HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 04-20-8728611
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ...... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 20, 1987
2:00 p.m.
AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL
C-1
C-2
Call to Order -- Roll Call. All present
The invocation will be delivered by The Reverend Charles T.
Green, Chaplain. Roanoke Memorial Hospitals. Present.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America will be led by Mayor Noel C. Taylor.
BID OPENINGS
Bids for the lease of the flow of the Muse and House
Springs waters located at the intersection of Route
116 and Garden City Boulevard. One bid was referred to a
committee composed of Messrs. Garland, Chairman, Kiser and
Clark. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. (I)
(2)
Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to
the Official 1976 Zoning Map. W. Robe.t He.bert,
City Manager. Adopted Ordinance No. 28611 (7-'0) and
Ordinance Nc. 28612 {6-0) on first reading.
A joint repbr~ of fhe City Manager and City
Attorney with regard to a communication from
Robert N. Richert in reference to a variance
granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals to an appli-
cant of the 1500 foot separation requirement of
Section 35-140(?) of the current zoning law. Concurred
in report.
CONSENT AGENDA (Approved (6-0)
ALL ~TTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED
TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE
MOTION IN THE FO~.LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DIS-
CUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIHED. THAT ITEM WILL
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday,
March 23, 1987, and Monday, April 6, 1987.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Dispense with the reading thereof and
approve as .ecorded.
A co,t~nication from Mrs. Florine Thornhill tende.ing her
resignation as a member of the Henry Street Revival Corrrmittee.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept resignation with regret and receive
and file communication.
¢I)
C-$
Qualification of Stanley G. Breakell as a member of the
Building Maintenance Division of the City's Board of'Building
Code Appeals for a term of five years ending November 10, 1991.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
REGULAR AGENDA
Rearing of Citizens Upon Public ~fatters:
Request of E. C. Warren, II, l~ediate Past President,
Virginia Restaurant Association, to address Council with
regard to a meals tax. Referred to 1987-88 budget study.
Petitions and Corr~,~nications: None.
Reports of Officers:
a. City Manager:
Briefings: None.
Items Recommended for Action:
1. A report with regard to liability insurance limits for
Festival-in-the-Park and Festival-on-the-River. Adopted
Resolution No. 28613. (7-0)
2. A report regarding roof replacement at the Juvenile
Detention Home. Adopted Ordinance No. 28614. (7-0)
b. Director of Finance:
1. A financial report
Received and filed.
Reports of Committees:
for the month
of March, 1987.
a. A report of the Airport Advisory Commission recommending an
increase in rental rates and fees for airport tenants.
Jack C. Smith, Chairman. Adopted Ordinance No. 28615 on
first reading. (7-0)
b. A report of the Airport Advisory Corr~nission recommending
approval to extend airline use agreements for a term of
three years with a 9% increase in rentals and fees, retro-
active to April 1, 1987. Jack C. Smith, Chairman. Adopted
Ordinance No. 28616 on first reading. (7-0)
c. A report of the Airport Advisory Co,,mission recommending
approval of a lease agreement with the Federal Aviation
Administ.ation for installation of a new MALSR system for
Runway 33. Jack C. Smith, Chairman· Adopted Ordinance Nc.
28617 on first reading. (7-0)
(2)
de
A report
received
Additions,
Chairman.
of the committee appointed to tabulate bids
for E-911 Co.u.unications, Alterations- and
Municipal Building· Robert A. Garland,
Adopted Ordinance No. 28618. (7-0)
Unfinished Business: None.
Introduction and Consideration of Ordinances and Resolutions:
a. Ordinance No. 28600, on second reading, permanently
vacating, discontinuing and closing an alley extending
th.ough Block 17, Map of Lilly View Addition, between Light
Street and Tuck Street, N. Eo; a portion of Purcell Avenue,
N. E., between Light Street and Tuck Street, N. E.; and
certain lots in Block 17 and Block 11, Map of Lilly View
Addition· Adopted Ordinance No. 28600. (7-0)
b. Ordinance No. 25601, on second reading, rezoning a certain
tract of land lying at the southwest corner of the inter-
section of Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N.
designated as Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, from
C-1, Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain proffered con-
ditions. Adopted Ordinance No. 28601.
c. Ordinance No. 2~02, on second reading, rezoning a certain
tract of land, being a portion of Lot 2, Hemlock Hills
Subdivision, located at 4415 North Road, N. W., designated
as Official Tax No. 6380304, from RS-3, Single Family
Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial District,
subject to certain proffered conditions. Adopted Ordinance
No. 28602. (7-01
d. Ordinance No. 2~603, on second reading, rezoning a tract of
land containing 12.37 acres, located on the westerly side
of Grandin Road Extension, south of Airview Road, S.
designated as a portion of Official Tax Nos. 5090204 and
5090203, from RS-l, Single Family Residential District, to
RG-1, General Residential District, subject to certain
proffered conditions, and repealing Ordinance No. 20385,
adopted by the Council on llonday, October 20, 1986.
Adopted Ordinance No. 28603. (7-0~.
e. Ordinance No. 25505, on second teasing, authorizing a right
of entry onto certain City property within the Roanoke
Centre for Industry and Technology to Advance Stores
Company, Incorporated, in order to permit the construction
of a facility thereon. Adopted Ordinance No. 28606. {7-0)
A Resolution establishing April 28, 1987, at 7:30 p.m.. as
a special meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke.
Adopted Resolution No. 28619. (7-0)
10.
Motions and Miscellaneous Business:
a. Inquiries and/o, comments by the Mayo,
Counoil.
b. Vacancies on various authorities, boards,
committees appointed by Council.
Other Hearings of Citizens:
and members of City
commissions and
(4)
April 22, 1987
File #51
Mr. Robert N. Richert
415 Allison Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Dear Mr. Richert:
A joint report of the City Manager and City Attorney with regard
to your communication requesting that Council appeal the granting
by the Board of Zoning Appeals of a special exception permit to
the Roanoke Valley Trouble Center, Inc., (TRUST), to operate its
facility at 404 Elm Avenue, S. W., advising that they cannot
recorr~nend an appeal, was before the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, April 20, 1987.
On motion, dulY seconded and unanimously adopted, Council con-
curred in the report.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
cc: iir. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Ms. Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Cor~nission
456 Munlcll:~l Bullcllng 215 G~urch A~ue, S.W. Roonoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-254t
WILBURN C. DIBLIN(~, JR.
CITY ATTORNEy
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 2401 1
703-981-2,431
April 20, 1987
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
During its meeting on April 13, 1987, Council was
requested by a citizen, Robert N. Richert, to appeal the
granting by the City's Board of Zoning Appeals of a speeial
exception permit to the Roanoke Valley Trouble Center, Inc.
(TRUST), to operate its facility at 404 Elm Avenue, S. W.
Council referred the matter to the City Manager and City
Attorney for a recommendation, and we are pleased to present
this report in response to Council's request.
By way of background, the Board of Zoning Appeals met
and considered the TRUST application for a special excep-
tion and variance on April 7, 1987. After a public hearing
of more than one hour, the Board approved the TRUST applica-
tion on a 4-0 vote with one Board member abstaining. For
the information of Council, a partial transcript of this
public hearing is attached hereto. Only Mr. Richert's tes-
timony and discussion related to his testimony is included;
testimony of the many TRUST supporters is not included.
Mr. Richert made three points in his presentation to
Council as to why he feels the Board's decision was wrong.
First, he says that "[i]n the final analysis the Board of
Zoning Appeals used the new zoning law, not yet passed by
Council, to justify [its] action." The records of the
Board's hearing indicates that this simply was not the case.
The Board itself made clear in several instances that it was
limited to considering the zoning regulations as they are in
effect. See pages 1, 3 and 11 of Transcript. One of the
Board members, in order to reinforce the point, requested of
the Board's legal counsel if it could consider the proposed
new regulations, and was advised that it could not. See page
12 of Transcript. The Board's motion and order granting
the special exception were clearly based on present zoning
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
May 20, 1987
Page 2
regulations and not upon the proposed ones, which Council
has informally approved, but not yet adopted. In our opi-
nion, this point does not constitute adequate basis for an
appeal of the Board's decision.
Mr. Richert's second point was that the provision in the
proposed new zoning regulations which would permit "non-
profit counseling facilities and services" as a permitted
use in the C-1, Office District, is a "new classification in
the new law unknown to [him], and not previously identified
in any published document or public hearing held on this
subject." While the new zoning ordinance has nothing to do
with the TRUST application, Mr. Richert's question is, never-
theless, an important one which should be addressed. Mr.
Riehert is simply wrong in his assertion. The draft of the
zoning ordinance which was presented to Council in December,
and upon which public hearings were held by Council on
December 15, 1986, contained this provision. (The original
is on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
It is true that the phrase "non-profit counseling facili-
ties and services" was discussed at the time of the TRUST
hearing. The City's Zoning Administrator expressed his opi-
nion at the Board's hearing, after the issue was raised,
that TRUST fell within the definition of "non-profit coun-
seling facilities and services." While Mr. Riohert may take
exception to this interpretation, this would not, in our
opinion, constitute the basis for an appeal of the Board's
action under the existing zoning regulations, nor is it even
relevant to the consideration of an appeal.
Mr. Richert's final point related to a variance which
the Board granted in conjunction with the special exception
permit. Section 36-140(7), Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, provides that uses in a C-1 District
such as TRUST be at least 1500 feet away from similar uses
such as rehabilitation centers, boarding and rooming houses,
sanitariums, rest homes, and convalescent homes for the
aged. TRUST requested a variance from this provision,
stating that the Bethany Hall Recovery Home for Alcoholic
Women was located 1125 feet away on Franklin Road, S. W.
The Board is authorized by §36-31 of the City Code to
authorize, upon appeal in specific cases, variances from the
terms of the zoning regulations where it makes findings that
certain criteria cited in this section are complied with,
the basic requirement being that a strict application of the
regulation in question would produce "undue hardship." (A
copy of §36-31 is attached.) The Board has the power to
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
April 20, 1987
Page 3
grant a variance from the 1500 foot dispersion requirement,
if the findings required in §36-31 are made, just as it has
the power to vary other numerical restrictions establishing
height, bulk and density restrictions such as set back
requirements, minimum lot sizes, minimum building sizes,
building height restrictions, and the like. The granting of
a variance, dependent as it is upon making findings of fact,
is uniquely within the province of the Board of Zoning
Appeals, a quasi-judicial body, and we are of the opinion
that adequate evidence is in the record to support the
Board's granting of the variance. Extensive testimony was
given on behalf of TRUST concerning the hardships that TRUST
would face if the variance and special exception were not
granted. Thirteen persons from among the many present in
support of TRUST spoke in favor, and others presented let-
ters and resolutions from community organizations, such as
the Roanoke Valley Ministers Conference and the United Way,
support of the request. Only one person, Mr. Richert, spoke
in opposition to the request.
One additional question posed by Mr. Richert was whether
the term "non-profit counseling facilities and related ser-
vices'' as used in the proposed ordinance includes existing
so-called "half-way houses" in the City. This term is not
intended to includes such facilities, which are separately
defined in §36-25(1) of the new regulations, and which faci-
lities are regulated differently from non-profit counseling
facilities and related services. The Zoning Administrator,
who has the primary responsibility for interpreting zoning
regulations, concurs in this statement.
