per Capita $ 1,960.39
Percent of Revenue 36.05%
From the Commonwealth $ 40,281,474.00
Per Capita $ 2,703.82
Percent of Revenue 49.73%
Federal Pass-thru $ 10,729,017.00
Per Capita $ 720.16
Percent of Revenue 13.24%
Direct Federal Aid $ 788,558.00
Per Capita $ 52.93
Percent of Revenue 0.97%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 11,517,575.00
Percent of Revenue 14.22%
Total Revenue $ 81,004,953.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 77,240.00
Transfers from Other Funds -
Total Sources Available $ 81,082,193.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
Alleghany County currently has two plans in place which specifically address hazard mitigation.
These are the Comprehensive Plan, currently being updated and last updated in 2019, and the
Emergency Operations Plan, the new version of which is expected to be adopted in November
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-4
2025. Additional plans in place which could incorporate hazard mitigation in the future include the
Capital Improvement Plan.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Alleghany County maintains a County code, several sections of which provide some opportunity
for hazard mitigation. Large amendments to the code are possible but may be constrained by
funding and staff capacity.
Chapter 30 of the County Code contains Erosion and Sediment Control regulations. These
provisions mirror Code of Virginia, § 10.1-563(C). Chapter 34 – Fire Prevention and Protection
adopts pertinent sections of the Code of Virginia, § 27-1 et seq. to do with fire management, and
additionally describes rules around the sale, possession, and use of fireworks. Chapter 47 of the
Code addresses Public Safety.
Chapter 52 of the County Code contains the Stormwater Ordinance. This was last adopted in
2014. It integrates the County's stormwater management requirements with its erosion and
sediment control, flood insurance, and floodplain management requirements into a unified
stormwater program. This facilitates the submission and approval of plans, issuance of permits,
payment of fees, and coordination of inspection and enforcement activities in a more convenient
and efficient manner.
Alleghany County adopted its most recent Floodplain District in December 2010 that requires new
residential buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation. The floodplain district is
an overlay that applies to all other zoning districts. Additional requirements prevent the obstruction
of the floodway. In addition to Federal Regulations, the County has established guidelines for
development within flood hazard areas. They can be found in Chapter 66-Zoning, of the Code of
the County of Alleghany, Virginia. No construction or development, including fill, can be done in a
designated floodway. Development can occur in the 100-year floodplain, however the first-floor
elevation of a structure must be at least one foot above the designated flood elevations shown on
the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Also, structures in the 100-year floodplain must be in compliance
with building code requirements for structures in flood hazard areas. Development can occur in
the 500-year floodplain with compliance of building code requirements for structures in flood
hazard areas.
Chapter 66 - Zoning Ordinance, contains, among other things, the established flood hazard areas
and guidelines for development therein. Chapter 66 and Chapter 54 - Subdivision Ordinance both
contain key regulatory authority over land use in the county.
One factor in all localities, including Alleghany, is that many structures may have been built prior
to the adoption of these ordinances. Pre-existing structures built in flood prone areas are often
only mitigated directly if mitigation is triggered by improvements on the property.
NFIP Compliance
Community Development is the responsible department for NFIP compliance in Alleghany County.
The NFIP coordinator is not a Certified Floodplain Manager. NFIP services include permit review,
inspections, review of floodplain mapping for zoning and rezoning, and a GIS layer; however, staff
capacity is a barrier to running an effective NFIP program. Alleghany County entered the NFIP in
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-5
1987. The Indian Draft community within the County is vulnerable to flooding but has limited NFIP
policy coverage. The total amount of paid claims in the community is $2,867,632 for 172 claims.
Dam Safety
There are four dams in Alleghany County. These are the Clifton Forge Dam (owned and
maintained by the Town of Clifton Forge), Gathright Dam (owned and maintained by US Army
Corps of Engineers), Pond Lick Branch Dam (privately owned) and WestRock #2 Flyash Lagoon
Dam (owned and maintained by WestRock). Alleghany County staff review plans annually with
Smurfit WestRock, US ACE, and DCR.
Town of Iron Gate
The Town of Iron Gate is a small town on the border of Alleghany and Botetourt Counties, which
shares a strong cultural identity with the Alleghany Highlands. The Town engages in water and
sewer service provision. They are not an active jurisdiction in this plan but participate through
Alleghany County. The Town Code deals mainly with solid waste management and water and
sewer service provision.
The Town of Iron Gate has very limited capacity for mitigation, but some utility lines and structures
may be vulnerable to hazards. The Town adopted Alleghany County’s floodplain ordinance to
maintain good standing with NFIP.
Other Factors
The County has also entered into a number of mutual aid agreements in relation to Statewide Aid
for Emergency Management, radio communications with neighboring localities and fire and
rescue departments, and emergency services. They commonly collaborate with Covington and
Clifton Forge, and also with Bath County outside the region. Alleghany County provides support
for floodplain management in the Town of Iron Gate.
Alleghany County does maintain a Planning Commission and is a member government of the
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-6
5.3 City of Covington
The City of Covington is a small city located in the Alleghany Highlands. The City shares strong
cultural connections and some infrastructure with Alleghany County and the Town of Clifton Forge.
Population in the City of Covington was 5,671 in 2023 and is expected to fall to 5,434 in 2030.
The median age is 41.5. Median household income is low at $45,737. The City provides water
and sewer to residents.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The statewide Comparative Report of Local Government Revenues and Expenditures shows the
following general information about the City of Covington’s real budget for the year 2024. The City
of Covington has a small staff. The Director of Development Services serves as a Building Official,
Community Planner, and Zoning Administrator. The Director of Public Safety also serves as Chief
of Police and primary Emergency Management response. Covington is a small locality, whose
employees generally wear many hats.
Funding is a large barrier to the City in expending mitigation efforts. Hazard mitigation grants were
uplifted as a main source of funding for mitigation activities. Additional funding sources for
mitigation activities include CIP allocations, utility fees, a stormwater utility fee, and other state
funding programs. Federal funding, either direct funding or pass-through from the state
government, is about 13 percent of the City’s revenue.
Table 45: City of Covington Budget 2024
City of Covington Budget 2024
Population 5,567
Local Revenue $ 21,666,135.00
Per Capita $ 3,891.89
Percent of Revenue 67.23%
From the Commonwealth $ 6,405,092.00
Per Capita $ 1,150.55
Percent of Revenue 19.88%
Federal Pass-thru $ 1,170,444.00
Per Capita $ 210.25
Percent of Revenue 3.63%
Direct Federal Aid $ 2,983,922.00
Per Capita $ 536.00
Percent of Revenue 9.26%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 4,154,366.00
Percent of Revenue 12.89%
Total Revenue $ 32,225,593.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 2,233,967.00
Transfers from Other Funds -
Total Sources Available $ 34,459,560.00
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-7
Plans and Planning Schedules
The City of Covington maintains a Capital Improvements Plan, a Continuity of Operations and
Local Emergency Operations Plan, a Stormwater Management Plan and an Economic
Development Plan.
The Emergency Operations Plan was updated in November 2023. The Stormwater Management
Plan was updated in March 2025. A Resilience Plan is in development which will directly affect
flooding and flood response in the City.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 18 – Environment of the City Code addresses Erosion and Sediment Control in
compliance with Code of Virginia § 10.1-560 et seq.
Chapter 19 – Stormwater Management, adopted pursuant to Code of Virginia, § 62.1-44.15:24 et
seq., addresses specific stormwater management regulations.
Chapter 20 – Fire Prevention and Protection; Emergency Medical Services designates the city
fire department and emergency medical services departments as integral to the safety program
of the city and additionally establishes open-air fire restrictions and regulations.
Appendix A addresses Subdivision regulations and Appendix B addresses Zoning. Article XIII-A
of Appendix B specifically establishes Floodplain Districts for the City, adopting the FIRM provided
by FEMA.
NFIP Compliance
The NFIP program within the City of Covington is maintained by Development Services. The
Development Services Director is the primary NFIP administrator. He was formerly certified, but
his certification has lapsed. The Development Services Director also serves as the building
administrator and zoning administrator, as discussed earlier in this section. Besides staff capacity,
one of the barriers to running an effective NFIP program within this jurisdiction is community
interest.
The City of Covington entered the NFIP in 1979. Since that time they have paid out 179 claims at
1,904,162. There are five known repetitive or severe repetitive loss structures in the community.
Dam Safety
There are three dams in that could impact the City of Covington. These are the Gathwright Dam
owned and maintained by US Army Corps of Engineers), Pond Lick Branch Dam (privately
owned) and Mead Westvaco #2 Fly Ash Lagoon Dam (owned and maintained by Mead
Westvaco). These dams are not located within the City boundary.
Other Factors
The City of Covington engages in mutual aid agreements and joint planning and service provision
efforts with Alleghany County. The City utilizes open source precipitation and water level gauges
through water.gov, as well as a staff gauge posted at the Main St. Park.
The City does maintain a Planning Commission and is a member government of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-8
5.4 Town of Clifton Forge
The Town of Clifton Forge, formerly the City of Clifton Forge, is an incorporated town within the
boundaries of Alleghany County. The population of the Town was 3,483 in 2023. Population
projections are not available in the data collected for this plan. The median age is the highest in
data available for the planning region at 53.5 years. No separate median household income is
available. The Town engages in utility service provision of water and sewer.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
No budget information was available in the statewide Comparative Report. However, the
approved 2025 budget provides some context for Clifton Forge’s revenues and resources.
Numbers provided may lack some of the nuance available in the state audit document.
Clifton Forge staffs a Community Planner and an Emergency Manager.
Table 46: Adopted Budget Town of Clifton Forge, 2025
Town of Clifton Forge Budget 2025 Projected
Population 3,483
Local Revenue $ 2,672,548.00
Per Capita $ 767.31
Percent of Revenue 47.61%
From the Commonwealth $ 2,340,613.00
Per Capita $ 672.01
Percent of Revenue 41.70%
Direct Federal Aid $ 600,000.00
Per Capita $ 172.27
Percent of Revenue 10.69%
Total Revenue $ 5,613,161.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
Clifton Forge maintains a Comprehensive Plan, a Land Use Plan, and a Local Emergency
Operations Plan. The Emergency Operations Plan is the most relevant to hazard mitigation, and
was last updated in 2023.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 50 – Fire Prevention and Protection establishes rules around open burning and the
acquisition and use of explosives and fireworks.
Appendix A – Subdivision Ordinance and Appendix B- Zoning contain information guiding new
development in the town. Article 5 of Appendix B, Floodplain Overlay District, formally adopts
floodplain regulations and the FIRM.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-9
NFIP Compliance
An NFIP worksheet was not developed for the Town, so further details of the NFIP program could
not be provided.
Dam Safety
There are three dams in that could impact the Town of Clifton Forge. These are the Smith Creek
Dam, Gathright Dam, and Douthat Lake Dam. The Smith Creek dam, along with the associated
Smith Creek Reservoir is owned and maintained by the Town of Clifton Forge and serves as the
water supply for the Town of Clifton Forge, portions of Alleghany County, and the Town of Iron
Gate. The Town of Clifton Forge is responsible for the maintenance of the Smith Creek Dam. After
the dam was transferred to the Town, repairs were made and completed in early 2021. The dam
and reservoir are routinely maintained and inspected by our water plant staff as well as being
inspected annually per dam safety regulations.
Other Factors
The Town of Clifton Forge engages in collective operations with Alleghany County and Covington
regarding regional branding, tourism, and economic development. The Town also provides water
to portions of Alleghany County.
The Town does maintain a planning commission and is a member government of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-10
5.5 Botetourt County
Botetourt County has been one of the fastest growing localities in the region over the last decade.
The southern half of the locality has experienced significant development pressure in this time.
The northern half of the locality is still largely rural, with strong cultural ties to the Alleghany
Highlands. The population in 2023 was 33,875 and is projected to fall to 33,556 by 2030. Median
age is 48.1 and median household income is the second highest in the region at $77,680.
Botetourt County does not maintain an MS4 permit. Utility service provision for water and sewer
is handled by the Western Virginia Water Authority or private community providers.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
State data is available regarding Botetourt’s revenue in 2024. Botetourt is one of the least
vulnerable to federal funding fluctuations, with only a little under 11 percent of revenue from
federal sources. The majority of Botetourt’s revenue is generated locally, at 54.5 percent.
Botetourt staffs a Certified Building Official, Community Planner, Emergency Manager, and
Floodplain Administrator. The Community Development Department contains multiple staff
positions, including several planners, building inspectors, a code enforcement officer, a combined
Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management Inspector and a separate
Administrator, and others. Botetourt’s emergency management response is supplemented by a
robust volunteer fire and EMS organization.
Table 47: Botetourt County Budget, 2024
Botetourt County Budget 2024
Population 33,466
Local Revenue $ 75,818,720.00
Per Capita $ 2,265.54
Percent of Revenue 54.50%
From the Commonwealth $ 48,166,729.00
Per Capita $ 1,439.27
Percent of Revenue 34.62%
Federal Pass-thru $ 10,085,282.00
Per Capita $ 301.36
Percent of Revenue 7.25%
Direct Federal Aid $ 5,045,745.00
Per Capita $ 150.77
Percent of Revenue 3.63%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 15,131,027.00
Percent of Revenue 10.88%
Total Revenue $ 139,116,476.00
Non-Revenue Receipts
Transfers from Other Funds -
Total Sources Available $ 139,116,476.00
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-11
Plans and Planning Schedules
Botetourt maintains a Capital Improvements Plan and a Comprehensive Plan. A Local Emergency
Operations Plan directly addresses hazards and was last updated in 2017.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Multiple sections of Botetourt’s code may affect mitigation activities and disaster response.
Chapter 8.5 – Drainage and Flood Control creates rules for impounding structures that control
runoff on a site.
Chapter 10 – Erosion and Sediment Control; Stormwater Management allows for local compliance
with the Erosion and Sediment Control Law of the Code of Virginia. The County adopted its most
current E&S ordinance in 2024. The towns of Buchanan, Fincastle and Troutville utilize Botetourt
County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control monitoring.
Chapter 11 – Fire Prevention and Protection addresses the coordinated fire and EMS system and
brush burning.
Chapter 21 – Subdivisions establishes subdivision regulations.
Chapter 25 – Zoning addresses various zoning rules for the County, including establishing a Flood
Hazard Overlay District based on the FIRM to bring the county in compliance with the NFIP.
NFIP Compliance
The Director of Community Development is the primary administrator of the NFIP in Botetourt
County, and is a Certified Floodplain Manager. The county also maintains a retainer contract with
an organization to assist in administrative functions. Like all rural, growing communities, the
County has difficulty maintaining budget and staff. Their success in NFIP is due to the dedication
of existing staff performing multiple auxiliary functions.
Botetourt County entered the NFIP in 1978. Since that time, 182 claims have been paid out in the
County, totaling $3,563,445. There are 1,752 structures exposed to flood risk in the community.
Twenty-eight are repetitive loss and six are severe repetitive loss. The community does not
participate in CRS. There were 137 NFIP policies in force in the County (including the towns of
Buchanan, Fincastle and Troutville) as of July 2025.
Dam Safety
Botetourt County adopted a Drainage and Flood Control Ordinance in 1987. Division 2 Dam
Safety, in Sec. 8.5-31 addresses issues concerning impoundment construction, inspection and
maintenance stating “No one shall have a right to build or maintain an impoundment structure
which unreasonably threatens the life or property of another. The [county] administrator shall
cause safety inspections to be made of impounding structures on such schedule, as he deems
appropriate. The time of the initial inspection and the frequency of reinspection shall be
established depending on such factors as the condition of the structure and its size, type, location
and downstream hazard potential. The owners of impounding structures found to have
deficiencies which could threaten life or property if uncorrected, shall take the corrective actions
needed to remove such deficiencies within the time limits established by this article, or if no time
limit is established, within a reasonable time.”
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-12
There are five dams of significance in Botetourt County. These are the Blue Ridge Estates Dam
on Laymantown Creek, Carvin Cove Dam on Carvin Creek, Orchard Lake Dam on Glade Creek,
Rainbow Forest Dam on Laymantown Creek and Greenfield dam on an unnamed creek.
Gathright Dam, located on the Jackson River in Alleghany County, was completed in 1979 and is
operated for flood control of the Jackson and James Rivers. The facility is managed by the Army
Corps of Engineers. The dam controls the runoff from a 345 square mile drainage area and
reduces the effects of flooding along the Jackson and James Rivers. The Corps of Engineers
estimates that the project has prevented more than $70 million in flood damages. The James
River passes through the northern part of Botetourt County and impacts the communities of Eagle
Rock and Glen Wilton and the Town of Buchanan.
Other Factors
Botetourt contains several Towns, which are further discussed in the following sections, and works
collaboratively with them to support their development when possible. Botetourt County is a
member government of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission and the Roanoke
Valley Transportation Planning Organization. They are one of only two attainment counties in the
Appalachian Regional Commission service area.
Botetourt County has experienced some turnover challenges in the past few years, which is fairly
consistent with other governments in the area. The County does maintain a planning commission,
as well as a public relations position on staff.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-13
5.6 Town of Buchanan
The Town of Buchanan is a small, incorporated town within Botetourt County located on the James
River. Buchanan is an important tourist hub for Botetourt County. The Town provides water and
sewer service to residents.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Town maintains four staff positions currently. The Town Manager is the most likely to
participate directly in mitigation planning.
The Town is too small to participate in the statewide audit document, but a proposed budget for
FY2025 is available on the website22. The General Fund shows a balance of $903,351. $65,610
comes from the Commonwealth. Total revenues including water and sewer service fees are a little
over $2 million.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Town maintains a Comprehensive Plan which is in the process of being updated.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Article II of Appendix A of the Code of the Town addresses Zoning, with Sec. 201 establishing a
Flood Hazard Overlay District to maintain participation in the NFIP.
Chapter 7 – Erosion & Sediment and Chapter 20 – Subdivisions establish additional restrictions
on development.
NFIP Compliance
Botetourt County has adopted a Flood Hazard Overlay District as part of its Zoning Ordinance
2002). The boundaries of the floodplain district are established as shown on the flood boundary
and floodway and/or Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Town of Buchanan has adopted a
Floodplain Management Ordinance that requires new residential buildings to be elevated to or
above the base flood elevation.
The Town participates in the NFIP as a consumer of flood insurance for local government
infrastructure and is in good standing with the County.
The Town of Buchanan uses Botetourt County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control
monitoring.
Other Factors
The Town of Buchanan collaborates with Botetourt County on some planning efforts. They are not
an official member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission due to their size, but
RVARC does some support work for the Town at the County’s request.
The Town does maintain a planning commission.
22 Invalid source specified.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-14
5.7 Town of Fincastle
The Town of Fincastle is a small town centrally located within Botetourt County and the county
seat. While administrative offices for Botetourt County have largely moved out of the Town, it
maintains a central position in Botetourt County’s identity. The Town has historically provided
water and sewer services; however, those services are now operated by the Western Virginia
Water Authority.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Town of Fincastle maintains a very small staff, including a part-time Town Manager who is
charged with the majority of planning activities. While they are too small to be included in the
Comparative Report, a budget for FY2024 is available on the town’s website which details a
General Fund of $173,000 and total revenues of $537,700.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Town does maintain a Comprehensive Plan, which was last updated in 2021.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The Town’s Zoning Ordinance is available online, with Sec. 201 establishing a Flood Hazard
District to maintain participation in the NFIP.
NFIP Compliance
Botetourt County has adopted a Flood Hazard Overlay District as part of its Zoning Ordinance
2002). The boundaries of the floodplain district are established as shown on the flood boundary
and floodway and/or Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Town of Fincastle has adopted a
Floodplain Management Ordinance that requires new residential buildings to be elevated to or
above the base flood elevation.
The Town participates in the NFIP as a consumer of flood insurance for local government
infrastructure and is in good standing with the County.
The Town of Fincastle uses Botetourt County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control
monitoring.
Other Factors
The Town of Fincastle holds several critical facilities for Botetourt County, including the
courthouse, Fire/EMS administrative offices, and the jail. They are not an official member of the
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission due to their size, but RVARC does some
support work for the Town at the County’s request.
The Town maintains a planning commission of seven members, including a Zoning Administrator.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-15
5.8 Town of Troutville
The Town of Troutville is a small town within Botetourt County. It is located on the southern end
of the county, where development pressures are higher, and is an Appalachian Trail community.
Town limits are just under one square mile with boundaries including Interstate 81 and the Norfolk
Southern Railroad right of way. Troutville provides domestic water via pumped storage system
including areas outside of town boundaries. Town population is 468 people.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Town maintains limited staff, including a volunteer Zoning Administrator, Utility Operator, and
Clerk as well as a Facilities and Equipment Manager and Town Attorney.
The FY26 Town budget for general fund is $187,000.00.
Plans and Planning Schedules
No plans or planning documents were available on the Town website. The last comprehensive
plan was completed in 2010.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The Town does maintain a Zoning Code and Erosion and Sediment Control regulations. Article
XIV of the Zoning Code details the Floodplain Overlay District.
NFIP Compliance
Botetourt County has adopted a Flood Hazard Overlay District as part of its Zoning Ordinance
2002). The boundaries of the floodplain district are established as shown on the flood boundary
and floodway and/or Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The Town of Troutville has adopted a
Floodplain Management Ordinance that requires new residential buildings to be elevated to or
above the base flood elevation.
The Town participates in the NFIP as a consumer of flood insurance for local government
infrastructure, and is in good standing with the County.
The Town of Troutville uses Botetourt County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control
monitoring.
Other Factors
The Town does maintain a planning commission. They are not an official member of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission due to their size, but RVARC does some support work for
the Town at the County’s request.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-16
5.9 Craig County
Craig County is one of the most rural localities in the service area, with a population in 2023 of
4,881 and a projected population of 4,528 by 2030. The median age is 46.1 and the median
household income is $66,286. Nearly two thirds of the county is national forest or state parks.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
Craig County budget information is available from the statewide Comparative Report for 2024.