One other issue raised by Mr. Richert should also be
addressed. This is the assertion that Council should not
consider any of the relatively few changes to the proposed
zoning ordinance which the Planning Commission is proposing
in a report on Council's agenda today. As Council was ad-
vised that the Commission would do when it was briefed by
the Commission in December of 1986, the Commission has re-
mained alert in the four intervening months to any correc-
tions or improvements that were suggested to improve the
ordinance during the public hearings held on the proposed
zoning maps that will implement the regulations. Since
December, the Commission and its staff have held additional
Ordinance Subcommittee meetings, conducted public hearings
and discussed the proposed regulations and the proposed
zoning map changes with hundreds of citizens. From this
extensive process, a relatively few changes to the regula-
tions Council considered in December have been proposed.
Ironically, one of the changes proposed by the Commission
The Honorable Mayor
of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
and Members
Page 4
was requested by Mr. Richert. Pursuant to §36-542, Code of
the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, since Council has
already conducted a public hearing on the proposed new regu-
lations, it may make appropriate changes or corrections
without the legal requirement of conducting a further public
hearing on the matter. The changes proposed by the Commis-
sion, which will be fully described to Council and the public,
have been incorporated into the ordinance now before Council.
The ordinance before Council is the product of an almost
three year effort, of hundreds of hours of volunteer efforts,
and countless public meetings and hearings. The ordinance
is not something that has been prepared by a consultant in
final form and delivered to the City, but is a unique product
of the citizens of the City of Roanoke. Its flaws, which we
hope are few, can be corrected by Council as we gain experi-
ence with its use.
In summary, we cannot reeommend an appeal of the decision
of the Board of Zoning Appeals in the TRUST case. We trust
that this report has fully addressed the issues referred to
us for comment.
With kindest personal regards, we are
Sincerely yours,
WCDJr:WRH:fcf
Attachment
cc: Mr. Robert N. Riehert
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Honorable Chairman and Members,
Honorable Chairman and Members,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
W Jr.
City Attorney
Board of Zoning Appeals
Planning Commission
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
RECORD OF PUBLIC HEARING
Roanoke, Virginia
April 7, 1987
APPEAL NO. 19-87-A
APPLICANT: TRUST, Roanoke Valley Trouble Center, Inc.
PREMISES: 404 Elm Avenue, S. W.
PRESIDING: L. Elwood Norris, Chairman
SUBJECT:
Request of the applicant for a special exception, as
provided under Section 36-140, Zoning, Roanoke City
Code, to permit the operation of a rehabilitation
center at 404 Elm Avenue, S. W., with a variance from
the provision that such facility shall not be located
within 1,500 feet of any other such facility and a
variance from provisions of Section 36-146, Zoning,
relative to requirements for off-street parking.
Following presentation of the request by Ellen Weinman,
attorney for the applicant, twelve persons spoke in
support of the granting of the application. In addition,
the secretary read a statement left by Polly Bixler,
502 Highland Avenue, S. W., who had been present
earlier and had asked that her statement be read.
Mr. R. N. Richert, 415 Allison Avenue, S. W., then
offered the following testimony.
Mr.
Richert: It's not easy to stand here and raise objections to
this request. I have no interest in being struck by
lightning. However, within the neighborhood I think
there is some division of opinion, and I think it is only
fair for the Board to know what that is. Now, to begin
with, I would like to establish that the classification of
this facility is not in question. I understand the position
that they are different and my experience is that each social
agency in the City that operates is different. They serve
men or women, they serve for housing or counselling, all
of them are different, but they are subdivided in certain
classifications by the City administration and I want to be
sure that the classification as I understand it as a group
home is, at least as far as the City and the Board are
concerned, is the correct classification because, as I
understand it, the 1500=ft. limitation in this case is
applied because Trust has been classified with group care
facilities and it provides over-night accommodations for
Board of
TRUST
April 7,
Page 2
zoning Appeals
1987
however many people can go into four or five bedrooms
and that sort of thing. They have not, as I understand
it, asked for a variance from their classification, they
have asked for a variance within the classification they
have been placed from the 1,500-ft. limitation and the
parking requirement limitation. If there is any debate
about that, before I begin I would like to know about it,
because that certainly affects how we look at this situation.
Mr. Norris: Mr. Hackworth?
Mr. Rife:
Let me ask Mr. Hackworth - under your understanding of
the zoning ordinance, is this considered a group home or is
there some other classification it might fall into? like
a neighborhood house, I believe is another type facility.
Mr. Hackworth: To my knowledge, nobody has classified it as a group
home. I don't think that is a term that is in our existing
zoning regulations. The application was for a special
exception as a rehabilitation center, and you would have to
find that this use is indeed a rehabilitation center in order
to grant the special exception.
Mr o
Mr.
Mr.
Rife: Now I'm more confused than I was before. If this is a
rehabilitation center, does the zoning ordinance address it?
Hackworth: Yes. They are permitted as special exception uses in
the C-1 zoning district. This property is zoned C-1.
Rife: Does the 1,500-ft. separation between rehabilitation centers
apply, or is there such a thing?
Hackworth: Yes, the same subsection that permits the Board to grant
a special exception permit lists several uses. It includes
rehabilitation centers, boarding and rooming houses, sanitariums,
rest homes and convalescent homes for the aged and none of these
are permitted to have more than 12 persons, including resident
staff residing in the facility. There is also a requirement
that these facilities be dispersed and not located closer than
1,500 feet from one another. But the applicant is aware of that
and has asked for a variance from the 1,500-ft. dispersement.
Mr. Rife:
We have a letter from Mr. Miller in which he says, "In regard
to the requirement for 1,500 ft. distance between this
facility and any other such facility, from what I understand
about the operation of Trust there is not another "such
facility" presently within the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Miller: That was purely for guidance.
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 3
Mr. Hackworth: Right. ! talked with Mr. Miller about that. It was
inadvertent wording on his part.
Mr.
Miller: That is just guidance for the Boa.rd to make its decision
on from what I could see when I was out there. And to my
knowledge there is not another one like it, but I think you
have to put it in this class somewhere.
Mr. Richert: Well, there is - I think.
Mr. Barranger: Is the Bethany Home .... ?
Mr.
Hackworth: Yes - and the applicant stated that in the application
and asked for a variance. It stated that Bethany Hall was
1,125 feet from the property in question.
Mr. Rife:
What I'm trying to figure out - the applicant apparently
feels that there is another facility within 1,500 feet.
Do you agree, Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller: Well, there's not another Trust, but there is another
facility that falls within this group that we are talking
about. It doesn't mention all of them by name, but I wanted
you to know that there are not Trusts located all over the
City. There is only one to my knowledge.
Mr.
Barranger: I would assume that we are classifying it as a
rehabilitation center under Section 36-140, subparagraph
(7). Is that right?
(It is agreed that this is correct)
Mre
Richert: So, we agree that there is no debate about the
classification. At least under the current zoning law.
That was one concern - because there isn't any argument about
the need for or the desirability of this facility in the City
of Roanoke. All of the people who spoke here as proponents of
this variance are sincere people who we appreciate are trying
to do the best they can to serve the needs of the City. And
as has been pointed out on numerous occasions when these subjects
have come before various boards, commissions and the City Council
it's a real shame that we can't find a way to find places where
these facilities can be absorbed into the community throughout
the City. However, recognizing that I am not opposed to Trust
and its objectives and fully support its needs and understand
fully the problems it has in finding a place, they are not
different in the sense that they are one of a number of social
agencies which operate in the City and one of a great number
that operate in Old Southwest. And that's why the neighborhood
Board of
TRUST
April 7,
Page 4
Zoning Appeals
1987
is reticent to absorb more than their share. Now,
we don't have a definitive position from the neighborhood
that I've heard. However, I do know that there are some
people who, understandably, are reticent to stand before
you and oppose a variance for the simple reason that it's
not popular to be opposed to things that are right and good
and needed. Ok? But what I want to talk to you about is
the reason for this 1500-ft. separation which was placed
in the zoning law in 1977 by City Council. At that time
Old Southwest was the only place - at least as near as we
can remember - in the City where group care facilities,
social agencies and whatnot, were finding homes. We had
some significant problems. The Council felt at that time
that there was a need to establish some guidelines which
could be universally applied to all such facilities and
force the separation so that they would not cluster, bunch
or accumulate on certain blocks and in certain parts of
the City. Now, 1,500 feet - as to why that number is magic -
the only way I can come to a conclusion is that it is about
three blocks if you measure the common length of a City
block in the City of Roanoke. It is about 500 feet, so it
is about three blocks apart. It was not done lightly.
Council was very thoughtful about it at the time. They had,
or were considering, applications for Watimka House, which
was a halfway house, if you will, for rehabilitated felons,
to find a home. We have had in our neighborhood as many
as nine facilities that deal with social problems that need
to be dealt with. There may still be that many. I'm really
not sure. We have over 30 social agencies which operate in
the neighborhood, so that the residents of Old Southwest
I believe can hold their heads high in the City of Roanoke
in terms of the amount of accommodation we provide for
the kind of needed care and support groups that are used in
the City of Roanoke. But there is a limit. And the reason
for that limit is that too high concentration of anything in
a residential zone tends to destroy that residential zone.
You can take the individual case, the individual building,
the individual useage and make a lot of individual arguments,
but the law is clear and we're not dealing here with 1498 feet.
We are dealing with nearly a third of the distance, as I
understand it, three hundred and eighty some feet short of the
1500 ft. limit. I don't know who measured it, but I measured
it to the extent that I'm capable of, and I know it's not
a marginal shortcoming. That is an unfortunate thing when
the individual group comes to you but it is shared by every
other facility that falls within that classification. So,
this is not unique, and as far as I know there is no justifi-
cation that I've heard that would imply that special privilege
or consideration is due to Trust other than any other social
agency. And therein lies the problem. Because once the
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 5
integrity of the 1500 ft limitation is breached for
one facility, then the same argument - and that particular
breach is used to justify additional breaches, not just in
Old Southwest, but perhaps in any other neighborhood where
these facilities are implemented. Now, I believe the
new zoning law addresses this by allowing facilities to
be expanded into residential zones, and I think most of
the neighborhoods, including Old Southwest, have been
particularly magnanimous in permitting that to happen,
so that the choice is widened. But the 1500-ft. limitation
remains in the new zoning law, which was passed by City
Council only recently and will be implemented, we hope,
this month. So it is not only a ten-year-old limitation,
but City Council has reenforced its intention that these
facilities be separated by at least three blocks to
allow their dispersion in the neighborhood and so that
the impact will not fall collectively on any particular
block or geographical area.
Let me just for a moment go back into the zoning law
where the variance classification - or options - are
outlined. And I believe that the City zoning law, and
the new zoning law is no exception, is very specific in
terms of the conditions under which the Board of Zoning
Appeals can grant a variance. I'm going to address my
comments to the 1500-ft. limitation because parking is a
problem, but I don't believe that's the major issue here.
I believe it's the concentration. That area has a parking
problem with a 14-unit apartment building across the street
with no off-street parking whatsoever, so there are anywhere
from 10 to 12 cars that have to park in the first block of
Fourth Street and it's generally parked up most of the time.
So if Trust can park their four cars on the property, that's
no problem to the people on the street - if it spills into the
street, it may be. But let's concentrate our consideration
to the 1500 feet and how the variance attacks it. First of
all, a variance can be granted if the situation is (not) contrary
to public interest - I don't think we can make an argument
here. It would be in the public's interest to grant it.
However, you have to identify the unnecessary hardship, and
the hardship here is placed on all property owners who own
property within 1500 feet of any other facility in Old
Southwest. Quite frankly, that covers the vast majority of
the C-1 zone as far as we can tell. It refers to particularly
relative to topography and geography, extraordinary circumstances
I don't think there are any extraordinary circumstances here
that have been identified. You cannot make an argument that
this 1500 ft. limit effectively prohibits or unreasonably
restricts the use of the property. Because it is not
Board of
TRUST
April 7,
Page 6
Zoning Appeals
1987
different from any other property, it is a house. I
grant you it is on Elm Avenue. There are many other
houses on Elm Avenue. People live on Elm Avenue. It's
not a particular restriction that would be identified.
In fact, it goes even further than that. The law says
that.., a variance should alleviate a clearly demonstrable,
unnecessary hardship, approaching confiscation. Now, that's
a serious issue, because whereas if you are dealing with a
piece of property that cannot be used, because of its size
for example, it is entirely different than a rule that says
you can't use it for a specific purpose in order to disperse
it throughout the neighborhood. It has to be distinguished
from special privilege. In other words, it can't be
because it's an inconvenience to the individuals - there's
no question that it is an inconvenience here, but it is
not justified to grant special privilege to Trust over
and above any other past or future social agency which may
choose to want to locate in Old Southwest or any other
neighborhood within a 1500 ft. limitation. Now, they go
on to list some specific things - no such variance shall be
authorized by the Board unless it finds, and it lists four
specific things that have to be tested against the variance
request. First of all, that strict application of this chapter
would produce undue hardship. There is no question that there
is a hardship being produced here on Trust. But that hardship
is being produced by the entire City of Roanoke, not this
particular piece of property. The second is that such hardship
is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning
district. This is certainly not true. Every property within
the C-1 zone, as the present law provides, shares this same
1500-ft. limitation. So, that's not met. The third one is
that the authorization of such variance will not be of sub-
stantial detriment to adjacent property and that the character
of the district will not be changed by the granting of the
variance. In this case, in that one item, you might make an
argument. They've committed to making architectural improvements,
something the neighborhood sorely needs and it might be argued
that there might be some detriment to the residential
character. However, there's been no testimony to that effect,
so you would have to assume that that would not be the case.
The fourth item is that the condition and situation of the
property concerned or the intended use of the property is not
of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably
practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be
adopted as an amendment to this chapter. Now what that really
says to me is, is that Trust has a problem, all such facilities
have a problem, which means that the law in general probably
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 7
should address that problem, and I believe that the new
zoning law takes a step in that direction in terms of
permitting ~hese facilities to disperse through other
higher density residential areas - I think with the
exception of RS-l, the new law would permit it in any
residential district, with a certain number limitation.
But I think the City is moving toward addressing this
kind of problem in terms of the dispersion. And I would
like to encourage the Board to be very cautious in this
matter because I think that I can tell you that there are
people in the neighborhood who are concerned. They are
concerned as I am with appearing in public with what
appears to be opposition, and I want this Board to
believe that I do not have any quarrel with Trust's
objectives or what they want to do. But I also have a
personal responsibility within my neighborhood to protect
it as I see fit. And we feel so strongly about that that
if the variance is granted, we will pursue it further,
because that 1500-ft. limitation is very, very important
to the future of the City's ability to absorb these much-
needed agencies. There just isn't going to be enough room
in one place, and it isn't fair to assume that that one
place, our neighborhood, ought to be the place where they
all reside. Now, we have to find a way, and the way we find
that is not to set aside the law as the City Council and
the Planning Department and the Planning Commission of this
City have laid it out for us. I thank you.
Mr. Norris: Are you speaking for yourself now or are you speaking
for .... ?
Richert: I speak only for myself and my family. I do not
represent... There are others whom I have talked to and
who have chosen not to come, but I don't represent them.
Mr. Norris: I see is anyone speaking for Old Southwest?
MS.
Weinman: The people who were here for Old Southwest - some of
them left - Mrs. Wheeler and Mrs. Bixler - left information
with you. The organization, as we said, did not take a
vote. We did not get any opposition, but there was no
vote taken.
Mr ·
Richert: They took no formal position, and that's the way I
understand it. I was not at that meeting. I wish I had
been. I would liked to have been there.
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 8
Mr. Rife:
Let me ask another question. The prior tenant, the
Baptist Friendship House, I presume would fall into this
category of group homes or -
Mr.
Richert: I don't know that they were not grandfathered, Mr.
Rife. I know only a little about that facility. I know
at one time or another it was used as a day care center.
One problem you have is that they moved down the street,
beyond Fifth Street, I'm not Sure how far, but I think if
you look at their new location, and it was classified the
same, you would find it is in the 1500-ft. limitation in
the other direction. I don't really know what that
classification was, they are operating the same as they
did - day care rather than a rehab.
Mr. Rife: Was it a neighborhood house?
Mr.
Richert: Well, they had a name for it which, and they did a
lot of public meetings. Old Southwest Inc. met there
for several years. You know, in the evenings they
provided space for neighborhood groups that needed a
place to meet. And I'm not sure that they don't still
do that, but I don't think they are the same. They do
not operate the same. The only thing that I knew
specifically was day care.
Mr. Norris: Ail right. Thank you, sir.
(Mr. Branon Thompson, 3438 Greencliff Avenue, then spoke
in support of the proposed facility, mentioning the fact
that the property in question was until recently used for
the Baptist Friendship House and that to his knowledge
there had been no objections to that facility. Also mentions
that he has been here twenty years, and as long as he can
remember the Friendship House was in that location~
Mr. Rife: Mr. Hackworth, in granting a special exception, the zoning
ordinance in this particular case lays out certain parameters
that are to be maintained in granting that special exception.
Does the Board have the right or the authority to change those?
If it says 1500 feet and we say in this case, well, you know,
we think 1150 is ok. Do we have the right to say that?
Mr. Hackworth: Well, the only way you can change something like that
is to grant a variance from the provisions - I think there are
two criteria that the Board has here. One is that there not
be more than 12 residents on the property and that there be
a 1500-ft. dispersion between similar uses. The Board has the
power t~?grant variances, as you know, from the terms and
provisions of the zoning ordinance under Section 36-31 of the
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 9
Code if the applicant meets the criteria for the granting
of the variance and there is evidence put before the Board
establishing that all the criteria have been met factually
on the particular matter you have before you. As you know,
the Board has routinely - or it does on occasion, grant
variances in connection with special exceptions, as you
have already done today on another matter.
Mr. Rife: For instance, on the five-acre requirement for the
nursing home.
Mr. Hackworth: That's right -
Mr. Barranger: Would this be considered a similar situation?
Mr. Hackworth: Well, it's hard to compare these things. I would
hate to use the word similar, but it - I think you can
definitely grant a variance if the evidence -
Mr. Barranger: The zoning ordinance says five acres, and we granted
a variance. This says 1500 feet. What I think I understand
you to be saying is that we have the authority to grant a
variance from the 1500 feet.
Mr. Rife: Either we have:it, or we have already acted illegally once
today ....
Mr.
Hackworth: As you know, the zoning ordinance is full of minimum
requirements. You have minimum lot sizes, you have setback
requirements. They are all measured in distances, feet and
square feet - and that's what the Board does, is consider -
Richert: May I ask Counsel a question, please. When we look at
Section 36-31, Item (b). Doesn't the Board have some
limitations on the granting of a variance based on a reasonable
interpretation of those four conditions - that they are met
by the testimony presented.
Mr. Hackworth: That's true. The Board is bound by those limitations.
They have to find the evidence in the record before them that
to their mind meets those criteria.
Mr.
Norris: I think the Board is aware of their powers and duties.
Any other questions? Let's see. Is Evie going to be the
last one, now?
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 10
Evie Gunter, Planner: I just wanted to add one particular comment
that perhaps might be of assistance to you in making your
decision. I have followed Trust's request throughout from
Planning Commission stage to City Council stage and I think
it was pretty evident during both of those public hearings
that Council felt strongly that Trust needed to find a
commercial zoning from which to operate their facility.
While it was recognized that the residential character
needed to be there in order to make the facility work, I
think that is a unique aspect that can be found in the
City only in very limited areas, and that perhaps that may
have some bearing on the use of this property.
Mr o
Barranger: Evie, may I ask you a question? Under the new zoning
ordinance, which has not yet been implemented, if it had
been implemented and were in effect, would it be necessary
for Trust to come to the Board for a variance, or would it
automatically have been allowed?
Ms.
Gunter: Well, I have kind of had a similar question on that.
I think that Trust can be classified as a nonprofit counseling
facility - service and facility, is that right? which is
permitted outright in the new C-1 zoning ordinance.
I don't know whether their overnight emergency shelter would
be considered accessory to the group counseling and be
included in with the facility's component of that or whether
that would be considered a group care type of facility. So,
it could be that while the counseling facilities were permitted
outright, perhaps there is some question as to whether the
overnight would have to be permitted by special exception.
(.Discussion among Board members and examination of the
proposed ordinance)
Mr.
Barranger: Mr. Miller, let me ask you a question. In Section 36-185
of the new zoning ordinance, subsection 4, it states that
the following uses shall be permitted as principal uses in
the C-1 district, sebsection 4, non-profit counseling facilities
and services. Now, we come to your office first for an
interpretation of what services means.
Mr. Miller: We have talked about that, and if you had to ask me right
now the way it is printed, we would say it is a permitted use.
But if the author of the book tells me that - well, we are going
to call it something else now, not group homes but congregate
housing, I think, then it would probably fall into this section
over here where you would probably have to apply the 1500 feet.
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 11
Barranger: I may have a conflict of interest because I'm one
of the authors of the book. I would feel that perhaps
when we worded that that way we had in mind accessory uses
that were not primary uses.
Mr.
Miller: Here's what I have told Ellen in a letter that if she
asked me today, if this ordinance were in effect, I would
say it would be a permitted use under the new ordinance,
unless we change that before it's officially put into effect.
Unless we have a note on it, unless we can tie it back to
the congregate housing, the group homes or whatever you call
them, then it would be a permitted use under the new ordinance.
Mr. Norris: Ail right, I think the Chair is ready for a motion.
Mr. Rife:
I've got a question here. Regardless of what the ordinance
may say in a couple of months, we, in my opinion, still need
to deal with this one. It says here, no such variance shall
be authorized by the Board unless it finds - then it begins
to talk about hardships, and I'm sure you are aware of the
findings. You know, we need to find that there is a hardship
to grant this 1500 feet. So, what's the hardship?