About 46 percent of revenues received by the County come from the Commonwealth, and 15
percent is direct federal money or federal pass-thru dollars.
Craig maintains minimal staffing, with a part time County Administrator serving also as the Zoning
Administrator, a Building Official, and an Emergency Management Coordinator.
Table 48: Craig County Budget 2024
Craig County Budget 2024
Population 4,855
Local Revenue $ 7,394,865.00
Per Capita $ 1,523.14
Percent of Revenue 39.02%
From the Commonwealth $ 8,701,440.00
Per Capita $ 1,792.26
Percent of Revenue 45.91%
Federal Pass-thru $ 2,410,413.00
Per Capita $ 496.48
Percent of Revenue 12.72%
Direct Federal Aid $ 446,778.00
Per Capita $ 92.02
Percent of Revenue 2.36%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 2,857,191.00
Percent of Revenue 15.07%
Total Revenue $ 18,953,496.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ -
Transfers from Other Funds $ -
Total Sources Available $ 18,953,496.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
The County maintains a Capital Improvements Plan, a Comprehensive Plan which addresses
land use, an Emergency Operations Plan and Continuity of Operations Plan. The Emergency
Operations Plan specifically addresses hazards and was last updated in 2025.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 26 – Fire Prevention and Protection establishes the volunteer fire service and establishes
rules for open burning.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-17
Chapter 46 – Erosion and Sediment Control regulates land disturbing activities. The Town of New
Castle utilizes the E&S Control services of Craig County.
Chapter 47 – Stormwater Management addresses required stormwater management plans.
Chapter 50 – Floods addresses flood hazard reduction and required elements for the NFIP.
Chapter 54 – Subdivisions and Chapter 58 – Zoning address new development in the County and
general land use.
NFIP Compliance
The Building Official is the floodplain administrator in Craig County, and is not certified. Staffing
challenges and financial restrictions combined with a low volume of required service are the
barriers to running an effective NFIP program. Since 1990, 71 claims have been paid out in the
community at $1,271,108. Two hundred and two structures are at flood risk in the community, with
six being repetitive loss structures. The community does not participate in CRS. There were 41
NFIP policies in force in the County and two in the Town of New Castle as of July 2025.
Dam Safety
There are four dams in Craig County. The Mountain Castles Soil and Water Conservation District
has responsibility for the operation and maintenance of these dams. The dams are located on
Johns Creek, Little Oregon Creek, Mudlick Branch, and Dicks Creek. The dams were constructed
during the period of 1966 to 1968 for the purpose of flood control in the Johns Creek watershed.
Future work will be occurring to rehabilitate several of these dams. Johns Creek Volunteer Fire
Department has observers for each dam when there are high water issues.
Town of New Castle
The Town of New Castle is included in this capabilities assessment despite not having met the
criteria for participation in the planning effort. Craig County serves as the planning authority for
the Town in hazard mitigation planning. The Town of New Castle is the county seat of Craig
County. They are not an active jurisdiction in this plan, but participate through Craig County. The
town has one staff person who functions as Town Clerk, Treasurer to the Town Council, and
Zoning Administrator. Limited information is available on the Craig County website regarding the
Town’s government. No budget information is available.
Other Factors
The County has participated in the VDEM Flood Intelligence Unit’s flood gauge program. Three
water level gauges and two precipitation gauges have been installed in key locations throughout
the County. The County receives support from RVARC as a member government and is within
the service area for the Appalachian Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-18
5.10 Roanoke County
Roanoke County is one of the largest localities by population, with 89,755 residents in 2023 and
100,027 projected in 2030, excluding the population of the Town of Vinton. The development
patterns of the County are largely suburban and rural, with some more densely developed areas.
The median age is lower than many other localities in the region at 43.7. The median household
income is the highest in the region at $80,872. The County encircles the Cities of Roanoke and
Salem. The Town of Vinton is located within the County. The County additionally owns and
operates the Explore Park, a major regional outdoor recreation facility which is bifurcated by the
Roanoke River, other parks potentially impacted by flooding such as Green Hill Park and Wayside,
and several miles of the Roanoke River Greenway which are largely in the floodplain.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
Data for the county is available in the statewide Comparative Report. Local revenue is over 56
percent of the revenue for the county in 2024. The percentage of federal revenue is low, at less
than 9 percent.
The County maintains numerous staff, including several community planners, stormwater
management staff and engineers, GIS staff, and emergency manager. They are a CRS
community.
Table 49: Roanoke County Revenues, 2024
Roanoke County Budget 2024
Population 96,519
Local Revenue $ 248,040,326.00
Per Capita $ 2,569.86
Percent of Revenue 56.23%
From the Commonwealth $ 154,421,775.00
Per Capita $ 1,599.91
Percent of Revenue 35.01%
Federal Pass-thru $ 30,897,590.00
Per Capita $ 320.12
Percent of Revenue 7.00%
Direct Federal Aid $ 7,761,572.00
Per Capita $ 80.41
Percent of Revenue 1.76%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 38,659,162.00
Percent of Revenue 8.76%
Total Revenue $ 441,121,263.00
Non-Revenue Receipts
Transfers from Other Funds $ 1,405,682.00
Total Sources Available $ 442,526,945.00
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-19
Plans and Planning Schedules
The County maintains numerous plans, including a Capital Improvements Plan, a Comprehensive
Plan last updated in 2024 which addresses future land use, an Emergency Operations Plan, an
Economic Development Plan, an annual update of the Regional Stormwater Management Plan,
and other plans and planning documents.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The County has engaged in a variety of mechanisms to address hazards, including land
acquisition, maintaining an up to date building code, adopting the FIRM and a floodplain overlay,
a subdivision ordinance, and a zoning ordinance, all of which are tools that have been used to
address hazards.
Roanoke County has adopted an Erosion & Stormwater Management Ordinance (2025) and
Design Manual (2008) that require new residential buildings to be elevated two feet and new
commercial buildings one foot above the 100-year base flood elevation. The Stormwater
Management Design Manual that specifies acceptable methodologies, design events for a wide
variety of facilities, and administrative requirements such as submittal checklists. Appendices
provide a wide variety of charts and tables to be used in applying the approved methodologies.
The County has a floodplain overlay district, corresponding to areas identified on Flood Insurance
Rate Maps (FIRM) prepared by FEMA. Roanoke County also has up to date DFIRMS of all FEMA
studied streams. Additionally, the County has adopted regulations for development in areas that
contain more than 100 acres of drainage area that require flood studies for elevations of additions
or new construction.
Roanoke County has adopted a Roanoke River Corridor Conservation and Overlay District.
Although primarily designed to protect water quality, it also helps reduce siltation, which in turn
protects the channel that is carrying floodwaters. In this overlay district, smaller sites (2,500
square feet in lieu of standard 10,000 square feet minimum) must meet erosion and sediment
controls standards. Roanoke County has completed over one mile of stream restoration. Project
goals were aimed at reducing streambank erosion, improving channel stability during high flow
events, storing flood waters, and supporting aquatic and other life.
NFIP Compliance
Roanoke County primarily staffs the NFIP program through the twin roles of a Project Engineer
and a Floodplain Administrator. Floodplain management is a primary function for staff. They are
also a CRS community. Major barriers to running an effective NFIP program include challenges
with staffing following disasters to complete tasks in a timely manner. Limited knowledge beyond
primary staff member requires that individual to be present or involved with all mitigation activities
and disaster response. More training is sought, however, staff time in the face of additional duties
remains a challenge.
Roanoke County entered the NFIP in 1978. To date 797 claims have been paid out in the
community with a total amount of $18,582,734. There were 288 NFIP policies in force in the
County as of July 2025.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-20
Participating in the Community Rating System is an important program for Roanoke County. The
County maintains an established permit process, requires and tracks elevation certificates, and
provides public outreach and education. The County is challenged by the investment of financial
and staff resources to improve the class in this plan cycle.
Dam Safety
There are eight regulated dams that could impact properties in Roanoke County: Privately owned
Loch Haven Lake Dam located on a tributary of Deer Branch Creek; Appalachian Electric Power
owned Niagara Dam located on the Roanoke River; privately owned Orchard Dam on a tributary
of Glade Creek; Carvin Cove Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Carvin Creek and
owned by the Western Virginia Water Authority, Spring Hollow Reservoir Dam located on a
tributary of the Roanoke River and owned by the Western Virginia Water Authority, Montclair Dam
and North lakes Dam in the Peters Creek watershed managed by Roanoke City, and Hidden
Valley Dam in southwest county managed by Roanoke County.
The County sees an opportunity for regional collaboration around high hazard potential dams,
and a need for dam breach inundation mapping for dams which could impact their community.
Other Factors and Activities
Roanoke County was first designated as a “StormReady” community in 2019 and has successfully
maintained this designation through the National Weather Service. The county’s next
recertification is scheduled for 2027.
The County has strategically deployed three (3) Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stream
flood sensors and three (3) locally monitored rain gauges to enhance real-time monitoring
capabilities. In addition, the County utilizes resources from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), including the Water Prediction Center’s forecasts and mapping tools
water.noaa.gov/va) and the NOAA rainfall monitoring system (weather.gov/rainfall).
Project Impact Roanoke Valley was a partnership of FEMA, Roanoke County, the cities of
Roanoke and Salem and the Town of Vinton to reduce destruction to life and property during
disasters through planning and mitigation. The Project Impact Roanoke Valley Steering
Committee and its work groups evaluated hazard mitigation needs from 1998 to 2001. The four
work groups were: Hazard Mitigation, Public Information and Community Education, Stormwater
Management and Partnership and Resource group. The Stormwater Management group was
responsible for the preparation of over 1,500 floodplain elevation certificates in the participating
localities. The Public Information and Community Education and Partnership and Resource
groups met with community organizations, civic groups, businesses and the general public to
promote hazard mitigation activities. The Land Use group focused on the how local plans and
ordinances relate to hazard mitigation and published Hazard Mitigation through Land Use
Planning in 2001. The Hazard Mitigation group addressed flooding, wildfire, meteorological
events, and hazardous materials incidents in its report Hazard Analysis.
The County provides annual updates on the Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management
Plan, which is further discussed in Section 5.14.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-21
Roanoke County provides capacity to the Town of Vinton around stormwater issues. The County
is a member government of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission and the
Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization. Water and sewer is provided by the
Western Virginia Water Authority. The County is a member of the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority. Valley Metro serves this locality and they are a member of the Greenway Commission.
They have a robust public outreach program and are a member of Roanoke Valley Television.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-22
5.11 City of Roanoke
The City of Roanoke has the highest population in the region, with a 2023 population of 98,677
and a projected 2030 population of 101,514 per the regional CEDS. The median age is 38, the
lowest in the region. The median household income is $51,523, the second to lowest in the region.
The City owns and maintains Carvins Cove, a large park which surrounds a key reservoir for
water in the Roanoke Valley. The region’s only level 1 trauma center is located within the City.
The City is encircled by Roanoke County and adjoined by the City of Salem and Town of Vinton,
meaning that many environmental issues are shared between these localities.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
Budget information for the City is available most recently in the 2023 publication of the statewide
Comparative Report. A little over 46 percent of the City’s revenue is local, with slightly less than
17 percent of the revenue being federal or federal pass-thru dollars.
The City maintains a robust stormwater management department, multiple planning staff, and
several emergency response professionals, as well as dedicated GIS staff. They are a CRS
community in good standing. The City sees an opportunity for increased emergency response
training amongst their staff.
Table 50: City of Roanoke Revenues 2023
City of Roanoke Budget 2023
Population 99,634
Local Revenue $ 280,458,617.00
Per Capita $ 2,814.89
Percent of Revenue 46.44%
From the Commonwealth $ 221,242,528.00
Per Capita $ 2,220.55
Percent of Revenue 36.63%
Federal Pass-thru $ 86,449,186.00
Per Capita $ 867.67
Percent of Revenue 14.31%
Direct Federal Aid $ 15,807,469.00
Per Capita $ 158.66
Percent of Revenue 2.62%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 102,256,655.00
Percent of Revenue 16.93%
Total Revenue $ 603,957,800.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 713,029.00
Transfers from Other Funds $ 1,961,500.00
Total Sources Available $ 606,632,329.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
The City maintains a variety of plans and planning documents. Many of these are listed in Section
3.4: Flooding.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-23
Comprehensive Plan
Downtown Roanoke Plan (2017)
Urban Forestry Plan
Parks and Recreation Plan
Climate Action Plan
CIP
NFIP Community Rating System Repetitive Loss Area Analysis (2021)*
City of Roanoke Flood Resilience Plan (2023)*
Emergency Operations Basic Plan (2020)*
Peters Creek Watershed Master Plan (2019)*
Tinker Creek and Tributaries Watershed Master Plan (2016)*
Trout Run Watershed Master Plan (2017)*
Additionally, they have conducted research into the urban heat island effect, mapping critical
hotspots within the City and working with the local Roanoke Memorial Hospital on improving
health outcomes for City residents and educating residents on the impacts of heat.
Key amongst these plans, the Flood Resilience Plan could be updated to include additional flood
mitigation actions.
The City is working on a collaborative plan to mitigate wildland fire in multiple park areas
throughout the City. The current Substantial Damage Management procedures are being
consolidated into an effective plan. They are also in the process of revising the Emergency
Operations Plan, which will provide opportunities to include mitigation language. The Debris
Management Annex will be revised during the next update to our EOP to include a more circular
economy framework.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The City has a robust ordinance, including most mechanisms allowed in the Commonwealth. The
FIRM is adopted in the Floodplain Overlay District (Chapter 36.2 Zoning). Additionally, a River
and Creek Corridors Overlay District seeks to manage water quality of the numerous streams
running through the City.
The City has adopted the River and Creek Corridors Overlay District (RCC) to recognize the
Roanoke River and its tributaries as valuable water resources in the City and to designate certain
areas along their banks as being critical to their protection in order to ensure that such streams
and adjacent lands will fulfill their natural functions. Streams have the primary natural functions of
conveying storm and ground water, storing floodwater, and supporting aquatic and other life.
Vegetated lands adjacent to the stream channel in the drainage basin serve as a buffer to protect
the stream system's ability to fulfill its’ natural functions. Primary natural functions of the buffer
include protection of water quality by filtering pollutants, provision of storage for floodwaters, and
provision of suitable habitats for wildlife. Within the River and Creek Overlay District, riparian
buffers shall be established and shall consist of all land adjacent to, and fifty (50) feet landward
from, the top of the banks of the Roanoke River or the applicable tributary. Further, riparian buffers
shall be retained and maintained if present, and where it does not exist, shall be established and
maintained upon any land disturbing activity. To retain ecological functional value, native
vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-24
Other sections of the ordinance relevant to this effort include Chapter 11.3: Stormwater Discharge
Requirements, Chapter 11.5 Stormwater Utility, Chapter 11.6 Stormwater Management, Chapter
11.7 Erosion and Sediment Control, and Chapter 12 Fire Prevention and Protection. Building
regulations, subdivision regulations, and general land use are also provided for in the ordinance.
Current zoning standards restrict floodway development to specific permitted uses including
agricultural operations, recreational use, botanical gardens, and accessory residential use. Other
acceptable floodway uses must be granted by special exception. All floodway development must
meet “no-rise” qualifications and all new floodplain development or substantially improved
structures must meet the freeboard requirements for elevation or flood-proofing and be within
NFIP compliance. After reviewing, the City finds its current zoning and floodplain management
ordinance adequate and does not plan to assert stricter permitted uses in the floodway or other
flood zones.
Enforcing stricter building codes within flood zones can further reduce flood risk by requiring more
strict elevation, or floodproofing requirements in the floodplain. The City currently requires 2 feet
of freeboard within the regulatory floodplain but otherwise follows the Virginia Uniform Statewide
Building Code. Current City standards are in line with City’s goals and will update alongside any
state level changes.
Subdivision ordinance language help to ensure that the threat of flooding is considered and
addressed in the planning process. The City’s ordinance language requires that subdivision
layouts be consistent with minimizing flood damage and ensuring there are clear and safe
evacuation routes during a flood event. It also requires adequate subdivision drainage and
locating utilities and facilities in areas subject to minimal flood damage. After review, there are no
areas of the subdivision ordinance in regard to floodplains that have been deemed in need of
change.
Stormwater management regulations, specifically those addressing water quantity, reduce the
severity of flooding when applied across the community. These regulations ensure development
impacts on stormwater runoff are offset by solutions such as green infrastructure best
management practices. The city code follows the Virginia Stormwater Management Program
VSMP) to address both stormwater quality and quantity, and also employs a stormwater credits
program that encourages both residential and commercial properties to employ stormwater best
management practices that assists the city in managing stormwater issues. There are no current
plans to revise the stormwater management ordinance beyond the state standards.
The City of Roanoke has adopted more stringent regulations, references, guidelines, standards
and specifications than promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (and any
local handbook or publication of the board) for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment
deposition to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and
other natural resources.
Notable amongst the other localities, the City has designated a Stormwater Utility Fee in 2014
which is used to fund water quality improvements in the region and encourage alternative
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-25
development practices. These activities have co-benefits to reduce flooding in many cases.
Project examples include:
Planning, design, engineering, construction, and debt retirement for new facilities and
enlargement or improvement of existing facilities, including the enlargement or
improvement of dams, levees, and floodwalls, that serve to control stormwater;
Water Quality Projects including stream restorations and other green infrastructure to
reduce pollutants and erosion and to enhance runoff infiltration;
Facility operation and maintenance, including the maintenance of publicly owned
stormwater and flood mitigation infrastructure;
Monitoring of stormwater control devices and ambient water quality monitoring; and
Other activities consistent with the state or federal regulations or permits governing
stormwater management, including, but not limited to, public education, watershed
planning, inspection and enforcement activities, and pollution prevention planning and
implementation.
Creation of a Stormwater Utility Flood Mitigation Program as a supplement to nationally
competitive FEMA grants.
Outreach and Education on water quality, stream health, floodplain natural functions, flood
insurance and substantial damage and substantial improvement requirements.
NFIP Compliance
The City participates in, and is in good standing with, the National Flood Insurance Program
NFIP) by enforcing floodplain management regulations that meet federal requirements. This
program allows property owners to purchase flood insurance from NFIP. As of 2025, there are
385 NFIP policies in force in the City.
The Zoning Administrator is the primary responsible staff person for floodplain management, but
is not a certified floodplain manager. The City entered the NFIP in 1981. In that time there have
been 797 claims at $18,852,734 total. There are 85 repetitive loss properties and 11 severe
repetitive loss properties in the City.
The City identified land use demands in an urban environment as a primary inhibiting factor for
running an effective NFIP program, as well as staff expertise continuity and maintenance.
The City of Roanoke entered the CRS program in 1996 and maintains a class 6 rating (20%
discount on flood insurance premiums for parcel owners within City limits).
Dam Safety
Spring Hollow Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Roanoke River and owned by the
Western Virginia Water Authority, could impact properties in the City of Roanoke if it failed. Carvins
Cove Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Carvins Creek and owned by the Western
Virginia Water Authority, could impact properties in the City if it failed. Two other smaller private
lakes in the City are designated high hazard by the DCR; Windsor Lake and Spring Lake, both
have conducted significant spillway improvements, and owners closely coordinate with the City.
The City works work directly with them during storm events and potential flooding impacts that
would or could potentially see impacts in on dam structures.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-26
Windsor Lake and Spring Valley Lake dams are privately-owned dams located within the City of
Roanoke. The emergency communication protocol for both includes notification to City of
Roanoke Emergency Management.
Windsor Lake Corporation reaches out to Emergency Management annually for communication
tests and every three years for a tabletop exercise and revision of their Emergency Action Plan.
They have shared a copy of their 2025 plan with us, as well as GIS shapefiles of inundation
extents.
Spring Valley Lake LLC is due for a revision of their Emergency Action Plan. The last revision of
the plan is dated 2013. They conducted a joint evaluation with City of Roanoke Emergency
Management after a 2020 emergency event.
Other Mitigation Implementation Activities
The City continues to maintain open space as recreational areas as well as seeking to expand
the open space in the floodplain through acquisition and demolition of highly flood prone
structures, then maintaining them as deed restricted parcels. Acquisition, demolition, and open
space preservation has been and will continue to be one of the City’s strategies to reduce
community flood risk. The City participates in State and Federal grant funding programs to be
able to fund these projects.
Stream restorations have been a significantly beneficial strategy for flood loss prevention. Stream
restorations allow for channel design and streambank stabilization that protects surrounding
infrastructure, with the added benefit of renaturalizing the surrounding floodplain. This not only
provides flood storage and property protection benefits, but also improves water quality and local
habitat. The City plans to continue to seek high priority stream segments and apply for grant
funding for projects in those areas.
Star City Alerts allows for direct alerting to citizen devices which helps save lives and property by
shortening warning times and informing the public during flood events. The City has plans to
leverage local stream gauge data to trigger automatic communications through this alerting
system. Currently the system has a manual communication chain during flood events. Grant
funding is being sought to establish the gauges and software necessary to make this connection
happen.
The City has a large backlog of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) to improve stormwater
drainage throughout problem areas in the City. The CIP project prioritization system now allows
the best use of Stormwater Utility funds and awarded grants to upgrade and repair the stormwater
drainage system.
The City has successfully maintained a consistent flooding outreach program that involves a
brochure that goes to all floodplain properties, a flood safety website, social media posts,
repetitive loss letters, and hosting a Prepareathon (an event focused on emergency preparedness
including flooding preparedness). New projects are always being considered to ensure flood
hazard and mitigation information is reaching the community. Outreach projects are typically
funded through the City general fund and the Stormwater Utility fund.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-27
The City of Roanoke was designated a Storm Ready community in February 2010 by the National
Weather Service. The City was certified based on it level of emergency preparedness including:
a 24-hour warning point and emergency operations center; development of at least four methods
by which weather warnings can be received and disseminated; creation of a system to monitor
local weather conditions; conducting community seminars to promote disaster readiness; and
development of a formal hazardous weather plan, including spotter training and emergency
exercises. An additional benefit of the designation to the residents and business owners in the
City is reduced rate for flood insurance.