Ms o
Weinman: From our perspective, I think we are in a situation
where - as I told you when I spoke before - we're in a
situation where the part of the zoning code that speaks of
what Trust is, a non-profit institutional use, those uses are
limited to residential areas. Our - City Council has told us
that that's not possible. So, we're in a situation,as Evie
pointed out, of looking for a residential facility in a
commercial zone. And this piece of property meets all of
those criteria for Trust in terms of our use of the property.
You know, we are different from other social service agencies,
and other rehabilitation centers, half way houses, the other
things that are listed, nursing homes, because it is not any
residential care. It's an emergency shelter, and I think that
makes a very big difference. So, the hardship from our
perspective is that we are looking at meeting the needs of
the community, as far as what we have been told in terms of
where we need to look for a facility and the language of the
zoning code in terms of calling ourselves a rehhilitation
center. Now, that's the closest thing in commercial property
that we can be. Once this new code is in effect and we can
be, quote, reclassified as a non-profit counseling use and
services, that really is what we are, and it would be a
permitted use. Our hardship is that we must get our facility
going this month, or else we will have to close our emergency
facility until this new zoning code comes into effect
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 12
and this property can be used.
Mr. Roberts: Let me ask one question. Does the 1500-ft. separation
apply under the new ordinance?
Mr. Hackworth: That's what we've been~earching here. It will to
some uses, but apparently this particular use Trust, the
intent of the drafters, I am told, would fall under the
definition of a non-profit counseling facility and service,
which would be permitted by right and there would not be a
dispersion requirement. Similar uses that are called in
the new ordinance group care facilities, there is still the
1500-ft. dispersion requirement.
Mr. Barranger; Of course, I think today we have got to act on the
basis of the existing ordinance.
Mr. Hackworth: That's right. I don't think you can fairly consider
the new ordinance.
Mr. Barranger; No, we can't. I was just interested, and why I
brought it up before, I was interested in what would happen
if you could wait three or four months.
Mr. Norris: Well, that's the hardship. They will have to shut down -
Mr. Barranger: I'll make a motion that the variance be granted, the
special exception, rather, be granted on the basis of
hardship for one. What section is that? 36? On the
basis that it appears that the use of this property for
this purpose would not be a detriment to the present
neighborhood, on the basis that it is located in an area
that is presently zoned C-1. Is that correct? I think
someone here earlier said C-2, but I think it is C-1.
Also on the basis that the proposals have been made here
that Trust will substantially improve this property, the
exterior and interior, which should be a benefit to the
neighborhood. And also on the basis that apparently this
property has been used for many, many years for a similar
purpose under a grandfather clause.
Roberts: I would like to add one thing. I think there is an
element of necessity here - a matter of timing. The hardship
would consist of closing down this facility unless this place
is granted for the use of it. And I think the City needs this
facility, and I think it would be a disaster for us to turn it
down and create that hardship of having no place to provide
for Trust if this is not allowed. This is the only place
they have.
Mr. Barranger: ...I will accept your addition.
Board of Zoning Appeals
TRUST
April 7, 1987
Page 13
(Mention was made that the special exception and
the variance should be set forth in the motion)
Mr. Barranger: I guess we should set those out. The variance
would be the 1500 feet and parking. The exception
would be the use.
Mr. Norris: I think if it were found you need more parking
you would provide it.
Mr.
Barranger: It doesn't appear to me that there is really
a problem with parking because I think you have more
space behind that house than you think you do.
Mr. Norris: Ail right, there's a motion on the floor to grant
the request. Do I hear a second?
Mr. Roberts: I second it with the provision - the necessity.
Mr. Barranger: I accepted that.
A poll of the Board showed the following vote.
AYES: Mr. Roberts, Mr. Rife, Mr. Norris, Mr. Barranger
NAYS: None
ABSTAINING: Mr. Wheaton (Conflict of interest)
J ~-31 ROANO~ CODR
Se~ 96-01. Powers ~ duties with res~ M v~-
(s) ~e
tb ~ of
e~o~mont of ~e chpMr ~ ~t in u~
~p, ~d
o~ ~d
f~ f~ ~d where, by rein of ~e e~p~o~
n~o~m, s~lo~m or sha~ of · s~ific pi~ of
p~y at ~e time of ~o eff~ive dsm of t.~!s chpMr, or
whe~ by rein of exceptio~ ~nphic conditio~ or
o~er ex~aordin~ sit~gon or ~ndition of such pi~ of
pro.fly, or of ~e ~ or development of pro~
imm~hMly adjacent ~ere~, the
~m of t~ chpMr wo~d eff~vely pro.bit or ~n-
ably r~i~ the
~fi~, u~n ~e e~dence he~ by it, ~t ~e ~ of
such v~ce ~ll
~ ~hip appr~c~ns ~onffm~tion, ~ dh~
f~m a
in ~mony
chapMr.
(b)
(1) ~t s~i~ appli~tion of t~s chp~r wo~d p~u~
~due ~hip.
(2) ~t such ~p h not sh~ Kener~y by o~r
pro~i~ in the sine zonins dh~ct
(3) ~t the au~or~on of such v~i~ ~ not ~ of
suh~ti~ detriment ~ adjacent pro.fly ~d tht
~ of the v~ce.
(4) That the condition and situation of the pro~y
concerned or the intended use of the prope~y h not of
so ~eneral or recurrins a nature ~ ~ .m~e
reasonably practicable the formuhtion of a Kener~
regulation to be adop~ as ~ ~endment ~ thh
chap~r.
(c) In authorizin~ a v~iance, the bo~d may im~ such
conditions re~ardins the location, charac~r and other
featur~ of the proposed stru~ure or use ~ it may d~m
nece~a~ in the public interest, ~d may require a
~uar~e or bond to insure that the conditions imp~ ~e
bein~ and will continue ~ be compli~ with.
(d) No variance sh~ be authorized except ~r ap~,
public notice and notice to p~ies in in.rest ~d he.ins,
~ specified in section 36-30 of this c~p~r. The ~d sh~
keep recordinss, Wanscrip~, mlnu~8 or o~er recor~ of
pr~eedin~s on v~i~ces sufficient ~ make p~ible co~
de~rminations on appeal ~ ~ the v~idity of i~ ~md~
~d
MINUTES CONSIDERED AT THIS COUNCIL MEETING
MAY BE REVIEWED ON LINE IN THE "OFFICIAL MINUTES" FOLDER,
OR AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Office cfi ~he City C~efl~
April 22, 1987
File #511
Mrs. Florine Thornhill
819 Center Avenue, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Dear Mrs. Thornhill:
Your communication tendering your resignation as a member of the
Henry Street Revival Committee, was before the Council of the
City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, April 20
1987. '
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the com-
munication was received and filed and the resignation was
accepted with regret.
The Council requested that I express its sincere appreciation for
the many services you have rendered to the City of Roanoke as a
member of the Committee. Please find enclosed a Certificate of
Appreciation issued by the Mayor on behalf of the members of City
Council.
Sincerely, ~~
Mary F. Parker, C~.~C
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
cc: Mayor Noel
Committee
C. Taylor, Chairman, Henry Street
Revival
Roo~n456 Nlunl~lpalBulldlng 215C~hurchAve~ue, S.W. Roanoke, Vlrgtnta24011 (703)981-2541
Office of the Cl~y Cle~
April 22, 1987
File #64
Mr. Ronald H. Miller
Building Commissioner
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Miller:
This is to advise you that Stanley G. Breakell has qualified as a
member of the Building Maintenance Division of the City's Board
of Building Code Appeals for a term of five years ending November
10, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
I~c~n456 MunicipalBuildlng 215 Church Av~que, S.W. Roanc~e, Vlrglnla24011 (703)981-254t
0-2
Oath or Affirmation of Office
State of Virginia, Cit~ o[ Roanoke, to .wit:
I,_ Stanley C. Breake].l
., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that
! will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that
I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as_.
a member of the Building Maintenance Division of the City's ~oard of
Building Code Apneals for a term of five years ending NoventVer 10,
1991,
according to the best of my ability. So help me God. ~
Subscribed and sworu to before me, this__ ~___/~a/y/of. ~~ ~_ ~, ~___
Office of the O~ Oe~
April 22, 1987
File #79
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of a statement from Mr. E. C. Warren, II,
Immediate Past President, Virginia Restaurant Association, in
regard to a meals tax, which statement was before the Council of
the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, April
20, 1987.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted,
was referred to 1987-88 budget study.
Sincerely, ~~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
the statement
MFP:ra
Enco
cc:
Mr. E. C. Warren, II, Immediate Past President, Virginia
Restaurant Association, 2522 Colonial Avenue, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24015
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Room 456 Municipal Building 2 t5 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541
taurant
'87 A!~ ~ Fii:ii: ome of good food since 1941"
April 14, 1987
Clerk, City of Roanoke
Municipal Building
Roanoke, VA
I request to be added to the agenda of the Roanoke City Council on
Monday, April 20, 1987. I represent the Southwest Chapter of the Virginia
Restaurant Association and the Roanoker Restaurant, and will address the
suggestion of o meals tax, if necessary.
R espec t fully sumbi t ted,
E. C. Warren, II
The Roanoker Restaurant
Immediate Post President,
Virginia Restaurant Association
2522 Colonial Ave., S.W. Roanoke, Va. 24015
/~~ ~Home of good food since 1941"
taurant
April 20, 1987
Mr. Mayor and Members of Council:
I om E. C. Warren and I represent the local Restaurants, the Virginia Restaurant
Association and The Roanoker Restaurant.
Again this year, our City will be faced with the decision of the meals tax - a
discriminatory tax on those who chose to or must dine out. A tax that started
in 1964 in Virginia Beach to be used entirely on promoting tourism, a tax that now
many of Virginia's citizens pay locally because 65-70% of all Restaurant meals ore
from local patrons.
Trading o meals tax for a real estate tax is simply another in a series of short
term solutions. City history reveals other budget answers; in 1976 it was annexation,
in 1982 it was build Valley View and now in 1987 - meals tax, but next time it will be
back to raising the real estate tax and that makes this year's solution short sighted
at least.
The tax is on the citizens and guests of the City, but it also effects the over
3500 foodservice employees who work in a 76 Million Dollar Industry. This Industry
provides an all day service and pays taxes on real estate, personal property, sewer,
electricity, and business license 7 days a week. An Industry that is in Roanoke and
paying taxes NOW. We do not need an incentive to come to Roanoke, we need
assurance we can compete in the Volley without a mandated price increase.
· The Restaurant Industry is not against keeping neighborhood schools open or
pawng streets or repairing the cities equipment, we are, however, against all these
broad, city wide programs being funded through a tax on one and only one segment
of the business community. We are good corporate and local citizens and our
leaders are always ready to join other business leaders in finding ways to solve
Roanoke's problems, equally.
We do not demand any special treatment, we only ask for fairness.
I thank you for this opportunity to address council and will answer any
questions you may have now or in the future.
E. C. Warren
THE R OA NOKER R ES TA UR A N T
Immediate Post President of
THE VIRGINIA RESTAURANT A$SOCIATION
2522 Colonial Ave., S.W. Roanoke, Va. 24015
Office of the Ci~y Oen~
April 22, 1987
File #67-87
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 28613, establishing the
minimum amount of public liability and property damage insurance
to be provided by Festival-in-the-Park, Inc., for festival acti-
vities, which Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, April 20, 1987.