The Stream Hydrology And Rainfall Knowledge System (SHARKS) is a platform that integrates
USGS precipitation gauge data as well as stream sensors across the City of Roanoke to show
real time stream height and rain data. This facilitates staff understanding and analysis of flooding
in real-time events as well as past flood data. The SHARKS system helps inform flood planning,
emergency responders, road closures and stormwater projects.
The City partners with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to monitor and study local waterways
to better understand local water quality dynamics and inform management decisions. Monitoring
objectives include: continual stream levels, water temperature, pH, conductivity, dissolved
oxygen, and turbidity. Statistical relationships between sediment and turbidity have been
developed at each station in order to estimate sediment loading with the goal of effective
management of suspended sediment. In addition, the monitoring data are being used with aquatic
insect data to better understand the relationship between hydrology, water quality and aquatic
insect health in the City. These monitoring and science efforts support the City’s science-informed
watershed management strategy; more information is available at the USGS’ Roanoke Project
Site.
The City has also partnered with the USGS to install precipitation monitoring gauges in a selected
spatial distribution pattern to optimize data capture. This robust precipitation monitoring network
can provide many benefits to a variety of stakeholders within the city, including stormwater and
other utilities, first responders, educational programs, and others. The monitoring network can
provide critical data to aid the management and modeling of the stormwater infrastructure and
first responders could utilize the real-time monitoring to better allocate resources during extreme
precipitation events. The network could also be used as an outreach tool to educate residents
and students about precipitation and potential risks of precipitation and flooding.
Project Impact Roanoke Valley was a partnership of FEMA, Roanoke County, the cities of
Roanoke and Salem and the Town of Vinton to reduce destruction to life and property during
disasters through planning and mitigation. The Project Impact Roanoke Valley Steering
Committee and its work groups evaluated hazard mitigation needs from 1998 to 2001. The four
work groups were: Hazard Mitigation, Public Information and Community Education, Stormwater
Management and Partnership and Resource group. The Stormwater Management group that
originated with the Project Impact Roanoke Valley initiative was responsible for the preparation of
over 1,500 floodplain elevation certificates. The Public Information and Community Education and
Partnership and Resource groups met with community organization, civic groups, businesses and
the general public to promote hazard mitigation activities.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-28
Other Factors
The City identified several factors as potentially inhibiting mitigation activities. State ordinance
and national building codes may offer some limitations. Funding for acquiring land may be limited.
The loss of multiple federal funding sources will severely impact mitigation efforts. Potential losses
include BRIC grants, funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, Community Bloc Grants, and
funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These have all been key sources of mitigation
funding in the past.
The City is a member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, the Roanoke Valley
Resource Authority, the Greenway Commission, the Western Virginia Water Authority, Valley
Metro, and the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization. They maintain a planning
commission and a board of zoning appeals. They have a robust public outreach program and are
a member of Roanoke Valley Television. Mitigation-related programming is common in their public
outreach.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-29
5.12 City of Salem
The City of Salem is a small city adjoining the City of Roanoke and encircled by Roanoke County.
Route 11, a key transportation corridor, bisects the City and LewisGale hospital, the region’s other
major hospital, is located within its boundaries. The City had a population of 25,477 in 2023 with
a projected population of 25,519 in 2030. The median age is 40.3, and the median household
income is $68,402.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The City staffs several positions, including all relevant positions to mitigation planning. A floodplain
administrator, a GIS coordinator, emergency management personnel, building officials and civil
engineers, as well as a community planner, are all covered by staff. The Comparative Report
shows a low 7 percent federal funding ratio, and local revenue makes up a hearty 61 percent of
revenues for the locality.
Table 51: City of Salem Revenues 2024
City of Salem Budget 2024
Population 24,985
Local Revenue $ 100,577,836.00
Per Capita $ 4,025.53
Percent of Revenue 61.27%
From the Commonwealth $ 52,065,597.00
Per Capita $ 2,083.87
Percent of Revenue 31.72%
Federal Pass-thru $ 5,508,189.00
Per Capita $ 220.46
Percent of Revenue 3.36%
Direct Federal Aid $ 6,003,705.00
Per Capita $ 240.29
Percent of Revenue 3.66%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 11,511,894.00
Percent of Revenue 7.01%
Total Revenue $ 164,155,327.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 720,018.00
Transfers from Other Funds $ 3,305,679.00
Total Sources Available $ 168,181,024.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
The City of Salem maintains numerous plans, many of which are listed in section 3.4: Flooding.
The Resilience Plan and the Emergency Operations Plan are perhaps most relevant to this effort.
The Comprehensive Plan was recently updated in 2025.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-30
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 30. – Environment of the City ordinance contains several sections relevant to mitigation
planning and emergency response, including Article III. Erosion and Sediment Control and Article
IV. Stormwater Management. Chapter 34 – Fire Prevention and Protection deals with hazardous
materials, bonfires, and creates the role of a fire marshal.
The City of Salem has adopted the regulations, references, guidelines, standards and
specifications promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (and any local
handbook or publication of the board) for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment
deposition to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and
other natural resources. Salem’s ordinance, in addition to referencing the Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Handbook, states in Section 30-117 that the erosion and sediment control plan
must consider “Peak runoff from a ten year or 100-year frequency storm, based on present and
future developed conditions …” and “If the watershed is greater than one square mile in area, a
peak runoff study of the 100-year frequency storm shall be prepared.”
The City of Salem adopted a Floodplain Management Ordinance in 1993 (revised in 2007) that
requires new residential buildings to be elevated to a minimum of one foot (1’) above the base
flood elevation. The City has a floodplain overlay district corresponding to areas identified on
Flood Insurance Rate Maps prepared by FEMA.
The City has a Stormwater Management Ordinance that is part of the City Code. It was developed
to bring the City into compliance with state laws on stormwater management and is consistent
with the statewide Stormwater Management Model Ordinance.
Chapter 106 establishes the zoning code, which includes the floodplain overlay district in
accordance with the NFIP. An urban forest overlay is also designated as a method to combat
urban heat island effect.
NFIP Compliance
The Director of Community Development is the program administrator for the NFIP. He is
floodplain manager certified. There were 252 policies in the community in 2025. Since Salem
joined the NFIP in 1978, 592 claims have been paid out in the community at $18,080,710. Flood
risk is high in the community, with 2,592 structures at risk. Ninety are repetitive loss structures,
with 29 being severe repetitive loss structures. Staff note that the program is understaffed and
underfunded – staffing constraints remain a repetitive issue for localities across the region in
running an effective NFIP program.
Dam Safety
Spring Hollow Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Roanoke River and owned by the
Western Virginia Water Authority, could impact properties in the City of Salem if it failed. The
WVWA is a recognized jurisdiction in this plan. Further information about potential impacts from
this dam is available in Appendix H.
Other Factors
The City stated a desire to improve public awareness around hazards. They stated that their
approach to mitigation is proactive and adaptive.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-31
The City maintains many of their own utility systems, including their own water and sewer system
and some electrical infrastructure. They are a member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission, the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization, and the Greenway
Commission. The locality does maintain a planning commission. Valley Metro serves this locality.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-32
5.13 Town of Vinton
The Town of Vinton is one of the largest towns in the Commonwealth with a 2023 population of
8,038 per the CEDS. Located within Roanoke County, the town also borders the City of Roanoke.
The median age is 39.7 making this the second youngest locality in the region.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
No budget information is available in the statewide Comparative Report for the past two years.
However, the adopted FY2025 budget is available on the Town website.23 The document states
FY2023 actual revenues in the General Fund, Capital Fund and Stormwater Fund were
15,756,600. Combined revenue from non-categorical aid, state sales tax, and categorical aid in
that year were about 23 percent of the revenues received.
Vinton uses this money to, among other things, staff several positions, including several
community planners, a code enforcement officer, floodplain manager, and a capital projects
manager. Some of these may be collected in one position. Vinton has a relatively small staff
compared to some other localities in the region.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Town maintains a Capital Improvement Plan (updated annually), Comprehensive Plan last
updated in 2025 which also serves as a land use plan, and an Emergency Operations Plan and
Continuity of Operations Plan updated in 2022. All of these plans include mitigation actions.
They also maintain a transportation plans and an economic development plan.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 79 – Stormwater Management establishes stormwater and erosion and sediment control
regulations. Appendix B contains the zoning ordinance, including establishing a Floodplain
Overlay District.
The Town of Vinton floodplain management regulations were originally adopted in 1982. These
regulations are designed as an overlay district and adopted as part of the 1995 Zoning Ordinance.
The regulations have been amended subsequently in 2007 and 2014 and comply with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain regulations. The Floodplain Overlay District
applies to properties that have been identified on a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) as being
in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The land area covered by the floodwaters of the base
flood is the SFHA.
There are two (2) flood zones in the Town:
1. Floodway – The land immediately adjoining the watercourse channel that is the natural
conduit for floodwaters; and
2. Special Flood Hazard Area – Any area of land that is susceptible to a one percent (1%)
chance of flooding annually. The most recent FIRM for the Town of Vinton was completed
in 2007.
23 https://www.vintonva.gov/100/Budgets-Reports
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-33
The Town’s floodplain management regulations ordinance requires that new residential structures
be at least two (2) feet above base flood elevation, and that new non-residential structures be at
least one (1) foot above flood elevation.
The Town follows Roanoke County’s Combined Erosion & Stormwater Management Ordinance
that is part of the County Code. It was developed to bring the County into compliance with state
laws on stormwater management and erosion and sedimentation control. In addition to using the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Roanoke County publishes a separate
Stormwater Management Design Manual that specifies acceptable methodologies, design events
for a wide variety of facilities, and administrative requirements such as submittal checklists.
Appendices provide a wide variety of charts and tables to be used in applying the approved
methodologies.
Roanoke County administers the Town of Vinton Erosion and Sediment Control program under
the adopted regulations, references, guidelines, standards and specifications promulgated by the
Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (and any local handbook or publication of the board)
for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment deposition to prevent the unreasonable
degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and other natural resources. Such regulations,
references, guidelines, standards and specifications for erosion and sediment control are included
in, but not limited to, the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations and the Virginia
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, as amended from time to time. In 2025, Erosion and
Sediment Control standards, specifications and regulations were adopted under a new joint
combined Erosion & Stormwater Management Ordinance
Vinton staff note that a complication of implementation of these ordinances is equity. The
enforcement of these ordinances inadvertently impact lower-income populations and
neighborhoods
NFIP Compliance
The Town participates in, and is in good standing with, the National Flood Insurance Program
NFIP) by enforcing floodplain management regulations that meet federal requirements. This
program allows property owners to purchase flood insurance from NFIP. There are currently 27
NFIP policies in force in the Town.
The Assistant Planning and Zoning Director is responsible for floodplain management in this
community and is a Certified Floodplain Manager. One hundred and sixty structures are exposed
to flood risk in the community. Three of these are repetitive loss structures. The Midway
Community has limited policy coverage but is at risk of flooding.
As of October 1, 2016, the Town is one of the few communities in Virginia that have been accepted
into the Community Rating System (CRS) program. Due to the continuing efforts of Town
administration, every Town of Vinton property owner – residential or commercial – whose property
is located within the Special Hazard Flood Area (SHFA), may be eligible for a 10% discount on
their annual flood insurance premium due to the Town’s CRS Classification of 8.
Relative to CRS requirements, Vinton undertakes the following CRS specific activities, among
many others.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-34
Higher Regulatory Standards: Credit is provided for enforcing regulations that require
freeboard for new construction and substantial improvement, and local drainage
protection. Credit is also provided for the enforcement of building codes, a Building Code
Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) Classification of 4/3, and regulations
administration.
Open Space Preservation: Credit is provided for preserving approximately 20 percent of
the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) as open space and protecting open space land
with deed restrictions.
Dam Safety
Carvins Cove Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Carvin Creek and owned by the
Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) could impact the western side of the Town of Vinton.
Inundation maps for this dam are included in Appendix H.
Other Mitigation Activities
The Town obtained two FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) grant funding in April
1998 and July 2004. Through these two grant programs, 19 properties that were either developed
with residential structures or vacant lots located in the SFHA were acquired. Eleven structures
that were located in the floodway were demolished and the occupants and/or tenants were
relocated from the SFHA and the properties were rezoned to public/open space district. The Town
purchased a mobile home park in 2024 using local funds which involved the relocation or
demolition of nine manufactured home units that were in the floodway. Additionally, the Town
purchased and demolished a single-family residence located in the floodway in March 2025 using
local funds. The Town has an overarching goal of continuing to purchase flood prone properties
throughout its jurisdiction using a piecemeal strategy by working with current or future
homeowners and vacant landholders.
In January 2010, the Town of Vinton and Roanoke County entered a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) for Operations, Oversight, and Management of the Merged Emergency
Communications Center. By the agreement, the Roanoke County Emergency Communications
Center shall provide emergency and non-emergency dispatch services for the Town of Vinton,
including the Vinton Police Department and the Vinton Public Works Department. Services
delivery procedures will be documented in General Orders (GO) Standard Operating Procedures
SOPs), and Directives, with input provided by the Inter-Agency Operational Team, and the
Advisory Board.
In partnership with the City of Roanoke, the Town purchased a flood warning system in 2022.
Other Factors
Increased assistance with grants administration is an opportunity for regional support to Vinton;
especially in regards to hazard mitigation grant programs provided by VDEM and DCR.
Additionally, less regulations and requirements on federal grants would be helpful in administering
the projects that are awarded. Additional grant assistance (especially from State agencies) is the
Town’s biggest need in terms of addressing capacity constraints.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-35
The Town receives support on stormwater work and some other services through Roanoke
County. The Town of Vinton is a member of the Roanoke Valley – Alleghany Regional Commission
and the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization. Valley Metro serves this locality
and they are a member of the Greenway Commission. The Town is a member of the Roanoke
Valley Resource Authority and the Western Virginia Water Authority. They have a robust public
outreach program and are a member of Roanoke Valley Television.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-36
5.14 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission is the regional planning district commission
and the holder of this planning document. The Regional Commission also staffs the Roanoke
Valley Transportation Planning Organization, which, while not a direct adopter to this plan, is
nonetheless a critical organization in providing transportation planning and funding to the region.
The Commission engages in planning across a wide variety of planning areas, including rural
transportation, alternative transportation and transportation demand management, public health
and opioid abatement, housing, water quality and stormwater management, and general technical
assistance including comprehensive plan and zoning assistance.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
A breakdown of the Regional Commission budget is included below. The Commission does not
own public land or levy taxes upon citizens. All revenue comes from organizational dues,
individual contracts with locality or regional partners, state appropriations, state grant programs,
or federal grant programs and pass-thru dollars. In fact, more than a quarter of the revenue for
the Commission is federal or federal pass-thru.
The annual workprogram and budget of the Commission and TPO guide the work of the
Commission from year-to-year. The Strategic Plan guides the work of the Commission over a five-
year period.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-37
Table 52: RVARC Budget FY2026
Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission
Budget Comparison FY2026 Final
Budget
2026
Revenues: Revenues
Localities Per Capita Regional Commission $ 400,274
Localities Per Capita TPO $ 35,882
Blueway Funding From Localities $ 11,491
Franklin County for Micro Transit Study $ 35,000
Department of Housing & Community Development $ 114,971
Federal Highway Administration - PL $ 726,273
Virginia Department of Transportation - PL $ 90,784
Federal Highway Administration - SPR $ 58,000
Federal STBG VDOT Glade Creek Funding $ 268,892
Virginia Department Rail & Public Transit, FTA Federal $ 184,682
Virginia Department Rail & Public Transit, FTA State $ 23,085
VA Dept. Rail & Public Transit, RideSolutions (Roanoke) $ 187,696
VA Department Rail & Public Transit Franklin County Micro
Transit $ 60,000
City of Roanoke Better Bus Stops $ 79,667
Federal Economic Development Administration $ 80,420
Virginia Department of Forestry $ 8,000
Virginia Department of Environmental Quaility $ 107,754
Virginia Environmental Endowment $ 20,798
Virginia Department of Emergency Management $ 38,619
Appalachian Regional Commission $ 67,614
Appalachian Regional Commission Ready LDD Grant $ 47,000
Mountain Castle Water Conservation District $ 7,000
Southeast Cresent $ 15,000
City of Roanoke Bike Coordination $ 12,000
ARP ACT City of Roanoke Carryover $ 68,327
Department of Health & Human Services-Peer Recovery $ 495,496
City of Roanoke Virginia Opioid Abatement Authority Funds $ 425,000
Western Virginia Regional Industrial Facility Authority $ 25,000
Virginia Housing $ 931,569
SERDI Website Administration Contract $ 1,538
RVARC Interest Income $ 40,000
Miscellaneous Income $ 2,500
Sponsorships $ 2,000
Blueway Carryover $ 28,000
Regional Bike Carryover $ 7,412
Total Revenues $ 4,707,744
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-38
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Regional Commission maintains a variety of regional plans mandated by the federal and
state governments, as well as several regional studies and documents which have been
generated by local interest. The Commission also staffs the TPO, whose documents will be
included in this section. Most relevant to the goals of this plan are the Long Range Transportation
Plan (LRTP), the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), the Rural Long Range Transportation
Plan (Rural LRTP), and the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy document (CEDS).
Together these four documents, in conjunction with this plan, guide significant investment across
the region.
Schedule of Updates:
CEDS: The CEDS receives an annual review and demographics update, with a full update
and revision every 5 years. The last 5-year update was conducted in 2024.
LRTP: The LRTP was last approved in 2023. The next update will begin in 2026.
Rural LRTP: The Rural LRTP was last updated in 2011, and an update is planned to
conclude in 2026.
TIP: The TIP is approved every four years. The current TIP covers FFY24-27. Updates will
begin on the next TIP in 2026.
The Regional Commission has also historically contributed to stormwater collaboration and water
quality activities throughout the region which can have direct impact on flood resilience.
Specifically, the Regional Commission is currently involved in Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Improvement Plan implementation work in partnership with the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality. The Commission also coordinates a regional stormwater advisory group
which allows local governments and other entities operating under an MS4 permit to meet and
share information and ideas.
Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management Plan (1997)
All four Roanoke Valley jurisdictions (Roanoke County, Cities of Roanoke and Salem, Town of
Vinton) participated in the development of a stormwater management plan that was coordinated
through the efforts of the Fifth Planning District Commission (Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission). It offers alternative solutions for both flooding and flash flooding problems. These
alternatives include clearing stream channels, enlarging drainage openings, constructing regional
detention facilities, and flood proofing individual structures. The plan presents a total of 138
individual projects to address flooding in the 16 watersheds. These are ranked in order of priority
within each watershed but no overall ranking within the valley is presented. Cost estimates are
presented for each project, but neither individual project benefits, nor cumulative benefits are
discussed. It would be essential to analyze the benefits of these projects before the plan can be
used as a guideline for specific activities. The identified projects would cost a total of $66 million
in 2001 dollars, not including land acquisition or efforts to flood proof or move over 2,200 buildings.
A formal quantification of the corresponding benefits would go a long way toward justifying this
cost, which can initially seem overwhelming to both citizens and community officials. For example,
the 1997 plan reports that between 1972 and 1992, floods caused over $200 million in damages
in the valley, and resulted in 10 deaths. The plan’s Financing Options Report recommends
creation of a regional stormwater utility as a means of funding the identified work.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-39
Other Factors
The Regional Commission is the primary holder of this plan and issues with capacity or staffing
directly affect the ability to update or maintain the document. Historically, the Commission has
also been a key partner for small localities in applying for mitigation grant funding, either by
providing assistance with the application process or by administering grants. The Commission
also serves as an incubator for regional initiatives.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-40
5.15 Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
The Roanoke Valley Resource Authority is a solid waste management organization serving the
Roanoke Valley. Member communities include the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, City of
Salem, and Town of Vinton.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The annual revenue for the RVRA totals at $19,116,734 per the adopted FY2026 budget24. They
maintain seven administrative staff positions, including a Director of Community Engagement, a
Director of Operations, and an Operations Manager.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The RVRA maintains an annual budget, a Master Plan that functions as the Capital Improvements
Plan, a Comprehensive Plan, and a Stormwater Management Plan. The plan was last updated in
2025. Any ordinances that cover solid waste are enacted by localities. RVRA does not have
regulatory authority.
Other Factors
The RVRA is primarily a support agency for response to disasters. They operate critical facilities
within the Roanoke Valley. RVRA sees the primary need for mitigation efforts to be better cross-
agency engagement.
24 https://www.rvra.net/135/Annual-Budget
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-41
5.16 Western Virginia Water Authority
The Western Virginia Water Authority provides critical water and sewer services and maintains
and operates infrastructure for many of the communities within this plan, including the counties of
Roanoke, Botetourt, and Craig, the City of Roanoke, and the Towns of New Castle, Fincastle, and
Vinton.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The WVWA staffs 309 full-time employees across multiple divisions within the organization. All of
the divisions might be directly or indirectly impacted by mitigation work or disaster events. Staff
members include those with skills in engineering, emergency management, and GIS. The WVWA
revenue in FY2025 was projected at $50.5 million.25
Plans and Planning Schedules
The WVWA maintains a Master Plan, a Capital Improvements Plan, Emergency Response Plans
for their various treatment facilities, and Emergency Actions Plans for High Hazard Potential Dams
under their ownership. They are all updated annually, and all include mitigation activities.
Ordinances which may impact the operations of the WVWA are controlled by the localities in which
they operate.
Dam Safety
The WVWA operates several dams within the region. Inundation mapping for WVWA-owned dams
is available in Appendix H.
Other Factors
The WVWA is primarily a support agency for response to disasters, but the Authority is the primary
maintenance agency for two high hazard potential dams in the region. They operate critical
facilities within the region.
25 https://www.westernvawater.org/about-us/financial-documents-reports/annual-budget
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-42
blank]
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-1
Chapter 6. Mitigation Goals and Strategies
Goals and strategies are guiding elements which help shape the action plans of the jurisdictions
participating in this planning process. Goals and strategies are housed regionally, emphasizing a
regional approach highlighting partnership and intentional strategy, representative of all
participants.
6.1 Identified Goals
Three goals were identified in the planning process. Goals are broad statements allowing for
establishment of tailored, focused strategy. These are aspirational, vision statements that guide
implementation efforts.
Goal 1
Minimize the loss of life, structures and critical
infrastructure during a disaster, as well as reduce
risk to the built environment and natural resources.
Goal 2
Minimize the economic impact to communities and
the region in the wake of disaster
Goal 3
Minimize impacts to social systems and community
resources following disaster.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-2
6.2 Regional Strategies
Strategies are conceptual statements wherein projects can be developed, detailed and executed.
In applying mitigation strategies to the region and participants, a wide range of activities were
considered in order to achieve the goals and to lessen the vulnerability of the area to the impact
of natural hazards. Goals are pursued regardless of financial resources. However, advancement
of identified strategies is largely contingent upon meaningful, sustainable projects relying on
availability and timeliness of non-local funding from a variety of partners and sources.
Strategies are generally organized conceptually around five areas of work, which are:
1. Local Plans and Regulations
2. Structure and Infrastructure Projects
3. Natural Systems Protection and Nature-Based Solutions
4. Education and Awareness Programs
5. Community Safety and Partner Efforts
Strategies were developed by jurisdictions in partnership with VDEM staff.
6.3 All Hazards
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Support local development codes that promote disaster resiliency.
2. Support robust, deliberate emergency operations planning.
3. Pursue opportunities to study, research and plan to build resiliency throughout
communities based on hazard data, new research and concepts. This could include
risk and vulnerability assessments, operational assessments among others.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
4. Equip and maintain critical facilities and resources with redundant power resources,
such as generators, hookups/quick connects, and battery/solar backups.
5. Assess and develop where practical, loan, grant, or similar programs to support
increased resilience of privately owned facilities, structures and property.
6. Seek opportunities to build resiliency within utilities to reduce impact from all-
hazards.
7. Develop redundancy in water sources and water distribution systems.
8. Establish, sustain and develop dam maintenance and replacement programs to
ensure dam safety, access to water sources and sustainment of natural recreation
areas.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
9. Integrate regional environmental and natural resources preservation efforts with
hazard mitigation planning.
Education and Awareness Programs
10. Pursue educational programs and outreach activities that promote individual, family
and business safety and resiliency
11. Provide planning resources tailored to business continuity.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-3
12. Make home safety and individual preparedness resources available to community
members
13. Participate in special outreach/awareness programs and activities.
14. Seek opportunities to communicate effectively across multiple methods with the
public well in advance of disaster to communicate forecast and preliminary action
steps, including the use of social media and non-emergency alert systems. Ensure
capability to speak with vulnerable communities including non-English speaking
community members and individuals with access and function needs.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
15. Participate, seek or maintain certification as a “Storm Ready” Community with the
National Weather Service.
16. Improve region-wide interoperability across radio systems.
17. Improve citizen access to emergency reporting mechanisms including but not limited
to 911 and post disaster recovery tools.
18. Pursue, sustain and develop emergency alerting tools that allow emergency services
to alert members of the community through a variety of methods, to impending
emergency, particularly mass notifications systems.
19. Develop, resource and sustain locations, physical and virtual, where whole of
government and community partners may coordinate to respond to the impacts of
hazards.
20. Conduct resiliency assessments of public facilities with an emphasis on critical
infrastructure and utilities.
21. Undertake deliberate research, planning and effort to develop comprehensive,
compliant and innovative debris management programs following all hazards
disasters that generate manageable debris.
22. Support the development of weather reading and monitoring equipment to increase
situational awareness, alert and warning.
23. Support the development and sustainment of Community Emergency Response
Teams (CERT) within localities.
24. Support the maintenance and expansion of locality sheltering locations and
resources.
25. Develop, sustain and support capabilities to shelter pets during disaster.
26. Resource capabilities related to assisting special needs and vulnerable populations.
27. Develop, sustain and support capabilities to conduct family reunification and
assistance.
28. Engage partners to share capability and situation information, pre, during and post
disaster.
29. Develop capabilities to conduct multi-jurisdiction sheltering when applicable.
30. Regularly train first responders, coordinate with regional partners, and ensure clear
post-disaster communication and recovery.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-4
6.4 Earthquake
Education and Awareness Programs
1. Conduct public information activities such as the “Great Shakeout” to provide individuals
with tactics to take when earthquakes strike.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
2. Engage with subject matter experts to understand the scope and risk to facilities and life
as a result of an earthquake.
3. Develop “critical area” maps based on geotechnical information to identify locations
where damage potential could be high.
4. Engage partners to share capability information.
6.5 Extreme Temperature
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Plan to develop adaptation features to build individual, community and infrastructure
resilience.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
2. Identify vulnerable structures and implement infrastructure retrofit projects to include
measures that reduce risk to existing utility systems.
3. Consider use of reflective roof coatings, radiant barriers and other tactics to mitigate
heat interaction with structures.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
4. Increase urban tree cover to mitigate heat island effect.
Education and Awareness Programs
5. Inform community members of the danger of extreme temperature and provide
resources through multiple methods, such as NWS HeatRisk.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
6. Identify locations and partnerships that create opportunity for community members to
seek reprieve from extreme temperatures.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-5
6.6 Flooding
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Encourage a comprehensive approach to floodplain management
2. Support programs that update FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). Consider
participation in FEMA’s Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) program that establishes
partners with local jurisdictions to develop and maintain up-to-date flood maps.
3. Participate in FEMA’s Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) program.
4. Support FIRM remapping projects that address flood prone areas in the region
5. Maintain an accurate database and map of repetitive loss properties
a. Localities will work with RVARC, VDEM and FEMA to update list of repetitive loss
properties annually.
b. Localities will obtain updated list of repetitive loss properties annually from
VDEM/FEMA.
c. Localities will review property addresses for accuracy and make necessary
corrections.
d. Localities will determine if and by what means each property has been mitigated.
e. Localities will map properties to show general site locations (not parcel specific in
order to maintain anonymity of the property owners).
f. Localities will determine if properties have been mitigated and inform
FEMA/VDEM through submission of an updated list/database and mapping.
6. Participate in, and remain in good standing with the NFIP, in accordance with NFIP
regulatory requirements including:
a. Adoption of the NFIP minimum floodplain management criteria via local
regulation;
b. Adoption of the latest effective Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), when
applicable;
c. Implementation and enforcement of local floodplain management regulations to
regulate and permit development in SFHAs;
d. Appointment of a designee or organization to implement the commitments and
requirements of the NFIP;
e. Implementation of the substantial improvement/damage provisions of their
floodplain management regulations after an event, as applicable.
7. Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the NFIP through participation in
relevant programs, such as the Community Rating System.
8. Work to reduce flood damage to insurable property.
9. Develop, support and sustain Stormwater Management Plans, such as the Roanoke
Valley Regional Stormwater Master Plan.
a. Explore the number of watersheds studied in the Roanoke Valley Regional
Stormwater Master Plan, consider expanding the number of inclusions as
appropriate and develop watershed plans for each.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
10. In cooperation with local governments, utilize GIS tools to inventory at risk infrastructure
and public and private structures within flood prone areas.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-6
11. Support local and state transportation projects that call for improved ditching,
replacement of inadequate and undersized culverts, enlargements of bridge openings,
drainage piping and other physical work needed to minimize flooding.
12. Pursue the acquisition of residential and commercial property in floodplains with an
emphasis on repetitive loss properties.
13. Support structural elevation projects where buildings can be safely elevated to avoid loss
or damage during flood events.
14. Seek opportunities to floodproof structures.
15. Pursue acquisition of elevation certificates for flood prone properties.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
16. Consider seeking funding to prepare site-specific hydrologic and hydraulic studies that
look at areas that have chronic and repetitive flooding problems.
17. Consider increasing conveyance standard to handle more intense precipitation, while
avoiding streambank erosion.
18. Pursue opportunities to utilize pervious hard surfaces when possible.
19. Pursue opportunities to stabilize soil along river, creek and stream banks to prevent
undercutting roads and other facilities.
20. Promote green infrastructure to prevent flooding, manage excess runoff and increase
filtration.
21. Promote the use of green roofs and rainwater harvesting systems
22. Restore and protect riparian areas.
23. Restore waterways that have been covered or buried due to natural conditions.
24. Protect and restore wetlands, forests, and other natural buffers to reduce storm surge
and flooding impacts.
Education and Awareness Programs
25. Enhance pre-disaster community situational awareness of flood hazards and hazard
prone locations, by cooperating with all relevant partners to support a comprehensive
public information and education program on all aspects of preparedness related to
flooding. Tools such as the FloodView App (2025) provide information and resources
supporting this strategy.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
26. Provide early flood warning
a. Identify target areas for monitoring, including flood prone areas, streams and
rivers to provide advance warning for downstream impacts.
b. Identify, acquire and maintain equipment that will perform required monitoring for
specific locations and needs. Ensure equipment is appropriately supported and
networked to enhance data coordination and empower early warning.
c. Configure systems and tools that monitor water levels and flooding conditions to
support data and early warning interoperability with organizations that have
responsibility to provide alerts, store, and monitor data. Ensure sustainment of
these systems and data interoperability.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-7
6.7 Geologic Hazards
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Develop, sustain and enforce, as appropriate, steep slope ordinances/guidelines for
development in steep slope/marginal soils areas.
Education and Awareness Programs
2. Develop an education and awareness program for home, land and business owners, to
inform life and property safety measures on an individual basis, as well as financial
considerations associated with geologic hazards.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
3. Encourage the delineation of karst areas and areas susceptible to sinkholes through a
cooperative effort with the Virginia Karst Mapping Project, Virginia Speleological Survey,
and Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (Virginia Cave Board).
4. Encourage the delineation of susceptible areas and different types of landslide hazards
at a scale useful for planning and decision-making, led by USGS and State geological
surveys.
5. Work with state and Federal agencies to develop data that will assist in reducing and
eliminating impacts from landslides.
6.8 Wind
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Promote building codes and retrofitting practices that enhance wind resistance for
homes, utilities, and critical facilities.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
2. Identify vulnerable structures and implement infrastructure retrofit projects to include
measures that reduce risk to existing utility systems.
3. Identify, maintain, and publicize designated tornado shelters, and encourage safe room
installation in schools, public buildings, and homes.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
4. Research and install landscape mitigation for strategic planting of trees and hedge rows.
5. Conduct pre-storm tree assessments and pruning to help minimize wind born debris and
protect infrastructure.
Education and Awareness Programs
6. In cooperation with Federal and State governments, support a comprehensive public
information and education program on wind hazards, including straight line winds,
tornados and thunderstorm winds. This can be accomplished through regional
workshops and educational materials for citizens, business, local staff, and elected
officials.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-8
7. Strengthen community access to NOAA Weather Radio, mobile alerts, and local
emergency notifications to ensure residents receive timely tornado warnings.
8. Support school level preparedness activities including tornado drills.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
9. Strengthen operational coordination relationships with utility providers to coordinate and
collaboratively support the community following disaster related impacts.
6.9 Wildfire
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
1. Encourage residents and developers to use NFPA Firewise USA TM building design,
siting, and materials for construction.
2. Continue to support domestic water line infrastructure into communities who currently
operate off well water.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
3. Create Defensible Space – implement perimeters around homes, structures, and critical
facilities through the removal or reduction of flammable vegetation.
4. Continue to utilize the Va. Dept. of Forestry “Dry-Hydrant” program to support access to
private water sources
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
5. Identify buildings or locations vital to the emergency response effort and buildings or
locations that, if damaged, would create secondary disasters in forested areas.
6. Encourage VDOF to continue its Community Wildfire Assessments.
6.10 Winter Storm
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
1. Implement pavement temperature sensors to increase real-time planning, execution and
public information efforts.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-1
Chapter 7. Mitigation Action Plans
7.1 Project Development and Prioritization
This section contains the mitigation action plans of each participating jurisdiction within the plan.
In developing mitigation strategies for the region, a wide range of activities were considered in
order to achieve the goals and to lessen the vulnerability of the area to the impact of natural
hazards. All goals, strategies, and projects are dependent on the availability and timeliness of
nonlocal funding.
Prioritization of projects was based on the benefit-to-cost criteria and the strategy’s potential to
mitigate the impact from natural hazards in line with long term planning efforts. For example, if a
project is already clearly scoped in an existing plan, that project is given higher priority.
Consideration was also given to availability of funding, the department or agency responsible for
implementation, and the ability of the locality to implement the project. Under each identified
project, applicable participant departments will be the lead in making sure that each project or
action will be implemented in a timely manner by coordinating with other departments, other
participant representatives and/or other regional agencies.
The anticipated level of cost effectiveness of each measure was a primary consideration when
developing the list of proposed projects. Projects were categorized as high, medium or low benefit
to cost based on the available information for each proposed project. Reduced damages over the
lifespan of the projects, the benefits, are likely to be greater than the project cost in all cases.
Although detailed cost and benefit analysis was not conducted during the mitigation action
development process, these factors were of primary concern when prioritizing and selecting the
proposed projects.
For more information about each locality, including active mitigation programs and ordinances,
please see Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-2
7.2 Alleghany County
The mitigation actions contained in this section also cover mitigation actions for the Town of Iron Gate.
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Acquisition of
flood prone
properties
Flooding Removal of households
from flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive loss;
reduce loss of life and
property
Unknown High High FEMA, VDEM,
Local government
Local government,
Engineering &
Building
Inspections
COMPLETE 2018-2023
Communication
equipment
interoperability
All hazards Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved response
times
7,000,000 High High FEMA, Local
government
Local government COMPLETE Current /
Ongoing
Identify areas
with recurring
flood problems
and request
additional
stream/rain
gauges
Flooding Improved early warning
of flooding; ensure that
these areas are
adequately covered and
monitored
12,500 High Medium FEMA, VDEM RVARC In progress 2025-2026
Identify areas
that warrant
site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic
studies
emphasizing
chronic and
repetitive
flooding
problems
Flooding Possible determination
of solutions to repetitive
loss properties.
Cost
Pending
Scoping
Medium Medium County, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Community
Development
Not started;
lack of scoping
and staff
Unknown
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-3
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Identify
buildings or
locations vital
to the
emergency
response effort
and buildings or
locations that, if
damaged,
would create
secondary
disasters in
forested areas
Wildfire Available inventory of
structures that need
additional or unique
protection from wildfires.
10,000 Low Medium VA Dept. of
Forestry, US
Forest Service,
Local
governments
Co Public Safety Not started;
lack of funding
Unknown
Evaluate critical
facilities and
public utilities
for flood-
proofing
Flooding Evaluation of county
owned critical facilities
and public utilities for
retrofitting or flood-
proofing to prevent
failure during disasters
250,000 Medium Medium FEMA, Local
government
Public Works/
General Services
Not Started
pending
scoping
6MOs from
Funding
Hazardous
Materials Risk
Assessment
and Education
Program
All
Hazards
that result
in
Hazardous
Materials
Release
Evaluate risk and
community safety
information for
Hazardous Materials
Release
25,000 Medium High County, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Public Safety Not started
pending
scoping
Pending
Scoping
Install
Generators at:
CSB
AHS
Pump Stations
All hazards
generating
power
outage
Ensure that emergency
facilities can be
operational during
hazard events
75,000(ea) High Medium County, CSB,
Schools, VDEM
Shelter Upgrade
Grant, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Public Safety,
Public Works,
General Services
Pending Grant
Award
6MOs from
grant
award
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-4
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Local codes
review
All hazards Review of development
codes to evaluate need
for changes that would
improve disaster
mitigation
10,000 Medium Medium FEMA, Local
government
Not started;
lack of funding
Unknown
Community
wildfire
assessments
Wildfire Reduction of loss to
wildfire, through
collaborative
assessments and
tailored mitigation action
25,000 Medium Medium VDOF, USFS,
Public Safety
Public Safety In progress Ongoing
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-5
7.3 City of Covington
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Add / Replace
Generators at
Fire Station
City Hall
Emergency
Shelter
Locations
All Hazards
generating
power outage
Extreme
Temperature
Evaluate the facilities and
install appropriate generating
equipment and controls to
allow them to be better utilized
during disasters and severe
events
220,000+ High High City/ Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Development
Services/Public
Works/ Emergency
Management
Not started
pending
scoping
1YR from
funding
Add flow
monitoring
equipment to
locality water
system
Flooding Provide better, more timely
information to public works to
identify system anomalies
100,000 High High City, I&I Grant Public Works In Progress DEC 2026
Elevation of
Structures - City
Pool and
Playground
Flooding Reduced damages and repair
costs
100,000 Medium Medium City & Local
Foundation Grant
Local Government Complete 2016
Drainage
Improvements –
Craig Avenue
and Royal
Avenue
Flooding Reduced damages and repair
costs
500,000 High High VDEM / FEMA /
LOCAL GOVT
Local Government Engineering/
design
underway
COMPLETE
2020-22
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-6
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
The upgrading
of the present
weather
terminal at the
Covington EOC
All Weather
Hazards
Better and more timely
weather information will allow
first responders to make better
decision about actions to take,
evacuations, and the
possibility of flooding and other
severe weather
10,000 High High City, Grantor with an
appropriate grant
Emergency
Management
Not started;
lack of
funding
TBD
Mobile
Generator
Acquisition with
Quick Connects
on Pump
Stations
All Hazards
generating
power outage
Continue to operate
wastewater pump stations
during power outage
100,000 High High City Development
Services/Public
Works
Pending
Delivery
Within 1MO
of Delivery
Drainage
Improvements:
Chestnut &
Monroe ST
Flooding Reduced Damage and repair
costs; access and response
between areas of the City
during moderate or greater
rainfall
7,000,000 High High City, Post Helene
Mitigation
Development
Services/Public
Works/ Emergency
Management
Pending
Grant Award
1YR from
Funding
Study potential
of Landslide on
220 at Town Hill
Geologic
Hazards
Prevent impact of landslide
into 220
100,000 Low High City, VDOT, Grantor
with an Apporpriate
Grant Program
Public Works Not Started
pending
scope
TBD
Study former
water line work
Geologic
Hazards
Mitigate flow in the area that
could be the cause of sink hole
50,000 Low Low City, Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Public Works Not Started
pending
scope
TBD
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-7
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Joint
Communication
s Center with
Alleghany Co
All Hazards Improved coordination
between responders and
response records between
both jurisdictions
10,000,000 High High City, County,
VDEM(NGS)
City PD/Alleghany
Public Safety/
Alleghany Sheriff’s
Office
Multi-phase
process, back
end technical
work
underway,
Scoping
move/
construction
3-5YRS
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-8
7.4 Town of Clifton Forge
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status Proposed
Schedule
Update and
Develop Town
Specific GIS
Layer
All-Hazards Create situational
awareness related to
assets, problem areas
and spacial functions
of the town.
15,000-
25,000
High High Local
Government,
Virginia Tech
Local
Government,
Community
Planning
In Progress 1YR to
Completion
Identify buildings
or locations vital
to the
emergency
response effort
and buildings or
locations that, if
damaged, would
create
secondary
disasters in
forested areas
Wildfire Available inventory of
structures that need
additional or unique
protection from
wildfires.
10,000 Medium Medium VA Dept. of
Forestry, US
Forest Service,
Local
governments
Local government,
VDOF, USFS
Not started;
lack of
scoping
1YR from
scoping
Communication
equipment
interoperability
All hazards Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved response
times
1,000,000 High High FEMA, Local
government
Local government,
Police Department
COMPLETE
Current /
Ongoing
Determine the
need for
generators at
public
emergency
facilities
All hazards Ensure that
emergency facilities
can be operational
during hazard events
250,000 High Medium FEMA, Local
government
Local government,
Public Works
COMPLETE
2013
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-9
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status Proposed
Schedule
Local codes
review
All hazards Review of
development codes to
evaluate need for
changes that would
improve disaster
mitigation
10,000 N/A Medium Town Local government,
Community
Development,
Building Official
In-Progress Unknown
Local Flood
Profile
Flood Identify Hazards
associated with Dam
Safety
100,000 High High USDA VA Soil and Water
Conservation
Board
COMPLETE 2014-15
Stream Bed
Survey
Flood Identify Repairs
Required
25,000 Medium Medium RWA, Local
Government
Local Government
Public Works
Not started;
lack of
funding
Unknown
Conduct a town-
wide study
Identify Geologic
Hazard Areas,
and appropriate
mitigation
actions
Earthquake,
Geologic
Hazards
Increased situational
awareness and
planning capability
75,000 Medium Medium Local
Government
FEMA, Local
Government,
Community
Development
Not started;
lack of
funding
1YR from
grant
award
Communications
Plan
All Hazards Improved
Communication and
Response
5,000 Medium High Local
Government
FEMA, Local
Government,
Police Department COMPLETE
Ongoing
Water Reservoir
Hazard Plan
All Hazards Protection of Town
Water Supply
125,000 High High VA Dept of Health,
FEMA
Local
Government, VA
Department of
Health
Not started;
lack of
funding
12 months
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-10
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status Proposed
Schedule
Hazardous
Materials
Planning
All Hazards
resulting in
HAZMAT
release
Increased awareness
and planning
capability to decrease
loss of life, property
and enhance
response resources.