Sincerely,~ ~ ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enc.
cc:
Mr. Sam H. McGhee, III, Executive Director,
Festival-in-the-Park, Inc., P. O. Box 8276, Roanoke, Virginia
24014
Ms. Wendi Turner, Frank B. Hall and Company of Virginia,
Inc., P. 0. Box 2571, Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. Jimmie B. Layman, Manager, Parks and Recreation
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
P, oorn4.56 MunlcipalBulldlng 215C~urchAve~ue, S.W. Roar,,c~e, Vlrglnla24011 (703)98t-254t
Office o~ the Oty Oerk
April 29, 1987
File #67-87
Mr. John D. Dove, Jr.
Frank B. Hall and Company of Virginia,
P. O. Bom 2571
Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Inc.
Dear Mr. Dove:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 28613, establishing the
minimum amount of public liability and property damage insurance
to be provided by Festival-in-the-Park, Inc., for festival acti-
vities, which Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, April 20, 1987.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eno.
Room 456 Municipal Boildlng 215 Church Avenue, S,W. Roonoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 98'1-254t
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28613.
VIRGINIA,
A RESOLUTION establishing the minimum amount of public liabi-
lity and property damage insurance to be provided by Festival-in-
the-Park, Inc., for festival activities.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Festival-in-the-Park, Inc., shall furnish one or more
public liability and property damage insurance contracts insuring
the liability of such organization with regard to festival acti-
vities on or about May 23, 1987 through May 31, 1987, in the
minimum amount of $1,500,000.00.
2. The City of Roanoke shall be named as an additional
insured on such policies of insurance, and a certificate of
insurance reflecting such coverage shall be filed with the City
Clerk prior to May 23, 1987.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
CITY" ....... ' "'-'''
: ~ ~ ~. Roanoke, Virginia
April 20, 1987
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Liability Insurance Limits for the Festival-in-the
Park and Festival-on-the-River
I. Back~round
A. Festival-in-the-Park, Inc. has requested the use of certain City
park facilities and the barricading of certain public streets
in connection with the Festival week scheduled for May 23
May 31, 1987.
1. Century Park
2. Colonial Plaza
3. Elmwood Park
4. Smith Park
5. Wasena Park
6. Key Plaza
7. Wiley Drive
8. Bullitt Avenue (Jefferson Street to Elmwood Park)
9. Williamson Road (one lane adjacent to Elmwood Park, from Franklin
Road to Elm Avenue)
10. Jefferson Street (Franklin Road to Elm Avenue)
11. Franklin Road (Jefferson Street to Williamson Road)
Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance, pursuant to
Section 15.1-14.9 of the Code of Virginia, must be furnished by
organizations permitted to use the public streets. The amount
of insurance is to be established by the governing body and the
jurisdiction is to be named as an additional insured. In addition,
as a matter of policy, the City requires public liability insurance
for the use of all public facilities including City parks.
II. Current Situations
City Council needs to establish the amount of liability insurance
that the Festival-in-the-Park, Inc. will be asked to provide in
connection with the subject events.
Page 2
Liability Insurance for Festival Week
Festival-in-the-Park, Inc. has offered to provide an insurance
coverage with limits of liability of $1,5OO,O00, which was the
amount established by the Council for the 1986 Festival-in-the-
Park.
III. Issues
A. Compliance with the Code of Virgi.{~
B. Amount of the insurance
C. Cost
D. Timing
IV. Alternatives
An
Council approve insurance coverage to be provided by the Festival-
in-the-Park, Inc. in connection with the requested use of certain
public streets and parks, for a limit of liability of $1,500,OOO.
1. Compliance with the Code of Virginia would be met.
2. Amount of the total liability insurance appears to be reasonable
for the subject events.
3. The cost of the subject insurance would be paid by the
Festival-in-the-Park, Inc.
Timing relative to Council's action on the subject matter
is critical in view of the scheduled beginning of the Festival
on May 23, 1987.
Council establish a higher level of insurance coverage.
1. Compliance with the Code of Virginia would be met.
2. Amount of the liability insurance may be more than
desired and may be unobtainable.
reasonably
3. The cost of a higher level of insurance coverage would be
higher for the Festival-in-the-Park, Inc.
4. Timing would remain critical as stated in Alternative A.
V. Recommendation
Council concur with Alternative "A" approve insurance coverage,
with limits of liability of $1,500,OOO, in connection with Festival-
in-the-Park and Festival-on-the-River events.
Page 3
Liability Insurance for Festival Week
B. The Festival-in-the-Park,
and to name the City of
policy.
Inc. - to furnish the above insurance
Roanoke as additional insured on that
Respectfully submitted:
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:DVT:vz
Executive Director, Festival-in-the-Park, Inc.
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Administration and Public Safety
Director of Public Works
Manager of Parks and Recreation/Grounds
Manager of General Services
', " ESTIYALTH : PARK
March 26, 1987
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
City of Roanoke
Room 364
Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Dear Bob:
In a separate letter dated March 26, 1987, Festival-in-the-Park has re-
quested the City to grant the Festival exclusive concession rights in certain
City parks and streets during the Festival week, May 23 through May 31, 1987.
This letter requests that the City permit Festival-in-the-Park to tempo-
rarily close and use those streets identified for other than public purposes,
pursuant to 15.1-14 (9), Code of Virginia.
This letter also requests that the City Council establish, pursuant to the
code requirements, the amount of public liability and property damage insurance
to be provided by Festival-in-the-Park.
This action needs to be taken as soon as possible, so that the established
amounts can be obtained. Current insurance limits carried are as shown on the
attached certificate. Festival is in the process of renewing this insurance
prior to the expiration date of the current policy to assure its availability.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
FESTIVAL-IN-THE-PARK
Sam H. McGhee,
SHM:bc
CC;
George C. Snead, Jr.
J. B. Layman
Wendi Turner
i'()~,T ()FFICI': I~()X ,",;')7(;, · N().\:N()I<I':, \'II,~(;INI \ 2 1()II * 7():~-:~ I')-'-)('; I()
,PROgUCER
Chas. Lunsford Sons & Associates, A Div
Frank B Hall & ~ompany of virginia, Inc
Box 2571
Roanoke, VA 24010
INSURED
Roanoke Festival in the Park, Inc.
P.O. Box 8276
Roanoke, VA 24014
iSSUE DATE (MM/OO/YY)
3--26--87 rdt
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS
NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER, THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND,
EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POEClES BELOW.
COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE
COMPANY ,~
LETTER
Royal Insurance Company
COMPANY
--LETTER B Nautilus Insurance Company
COMPANY
LETTER C Tudor Insurance Company
COMPANY D
LETTER
United States Fidelity & 'Guarant~
COMPANY
LEttER E
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY
BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLiCiES DESCRISED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS, AND CONDI-
TIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.
TYPE OF INSURANCE
GENERAL LIABILITY
COMPREHENSIVE FORM
PREMISES/OPERATIONS
UNDERGROUND
EXPLOSION & COLLAPSE HAZASO
PR00ucTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS
CONTRACTUAL
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE
PERSONAL INJURY
AUTO~OBILE MABIUTY ANY AUTO
ALL OWNED AUTOS (PRIV PASS)
OTHER THAN
ALL 0WNE0 AUTOS ( RRIV PASS )
HIRSO AUTOS
NON'OWNED AUTOS
GARAGE LIABILITY
EXCESS LIABILITY
UMBRELLA FORM
OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
AND
EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
OTHER
POLICY NUMBER
XO0071
FYi/g03
PLUK 12170
5/5/86
5/5/86
5/5/87'
5/5/87
LIABiLiTY LIMITS IN THOUSANDS
EACH AGGREGATE
$
6617157 86 9
5/29/86
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATION~LOCATIONSNEHICLE~SPECIAL ITEMS
Excluded are Liquor Liability, Pollution and Punitive Damages
The city of Roanoke is'named aS Additional Insured.
5/29/87
$ $
500 500
PERSONAL INJURY
500
$ 500 500
STATUTORY
I$ lOd (EACH ACCIOEN'O
5oo (DISEASE-POUCY LIMIT)
1$ ]no
CitY of Roanoke
Municipal Building
Roanoke, VA 24011
SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POUCIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EX-
PIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO
M~L 10 DAYS WRn-rEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE MOLDER NAMED TO THE
LEFT, BUT FAS.URE TO MAIL SUCI.I NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO O61JGATKIN OR L.IABIL/Ty
OF ANY KiND IrS AGENTS eR REPRESENTATIVES.
& Co of Va, Inc.
Office of the City Oerk
April 22, 1987
File #305
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 28614, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1986-87 General Fund
Appropriation Ordinance, to provide for the appropriation of
$15,000.00, in connection with roof replacement at the Juvenile
Detention Home in Corner Springs, which Ordinance was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, April 20, 1987.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
EnCo
cc:
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Mr. Robert F. Hyatt, Manager, Juvenile Home
Room 456 Munlclpol Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, ~,Irginla 24011 (703) 981-2541
5A2
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28614.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1986-87 General Fund Appropriation Ordinance, and providing for an
emergency.
~EREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal
Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1986-87 General Fund
Appropriation Ordinance be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Public Works
Building Maintenance
(1) ..........................
$15,260,072
2,583,324
Revenue
Miscellaneous
Miscellaneous
$
(2) .................................
(1) Maint. - General
Fund
(2) Miscellaneous
(001-052-4330-3050) $15,000
(001-020-1234-0859) 15,000
322,946
130,000
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Roanoke, Virginia
April 20, 1987
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Roof Replacement
City of Roanoke
Juvenile Detention Home
Coyner Springs, Virginia
I. Back~round
April, 1980 was the date established for the ten (10) year roof
guarantee to start on the roof installed on the Juvenile Detention
Center. At the time of the alterations and additions, the entire
facility received a new single membrane roof.
Be
The ~eneral Contractor was Avis Construction Company; the roofer was
Valley Roofing Corp.; the roof membrane was produced by Braas Co.;
membrane distributed by The Weather-Shield Systems Corp., who is
also the guarantor; and Roof Membrane Service Corp., who is an inde-
pendent contract service organization and acts only as a liaison for
the principals listed above.
II. Current Situation
A. The Juvenile Detention Home single membrane roof has been leaking
for some time and is in need of repair or replacement.
Be
The Brass Co. is the manufacturer of the single membrane roofing
material. This company was taken over several years ago by the
Panasote Corporation. The ?anasote Corporation did not assume the
obligations of the Braas Co., only their distributors.
The Weather-Shield Systems Corp. was a distributor of the Braas Co.
They have not been active in the distribution of roof membranes
since 1983. This firm is operating with a limited amount of funds
in the repair of roof systems. They also are the guarantors on the
roof system for this project.
Roof Membrane Service Corp., the independent contract service orga-
nization, in conjunction with the two firms named above (or the suc-
cessor) has offered to settle with the City of Roanoke for
$15,000.00 of an estimated $24~000.00 roof replacement cost.
Page 2
Guarantee for replacement of a single membrane roof is similar to a
tire guarantee, the replacement cost by the guarantor goes down as
the time of guarantee expires.