15,000-
25,000
High High Town, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Emergency
Services,
Railroads, VDOT
Not started;
Lack of
funding/
scoping
2Yrs from
funding
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-11
7.5 Botetourt County
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Estimate Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Participate in
the
StormReady”
program
All Hazards Community is better prepared
through planning and
education
1,000 High Medium FEMA, VDEM, NWS,
Local governments
Local government COMPLETE Accepted to
program in
2011. County
is a
participant in
good
standing
Obtain more up-
to-date and
comprehensive
GIS system
All hazards Increased information for
better incident response
350,000 High High Local Government Local Government COMPLETE Complete
due to
transition to
ArcGIS,
external
funding
sources not
needed.
Community
notification
system
All hazards Reduced loss through
improved warning system
55,000 High Low FEMA, VDEM, ODP,
Local Government
Local government,
ESC, Sheriff Dept.
COMPLETE
Evaluate critical
facilities and
public utilities
for flood-
proofing
Flooding Evaluation of critical facilities
and public utilities for
retrofitting or flood-proofing to
prevent failure during
disasters, particularly
emergency services facilities
located in flood hazard areas.
50,000 Medium Medium FEMA, Local
government
Local government In progress:
Evaluation
ongoing,
funding
sources are
being sought
2026
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-12
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Estimate Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Communication
equipment
interoperability
All hazards Improved coordination among
jurisdictions; improved
response times
250,000 High High FEMA, Local
government
Local government,
ESC, Sheriff Dept.
In progress:
Still on-going,
procurement
for new radio
system
underway
Fall 2027
Identification
and tracking of
special needs
populations
All hazards Preparation for assisting
special needs populations to
prevent loss of life and property
25,000 Medium Medium Local government Local government In progress:
GIS efforts
underway
Ongoing
Identification
and installation
of generator
quick-connect
locations for
critical public
service
facilities, shelter
facilities, and
other critical
infrastructure
All Hazards
resulting in
power outage
Continuity of critical services
during disasters
200,000 High High FEMA, VDEM, Local Local government In progress:
project
underway,
grant funding
is pending
FEMA review,
expense has
increased
2025
Obtain portable
generators to be
used on various
infrastructure
components as
needed during
incidents
All Hazards
resulting in
power
outage,
including
wildfire
Would allow deployment of
generator to critical
infrastructure when power fails
to certain facilities, to include
mountain tower sites
180,000 High Medium Local Government Local Government In progress,
grant in FEMA
review
2026
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-13
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Estimate Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Construct an
Emergency
Operations
Center for use
during disasters
to support
response and
recovery efforts
All hazards Allow for central location to
coordinate all response and
recovery resources during and
after an event.
1,000,000 High Medium Local Government Local Government Not Started;
Lack of
Funding: In
progress,
Capital
Improvement
Project for
new Fire
Station/Dispat
ch Center
2026
Installation and
Maintenance of
River and
Precipitation
Gauges
Flood Development of a water and
flooding common operating
picture supporting early
warning and situational
awareness
70,000 High High Local Government,
HMGP: Helene
Botetourt County
Emergency
Management
In progress,
Funding has
been sourced
for initial
installation,
addition
funding is
being sourced
for
maintenance
and
expansion
2026
Development of
Sheltering
Resource
Cache
All-Hazards Expand capability to operate
shelters within the County
50,000 High High SHSP, Other
emergency
management grant
sources as available
Botetourt County
Emergency
Management
Not Started,
previously
submitted
grants have
not been
approved,
continuing to
seek funding
6 Mos upon
funding
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-14
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Estimate Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Landslide and
Geologic
Hazards
Training for land
disturbance
inspectors
Geological
Hazards
Due to increased
consequential development in
the community and land
disturbance, inspectors will
have increased perspective
and consideration for these
types of hazards
5,000 Low Low County, Grantor with
an appropriate grant
program
Community
Development
Not Started,
Pending
development
2027
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-15
7.6 Town of Buchanan
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Evaluate
public utilities
for
floodproofing
Flooding Evaluation of public utilities
for retrofitting or
floodproofing to prevent
failure during disasters
10,000 Low High FEMA, Local
government
Local government,
Public Works Dept
COMPLETE
Ongoing
Aquire and
demolish
derelict
property in the
floodplain
through local
program
Flooding Reduction of derelict
structures within the flood
plain
Unsure Medium Low Town, and Grantor
with an appropriate
grant program
Town Manager Not started;
lack of
funding
TBD
Elevation of
the Water St
Pump Station,
Pump
replacement,
movement of
sewer line
under the river
Flooding Continuation of sewer
service during disasters
1,800,000 High High DEQ, Town Town Water
System Operator
In progress 3 Yrs from
Engineering
Flood Wall to
protect Lowe
Street and
Main Street
Flooding Elimination of street,
business and residential
flooding downtown
unknown High High FEMA, VDEM,
Local
Local government Not started;
lack of
funding
2026
Elevate
Parkway Dr
from Main St
to Quarry
Flooding Elevate Parkway Dr. $1,000,000 Medium Medium Town, County,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Town Manager Not Started,
pending
scoping
TBD
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-16
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Study
residential
and
agricultural
property
existing in
steep slope
areas to
identify
mitigation
solutions
Geologic
Hazards,
Wildfire
Study landslide, karst and
wildfire risk associated with
residential and agricultural
property existing in steep
slope areas to identify
mitigation solutions
50,000 Medium Medium Town, Grantor with
an appropriate
grant program
Town Manager Not started
pending
scoping
1YR from
scoping
Plan
Buchanan
Library and
elementary
school as a
backup area
shelter and
POD.
Extreme
Temperature,
Wind, Winter
Development of a
redundant location for local
emergency sheltering
5,000 Medium Medium Town, County County
Emergency
Manager
In Progress TBD
Identification
and
installation of
generator
quick-connect
locations for
critical public
service
facilities,
shelter
facilities, and
other critical
infrastructure
All Hazards
resulting in
power
outage
Continuity of critical
services during disasters
200,000 High High FEMA, VDEM,
Local
Botetourt Co
Emergency
Management
In progress:
project
underway,
grant
funding is
pending
FEMA
review,
expense
has
increased
2025
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-17
7.7 Town of Fincastle
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Evaluate
public utilities
for
floodproofing
Flooding Study public utilities for
retrofitting or floodproofing
to prevent failure during
disasters
10,000 Medium High Town, County,
Available Grantors
with appropriate
grant programs,
when scope of
work is developed
Town Council Not started;
lack of
funding
4-6 Months
from
Funding
Study
vulnerability
of the
Wastewater
Treatment
plant
All Hazards
generating
power
outage,
Flooding,
Geologic
Hazards,
Wildfire,
Earthquake
Study to determine flood
risk, power failure and
resiliency, slope stability,
road access, defensible
space and security
measures at WWTP
50,000 Medium Medium Town, County,
Available Grantors
with appropriate
grant programs,
when scope of
work is developed
Town Council Not Started
pending
scope of
work
To be
determined
by scope
Procure
Trailer Drawn
Generator
and Install
Quick
Connects
All Hazards
generating
Power
Outage, i.e.
Flood, Wind,
Winter,
Extreme
Temperature
Have a portable generator
to support 2 town wells and
the WWTP, upon which
quick connects will be
installed. Available
resource for the Ventilator
Dependent Skilled Nursing
Facility located within the
town, in the event of
extreme temperatures.
210,000 High High Town, County,
VDEM Hazard
Mitigation, FEMA
Post Disaster
Mitigation Grant
Helene)
Town Manager,
County
Emergency
Manager
Not Started
pending
grant
approval
6 Months
from
Funding
order time
of
generator)
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-18
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Study:
Stream Bank
Restoration-
Town Branch
Flooding Determine course of action
and cost to restore the
banks of Town Branch to
minimize flooding in the low
lying area of Roanoke Rd
50,000 Low Low Town, County,
VDOT, Available
Grantors with
appropriate grant
programs, when
scope of work is
developed
Town Council Not Started
pending
scope of
work
To be
determined
by scope
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-19
7.8 Town of Troutville
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Conduct
study for
public utilities
floodproofing
Flooding Evaluation of public utilities
for retrofitting or
floodproofing to prevent
failure during disasters
10,000 Medium Medium Town, County,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Town Water
Department
Not started;
lack of
scoping
1YR from
scoping
Local Code
Review
All
Hazards
Review of development
codes to evaluate need for
changes that would improve
disaster mitigation
10,000 Medium High Town, County,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Town Council Not started;
lack of
funding
1YR from
funding
Stream
Restoration in
the Park
Flooding Safe community park area
and preservation of stream
banks
100,000 Medium Medium Town, County,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Town Council Not Started
pending
scoping
2Yrs from
scoping
Identify Water
Distribution
Infrastructure
vulnerable to
hazardous
environmenta
l concerns
including
extreme cold
and karst
Extreme
temperatur
e and
Geologic
Hazards
Identify and prioritize
vulnerable infrastructure to
prevent customer/system
outage
50,000 High High Town, County,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Town Water
Department
Not Started
pending
scoping
1YR from
scoping
Transfer
Switch and
Generator
Upgrade for
town
Buildings
All
Hazards
generating
power
outage
Redundant power for Town
Hall, Fire Department, Water
Tower, Pump Station,
Training Center (Back-up Co
911)
30,000 High High Town, County,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Town Water
Department
Not Started
pending
funding
8MOs from
funding
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-20
7.9 Craig County
The mitigation actions located in this section also cover mitigation actions for the Town of New Castle.
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Reverse
911 (Mass
Notification)
All hazards Reduced loss through
improved warning system
38,000 High High FEMA, VDEM,
Local Government
Local government,
ESC, Sheriff Dept.
Complete 2020-22
Develop
and
maintain an
inventory of
flood prone
critical
facilities
Flooding Available inventory of critical
structures that need
additional or unique
protection from flooding.
1,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM Local government Complete
Communica
tion
equipment
interoperabi
lity
All
hazards,
enhanced
capability
for Wildfire
Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved response times
4,700,000+ High High Local Government,
US Congress,
General Assembly
Local government,
ESC, Sheriff Dept.
In Progress Spring ‘27
Install
generators
at
communicat
ions towers
All hazards
resulting in
power
outage
Redundant power for public
safety communications, part
of overall radio project.
100,000 High High Local Government,
US Congress,
General Assembly
ESC In Progress Spring ‘27
Install
Generator
at Shelter-
Simmonsvill
e Fire Dept
All Hazards
requiring
shelter/war
ming/coolin
g
Resilient shelter and
community location in rural
area of the county
TBD High High VDEM Shelter
Upgrade Grant
ESC In Progress 6MOs from
funding
award
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-21
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Support
Virginia
Department
of
Transportati
on projects
that
minimize
flooding
Flooding Clear debris and repair
banks along roads to
prevent backup, erosion and
flooding of existing drainage
systems
700,000 N/A Medium FEMA, VDEM,
VDOT
VDOT PER VDOT
Add
additional
stream and
precipitation
gauges
Flooding Provide better, more timely
information to allow faster,
more accurate warnings to
be issued to the public
TBD High Medium VDEM / FEMA /
VDOT
Local EM Not started;
lack of
funding
Seek
funding and
support
programs
that update
FEMA’s
Flood
Insurance
Rate Maps
Flooding Updated flood hazard
mapping
TBD NA High FEMA Building Inspector Not started;
lack of
funding
Identify
projects that
would
mitigate
repetitive
flooding at
properties
along
Craig’s
Creek
Flooding Reduction of property and
community impacts from
flooding along Craig’s Creek
unknown Unknown High Grantors with
appropriate grant
programs
Local EM Not started;
lack of
funding
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-22
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Safety
improveme
nts to Johns
Creek dams
1, #2, #3,
and #4
Flooding Protection of life and
property downstream from
the dams.
Unknown Unknown High FEMA, DCR,
USDA, SWCD
Mountain Castle
SWCD
Design in
progress
2030
Downtown
New Castle
Flooding
Flooding Work with VDOT to address
downtown stormwater
drainage problems
400,000 High High FEMA, VDOT, VA
DHCD
County
Administrator and
VDOT
Planning
and design
underway.
Project
paused
due to lack
of funding
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-23
7.10 Roanoke County
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Publish Public
Safety
Announcements
PSA) using Multi –
Media Outlets with
emergency
information on
earthquakes.
Earthquake Increased level of
knowledge and
awareness in
citizens
2,500 High Low FEMA,
VDEM
Local government
Roanoke Co Public
Information Office &
Emergency
Management
Ongoing
Research and
consider
participating in the
National Weather
Service “Storm
Ready” program
All
Weather
Hazards
Community will be
better prepared
through planning
and education
about hazards
2,000 Medium Medium NWS Local government
Roanoke Co
Emergency
Management
Complete Complete
Publish Public
Safety
Announcements
PSA) using Multi-
Media Outlets and
utilizing practice
drills to increase
knowledge and
impacts risks
associated with high
winds in business
and schools.
Wind Public informed
about how to
protect yourself
during a tornado in
case you are at
home, in a car, at
the office, or
outside
5,000 High Medium Local
government
Local government
Roanoke Co
Emergency
Management and
Participating
Departments
Ongoing
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-24
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Participate in, and
remain in good
standing with, the
National Flood
Insurance Program
NFIP)
Flooding Reduction of
future flood
damage through
enforcement of
floodplain
ordinances and
availability of
discounted flood
insurance for
property owners
Unknown N/a High FEMA Local government Ongoing Ongoing
Maintain an
accurate database
and map of
repetitive loss
properties. Request
Data from FEMA.
Flooding Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that
should be
mitigated
Unknown N/A High FEMA,
VDEM
Local government
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Ongoing Ongoing,
continuous effort
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone roadways
Flooding Inventory of flood
prone roadways
for planning
purposes (road
improvements,
limitation of
development)
25,000 Medium Medium FEMA,
VDEM,
RVARC,
VDOT, Local
government
RVARC, Roanoke
Co Development
Services
In progress Ongoing,
continuous effort
Support Virginia
Department of
Transportation
projects that
minimize flooding
Flooding Clear debris and
repair banks along
roads to prevent
backup, erosion
and flooding of
existing drainage
systems.
Cost varies
annually, due to
work performe
N/A Medium FEMA,
VDEM,
VDOT
Roanoke Co
Development
Services & VDOT
Ongoing Ongoing,
continuous effort
throughout the
year
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-25
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Seek funding to
prepare site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic studies
that look at areas
that have chronic
and repetitive
flooding problems
Flooding Possible
determination of
solutions to
repetitive loss
properties.
100,000 High Medium Local
governments
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Continuous
effort based on
volume of
projects
ongoing
Ongoing,
continuous effort
throughout the
year
Identify locations for
additional rain, river
and stream
monitoring.
Flooding Provide better,
more timely
information to
allow faster, more
accurate warnings
to be issued to the
public
25,000 High Medium VDEM /
FEMA /
LOCAL
GOVT
Local Government Not started;
lack of funding
TBD
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone critical
facilities
Flooding Available
inventory of critical
structures that
need additional or
unique protection
from flooding.
1,000 Medium Medium FEMA,
VDEM
Local government
Roanoke Co
General Services
and Development
Services
COMPLETE
Ongoing
Maintain an
inventory of flood
prone residential
properties and
repetitive loss
properties.
Flooding Available
inventory of
repetitive loss
properties that
could be used for
planning purposes
N/A No external
funding
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Ongoing,
continuous
effort
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-26
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Repetitive Loss
Property Acquisition
and Demolition of a
Property located in
North County
Flooding Mitigation of
repetitive loss
property
1,000,000 High High FEMA,
VDEM
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Pending
Funding
6MOs from
received funding
Revise stormwater
management and
floodplain
management
ordinances
Flooding Up to date hazard
related ordinances
to provide
guidance for
planning and
development
Unknown High High Local
government,
DCR
Local government Complete 2025
Citizen Warning and
Alert
All hazards Reduced loss
through improved
warning system 20,000 annually
High Medium FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Government
Roanoke Co
Emergency
Management
Ongoing annual
recurring cost
Annual
Additional hazard
related GIS
layers/data
All hazards Increased
accuracy of
hazard mitigation
planning
100,000 High High USGS,
NOAA,
FEMA,
VDEM,
VDOT,
VDOF
Roanoke Co
Development
Services and GIS/IT
Complete Continuous
improvement
effort
Public education All hazards Inform public
about hazards and
mitigation options
50,000 High High FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government
Local government,
Emergency
Management
In progress Ongoing
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-27
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Participate in
special statewide
outreach/awareness
activities, such as
Winter Weather
Awareness Week,
Flood Awareness
Week, etc
All Hazards Inform public
about hazards and
mitigation options
10,000 High High VDEM,
FEMA, NWS
Roanoke Co
Emergency
Management
In progress Ongoing events
Upgrade/repairs to
stormwater system
Flooding Reduce frequency
and impact of
flooding
10,000,000 High High FEMA,
VDEM,
VDOT
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Ongoing Continuous
effort
Drainage system
maintenance
Flooding Clear debris and
repair banks to
prevent backup,
erosion and
flooding of existing
drainage systems
1,000,000
annually
High High FEMA,
VDEM,
VDOT
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Ongoing Continuous
Effort
Identify buildings or
locations vital to the
emergency
response effort and
buildings or
locations that, if
damaged, would
add complexity to a
response. Apply
community wildfire
assessments as
appropriate.
Wildfire Available
inventory of
structures that
need additional or
unique protection
from wildfires.
Support property
owners in taking
mitigation actions
such as defensible
space, building
and siting
materials
80,000 Medium Medium VA Dept. of
Forestry, US
Forest
Service,
Local
governments
Local government,
VDOF, USFS, and
Roanoke County
Fire & Rescue Dept.
Ongoing
Perpetual
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-28
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Dixie Cavern
Landfill Leachate
System
Flooding Replace aging
system to prevent
discharge
1,000,000 Medium Medium Funding
Partners with
Mitigation
Grants; other
relevant
development
grants
Roanoke Co
Development
Services
Pending Study
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-29
7.11 City of Roanoke
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priorit
y
Funding
Partners
Implementa
tion/ Lead
Agency
Stat
us
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Star City Alerts
Rave Mobile
Safety)
All
Hazard
s
Reduced loss of life
and property through
improved warning
system. 25,000 High High
Local
Government
Local
Government,
Emergency
Management
Online registration
portal available.
Text,email, and
voice message
opt-in available.
Ongoing.
Star City
Alerts
replaced the
previous
alert system
known as
Reverse
911".
Continuing to
utilize hazard
response
operations.
Structure
acquisition Flooding
Removal of
structures from flood
hazard areas;
reduce repetitive
loss; reduce loss of
life and property.
200,000 per
year
High High
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
Government
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility
Ongoing, To date
13M has been
spent to mitigate
139
homes/structures
thereby returning
58 acres to
natural floodplain
open space.
Ongoing
Continuing to
achieve
property
protection
measures.
Created City
of Roanoke
Flooding
Mitigation
Program in
2019.
Two of the four
PDM grants from
2020 have been
fully completed.
The two remaining
grants are
currently at 95%
completion and
65% design
phase.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-30
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementati
on/ Lead
Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Acquisition of
flood prone
properties
Flooding
Removal of
households from
flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive
loss; reduce loss of
life and property.
50,000 High High
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
government
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility
Ongoing, To date
13M has been
spent to mitigate
139
homes/structures
thereby returning
58 acres to
natural floodplain
open space.
Ongoing
Continuing to
achieve
property
protection
measures.
Created City
of Roanoke
Flooding
Mitigation
Program in
2019.
Two of the four
PDM grants from
2020 have been
fully completed.
The two remaining
grants are
currently at 95%
completion and
65% design phase
Public Education
All
Hazard
s
Inform public about
hazards and
mitigation options
and NFIP. 50,000 Medium Mediu
m
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
Governme
nt
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility,
Emergency
Management
Ongoing – Direct
mailer sent each
year and Flooding
Brochure inserted
in Roanoke Times
each year or
included with
direct mailer.
Roanoke
Remembers the
Flood of 85 Event
2025 for education
on local flood
history
Ongoing
Advise
property
owners,
potential
property
owners, and
visitors about
hazards.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-31
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementati
on/ Lead
Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Flood Hazard
mapping update /
modernization Flooding
Increased accuracy
of flood maps and
more effective
regulation and
enforcement of
regulations.
212,800 High High FEMA, VDEM
Local
government
Stormwater
Utility,
Planning
Division
Ongoing; Flood
prone roads and
critical facilities
have been
mapped. Roanoke
River Flood
Reduction Project
LOMR approved
and adopted in
December 2023.
FEMA Remapping
in progress
Ongoing,
Work with
organization
s to improve
flood hazard
mapping.
Look to
develop flood
models.
Additional Hazard
related GIS
layers/data
All Hazards Increased accuracy of
hazard mitigation
planning
100,000 High Medium USGS, NOAA,
FEMA, VDEM,
VDOT
Local
Government,
Stormwater
Utility,
Department of
Technology,
Emergency
Management
Ongoing Ongoing Update City of
Roanoke Real
Estate GIS to
reflect flood
zones on
FEMA Map
Center
Participate in CRS Flooding
Reduction in flood
insurance rates;
reduction in flood
loss.
10,000 High High VDEM
Local
government;
Stormwater
Utility
Participating
Community –
Currently Class 6
Working toward
Class 5
Ongoing;
Class 5
projected by
2030
Continue to
work with
departments
in the City of
Roanoke to
achieve CRS
credit.
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone critical
facilities
Flooding
Available inventory of
critical structures that
need additional or
unique protection from
flooding.
10,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility,
Emergency
Management
Completed Ongoing;
updates as
needed
Plan for
emergency
services.
Advise
emergency
response,
citizens, and
visitors.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-32
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementati
on/ Lead
Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Continue
participation in
FEMA’s DFIRM
program Flooding
Updated flood hazard
mapping. 15,000 High High
FEMA, local
government
Local
government In progress Ongoing Property
protection.
Develop Family
Assistance Center
Plan, Standard
Operating
Guidelines for
Family Assistance
Center
deployment, and
identify staffing
needs
All Hazards
Supporting
government and
private employers in
Roanoke by
developing SOGs to
implement Family
Assistance Center.