The roof guarantee states that the roof will be "maintained in a
water-tight condition at Weather-Shield's expense for ten (10) years
from this date, April 1980." In trying to correspond with
Weather-Shield we were referred to Roof Membrane Service Corp. and
this is who informs us that they have discussed our roof problem
with the other two firms and they have agreed to offer the City the
sum of $15,000.00. Roof Membrane Service Corp. would probably con-
tinue to make enough effort to avoid plainly breaking the warranty.
III. Issues are:
A. Engineering concerns
B. Time of repair
C. Funding of the project
IV. Alternatives are:
A. Accept the offer of Roof Membrane Service Corp. to terminate the
guarantee on the Juvenile Detention Home Roof for a cash settlement
of $15~000.00.
Engineering concerns would be met in a timely fashion. The City
Engineer's Office would prepare contract documents for a repla-
cement roof, receive bids and award a contract in an expeditious
manner.
2. Time of repair would be done in an orderly manner and in a
timely manner.
3. Funding for the project would be from the cash rebate and from
the Building Maintenance budget.
B. Reject the offer made by Roof Membrane Services Corp. for a
$15,000.00 cash settlement and attempt to have the roof maintained
in a water-tight condition.
1. En~ineerin~ concerns would not be met in an orderly fashion and
the roof would continue to leak.
Time of repair would be extended. It is quite possible that the
time could be extended beyond the three remaining years of the
guarantee and the City would still have a leaky roof.
Fundin~ would not be received from the Service Corp. The offer
made to the City is approximately 63% of the cost of replace-
ment. There is only 30% of the roof guarantee remaining.
Page 3
V. Recommendation to Council is as follows:
A. Accept the offer of Roof Membrane Service Corp. of $15~000.00 to
terminate the remaining three years of the ten year roof membrane
guarantee.
B. Appropriate $15~000.00 to the Building Maintenance Account
No. 001-052-4330-3050 and increase the Miscellaneous revenue esti-
mate, Account No. 001-020-1234-0859, by the same amount.
WRH/LBC/hw
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Budgets and Systems
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Office of fi~e Cib, Clerk
April 22, 1987
File #1
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
A financial report for the month
Council of the City of Roanoke
Monday, April 20, 1987.
On motion, duly seconded and
received and filed.
of March, 1987, was before the
at a regular meeting held on
unanimously adopted, the report was
Sincerely~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
cc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Room 456 Municipal Building 2'~5 C~hurch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, ¥1rginla 2401 t (703) 981-2541
CiTY OF ~C)ANOKI'. VA.
April 20, 1987
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Joel M. Schlanger
Monthly Financial Report
Attached is a copy of the financial report for the
month of ~Iarch, 1987.
JMS:dp
GENERAL FUND
CONTINGENCY BALANCE
AS OF MARCH 31, 1987
Contingency Reserve:
Balance July 1, 1986
Citizens' Request for Service
Commissioner of Revenue
City Clerk
Finance
Municipal Auditing
City Attorney
Planning
Circuit Court
Clerk of Circuit Court
Director of Human Resources
City Attorney
City Attorney
City Manager
City Manager
Economic Development
Youth Haven
Non-Departmental
Snow Removal
Snow Removal
City Attorney
Citizens' Request
Budget and Systems
Community Planning
Personnel
Contingency Balance
Mowing Equipment
Advertising
Disability Insurance
Disability Insurance
Disability Insurance
Disability Insurance
Administrative Supplies
Micro-Computers
Reimbursement of Court Funds
Study of Homeless
Settlement of Claims
Professional Services
Publication Costs
Publication Costs
Training
Freezer
Worker's Compensation
Salaries
Salaries and Chemicals
Professional Services
Wood Removal
Dues
Advertising
Section 125 Plan Expenses
$(
5,000)
11,500)
1,311)
3,203)
2,706)
2,792)
358)
4,875)
5,000)
6,000)
5,000)
5,000)
5,000)
5,000)
3,000)
1,930)
25,000)
50,000)
55,000)
5,000)
5,000)
3,250)
5,000)
3~978)
$ 237,542
(219~903)
$ 17~639
CITY OF ROANOKE
WATER FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE g MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1987
Operating Revenue:
Cor~ercial Sales
Domestic Sales
Industrial Sales
Town of Vinton
Roanoke County
Customer Services
Customer's Work
Total Operating Revenue
Less: Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Personal Services
General Expenses
Pumping Stations and Tanks
Purification
Total Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Operating income Before Depreciation
Less: Depreciation
Operating Income
Add: Non-Operating Income
interest on Investments
Rents
Miscellaneous
Bad Debt Collections
Total Non-Operating income
Income Before Non-Operating Expenses
Less: Non-Operating Expenses
Transfer to Other Funds
Interest Expense
Total Non-Operating Expenses
Net Income
1987
$ 731,203
1,109,730
84,885
24,009
556,611
192,774
14t464
2~713~676
523,053
952,505
302,006
152~454
1~930~018
783,658
442~656
341~002
126,295
3,388
11,274
4~939
145;896
486,898
57,010
27~800
84~810
1986
$ 715,698
1,066,758
94,647
31,349
837,349
186,172
18~205
2~950~178
502,809
833,558
291,934
158t001
1~786~302
1,163,876
438~979
724~897
144,899
5,013
646
7~090
157~648
882,545
39,000
34~850
73t850
$ 808~695
WATER FUND
CONTINUED
Capital Outlay Not Included in Operating Expenses:
Project
Furniture and Equipment
Vehicular Equipment
S.W. Trunk Line {Phase 4)
12 Line Shadwell
16 Line G.C. Tank #3
New Services Hyd. Lines
Unidentified Plant Replacement
Fire Hydrants
Portland - Ben Tie In
FC Generator Replacement
CCFP Storm Windows
Franklin Road Pump Station
Franklin Road Tank Loop
Franklin Road Tank Land
G.C. #1 Tank Painting
Salem Interconnect PS
FY85 Projects Design
FY86 Projects Design
Franklin Road Tank
Watershed Protection Carvins Cove
Year to Date
Expenditures
$ 1,674
16,975
23,826
175
37,525
265,640
149,864
7,009
4,357
21,131
19,408
131,638
141,251
11,371
18,167
3,650
13,791
12,103
153,435
196~412
Total $ 1~229~402
C~TY OF ROANOKE
SEWAGE TREATMENT FUND
COMPARATIVE ~NCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1987
Operating Reven~e:
Sewage Charges - City
Sewage Charges - County
Sewage Charges - Vinton
Sewage Charges - Salem
Sewage Charges - Botetourt County
Customer Services
Interfund Services
Total Operating Revenue
Less: Operating Exp, Before Depreciation
Personal Services
Administrative and Operating Expenses
Total Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Operating Income Before Depreciation
Less: Depreciation
Operating Income
Add: Non-Operating Income
Interest on Investments
Miscellaneous
8ad Debt Collections
Total Non-Operating Income
Income Before Non-Operating Expenses
Less: Non-Operating Expenses
Interest Expense
Net Income
1987
$2,881,141
627,373
161,588
753,467
80,788
67,135
6~085
4~527~577
845,923
2~486~561
3~332~484
1,195,093
648~745
546~348
169,761
19,832
5~869
195~462
741,810
104~651
$ 637,159
1986
$2,883,613
719,204
161,479
606,662
23,689
50,644
6~454
4~451t745
867,459
2;297~832
3~165~291
1,286,454
641~359
645~095
170,147
20,868
9~087
200t102
845,197
118~186
$ 727~011
SEWAGE TREATMENT FUND
CONTINUED
Capital Outlay Not Included in Operating Expenses:
Project
Other Equipment
Construction - Structures
Flood Relief
FY85 Project Design
Williamson Road West Sewer Project
FY86 Project Design
Mud Lick Sewer Land Purchase
Digester Gas Line
STP Land Acquisition
Cove Road
Land Acquisition Dogwood Lane
Total
Year to Date
Expenditures
$ 49,889
500
315,228
148
22,262
8,322
3,017
76,385
7,950
61,230
8~500
,$ 553~31
CITY OF ROANOKE
REGIONAL AIRPORT FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1987
Operating Revenue:
Landing Fees
Building and Equipment Rentals
Terminal Building Rentals
Other Property Rentals
Advertising
Commissions
Fuel and Oil Sales Commissions
Miscellaneous Fees
Total Operating Revenue
Less: Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Total Operating Exp, Before Depreciation
Operating Income Before Depreciation
Less: Depreciation
Operating Income
Add: Non-Operating Income
Interest on Investments
Miscel]aneous
Tota{ Non-Operating income
Income Before Non-Operating Expenses
Less: Non-Operating Expense
Interest Expense
Net Income
1987
$ 271,910
125,539
147,944
27,896
17,094
1,031,976
23,779
21~115
1~667~253
295,652
840~648
1~136~300
530,953
407~803
123~150
191,883
191~883
315,033
85~277
$ 229~756
1986
$ 238,067
139,934
143,089
20,944
15,046
991,390
21,571
29~367
1~599a408
275,529
762~718
1~038~247
561,161
431~797
129~364
200,628
5~500
206t128
335,492
81~673
253;819
REGIONAL AIRPORT FUND
CONTINUED
Capita] Outlay Not Included in Operating Expenses:
Project
Other Equipment
Overlay GA & T/W
Unidentified Construction
Repaint R/W & T/W Markings
Roof Repairs - Replacement
Fencing - New & Replacement
AlP #01
Airport Master Plan
New Terminal
Noise Protection & Soundproofing
Burton - Clear Zone Property
Aviation Drive Widening
Auto Transfer Switch
Year to Date
Expenditures
$ 4,248
33,677
1,920
4,150
12,908
2,475
74,411
1,171
1,423,918
48,262
79,511
125,404
12~417
Total $ I~824~472
CITY OF ROANOKE
CiViC CENTER FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1987
Operating Revenue:
Rentals
Parking Fee
Event Expenses
Advertising
Admissions Tax
Commissions
Total Operating Revenue
Less: Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Administrative: Personal Services
Utilities and Communications
Administrative Expenses
Promotional Expenses:
Personal Services
Services and Charges
Total Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Operating (Loss) Before Depreciation
Less: Depreciation
Operating (Loss)
Add: Non-Operating Income
Interest on Investments
Miscellaneous
Total Non-Operating income
Net (Loss)
$(
1987
219,028
44,974
56,635
3,045
41,506
67~155
432~343
344,409
262,149
390,221
35,779
3~565
1~036~123
( 603,780)
228~783
( 832~563)
34,894
3~585
38t479
794~084)
1986
$ 236,264
45,577
78,360
2,800
73,141
85~409
521~551
330,338
250,007
422,830
44,989
7~217
lt055~381
( 533,830)
257~307
( 791~137)
34,367
1~993
36~360
$ (754~777)
CIVIC CENTER FUND
CONTINUED
Capital Outlay Not Included in Operating Expenses=
Project
Equ(pment
Total
Year to Date
Expenditures
$ 99~175
$ 99~175
CITY OF ROANOKE
INTERNAL SERVICE FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1987
Operating Revenue:
Charges for Services
Total Operating Revenue
Less: Operating Exp. Before Depreciation
Persona] Services
Operating Expenses
Total Operating Expenses Before Depreciation
Operating Income (Loss) Before Depreciation
Less: Depreciation
Operating Income (Loss)
Add: Non-Operating Income
Transfer from Water Fund
Interest on Investments
Total Non-Operating Income
1987
$4~429~719
4~429~719
2,563,812
1~200~225
3~764~037
665,682
301~734
363~948
57,010
13~130
70~140
1986
$3~711~120
3~711~120
2,500,017
962~062
3~462~079
249,041
284~493
(35,452)
33~998
33~998
Net Income (Loss) $ 434,088 $ ( 1~454)
INTERNAL SERVICE FUND
CONTINUED
Capital Outlay Not Included in Operating Expenses:
Project
Management Services - Equipment
CIS - Other Equipment
Motor Vehicle Maintenance - Furniture & Equipment
Motor Vehicle Maintenance - Other Equipment
Utility Line Service - Construction Structures
Utility Line Service - Other Equipment
Utility Line Service - Furniture and Equipment
Year to Date
Expenditures
$ 3,285
135,642
7,293
2,811
10,797
183,786
3)562
Total $ 347~176
CiTY OF ROANOKE PENSION pLAN
STATEMENT OF REVENUE AND EXPENSES
FOR THE 9 MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1987
REVENUE
City's Contributions
Investment Income
Gain on Sale of Investments
Income from Bond Discount Amortization
Total Revenue
1987
$ 3,497,559
2,963,690
4,694,421
119;660
$11~275~330
1986
$ 3,724,622
2,818,401
2,875,890
73;726
$ 9~492~639
EXPENSES
Pension Payments
Commissions
Active Service Death Benefit
Expense from Bond Premium Amortization
Insurance Expense
Administrative Expense
Total Expenses
$ 2,915,779
189,705
12,879
155,462
4,288
118~233
3;396~296
$ 2,846,966
183,391
23,430
74,721
4,237
90;824
3;223;569
Net Income Year to Date $ 7~879~034 $ 6~269~070
CiTY OF ROANOKE PENSION pLAN
BALANCE SHEET
AS OF MARCH 31, 1987
ASSETS
Cash
Investments (at cost):
(market value - 1987 $87,465,319 and 1986 $75,784,664)
Prepaid Expenses
Total Assets
1987
$ 10,767
75,677,421
6~592
$75~694~780
1986
$ 910
63,702,711
12~243
$63~715t864
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE
Accounts Payable
Current Liabilities
Fund Balance, July 1
Net Income Year to Date
Fund Balance
Current Liabilities and Fund Balance
$
67,815,746
7~879~034
75~694~780
$75~694~780
$ 11~179
11~179
57,435,615
6~269t070
63~704:685
$631715~86~4
Office of the City Clerk
April 22, 1987
File #188
Construction Services of Roanoke,
3812 Bunker Hill Drive, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
[nc.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28618, accepting your bid
for construction of alterations and additions to the Municipal
Building to accommodate E-911 communications equipment, in the
total amount of $117,828.00, which Ordinance was adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, April 20, 1987.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
CC: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
W. Robert tierbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Alfred T. Beckley, Manager, Co,~unications
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration
Public Safety
and
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 ~urch Avenue, S,W. Roanoke, Virginia 240tl (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28618.
AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid
of Roanoke, Inc., for construction
tions to the Municipal Building to
of Construction Services
of alterations and addi-
accommodate E-911 eom-
munications equipment, upon certain terms and conditions,
and awarding a contract therefor; authorizing the proper
City officials to execute the requisite contract for such
work; and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. The bid of Construction Services of Roanoke, Inc.,
made to the City in the total amount of $117,828.00 for con-
struction of alterations and additions to the ~nicipal
Building to accommodate E-911 communications equipment, such
bid being in full compliance with the City's plans and spe-
cifications made therefor and as provided in the contract
documents offered said bidder, which bid is on file in the
Office of the City Clerk, be and is hereby ACCEPTED.
2. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager and
the City Clerk are hereby authorized on behalf of the City
to execute and attest, respectively, the requisite contract
with the successful bidder, based on its proposal made
therefor and the City's specifications made therefor, said
contract to be in such form as is approved by the City
Attorney, and the cost of said work to be paid for out of
funds heretofore or simultaneously appropriated by Council.
3. In order to provide for the usual daily operation
the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist,
and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon
its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
CITY~.. ..~ -' :fi ?. Roanoke, Virginia
April 20, 1987
'87 ~,PI! 1(i
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Bid Committee Report
E-911 Communications
Alterations and Additions
Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia
concur with the recommendations of the attached Bid Committee Report.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/LBC/mm
Attachment: Bid Committee Report
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Construction Cost Technician
REC~{'ED Roanoke, Virginia
CITY .... '~','7
April 20, 1~87
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Bid Committee Report
E-911 Communications
Alterations and Additions
Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia
I. Background:
City Council, at its April 13, 1987 meeting, publicly opened
and read aloud the bid received for the E-911
Communications, Alterations and Additions to the Municipal
Building.
One (1) bid was received from Construction Services of
Roanoke~ Inc., in the amount of $117,828.00, and 8--5 con-
secutive calendar days project construction time.
Project consists of the remodeling of the present com-
munications area of the building plus a portion of the old
telephone equipment room to accommodate the new E-911 com-
munications equipment. Extensive mechanical and electrical
remodeling is also required for this project.
Advertisement was placed in the local paper plus being sent
to Dodge Reports for distribution through their distribution
system. In addition, the Engineer's Office telephoned four
additional local contractors to inform them of the project
and its due date. None of the four contacted by telephone
chose to bid.
II. Issues in order of importance are:
A. Compliance of the bidders with the requirements of the
Contract Documents.
B. Amount of the iow bid.
C. Fundin~ of the project.
D. Time of completion.
Page 2
III. Alternatives are:
Award a lump sum contract to Construction Services of
Roanoke~ Inc., in the amount of $117~828.00 and 8~5 con-
secutive calendar days for the E-911 Alterations and
Additions to the Municipal Building according to the contract
documents as prepared by the City Engineer's Office.
1. Compliance of the bidder with the requirements of the
Contract Documents was met.
Amount of the bid is within the Engineer's estimate.
This is $1,382.00 less than the same contractor proposed
on 3/13/87.
3. Funding is available from the E-911 project account
number 008-052-9514-9003.
Time of completion is quoted as 85 consecutive calendar
days which is acceptable. This will leave just enough
time for the other vendors to install the communications
and computer equipment, previously authorized by
Council.
B. Reject the bid and do not award a contract at this time.
1. Compliance of the bidder with the requirements of the
Contract Documents would not be an issue.
2. Amount of the low bid probably would not change.
3. Funding would not be encumbered at this time.
Time of completion would be extended. The timetable is
now very tight and any additional delay at this time
would mean that E-911 would not be operational by the
October, 1987 target date.
IV. Recommendation is that City Council take the following action:
A. Concur with the implementation of Alternative A.
Be
Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contractural
agreement with Construction Services of Roanoke, Inc., to
construct the E-911 Alterations and Additions to the
Municipal Building in accordance with the Contract Documents
as prepared by the City Engineer's Office in the amount of
$117~828.00 and 8~5 consecutive calendar days.
Page 3
Authorize the Director of Finance to establish a project
account in the amount of $127~000.00, which includes a pro-
ject contingency amount of $9~172.00.
Respectfully submitted,
'Ga r 1 ha i rman
Robert A.
William F. Clark
George CS~nead, Jr.
RAG/LBC/mm
Attachment: Tabulation of Bids
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Citizens' Request for Service
City Engineer
Construction Cost Technician
E-911 COMMUNICATIONS
ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
Bids opened before City Council on April 13, 1987 at 7:30 p.m.
BIDDER LUMP SUM DAYS BOND
Construction Services of $117,828.00 85 Yes
Roanoke, Inc.
~ Chairman
William F. Clark
Office of City Engineer
Roanoke, Virginia
Office o~ the Ciry Cle~
April 15, 1987
File #188
Mr. Robert A. Garland, Chairman )
Mr. William F. Clark ) Committee
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr. )
Gentlemen:
The following bid for E-911 Communications,
Additions to the Municipal Building, was opened
the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
Monday, April 13, 1987:
Alterations and
and read before
meeting held on
BIDDER
BASE BID TOTAL
Construction Services of Roanoke, Inc.
$117,828.00
On motion, duly seconded and adopted, the bid was referred to you
for study, report and recommendation to Council.
~ary F. Parker, C~;C
City Clerk
~IFP:ra
Room 456 Municll:x~l Building 215 C~urch A've~ue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-254t
Mr. Robert A. Garland, Chairman
Mr. William F. Clark
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr.
Page 2
April 15, 1987
cc:
Construction Services
Drive, S. W., Roanoke,
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling,
of Roanoke, Inc.,
Virginia 24018
Jr., City Attorney
3812
Bunker
Hill
Office c~ ~ne City Cle~
April 22, 198F
File #514
Mr. Harry S. Rhodes
Attorney
P. O. Box 1529
Roanoke, Virginia 24007
Dear Mr. Rhodes:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28600, permanently vacating,
discontinuing and closing an alley extending through Block 17,
Map of Lilly View Addition, between Light Street and Tuck Street,
N. E.; a portion of Purcell Avenue, N. E., between Light Street
and Tuck Street, N. E.; and certain lots in Block 17 and Block
11, Map of Lilly View Addition, which Ordinance was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday,
April 13, 1987, also adopted by the Council on second reading on
Monday, April 20, 1987, and will take effect ten days following
the date of its second reading.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24~1 t (703) 98t-2541
Mr. Harry S. Rhodes
Page 2
April 22, 1987
cc: Mr. Alfred V. Thomas, 1301 Orange Avenue, N. E., Roanoke,
Virginia 24014
Ms. Shirley F. Picarella, 5400 Bernard Drive, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24014
Mr. Gordon N. Dixon, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District
Commission, P. 0. Box 2569, Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Ms. Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Corr~nission
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and Zoning
Administrator
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Ms. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Cominission
Ms. Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
Mr. J~ome S. Howard, Jr., Commi~sion~of Revenue
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28600.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE vacating certain portions of the plat of the Lilly
View Addition subdivision, including certain public right-of-way
therein, as is more particularly described hereinafter.
WHEREAS, Blue Stone Block, Incorporated, has filed an application
to the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in accordance with
the provisions of §15.1-482(b), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
requesting the Council to vacate certain portions of the plat of the
Lilly View Addition subdivision as described hereinafter; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, which after giving proper
notice to all concerned as required by §15.1-482(b), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, and after having conducted a public hearing on the
matter, has made its recommendation to Council.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said application by the City
Council on April 13, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., after due and timely notice
thereof as required by §15.1-482(b) Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were
afforded an opportunity to be heard on said application; and
WHEREAS, it appearing from the foregoing that the land proprietors
affected by the requested vacation of certain portions of the subject
plat have been properly notified; and
WHEREAS, from all of the foregoing, the Council considers that no
inconvenience will result to any individual or to the public from
vacating the subject portion of the plat of the Lilly View
Addition subdivision, including the alley and street therein.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Counoil of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, that the following portions of the plat of the Lilly View
Addition subdivision be and they are hereby vaoated pursuant to the
provisions of §15.1-482(b), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended:
1. The following lots:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Block 17, Map of
Lilly View Addition and Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14 and 15 of Block 11 of Lilly View Addition includ-
ing the portion of the alleyway adjoining each lot
which was vacated by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25,
1978.