0 High Medium
City & private
partner agencies
City of
Roanoke
Emergen
cy
Management,
City
Schools
Developed Ongoing
Plan for
emergency
response and
protection to
public safety.
Secure grants to
purchase and
maintain
Volunteer
Management and
Reception
capabilities
All Hazards
Supporting
spontaneous
volunteers in a
disaster.
25,000
100% grant
funded)
High Medium City/FEMA
Roanoke
Valley
governments
Implemented Ongoing
Plan for
emergency
response and
protection to
public safety.
Standard
Operating
Guidelines for
Volunteer
Reception
deployment
All Hazards
Supporting
spontaneous
volunteers in a
disaster.
0 High Medium
City Emergency
Management
City
EM,
Polic
e
Department,
Animal
Wardens
Developed
Ongoing.
Activated
September
21,
2022.
Plan for
emergency
response and
protection to
public safety.
Develop Disaster
Pet Sheltering
capabilities
All Hazards
Supporting Pets in
Disaster by
developing
Community Animal
Response Team.
25,000
100% grant
funded)
High Medium
City Emergency
Management
City EM &
Police
Department
Developed
Ongoing.
Exercised and
utilized in
2022.
Plan for
emergency
response and
protection to
public safety.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-33
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priority
Fundin
g
Partner
s
Implementati
on/ Lead
Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Upgrade / repairs
to storm water
system
Flooding
Reduce frequency
and impact of
flooding. 140,000,00
0
High High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government
Local
government Ongoing Ongoing
Preventative
maintenance.
Drainage System
Maintenance Flooding
Clear debris and
repair banks to
prevent
backup, erosion and
flooding of existing
drainage systems.
500,000 High High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
govern
ment
Local
government Ongoing Annually
Preventative
maintenance.
Stream
Restorations Flooding
Improved stream flow
and sediment
transport, reduction
of stream bank
erosion, increase in
water quality benefits.
Variable
300,000 to
2 million High High
VADEQ,
potentially FEMA
Local
government
Ongoing based
on Watershed
Master Plans.
Two restoration
projects
completed Glade
Creek and W.
Fork Carvins.
Garnand stream
restoration is now
in design.
Ongoing
Natural
Resource
Protection
Study on power
resiliency
All hazards
generating
power outage
Solutioning long term,
multi disaster power
resiliency
100,000 Medium Medium City, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Sustainability,
Emergency
Management
Not started,
pending scoping
Pending
scoping
Pavement
Temperature
Sensors
Winter, extreme
temperature
Operational efficiency
generating safer
travel methods
150,000 Medium Medium City, USGS,
Grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Transportation
Division
Not started,
pending scoping
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-34
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementati
on/ Lead
Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Develop Heat
Resilience Plan
Extreme
Temperature
Develop adaptation
features to build
resiliency
150,000 Medium High City, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Sustainability Not Started,
pending funding
1YR from
funding
Sponsor
Community
Resilience Hub
All Hazards Support community
efforts to develop
resilience hub, by
supporting funding
pursuit
TBD Low Medium Partner
identification
underway with
USDN
Sustainability
and
Emergency
Management
Scoping on going
Develop Crisis
Communications
Plan
All Hazards Increased planning to
establish coordinated
public information and
warning throughout
the incident
continuum
TBD High High City, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Emergency
Management,
Communicatio
ns
Ongoing scoping 1 Yr from
completed
project scoping
Develop Continuity
of Government Plan
All Hazards Increased decision
making and
coordination
resiliency
TBD High High City, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Emergency
Management,
City Manager
Not started,
pending scoping
Participate in, and
remain in good
standing with, the
National Flood
Insurance
Program (NFIP) Flooding
Reduction of future
flood damage through
enforcement of
floodplain ordinances
and availability of
discounted flood
insurance for property
owners.
0 High High FEMA
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility
Ongoing Ongoing
Reflect City
Codes to
match NFIP
Standards.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-35
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Benefit
to- Cost
Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementati
on/ Lead
Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Additional
Notes
Elevation
Certificate
Updates
Flooding
Once the LOMR is
updated as a result
of the Roanoke River
Flood Reduction
Project, new elevation
certificates along the
river corridor may be
needed.
Unknown Med Med
Silver Jackets,
VDEM, FEMA Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility
Completed
Waiting
completion of
LOMR as part
of ESP
contract.
Revised
Elevation
Certificates
with updated
Base Flood
Elevations
Inundation
Mapping
Flooding
City will be able to
understand what
flooding depths will
be based on RR
stream gauge
heights.
Unknown High High
Silver Jackets,
local
governments
Stormwater
Utility
Completed
Ability to
provide road
closures and
needed
evacuation
zones at
certain
gauges levels
of the
Roanoke
River.
Maintain an
accurate database
and map of
repetitive loss
properties
Flooding
Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that
should be mitigated.
Unknown High High FEMA, VDEM Stormwater
Utility, VDEM
Ongoing -
Obtained ISAA with
FEMA to better
track Rep. Loss
structures and
areas
Ongoing:
annual
updates
Continue to
update
Repetitive
Loss list.
Watershed Master
Planning
Flooding Assess and plan
Stormwater needs on a
per watershed basis
with comprehensive
modeling and
identification of priority
projects
700,000 per
watershed
High High Local
Government,
DCR
Stormwater
Utility
In progress Funding
Stream
identified
CFPF)
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-36
7.12 City of Salem
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Communicatio
n equipment
interoperability
All hazards Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved response times;
citizen alerts
1,000,000
to 3,000,000
N/A High FEMA, Local
government
Local
government, Fire
Emergency
Services, Police,
IT
COMPLETE 2018-2019
Mass
notification
System
All hazards Reduced loss through
improved warning system
N/A N/A N/A FEMA, VDEM,
Local Government
Local
government, Fire
Emergency
Services, Police,
IT
Complete N/A
Flood hazard
mapping
update/
modernization
Additional
hazard related
GIS
layers/data
All
hazards/
flooding
Increased accuracy of flood
maps and increased
accuracy of hazard
mitigation planning
N/A High Medium FEMA, VDEM Community Dev Ongoing Ongoing
Soil
Stabilization
All
hazards/
flooding
Continue headwall and
riverbank stabilization to
reduce road undercutting in
multiple areas as scoping
determines.
500,000 High Medium FEMA, VDEM,
Local government
CFPF, grantor with
app grant program
Community Dev Ongoing 2025-2030
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-37
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Public
education
All hazards Develop web application(s)
for informing public about
hazards and mitigation
options Utilize ArcGIS to
allow real-time citizen input
regarding occurring
hazards.
N/A High Low FEMA, VDEM,
Local government
GIS Ongoing Ongoing
Participate in
FEMA Hazard
Mitigation
Programs
such as FMA,
PDM, and
HMGP for
acquisition of
flood prone
properties or
flood-proofing
projects
Flooding Possible sources of funding
for acquisition/demolition
projects, structure elevation,
mitigation reconstruction
project, flood-proofing
critical facilities, flood-
proofing commercial
structure, infrastructure
upgrades, and technology
upgrades
500,000 High High FEMA, VDEM,
Local government,
grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Community
Development
Not started;
pending
scoping
n/a
Seek funding
to prepare
site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic
studies that
look at areas
that have
chronic and
repetitive
flooding
problems
Flooding Possible determination of
solutions to repetitive loss
properties.
15,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM,
City, grantor with
app grant program
Community
Development
Not started;
lack of
scoping
N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-38
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Open
Drainage
system
maintenance;
Flooding Improved stream flow and
mitigation of flooding; Clear
debris and repair banks to
prevent backup, erosion and
flooding of existing drainage
systems
100,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM,
City, grantor with
app grant program
Community
Development,
Street
Department
Ongoing,
preventative
maintenance
Ongoing
Closed
Stormwater
system
construction,
upgrades or
repairs
Flooding Reduce frequency and
impact of flooding
1,000,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM,
City, grantor with
app grant program
Community
Development.
Ongoing,
preventative
maintenance
N/A
Additional
hazard field
data
Flooding Elevation certificates for
residential, business and
critical facilities; increased
accuracy of hazard
mitigation planning
25,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM,
Local government
Local
government,
Community
Development.
As needed
per project
Ongoing
Use HEC-
GeoRAS,
HEC-
GeoHMS, or
HAZUS
software to
model
potential flood
scenarios and
identify high-
hazard areas
Flooding Use software to model
potential flood areas and
identify high risk areas to
help mitigate flooding
10,000 Medium Low FEMA, VDEM,
Local government
Community
Development
Not started;
lack of
scoping
Within 6
months of
scoping
Participate in
CRS
Flooding Reduction in flood insurance
rates; reduction in flood loss
20,000 Medium Low VDEM, City,
grantor with an
appropriate grant
program
Community
Development
Not started;
lack of
funding
N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-39
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Revision of
floodplain
ordinance
All
Hazards
Up to date floodplain and
zoning ordinance to provide
guidance for development
150,000 N/A Medium City, grantor with
an appropriate
grant program
Local
government,
Community
Development
Not started;
pending
scoping
2025-2029
Defensible
Space
Wildfire Partner with the Virginia
Department of Forestry to
mitigate wildfire risk by
focusing on fire prevention
and creating defensible
space.
TBD by
project
High Low DOF, Local
government
Local
government,
Community
Development,
Fire &
Emergency
Services, Streets
and General
Maintenance
Ongoing 2025-2030
Identify and
equip a
community
resource
center
Extreme
temps,
winds,
earthquake
winter
Provide community space
for warming/ cooling and
power needs in a disaster
200,000 Medium Medium FEMA, VDEM,
City, grantor with
an appropriate
grant program
Fire and EMS Not started;
lack of
scoping
2026-2028
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-40
7.13 Town of Vinton
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Implement Mass
Notification System
All Hazards Public made aware of
impending danger.
Encourage voluntary use
of the National Weather
Service or private warning
mechanisms, such as The
Weather Channel
NOTIFY! and the Specific
Area Message Encoding
SAME)
100,000 High High RVARC
Localities
RVARC and Local
government
COMPLETE
Provide an
informational
brochure or handout
on Flood Safety in
Vinton
All Hazards Public better informed
about Flood Safety.
Unknown Medium Medium VDEM
FEMA, RVARC
Localities
Town of Vinton
COMPLETE
Determine the need
for generators at
public infrastructure
facilities, emergency
shelters, and public
buildings
All hazards Ensure that water and
sewer service can be
operational during hazard
events. Needed services
can be provided during
emergency events.
20,000 High High FEMA, Local
government
Town of Vinton
Public Works and
Police
Departments
COMPLETE
Local codes review All hazards Review development
codes to evaluate need for
changes that would
improve disaster
mitigation
100,000 Medium High FEMA, Roanoke
County and Town
of Vinton
Town of Vinton
Planning and
Zoning
Department COMPLETE
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-41
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Seek funding to
prepare site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic studies that
look at areas that
have chronic and
repetitive flooding
problems
Flooding Study Gish Mill
redevelopment area and
Tinker Creek Tributary to
determine effective
solutions
Unknown High Medium FEMA, VDEM,
and RVARC
Localities
Local
governments
COMPLETE
Flood hazard
mapping update/
modernization
Flooding Increased accuracy of
flood maps and more
effective regulation and
enforcement of
regulations
50,000 Medium High FEMA, VDEM RVARC, County of
Roanoke, and
Town of Vinton
COMPLETE
Transportation
corridor debris
removal and bank
stabilization.
Flooding Clear debris and repair
banks along roads to
prevent backup, erosion
and flooding of existing
drainage systems. Hardy
Rd, Walnut Ave, Virginia
Ave, as well as, other
roadways as determined
by Town, VDOT, Roanoke
City staff.
2,000,000 Medium Medium Town, VDOT,
Roanoke City,
Roanoke Co
Town Planning
and Zoning
Not started;
lack of
funding
As funding
becomes
available
Maintain an inventory
of flood prone
residential properties
and repetitive loss
properties
Flooding Available inventory of
repetitive loss properties
that could be used for
planning purposes
Unknown Unknown Unknown VDEM, RVARC RVARC, Roanoke
County and Town
of Vinton COMPLETE
Property acquisition –
single-family and
commercial
structures
Flooding Removal of households
and other structures from
flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive loss;
reduce loss of life and
property
10,000,000 Medium High FEMA, VDEM,
Town of Vinton
Town of Vinton
Planning and
Zoning
Department
Ongoing 2020-2024, as
funding
becomes
available
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-42
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Town-wide
Stormwater facilities
retrofit
Flooding Reduce frequency and
impact of flooding
20,000,000 Medium High Town of Vinton,
Grantor with
Appropriate
Grant Program
Town of Vinton
Planning and
Zoning
Department
Not Started
pending
scope of
work and
funding
2025-2050
Evaluate public
utilities for
floodproofing
Flooding Evaluation of public
utilities for retrofitting or
floodproofing to prevent
failure during disasters
50,000 High Medium FEMA, VDEM,
Town of Vinton
Town of Vinton
Public Works
Department COMPLETE
Additional
projects as
funding
becomes
available.
Obtain CRS
Classification Rating
Flooding Reduction in flood
insurance rates; reduction
in flood loss
10,000,
Annually
Medium High FEMA, RVARC
Localities, Town
of Vinton
Town of Vinton
Planning and
Zoning
Department
COMPLETE 2016
Identify locations for
additional stream
gauges
Flooding /
Heavy
Rains
Provide better, more
timely information to allow
faster, more accurate
warnings to be issued to
the public
25,000 Medium Medium Town, Roanoke
City, Roanoke
County, Grantor
with an
appropriate grant
program
Town of Vinton
Planning and
Zoning
Ongoing As funding
becomes
available
Community Wildfire
assessments
Wildfire Reduction of loss to
wildfire
50,000 Medium Medium VA DOF, RVARC
Localities
Roanoke County
and Town of
Vinton
Ongoing As funding
becomes
available
Retrofit and
Floodproof Gish Mill
Historical Structure
Flooding Protect structure and
tenants from flooding,
improve economic
community value
400,000 High High Town, Private
Developers,
Helene Post
Disaster
Mitigation
Town Planning
and Zoning
Department
Ongoing 2027
Charles R. Hill
Community Center
Shelter Retrofit
All Hazards Retrofit building with
generator and supplies to
serve as shelter while War
Memorial is upgraded
200,000 Medium Medium Town, Roanoke
Co, Grantor with
appropriate grant
program
Town Emergency
Management
Not Started N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-43
7.14 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
Project Hazard
Mitigated
Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost
Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status Proposed
Schedule
Identify areas with
recurring flood problems
and prepare funding
scope for additional
stream/rain gauges
Flooding Improved early warning
of flooding; ensure that
these areas are
adequately covered
and monitored
5,000 High High DHCD,
Localities
RVARC In progress 2025-2026
Request additional
stream/rain gauges on
behalf of interested local
governments.
Flooding Improved early warning
of flooding; ensure
these areas are
adequately covered
and monitored.
120,000 Medium Medium FEMA,
VDEM
RVARC Not started 2026-2028
Update the 2005 Flood
Prone Roadway Study
Flooding Improved and updated
information about
roadway flooding in the
region
10,000-
30,000
Medium High TPO RVARC Not started 2026-2027
Critical and Vulnerable
Facilities Flood
Vulnerability Study and
action plan
Flooding Improved and updated
information on the
regional impacts to
critical facilities
30,000-
60,000
Medium Medium TPO, other RVARC Not started 2027-2029
Train staff in hazard
mitigation, specifically in
wind-related hazards
Wind Increased staff capacity
for 2030 plan update
10,000-
15,000
High High RVARC In progress 2025-2027
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-44
Project Hazard
Mitigated
Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost
Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status Proposed
Schedule
Maintain an active
regional database of
repetitive loss properties
Flooding Improved information
around repetitive loss
5,000-
10,000
High High FEMA,
VDEM
RVARC Needs to be
reinstated
2025
Develop or update the
Regional Stormwater
Management Plan
Flooding New and updated
action items for
stormwater
management
100,000-
150,000
Medium Medium To be
identified
RVARC Not started TBD
Regional Transit Impact
Study
Flooding,
Winter
Storm
Improved information
around transit impacts
in hazard events
40,000 -
80,000
Medium Low TPO RVARC Not started TBD
Expand assessment of
wildfire risk to
incorporate new data
regarding air quality
mortality in partnership
with regional health
advocates
Wildfire Improved data around
wildfire risk and public
health
TBD Medium Low Regional
health
partners,
VDH
RVARC Not started TBD
Expand extreme
temperature data
collection in partnership
with interested localities
Extreme
Temperature
Improved data around
extreme temperature
impacts
TBD Low Low VDOF, VDH,
other
RVARC, local
governments
Not started TBD
Annual updates on
Regional and Local
project progress and
plan documentation
All Hazards Improved
implementation tracking
and public engagement
5,000-
10,000
High High Localities RVARC,
localities
Ongoing Annual
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-45
7.15 Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Implement 2 trailer
drawn emergency
generators to support
2 pump stations
primarily, with
flexibility to support
others
All Hazards
that result
in power
outage:
Wind,
Winter,
Flood, etc
Keep pump stations
operational during power
outage: protection of illicit
discharge to VA waters.
Trailer mounted set-up
provides flexibility for other
internal and external use.
300,000
High
High
Sourcing FEMA
Post Disaster
Mitigation Funds
RVRA- Dir. Of
Operations/
Operations
Management
Pending
Funding,
Applications
and plans
are finished
190 Days
from
Funding
Leachate Bypass
Pump Station and
Tank Cleaning
Flooding Maximize storage capacity,
protection of pumps,
improved pump out capacity
through efficiency gains.
Builds resiliency and
prevents system from being
overrun in a storm event.
322,400 High High Sourcing FEMA
Post Disaster
Mitigation Funds
Connected to the
generator project
RVRA- Dir of
Operations/
Operations
Management
Pending
Funding,
Applications
and plans
are finished
Less than
1YR from
Funding
Haul Road Study Flooding,
Geologic
Hazards,
Earthquake
Authority owns a critical
access road, along with
several state roads leading
to the area. This area
experiences routine short
term and occasional long
term flooding. The area is at
risk for karst events and
runs alongside a sheer cut
hillside. A study could yield
meaningful solutions to the
issue.
Unknown,
pending
development
of a scope of
work
Low Medium Seeking grant
funding that would
be applicable. This
could be from any
source.
RVRA Executive
Director
Not Started No
Available
Timeline
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-46
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-to-
Cost Priority Funding Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Increase
relationships with
service area
jurisdictions
All-
Hazards
RVRA has significant
relationships across the
operational region, both
contractually and
organizationally and seeks
to share resource
information, capability and
contribute to regional public
safety efforts
0 High Low All localities and
partners within
service district on a
case by case basis
RVRA Executive
Director
On-Going Continuous
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-47
7.16 Western Virginia Water Authority
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Water Pollution
Control Plant
Flood
Protection-
Ferrum
Flooding Study and execute
a solution to
prevent flooding
within the water
pollution control
plant.
4,000,000 High High FEMA Post
Disaster
Mitigation
WVWA Water
Quality
Not Started
pending
grant award
Study: 6MOs
from grant
award
Water Pollution
Control Plant
Flood
Protection-
Boones Mill
Flooding Construction of
stormwater
conveyance
system to prevent
flooding within the
water pollution
control plant.
228,000 High High FEMA Post
Disaster
Mitigation
WVWA Water
Quality
Not Started
pending
grant award
1YR from
grant award
Carvins Cove
Forestry
Management
Study
Wildfire,
Geologic
Hazards
Prevent and
mitigate wildfire, to
create resiliency in
water quality from
source to tap,
including reservoir
and WTP.
TBD Medium High WVWA, City
of Roanoke,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
program
WVWA Water
Quality
Phase 1
complete,
sourcing
funds for
phase 2
2Yrs from
funding
development
Identify critical
facilities within
WVWA
Network to
install
generators
All Hazards
resulting in
power
outage
Promote resiliency
of water
distribution system
during power
outages
5,000,000 Medium High WVWA,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
program
WVWA Water
Quality
Not Started
pending
funding
2Yrs from
funding
development
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-48
Project Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Cost
Estimate
Benefit-
to-Cost Priority Funding
Partners
Implementation/
Lead Agency
Status
Proposed
Schedule
Identify
distribution
infrastructure
vulnerable to
hazardous
environmental
concerns
including
extreme cold
and geologic
hazards
Extreme
Temperature,
Geologic
Hazards
Identify and
prioritize
vulnerable
infrastructure to
prevent
customer/system
water outage.
Routine
effort. Cost
by project
High High WVWA,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
program
WVWA
Engineering
Services
On-going
constant
maintenance
effort,
exacerbated
by natural
hazards
On-going
multiple
projects per
year
Study WVWA
Dams and
establish a
replacement
program
Flooding,
Geologic
Hazards,
Earthquake
Long term
planning to
evaluate dam
lifecycle.
TBD Medium Low-
Med
WVWA,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
program
WVWA Water
Quality
Not Started
pending
internal
scoping
TBD
Distribution
System
Redundancy
All-Hazards Promote resiliency
of water
distribution and
collection systems.
TBD Medium Medium WVWA,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
program
WVWA
Engineering
Services
Not Started
pending
internal
scoping
On-Going
Additional Materials a
References
ASPR TRACIE. (2023). Extreme Heat Events: Lessons from Seattle's Record-Breaking
Summers. Retrieved from https://files.asprtracie.hhs.gov/documents/extreme-heat-
events-lessons-from-seattles-record-breaking-summers.pdf
CISA, MARISA, GLISA. (n.d.). Climate and Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool. Retrieved June 20,
2025, from https://champ.rcc-acis.org/
Commonwealth of Virginia. (2016). Impounding Structure Regulations. Retrieved August 1,
2025, from DCR.Virginia.gov: https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/dam-safety-and-
floodplains/document/ds-va-code-4vac50-20-10.pdf
Division of Health Statistics, Virginia Department of Health. (n.d.). Statistical Reports and
Table. Retrieved June 20, 2025, from
https://apps.vdh.virginia.gov/HealthStats/stats.htm
Environmental Protection Agency. (2025, March 27). Extreme Heat. Retrieved June 20, 2025,
from EPA.gov: https://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/extreme-heat
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2004). Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety.
Government.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2024, July). FEMA.gov. Retrieved from
Introduction to 2024 Edition Seismic Design Category Maps:
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema-
seismicdesigncategorymaps-july2024.pdf
HNTB Corporation. (2025). After-Action Assessment Report. City of Richmond.
Landslide Hazard Mapping. (n.d.). Retrieved August 15, 2025, from Virginia Department of
Energy: https://energy.virginia.gov/geology/FEMA_landslide.shtml
National Weather Service. (n.d.). Wet Bulb Globe Temperature Informational Guide.
Retrieved June 20, 2025, from Weather.gov:
https://www.weather.gov/media/ilm/WBGT_Handout.pdf
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission. (2025). Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy, 2025-2029.
Sublette, S. (2025, January 1). A consistently cold start to 2025, with opportunities for snow.
The Richmonder.
Additional Materials b
Tonya E. Thornton, P. a. (2024). The Economic and Fiscal Costs of Water Supply Disruption
to the National Capital Region. Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
Virginia Department of Emergency Management. (2023). Commonwealth of Virginia Hazard
Mitigation Plan. Richmond: Commonwealth of Virginia.
Virginia Department of Energy. (n.d.). KarstView User Guide and Explanation. Retrieved
August 19, 2025, from
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/165901d938ae458f8e9e44d656b74389
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. (n.d.). Water Supply Planning. Retrieved
August 4, 2025, from https://www.deq.virginia.gov/our-programs/water/water-
quantity/water-supply-planning
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. (n.d.). Water Supply Planning Resources.
Retrieved July 14, 2025, from https://www.deq.virginia.gov/our-
programs/water/water-quantity/water-supply-planning/water-supply-planning-
resources
Virginia Department of Transportation. (2002). VDOT Drainage Manual. Richmond:
Commonwealth of Virginia. Retrieved August 2025, from
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/doing-business/technical-guidance-and-
support/technical-guidance-documents/drainage-manual/
Virginia Department of Transportation. (2024). Mileage Tables: The State Highway Systems.
Richmond: Commonwealth of Virginia.
Virginia Health Information. (2021, February 26). Retrieved June 20, 2025, from
https://www.vhi.org/Hospitals/vahospitals.asp
Additional Materials c
Appendices
Appendix A: Public Engagement Summary and Documentation
Appendix B: Hazard Mitigation Survey Results
Public Input Survey Report
Stakeholder Form Responses
Appendix C: Flood Hazard Areas
Appendix D: Flooding HAZUS Reports
100 Year Flood Model
500 Year Flood Model
Appendix E: Wildfire Incident Reports and Regional Wildfire Report
Wildfire Incident Reports
Regional Wildfire Risk Model Report
Appendix F: Critical and Vulnerable Facilities Inventory
Appendix G: Jurisdiction Capability Assessment Worksheets
Appendix H: High Hazard Dam Supplemental Information
Dam Safety Fact Sheets
Inundation Maps Beaverdam Creek
Inundation Maps Carvin Cove
Inundation Maps Falling Creek
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 1
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 2
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 3
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 4
Inundation Maps Spring Hollow
Appendix I: Policy Guide Checklist
Appendix J: Resolutions and Adoption
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Planning and Zoning
Issue
Public hearing on the petition of Rikki McConnell, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a proposed
medical clinic, located at 600 South Pollard Street, Vinton, Virginia, tax map number 060.19-03-
21.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District.
Summary
The proposed use for this property meets the definition of a “medical clinic” which requires a
special use permit in this zoning district. Based on the owner’s application, this establishment will
provide primary care, urgent care, medical weight loss, and other medical and therapeutic services
to their clientele. The owner/applicant, Rikki McConnell, has provided a letter as a part of her
application package that lists all the services they intend on providing at this location.
Attachments
Staff Report
Ordinance
Recommendations
Take action on Ordinance
Town Council
Agenda Summary
STAFF REPORT
PETITIONER: Rikki McConnell PREPARED BY: Nathaniel McClung
CASE NUMBER: PC-25-002 DATE: November 13, 2025
Application Information
Request: Special Use Permit: Medical Clinic Use
Owner: Tammy S. Jessup & Neal S. Jessup
Applicant: Rikki McConnell (The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center)
Site Address/Location: 600 S. Pollard St.
Tax Parcel ID #: 060.19-03-21.00-0000
Lot Area: 0.31 AC
Zoning: GB General Business District
Existing Land Use: Current use: Vacant (previously a medical clinic)
Proposed Land Use: Medical Clinic
Specified Future Land Use: Mixed-Use Corridor
A. NATURE OF REQUEST
Ms. Rikki McConnell, owner of the Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center, requests a special use permit (SUP)
for a proposed medical clinic use, which is a use permitted by SUP, in the GB General Business District,
subject to the approval of the Vinton Town Council.
B. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Article IV, District Regulations, of Appendix B, Zoning, of the Town Code
Division 2, Sec. 4-4 (b), Multiple Purpose Districts (General Business District)
The purpose of the GB general business district is to accommodate a wide range of retail and service uses
which serve the community as a whole or cater to the traveling public. The district is intended to be applied
along primary traffic routes and to areas having direct access to such routes, in order to provide safe and
efficient access while avoiding the routing of traffic onto minor streets or through residential areas. The
district regulations are designed to afford flexibility in permitted uses of individual sites in order to
promote business opportunities, economic development and the provision of services. The district
regulations are also designed to provide for harmonious development and compatibility with adjacent
residential areas.
4-5, Use Table for Multiple Purpose Districts. The medical clinic use is permitted in the GB General
Business District, subject to approval of a special use permit by the town council.
C. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
Background – The existing building was constructed in 2004 and utilized as 6,800 square feet. medical
office/clinic during its existence. Since its inception, the property has been used as an optometry office
and then its most recent use before becoming vacant was a family medicine office operated by Lewis Gale.
Location – 600 South Pollard Street, Vinton, VA 24179
Topography/Vegetation – The existing structure is located on level lot that is comprised mainly of
impervious surfaces and an existing medical office building.
Adjacent Zoning and Land Uses – The land uses within the vicinity of the subject property are summarized
below.
Direction from Property Zoning District Land Use
D. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Site Layout/Architecture - The current property consists of a single-story, medical style building with a
brick exterior and architectural roof covering. The proposed use will be located entirely within the existing
structure, and the commercial space will not require a change-of-use or new certificate of occupancy from
the Roanoke County Office of Building Safety.
Site Access – The structure can be accessed via the main entrance fronting South Pollard Street which
intersects East Virginia Avenue. There are 16 off-street parking spaces available on the property. An
additional access to the rear of the property is through a public alley that is accessed between East Virginia
Avenue and East Augusta Avenue.
Utilities – Public water and sewer services are available for the existing structure.
E. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/FUTURE LAND USE
The Vinton 2050 Comprehensive Plan designates this property as a Mixed-Use Corridor land use area.
F. STAFF CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
On September 3, 2024, Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 1059 that a special use permit subject to
approval of Town Council will be required for medical and dental facilities, and hospitals to be operated
within applicable zoning districts of the Town. The proposed use, as indicated in the submitted special use
permit application, is consistent with the general characteristics and the intent of the GB General Business
District. Staff would like to state that, with a special use permit request, the Planning Commission and
Town Council are given the opportunity to review the proposed request and impose such conditions as
reasonably necessary to ensure the use will be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with
the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance.
Town staff recommends that the Town Council subject the approval of this SUP to the following
conditions:
1. Pursuant to the directives outlined in Ordinance No. 1059 of the Vinton Town Council, the
petitioner provided the Town with a detailed and comprehensive list of all the medical services to
be provided at the property. The medical clinic use shall only be permitted to provide and/or
perform the services described within this document, which shall become a permanent part of the
minutes. If the establishment or a future establishment intends to provide and/or perform services
not specifically described within said document, they must apply for a new special use permit that
will again be subject to the approval of the Vinton Town Council.
Rikki Ann McConnell, FNP-C
The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center
4600 Brambleton Avenue Suite A
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
540.776.2274
THC@TheHybridClinic.com
10/27/2025
To:
Town of Vinton Zoning and Planning Commission
311 S. Pollard Street
Vinton, VA 24179
Subject: Special Use Permit Application – The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center
Dear Members of the Commission,
My name is Rikki Ann McConnell, and I am a Family Nurse Practitioner and the owner of
The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center. I am applying for a Special Use Permit to open and
operate a medical and wellness clinic within the Town of Vinton.
The Hybrid Clinic was originally founded in Stewartsville, Virginia, in 2019, serving the
greater Vinton community with compassionate and patient-centered healthcare. In 2024, I
acquired Crystal’s Healing Hands Massage, a well-known and respected massage therapy
practice located in the Cave Spring area of Roanoke County. Following that acquisition, I
rebranded it as The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center and temporarily relocated the medical side
of the practice to Cave Spring while preparing for expansion.
Now, we are excited to return to Vinton, where our medical clinic began, and establish a new,
expanded location that will bring together our medical and wellness services under one roof. Our
plan is to move in November 2025 and open as soon as all required permits and inspections are
complete.
About The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center
The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center is a licensed medical and holistic practice focused on
integrating traditional healthcare with alternative and preventive treatments. Our goal is to help
patients feel better naturally, reduce dependence on pharmaceuticals, and improve their overall
health and quality of life through ethical, compliant, and evidence-based care.
Below is a full description of the services we plan to provide at our new Vinton location:
Primary Care (PCP) - Comprehensive healthcare for adults and families, including wellness
exams, physicals, chronic condition management, preventive screenings, and lab work.
Urgent Care - Visits for non-emergent medical conditions such as sinus infections, sore throat,
ear pain, rashes, cough, and minor illnesses. Both in-person and virtual options will be offered.
Hormone Balancing Services for Men and Women - Evaluation and treatment of hormone
imbalances through prescriptions, injections, or bioidentical hormone pellets. Pellet therapy
involves placing small, rice-sized pellets beneath the skin to deliver a steady release of natural
hormones for 3–6 months, improving mood, energy, sleep, and overall wellness.
Medical Weight Loss Management - Medically supervised weight loss that includes nutritional
counseling, ongoing support, and injectable treatments such as GLP-1 medications. Each plan is
based on individual labs and health goals for safe, sustainable results.
Massage Therapy - Provided by licensed massage therapists, including medical, deep tissue,
Swedish, and relaxation techniques to relieve pain, reduce tension, and support recovery.
T-Shape 2 Body Contouring - A non-invasive treatment that uses radiofrequency, vacuum
therapy, and low-level laser technology to improve circulation, tighten skin, and assist with body
contouring.
Medical Cannabis Certifications - As a state-licensed medical cannabis practitioner, I evaluate
and certify patients who qualify under Virginia law. It is important to note that no cannabis or
cannabis products are stored, sold, or dispensed on-site. Patients who qualify receive a medical
certification to legally purchase their medication only from licensed Virginia dispensaries.
IV Hydration Therapy - Medical-grade IV infusions that deliver fluids, electrolytes, vitamins,
and nutrients directly into the bloodstream to promote hydration, boost energy, and enhance
recovery.
Vitamin Injections - Targeted nutrient injections such as B12, Lipo-Mino, and other blends to
support metabolism, immune function, and energy levels.
Sound Bed Therapy - Therapeutic use of vibrational sound frequencies delivered through a
specially designed sound bed to reduce stress, promote relaxation, and improve mental clarity.
Red Light Therapy - A non-invasive light therapy using specific wavelengths of red and near-
infrared light to support skin rejuvenation, reduce inflammation, and encourage cellular repair.
Infrared Sauna - An advanced sauna experience using infrared heat to promote detoxification,
relaxation, and muscle recovery while improving circulation and overall wellness.
Commitment to Compliance and Community Benefit
The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center operates in full compliance with all local, state, and federal
laws. All staff members are licensed and credentialed through the Virginia Department of Health
Professions, and the clinic maintains strict adherence to HIPAA, OSHA, and patient safety
standards.
Our expansion into Vinton will:
Create local jobs for licensed healthcare providers and support staff.
Increase access to affordable, holistic medical care for Vinton residents.
Support local commerce, as our large established patients and clients often shop and
dine locally.
Contribute to Vinton’s growth by adding a reputable, health-focused business to the
community.
Closing
It would be an honor to return to where our clinic first began and to continue serving the
residents of Vinton with the same compassion, integrity, and professionalism that have defined
our practice since 2019. We look forward to being a positive addition to the town’s growth and
wellness community.
Thank you for your time and consideration of our Special Use Permit request. I am happy to
provide any additional documentation or information as needed.
Sincerely,
Rikki Ann McConnell, FNP-C
Family Nurse Practitioner
Owner & Operator, The Hybrid Clinic Wellness Center
ORDINANCE NO.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2025, AT 6:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE
VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON,
VIRGINIA.
AN ORDINANCE to approve the petition of Rikki McConnell, for a Special Use Permit (SUP)
for a proposed medical clinic, located at 600 South Pollard Street, Vinton, Virginia, tax map
number 060.19-03-21.00-0000, zoned GB General Business District.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as
amended, the legal notice for the public hearings has been advertised in the Cardinal
News, and the adjoining property owners have been notified; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2025, members of the Vinton Planning Commission held a work
session on the SUP request; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2025, during the Town Council regularly scheduled meeting,
members of the Town Council were briefed on the SUP request; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the Vinton Town Council held a joint public hearing
on December 2, 2025.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Vinton, Virginia, that
the petition of Rikki McConnell, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a proposed medical clinic,
located at 600 South Pollard Street, Vinton, Virginia, tax map number 060.19-03-21.00-0000,
zoned GB General Business District., be approved with the following condition:
1. Pursuant to the directives outlined in Ordinance No. 1059 of the Vinton Town Council,
adopted on September 3, 2024, the petitioner provided the Town with a detailed and
comprehensive list of all the medical services to be provided at the property. The medical
clinic use shall only be permitted to provide and/or perform the services described within
this document, which shall become a permanent part of the minutes. If the establishment
or a future establishment intends to provide and/or perform services not specifically
described within said document, they must submit for a new Special Use Permit (SUP)
request that will again be subject to the approval of the Vinton Town Council.
This Ordinance adopted on motion made by Council Member ________________ and
seconded by Council Member ____________________, with the following votes recorded:
AYES:
NAYS:
APPROVED:
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
Megan K. Lawless, Town Clerk
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Planning and Zoning
Issue
Public Hearing on proposed amendments to the Vinton Zoning Ordinance, which include adding a new
use type of commercial kitchens and commissary kitchens to the use table in Article IV (District
Regulations) and add a definition for these use types in Article XI (Definitions) and amending multiple
provisions and requirements for Planned Unit Development Districts in Article IV, Division 4 (Planned
Unit Development Districts).
Summary
The following proposed amendments come in light of the Vinton 2050 Comprehensive Plan goal of
updating the “Town’s zoning code to support more housing options by modernizing typical standards to
allow greater flexibility in minimum lot sizes, maximum lot coverage, minimum lot widths, and setbacks…”
The proposed amendments address regulations and provisions specifically for the PD zoning district. The
main reason to review the regulations of the PD zoning district stemmed from the overarching requirement
that a PD zoning district could not be initiated unless the area contained 10 acres of contiguous land.
Additionally, the main justification behind adding the commercial/commissary kitchen use is due to the
expressed interest of certain business enterprises in operating licensed, commercial kitchen spaces in the
Town, that are primarily rented to other food businesses for the preparing, cooking, and storing of food and
supplies. A typical food business that would use this space includes food trucks, catering businesses, bakers,
and community groups. Town staff recommend making this type of use its own unique category because
these types of operations are different from a typical restaurant, bakery, or other eating or drinking
establishment in that they do not promote customer traffic.
Attachment
Staff Memorandum and Draft Ordinance Revisions
Recommendations
Take action on Ordinance
Town Council
Agenda Summary
PART II - CODE
APPENDIX B - ZONING
ARTICLE IV. - DISTRICT REGULATIONS
DIVISION 4. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
Vinton, Virginia, Code of Ordinances Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:13 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 1 of 6
DIVISION 4. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
Sec. 4-10. Purpose of the planned unit development district.
Consistent with the general purposes of this appendix, the intent of the PD planned development district is
to encourage and provide for the development of medium to large parcels of land for residential or limited mixed
use communities in a planned and coordinated manner. The district is intended to provide greater flexibility than
normal zoning classifications in order to encourage the most efficient and economical use of limited vacant land, to
maximize opportunities to provide open space and preserve natural features of the land through clustering and
other design concepts and to adapt development standards to the unique characteristics of individual sites. The
district regulations are intended to promote imaginative and innovative design, a variety of housing types,
convenience of services and provision of recreational and other amenities for residents.
Sec. 4-11. Use table for planned use development district.
Dwelling, single-family P
Dwelling, two-family P
Dwelling, multifamily P
Townhouses P
Group homes P
Banks and other financial services P
Massage clinics P
Medical and dental clinics S
Offices P
Research and development facility P Section 5-25
Laundromats, laundry, and drying cleaning pick up
stations
P
Personal service business P
Retail stores and shops P
Gasoline service stations and self-service gasoline
stations
P
Eating and drinking establishment P
Churches and other places of worship P
Day care home, adult P
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:13 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 2 of 6
community centers not operated for commercial
Utility and Accessory Uses
S" indicates a use permitted only by special use permit.
A blank cell indicates the use is not permitted; any use not listed in this table is not permitted in the planned
Ord. No. 1059, 9-3-2024)
Sec. 4-12. Use limitations.
Use limitations. Commercial uses permitted in the PD planned development district shall be subject to the
following limitations in addition to other applicable requirements:
1) Not more than 15 percent of the gross area of a PD district shall be devoted to sites for commercial
uses and their accessory uses and structures.
2) No individual commercial use shall contain more than 5,000 square feet of floor area.
3) No zoning permit for any commercial use shall be issued until certificates of use and occupancy have
been issued for at least 25 percent of the dwelling units proposed in the PD district.
Sec. 4-13. District size.
Each PD district shall contain not less than fiveten acres of contiguous land area. Existing public streets shall
not be included in calculating land area.
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:13 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 3 of 6
Sec. 4-14. General development standards.
a) Density. The density of a PD district shall not exceed ten dwelling units per gross acre. For purposes of
calculating density, areas devoted to sites for commercial uses shall not be included. Different dwelling types
may be mixed together within a development in any combination or proportion. In such cases, the concept
development shall delineate the boundaries between the different types of units for the purposes of
calculating the density requirements shown above.
b) Common open space requirements. Not less than 20 percent of the gross area of each PD district shall be
devoted to common open space meeting the following criteria:
1) Common open space shall consist of areas owned by a homeowners' association and devoted to active
or passive recreation or leisure time use or to the privacy or visual enjoyment of residents of the
development, and may include buffers, floodplains, steep slopes and other natural areas to be
preserved. Common open space may include land improved or developed for recreation use, including
swimming pools, game courts, playgrounds, recreation centers and similar facilities, but shall not
include streets, parking areas, private yard areas or sites reserved for future development of a nature
that would not qualify as common open space.
2) Common open space shall have horizontal widths of not less than 50 feet, except areas devoted to
pedestrian trails, bikeways or leisure trails shall not be less than twentyten feet in horizontal
dimensions.
3) Common open space shall be arranged, together with streets and walkways, to provide a continuous
and interconnected system which is accessible from all dwelling units within the development without
having to cross privately owned property.
c) Yards and setbacks. Minimum yards, setbacks and spaces between buildings shall be as required in the R-3
residential district, unless different minimum requirements are specifically authorized in the approved
master plan for the PD district. Lot and building requirements.
1) Residential lot and building standards.
a. Single-family dwellings shall have a minimum lot area of four thousand (4,000) square feet. Minimum
yards and setbacks shall be as required in the R-3 residential district, unless different minimum
requirements are specifically authorized in the approved master plan for the PD district.
b. Two-family dwellings shall have a minimum lot area of eight thousand (8,000) square feet. Minimum
yards and setbacks shall be as required in the R-3 residential district, unless different minimum
requirements are specifically authorized in the approved master plan for the PD district.
c. Townhouses shall conform with the townhouse development standards prescribed in Article V, Sec. 5-
29.
d. Multifamily dwellings shall conform with the multifamily development standards of the R-3 residential
district as prescribed in Article V, Sec. 5-18.
2) Commercial and other non-residential lot and building standards.
a. Commercial and other non-residential uses. Minimum lot sizes, yards, setbacks and spaces between
buildings shall be as required in the R-3 residential district, unless different minimum requirements are
specifically authorized in the approved master plan for the PD district.
3) Accessory structures and buildings.
a. Accessory structures and buildings shall follow the yards requirements of Article VI, Sec. 6-8, and shall
not exceed the height of the main building on a lot.
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:13 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 4 of 6
ed) Perimeter buffer. A buffer area of not less than 50 feet in width shall be provided around the perimeter of
the PD district, except adjacent to public streets providing access to the district. Such buffer area shall be left
in a natural state or shall be supplemented with landscaping materials and/or structural fences or walls that
follow the standards of buffer yard type C as described in Article VI, Division 5, Sec. 6-28 . No building,
structure, road, parking area or improvement for active recreation use shall be located in any required
buffer.
f) Landscaping requirements. The development shall meet the landscaping, screening, and buffer yard
requirements of Article VI, Division 5.
ge) Height limits. No building or structure in a PD district shall exceed a height of 45 feet, provided that no
accessory building located within 25 feet of a property line shall exceed a height of 15 feet. (See article VI for
supplementary height regulations.)
hf) Public sewer and water. The PD district shall be served by public sewer and public water systems.
ig) Underground utilities. All utility lines within a PD district shall be placed underground.
jh) Streets. Except as may be specifically approved by the town council in conjunction with the PD district master
plan, streets within a PD district shall be public and shall be constructed in accordance with applicable
standards of the town and the Virginia Department of Transportation. Private internal streets within a PD
district which provide access to sites within the district and do not provide for through traffic by the general
public may be permitted by the council in accordance with design and construction standards specified in the
PD district master plan.
ki) Preservation and maintenance of common areas. Provisions shall be made by the developer to ensure
preservation and maintenance of required common open space and other common areas and facilities.
Ownership of common areas and facilities shall be vested in a homeowners' association comprised of all
owners of property within the development. Appropriate covenants and restrictions providing for
preservation and maintenance of such areas and facilities shall be described in general and approved as to
form by the town attorney at the time of submission and review of the PD district master plan. Final
covenants and restrictions shall be submitted for review by the zoning administrator and town attorney, and
shall be recorded prior to approval of any site plan.
Sec. 4-15. Procedures.
a) Generally. Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this division, application for rezoning of a
property to a PD district shall be submitted in the same manner and shall be reviewed and considered in the
same manner as other applications to change the zoning classification of property by amendment to the
official zoning district map as set forth in article IX of this appendix. A master plan for the development of
each PD district shall be submitted by the applicant as part of the application for rezoning. Upon approval by
the town council, the standards and requirements set forth in the master plan shall, together with the
applicable requirements of this appendix, constitute the regulations applicable within the PD district.
b) Master plan contents. Every application for rezoning to a PD district shall include a master plan for
development of the site which shall consist of not less than the following written and graphic information, in
such number as specified by the policy of the planning commission, prepared in sufficient detail and scale
and with sufficient clarity to accurately depict the nature and character of development proposed within the
PD district:
1) A plat, legal description of the property and verification of ownership or control by the applicant.
2) Existing zoning, uses and structures on the subject site, and existing zoning and use of adjacent
properties.
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:13 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 5 of 6
3) An inventory of site characteristics and natural features, including topography with contour intervals of
five feet or less, watercourses, water bodies, floodplains, wooded areas and other major vegetation
features, and historic and archeological resources.
4) Description of the proposed development, including its general character, the manner in which it
satisfies the purposes and intent of PD districts, means of preserving significant natural features and
means of addressing potential impacts on the community and on public services.
5) A land use plan for the site, showing specific land uses with schematic site plans, access and circulation,
general location and arrangement of buildings, parking areas, driveways, pedestrian routes, natural
areas to be retained, buffers and open spaces and their functions and general character.
6) Statements or graphic representations showing proposed development standards including minimum
lot areas and widths, minimum yards and setbacks, building heights, densities, amount of
nonresidential floor area, number of parking spaces and percentage of open space.
7) Traffic impact analysis.
8) General plans for public services and utilities showing the necessary services and utilities will be
provided and are sufficient to serve the development.
9) Statements or graphic representations of general character and architectural and community design
guidelines to be applicable to the development, including street and parking area design standards,
lighting and signage.
10) General description of covenants and restrictions intended to provide for preservation and
maintenance of common areas and facilities.
11) Development phasing schedule.
12) Such other information that is deemed necessary by the zoning administrator, planning commission or
town council to establish that the proposed development complies with the general purposes or
specific requirements of this appendix, including such additional information or analyses as may be
necessary to evaluate potential impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding area and the
community as a whole.
c) Reserved.
d) Pre-application conference. Prior to submission of the application and master plan, the applicant shall meet
with the zoning administrator to discuss the proposed development in general and the PD district
application, review and approval process.
e) Review and consideration of application. Formal review, consideration and action on the application shall be
conducted in accordance with the provisions of division 1 of article IX of this appendix. The planning
commission's action on the application shall include recommendations to town council regarding the master
plan accompanying the application, and the commission may recommend modifications or changes to such
master plan. The town council may consider further appropriate modifications or changes to the master
plan.
f) Approval of subdivision and site plans. Prior to development pursuant to an approved PD district, subdivision
plats as normally required by the subdivision ordinance, appendix A of this Code, and/or of the town and site
plans as normally required by article VIII of this appendix shall be submitted and approved. Subdivision plats
and site plans shall conform to the standards and requirements of the PD district and the master plan
approved in conjunction with the district.
g) Modifications or amendments to approved master plan. Minor modifications to an approved PD district
master plan may be authorized by the zoning administrator when such modifications do not: Alter the
boundaries of the property; conflict with specific requirements of this appendix or any specific standards or
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:13 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 6 of 6
requirements set forth in the approved master plan; significantly decrease the width or depth of any yard,
setback or buffer area; significantly alter points of access to the property or the internal circulation system;
significantly alter the arrangement of major site plan elements; or substantially change the general
character, architectural treatment or design of elements of the plan. Any change in an approved PD district
master plan other than a minor modification as described above shall require a formal amendment subject
to the same procedures and requirements as a new application.
h) Failure to submit site plans. Failure of an applicant to submit a site plan for a first phase of development
pursuant to an approved PD district within 24 months of approval of the district shall cause the town council
to initiate an ordinance to amend the official zoning map to rezone the property to the classification(s)
existing at the time of initial approval of the PD district.
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:12 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 1 of 4
Sec. 4-5. Use table for multiple purpose districts.
Dwelling, single-family P
Dwelling, two-family P Section 5-30
Dwelling, two-family, that does not
meet the lot area and/or lot width
Accommodations and Group Living Uses
Commercial Uses: Office and Related Uses
Commercial Uses: Miscellaneous
with outside runs, play yards, pens, or
accessory use of property. This shall
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:12 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 2 of 4
utility trailers, or recreational
Commercial Uses: Retail Sales and Service
incidental retail sales of related
daycare facility, with outside runs, play
Industrial Uses
Warehousing and Distribution Uses
including wholesale storage or
Assembly and Entertainment Uses
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:12 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 3 of 4
Public, Institutional, and Community Facilities
middle, and secondary (public or
services, but not including package
Utility and Accessory Uses
Created: 2025-03-13 16:33:12 [EST]
Supp. No. 18)
Page 4 of 4
S" indicates a use permitted only by special use permit.
A blank cell indicates the use is not permitted; any use not listed in this table is not permitted in multiple
Ord. No. 1058, 7-16-2024; Ord. No. 1059, 9-3-2024)
Definition to Add for Commercial or Commissary Kitchen
A small-scale (less than 2,500 square feet of floor space), licensed, commercial-grade kitchen space that may be
operated by a food business establishment or rented to other food businesses for preparing, cooking, and storing
food and supplies. These shared kitchen spaces may offer professional equipment, storage, and facilities like water
refills and waste disposal. Typical food businesses that utilize these spaces include food trucks, catering businesses,
bakers, community groups, and other similar small-scale operations.
ORDINANCE NO. _____
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE VINTON TOWN COUNCIL, HELD ON
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2025, AT 6:00 P.M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE
VINTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 311 SOUTH POLLARD STREET, VINTON,
VIRGINIA.
AN ORDINANCE amending Appendix B, Zoning, Article IV, District Regulations, Division 2,
Multiple Purpose Districts, Section 4-5; Division 4, Planned Unit Development Districts, and
Article XI, Definitions, Sec. 11-2 of the Vinton Town Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Vinton
amendments to Appendix B, Zoning, Article IV, District Regulations, Division 2, Multiple
Purpose Districts, Section 4-5; Division 4, Planned Unit Development Districts, and Article XI,
Definitions, Sec. 11-2 of the Vinton Town Code are adopted and enacted as follows:
APPENDIX B. – ZONING
ARTICLE IV. – DISTRICT REGULATIONS
DIVISION 2 – MULTIPLE PURPOSE DISTRICTS
Sec. 4-5. – Use table for multiple purpose districts.
Dwelling, single-family P
Dwelling, two-family P Section 5-30
Dwelling, two-family, that does
not meet the lot area and/or lot
width requirements of section 4-
Accommodations and Group Living Uses
Halfway house S
Hotels and motels P P
Nursing homes P
Tourist homes P P P Section 5-28
Commercial Uses: Office and Related Uses
Alternative financial institution S
Banks and other financial
services
P P P
Contractors' offices, shops and
display rooms, general or special
Commercial Uses: Miscellaneous
clinic, with outside runs, play
principal or accessory use of
property. This shall not include
the parking or storage of
recreational vehicles, watercraft,
utility trailers, or recreational
VI
Commercial Uses: Retail Sales and Service
sold principally at retail on the
Barber and beauty shops, with
incidental retail sales of related
daycare facility, completely
daycare facility, with outside
runs, play yards, pens, or
Industrial Uses
Warehousing and Distribution Uses
broker, not including wholesale
Assembly and Entertainment Uses
Amusement, commercial, indoor P S
Amusement, commercial,
outdoor
S
Eating and drinking
establishment
P P Section 5-11
Entertainment establishment P P
Microbrewery P P Section 5-11
Microdistillery P P Section 5-11
Off-track betting centers P
Recreation, commercial, outdoor S S
Recreation, commercial, indoor P S
Sports Complexes S S
Public, Institutional, and Community Facilities
Artist studio (including
photography)
P P P
Art galleries, supply shops, and
custom frame shops
P P
Bicycle and pedestrian paths and
trails
P
Cemeteries P
Churches and other places of
worship
P P P
Day care home, adult P
Day care center, adult P P P
Day care center, child P P P
Day care home, family S
Educational facilities, business
schools or nonindustrial trade
elementary, middle, and
Parks, playgrounds, other
recreational facilities and
services, but not including
Utility and Accessory Uses
conjunction with any use
S" indicates a use permitted only by special use permit.
A blank cell indicates the use is not permitted; any use not listed in this table is not permitted
DIVISION 4 – PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
Sec. 4-10. Purpose of the planned unit development district.
Consistent with the general purposes of this appendix, the intent of the PDPUD planned unit
development district is to encourage and provide for the development of medium to large parcels
of land for residential or limited mixed use communities in a planned and coordinated manner.
The district is intended to provide greater flexibility than normal zoning classifications in order
to encourage the most efficient and economical use of limited vacant land, to maximize
opportunities to provide open space and preserve natural features of the land through clustering
and other design concepts and to adapt development standards to the unique characteristics of
individual sites. The district regulations are intended to promote imaginative and innovative
design, a variety of housing types, convenience of services and provision of recreational and
other amenities for residents.
Sec. 4-11. Use table for planned unituse development district.
Dwelling, single-family P
Dwelling, two-family P
Dwelling, multifamily P
Townhouses P
Group homes P
Banks and other financial services P
Massage clinics P
Medical and dental clinics S
Offices P
Research and development facility P Section 5-25
Laundromats, laundry, and drying cleaning
pick up stations
P
Personal service business P
Retail stores and shops P
Gasoline service stations and self-service
gasoline stations
P
Eating and drinking establishment P
Churches and other places of worship P
Day care home, adult P
Day care center, adult P
Day care center, child P
Day care home, family P
Home occupations P
Parks, playgrounds, other recreational
facilities and community centers not operated
Utility and Accessory Uses
S" indicates a use permitted only by special use permit.
A blank cell indicates the use is not permitted; any use not listed in this table is not permitted
Sec. 4-12. Use limitations.
Use limitations. Commercial uses permitted in the PDPUD planned development district shall be
subject to the following limitations in addition to other applicable requirements:
1) Not more than 15 percent of the gross area of a PDPUD district shall be devoted to
sites for commercial uses and their accessory uses and structures.
2) No individual commercial use shall contain more than 5,0002,500 square feet of floor
area.
3) No zoning permit for any commercial use shall be issued until certificates of use and
occupancy have been issued for at least 25 percent of the dwelling units proposed in
the PDPUD district.
Sec. 4-13. District size.
Each PDPUD district shall contain not less than fiveten acres of contiguous land area.
Existing public streets shall not be included in calculating land area.
Sec. 4-14. General development standards.
a) Density. The density of a PDPUD district shall not exceed ten dwelling units per gross acre.
For purposes of calculating density, areas devoted to sites for commercial uses shall not be
included. Different dwelling types may be mixed together within a development in any
combination or proportion. In such cases, the concept development shall delineate the
boundaries between the different types of units for the purposes of calculating the density
requirements shown above.
b) Common open space requirements. Not less than 20 percent of the gross area of each
PDPUD district shall be devoted to common open space meeting the following criteria:
1) Common open space shall consist of areas owned by a homeowners' association and
devoted to active or passive recreation or leisure time use or to the privacy or visual
enjoyment of residents of the development, and may include buffers, floodplains, steep
slopes and other natural areas to be preserved. Common open space may include land
improved or developed for recreation use, including swimming pools, game courts,
playgrounds, recreation centers and similar facilities, but shall not include streets,
parking areas, private yard areas or sites reserved for future development of a nature
that would not qualify as common open space.
2) Common open space shall have horizontal widths of not less than 50 feet, except areas
devoted to pedestrian trails, bikeways or leisure trails shall not be less than ten feet in
horizontal dimensions.
3) Common open space shall be arranged, together with streets and walkways, to provide
a continuous and interconnected system which is accessible from all dwelling units
within the development without having to cross privately owned property.
c) Yards and setbacks. Minimum yards, setbacks and spaces between buildings shall be as
required in the R-3 residential district, unless different minimum requirements are
specifically authorized in the approved master plan for the PDPUD district. Lot and
building requirements.
1) Residential lot and building standards.
a. Single-family dwellings shall have a minimum lot area of four thousand (4,000) square
feet. Minimum yards and setbacks shall be as required in the R-3 residential district,
unless different minimum requirements are specifically authorized in the approved master
plan for the PUD district.
b. Two-family dwellings shall have a minimum lot area of eight thousand (8,000) square
feet. Minimum yards and setbacks shall be as required in the R-3 residential district,
unless different minimum requirements are specifically authorized in the approved master
plan for the PUD district.
c. Townhouses shall conform with the townhouse development standards prescribed in
Article V, Sec. 5-29.
d. Multifamily dwellings shall conform with the multifamily development standards of
the R-3 residential district as prescribed in Article V, Sec. 5-18.
2) Commercial and other non-residential lot and building standards.
a. Commercial and other non-residential uses. Minimum lot sizes, yards, setbacks and
spaces between buildings shall be as required in the R-3 residential district, unless different
minimum requirements are specifically authorized in the approved master plan for the PUD
district.
3) Accessory structures and buildings.
a. Accessory structures and buildings shall follow the yards requirements of Article VI,
Sec. 6-8, and shall not exceed the height of the main building on a lot.
d) Perimeter buffer. A buffer area of not less than 50 feet in width shall be provided around the
perimeter of the PDPUD district, except adjacent to public streets providing access to the
district. Such buffer area shall be left in a natural state or shall be supplemented with
landscaping materials and/or structural fences or walls that follow the standards of buffer
yard type C as described in Article VI, Division 5, Sec. 6-28 . No building, structure, road,
parking area or improvement for active recreation use shall be located in any required
buffer.
e) Landscaping requirements. The development shall meet the landscaping, screening, and
buffer yard requirements of Article VI, Division 5.
f) Height limits. No building or structure in a PDPUD district shall exceed a height of 45 feet,
provided that no accessory building located within 25 feet of a property line shall exceed a
height of 15 feet. (See article VI for supplementary height regulations.)
g) Public sewer and water. The PDPUD district shall be served by public sewer and public
water systems.
h) Underground utilities. All utility lines within a PDPUD district shall be placed
underground.
i) Streets. Except as may be specifically approved by the town council in conjunction with the
PDPUD district master plan, streets within a PDPUD district shall be public and shall be
constructed in accordance with applicable standards of the town and the Virginia
Department of Transportation. Private internal streets within a PDPUD district which
provide access to sites within the district and do not provide for through traffic by the
general public may be permitted by the council in accordance with design and construction
standards specified in the PDPUD district master plan.
j) Preservation and maintenance of common areas. Provisions shall be made by the developer
to ensure preservation and maintenance of required common open space and other common
areas and facilities. Ownership of common areas and facilities shall be vested in a
homeowners' association comprised of all owners of property within the development.
Appropriate covenants and restrictions providing for preservation and maintenance of such
areas and facilities shall be described in general and approved as to form by the town
attorney at the time of submission and review of the PDPUD district master plan. Final
covenants and restrictions shall be submitted for review by the zoning administrator and
town attorney, and shall be recorded prior to approval of any site plan.
Sec. 4-15. Procedures.
a) Generally. Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this division, application for
rezoning of a property to a PDPUD district shall be submitted in the same manner and shall
be reviewed and considered in the same manner as other applications to change the zoning
classification of property by amendment to the official zoning district map as set forth in
article IX of this appendix. A master plan for the development of each PDPUD district shall
be submitted by the applicant as part of the application for rezoning. Upon approval by the
town council, the standards and requirements set forth in the master plan shall, together with
the applicable requirements of this appendix, constitute the regulations applicable within the
PDPUD district.
b) Master plan contents. Every application for rezoning to a PDPUD district shall include a
master plan for development of the site which shall consist of not less than the following
written and graphic information, in such number as specified by the policy of the planning
commission, prepared in sufficient detail and scale and with sufficient clarity to accurately
depict the nature and character of development proposed within the PDPUD district:
1) A plat, legal description of the property and verification of ownership or control by the
applicant.
2) Existing zoning, uses and structures on the subject site, and existing zoning and use of
adjacent properties.
3) An inventory of site characteristics and natural features, including topography with
contour intervals of five feet or less, watercourses, water bodies, floodplains, wooded
areas and other major vegetation features, and historic and archeological resources.
4) Description of the proposed development, including its general character, the manner
in which it satisfies the purposes and intent of PDPUD districts, means of preserving
significant natural features and means of addressing potential impacts on the
community and on public services.
5) A land use plan for the site, showing specific land uses with schematic site plans,
access and circulation, general location and arrangement of buildings, parking areas,
driveways, pedestrian routes, natural areas to be retained, buffers and open spaces and
their functions and general character.
6) Statements or graphic representations showing proposed development standards
including minimum lot areas and widths, minimum yards and setbacks, building
heights, densities, amount of nonresidential floor area, number of parking spaces and
percentage of open space.
7) Traffic impact analysis.
8) General plans for public services and utilities showing the necessary services and
utilities will be provided and are sufficient to serve the development.
9) Statements or graphic representations of general character and architectural and
community design guidelines to be applicable to the development, including street and
parking area design standards, lighting and signage.
10) General description of covenants and restrictions intended to provide for preservation
and maintenance of common areas and facilities.
11) Development phasing schedule.
12) Such other information that is deemed necessary by the zoning administrator, planning
commission or town council to establish that the proposed development complies with
the general purposes or specific requirements of this appendix, including such
additional information or analyses as may be necessary to evaluate potential impacts of
the proposed development on the surrounding area and the community as a whole.
c) Reserved.
d) Pre-application conference. Prior to submission of the application and master plan, the
applicant shall meet with the zoning administrator to discuss the proposed development in
general and the PDPUD district application, review and approval process.
e) Review and consideration of application. Formal review, consideration and action on the
application shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of division 1 of article IX
of this appendix. The planning commission's action on the application shall include
recommendations to town council regarding the master plan accompanying the application,
and the commission may recommend modifications or changes to such master plan. The
town council may consider further appropriate modifications or changes to the master plan.
f) Approval of subdivision and site plans. Prior to development pursuant to an approved
PDPUD district, subdivision plats as normally required by the subdivision ordinance,
appendix A of this Code, and/or of the town and site plans as normally required by article
VIII of this appendix shall be submitted and approved. Subdivision plats and site plans shall
conform to the standards and requirements of the PDPUD district and the master plan
approved in conjunction with the district.
g) Modifications or amendments to approved master plan. Minor modifications to an approved
PDPUD district master plan may be authorized by the zoning administrator when such
modifications do not: Alter the boundaries of the property; conflict with specific
requirements of this appendix or any specific standards or requirements set forth in the
approved master plan; significantly decrease the width or depth of any yard, setback or
buffer area; significantly alter points of access to the property or the internal circulation
system; significantly alter the arrangement of major site plan elements; or substantially
change the general character, architectural treatment or design of elements of the plan. Any
change in an approved PDPUD district master plan other than a minor modification as
described above shall require a formal amendment subject to the same procedures and
requirements as a new application.
h) Failure to submit site plans. Failure of an applicant to submit a site plan for a first phase of
development pursuant to an approved PDPUD district within 24 months of approval of the
district shall cause town staff the town council to review the potential initiate initiation of an
ordinance process to amend the official zoning map to rezone the property to the
classification(s) existing at the time of initial approval of the PDPUD district.
ARTICLE XI. – DEFINITIONS
Sec. 11-2. – Words and terms defined.
b) Certain words and terms defined. The following words and terms shall be interpreted as
having such meaning as described herein, unless a specific meaning to the contrary is
indicated elsewhere in this appendix:
XX) Commercial or commissary kitchen. A small-scale (less than 2,500 square feet of total floor
space), licensed, commercial-grade kitchen space that may be operated by a food business
establishment or rented to other food businesses for preparing, cooking, and storing food and
supplies. These shared kitchen spaces may offer professional equipment, storage, and facilities
like water refills and waste disposal. Typical food businesses that utilize these spaces include food
trucks, catering businesses, bakers, roasteries, community groups, and other similar small-scale
operations.
This Ordinance adopted on motion made by ____________ and seconded by _______________,
with the following votes recorded:
AYES:
NAYS:
APPROVED:
Bradley E. Grose, Mayor
ATTEST:
Megan K. Lawless, Town Clerk
Meeting Date
December 2, 2025
Department
Public Works
Issue
Public Works Committee
Summary
The Public Works Committee met on November 19, 2025. Bo Herndon, Public Works Director,
will be present to provide a report to the Council on what the Committee discussed.
Attachments
None
Recommendations
No action required
Town Council
Agenda Summary