2. The alley described as follows:
BEING the alley extending through Block 17 of the
Lilly View Addition Map, bounded on the east by
the center line of Tuck Street (formerly Clay
Avenue, now vacated); on the south by the norther-
ly line of Lots 1 through 8, Block 17, of the
Lilly View Addition Map and a portion of Tuok
Street whioh was vaoated by Ordinance No. 24125,
May 25, 1978; on the west by the easterly line of
Light Street; and on the north by the southerly line
of Lots 9 through 17, Block 17, Lilly View Addition
Map and a portion of Tuck Street whieh was vacated
by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
3. The street described as follows:
BEING that portion of Purcell Avenue (formerly Hol-
combe Avenue) bounded on the west by the easterly
line of Light Street; on the north by the southerly
line of Block 17 of the Lilly View Addition [~p and
a portion of Tuck Street which was vaoated by Ordi-
nance No. 24125, May 25, 1978; on the east by the
center line of Tuck Street (formerly Clay Avenue,
now vacated); and on the south by the northerly
line of Block 11 of the Lilly View Addition Map and
a portion of Tuck Street whioh was vacated by Ordi-
nance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that all right and interest of the public
in and to the above described alley and street be, and hereby is,
released insofar as the Council of the City of Roanoke is empowered so
to do, pursuant to the provisions of §15.1-482(b), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, reserving however, to the City of Roanoke an ease-
ment for sewer lines and water mains and other public utilities that
may now be located in or across said public right-of-way, together
with the right of ingress and egress for the maintenance or replace-
ment of such lines, mains or utilities; such easement or easements to
terminate upon the later abandonment of use or permanent removal from
the above-described public right-of-way of any such municipal
installation or utility by the owner thereof.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he is,
directed to mark "permanently vacated" on the aforesaid public
right-of-way on all maps and plats on file in his office on which
said right-of-way is shown, referring to the book and page of ordi-
nances and resolutions of the Council of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, wherein this ordinance shall be spread.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the Clerk of the Council deliver to
the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
and to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, a
certified copy of this ordinance for recordation in the Deed Books of
said Clerks' Offices, indexing the same in the name of the City of
Roanoke. Virginia. as Grantor, and in the name of Blue Stone Block,
Incorporated, and the names of any other parties in interest who may
so request, as Grantees, in accordance with the provisions of
§15.1-482(b), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the Ot~ Ge~
April 22, 1987
File #514
Miss Patsy Testerman
Clerk of the Circuit
Roanoke, Virginia
Court
Dear Miss Testerman:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 28600 for proper recordation
in your office, which provides for the permanent vacating,
discontinuing and closing of an alley extending through Block 17,
Map of Lilly View Addition, between Light Street and Tuck Street,
N. E.; a portion of Purcell Avenue, N. E., between Light Street
and Tuck Street, N. E.; and certain lots in Block 17 and Block
11, Map of Lilly View Addition, which Ordinance was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday,
April 13, 1987, also adopted by the Council on second reading on
Monday, April 20, 1987, and will take effect ten days following
the date of its second reading.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
cc: Mr. Harry
Virginia
$. Rhodes, Attorney, P. 0. Box 1529, Roanoke,
24007
Room456 MunlclpalBulldlng 215 Church Ave~ue, S.W. Roanc~e,'~rginla24011 (703)981-2541
Roanoke Cily Planning Commission
April 13, 1987
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Request from Blue Stone Block, Inc., represented by Harry
S. Rhodes, Attorney, to permanently vacate an alley shown
in Block 17, Map of Lilly View Addition, and a portion of
a certain street known as Purcell Avenue, and certain
lots in Block 17 and Block 11, Map of Lilly View
Addition, pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b), of the
Virginia Code, as amended.
I. BackBround:
Section of Purcell Avenue and subject alley as requested for
closure are located adjacent to Orange Avenue (U.S. Route 460)
East) and approximately 1,500 feet east of the intersection of
Orange Avenue and Gus Nicks Boulevard.
Street and alley as requested for closure are undeveloped as
public rights-of-way.
Street and alley were originally dedicated by subdivision as
part of the map of Bowling Land Company, Inc., Lilly View,
Plat Book 1, Page 322.
Area of street and alley as requested for closure is
approximately 18,200 square feet.
Closure, without lot and parcel consolidation, would landlock
a number of adjacent lots.
Room 355 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, 5.'94 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 98t-2344
IN RE:
IN THE COUNCIL O~E"~-CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
Application of BLUE STONE BLOCK, )
INCORPORATED )
for vacation of ALLEY and STREET )
AMENDED
APPLICATION FOR VACATING
PART OF THE MAP OF
LILLY VIEW ADDITION
LAW OFFICES
BErSCh & RHODES
ROANOKE VIRGINIA
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
BLUE STONE BLOCK, INCORPORATED, by counsel, applies to have
the alley shown in Block 17, Map of Lilly View Addition, and a
portion of a street known as Purcell Avenue (formerly Holcombe
Avenue) between Light Street and Tuck Street, and certain lots in
Block 17 and Block 11, Map of Lilly View Addition, in the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, permanently vacated pursuant to Virginia Code
Section 15.1-482(b), as amended. The areas to be vacated are
outlined in red on the map, Exhibit A, attached.
The alley is more particularly described as follows:
BEING the alley extending through Block 17 of the Lilly
View Addition Map, bounded on the east by the center
line of Tuck Street (formerly Clay Avenue, now
vacated); on the south by the northerly line of Lots 1
through 8, Block 17, of the Lilly View Addition Map and
a portion of Tuck Street which was vacated by Ordinance
No. 24125, May 25, 1978; on the west by the easterly
line of Light Street; and on the north by the southerly
line of Lots 9 through 17, Block 17, Lilly View
Addition Map and a portion of Tuck Street which was
vacated by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
The street is more particularly described as follows:
BEING that portion of Purcell Avenue (formerly Holcombe
Avenue) bounded on the west by the easterly line of
Light Street; on the north by the southerly line of
Block 17 of the Lilly View Addition Map and a portion
of Tuck Street which was vacated by Ordinance No.
24125, May 25, 1978; on the east by the center line of
Tuck Street (formerly Clay Avenue, now vacated); and on
the south by the northerly line of Block 11 of the
Lilly View Addition Map and a portion of Tuck Street
which was vacated by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
The lots are more particularly described as follows:
LAW OFFICES
BER$CH & RHODES
ROaNOke. VIrGINiA
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and $ of Block 17, Map of
Lilly View Addition and Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
and 15 of Block 11 of Lilly View Addition including the
portion of the alleyway adjoining each lot which was
vacated by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
BLUE STONE BLOCK, INCORPORATED states that the grounds for
this application are as follows:
1. Petitioner is the owner of all lands abutting the
property to be vacated with the exception of Lots 9, 10 and 15 of
Block 17, Lilly View Addition. This application has been
discussed with all landowners whose property adjoins the property
to be vacated. The names and addresses of all adjoining
landowners are attached as Exhibit B.
2. The property to be vacated is presently not being used.
A large portion of the alley is under water, being part of a
deserted quarry which covers the part of the alley bordered by
lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16 and 17, Block 17, Lilly View
Addition. The paper street known as Purcell Avenue between Light
and Tuck Streets is not used at this time.
3. The applicant desires to use the property to be vacated
for storage of inventory, primarily cinder block and other stone
)roducts used in construction.
4. The acreage parcel resulting from this vacation is
)utlined in green on the map, Exhibit C, attached.
WHEREFORE, BLUE STONE BLOCK, INCORPORATED respectfully
requests that the above-described portion of the Map of Lilly
View Addition be vacated and returned to acreage by the Council
of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in accordance with Virginia
Code Section 15.1-482(b), as amended.
Respectfully submitted,
BLUE STONE BLOCK, INCORPORATED
By Co~el
Da~e~/~ //~ /~,c~
EXHIBIT B
Property owners affected by the closure:
Tax Map No. 3221309
Aflred V. Thomas
3028 Lockridge Rd.
Roanoke, VA 24014
Tax Map No. 3221315
Shirley Farley Picarella
5400 Bernard Dr., S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24014
Tax Map No. 3221311
3221312
3221313
3221314
3221316
3221317
3221401
3221601
3221602
3221603
3221604
3221605
3221606
3221704
3221721
Blue Stone Block, Incorporated
1510 Wallace Ave., N.E.
Roanoke, VA 24012
(the petitioner)
3222023
322202'
322 /
.i,z,::2 o;$ ~ 3222. o,~. T ¢'
LOCATION
DIVVIES0 k
~d~ "/48'"
I
e. /~' ;~o
I)1,10I)OSl-'l.
STRI..'I T
~.~ NUMBER - ]2512032
PU3LISHE~'S FEE - $161.12
FOANOKE TIqES & WOFLD-NEWS
'87
RHI]DES HAFRY S ESQ
P 0 BOX 1529
ROANOKE VA 2z, 007
STATE 01: VIFGINIA
S ITY OF ROANOKE
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, ITHE UNDERSIGNEDJ AN OFFICER OF
T [MES-k'ORLD CORPORATION, WHICH COR-
PORATION IS PUBLISHEF OF THE ROANOKE
TIMES & WORLD-NEWS, A DAILY NEWSPAPER
~UBLISHED IN FOANOKE, IN THE STATE OF
VIRGINIA, DO CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED
~OTICE WAS PUBLISHED IN SAID NEWSPAPERS
3N THE FOLLOWING DATES
03/27/87 NORNING
0~/0~/87 MOR, N I N G
WITNESS, THIS 6TH DAY OF APRIL 1987
.........
FFICEF S S~/GNATURE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
The Council of the City of Roanoke will hold a Public Hear-
lng on Monday, April 13, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., or as soon there-
after as the matter may be heard, in the Council Chamber in the
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., on an application
to vacate the following portions of the plat of the Lilly View
Addition, pursuant to the provisions of §15.1-482(b), Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended:
1. The following lots
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Block 17, Map of
Lilly View Addition and Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14 and 15 of Block 11 of Lilly View Addition includ-
ing the portion of the alleyway adjoining each lot
which was vacated by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25,
1978.
2. The alley described as follows:
BEING the alley extending through Block 17 of the
Lilly View Addition Map, bounded on the east by
the center line of Tuck Street (formerly Clay
Avenue, now vacated); on the south by the norther-
ly line of Lots i through 8, Block 17, of the
Lilly View Addition Map and a portion of Tuck
Street which was vacated by Ordinance No. 24125,
May 25, 1978; on the west by the easterly line of
Light Street; and on the north by the southerly line
of Lots 9 through 17, Block 17, Lilly View Addition
Map and a portion of Tuck Street which was vacated
by Ordinance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
3. The street described as follows:
BEING that portion of Purcell Avenue (formerly Hol-
combe Avenue) bounded on the west by the easterly
line of Light Street; on the north by the southerly
line of Block 17 of the Lilly View Addition Map and
a portion of Tuck Street which was vacated by Ordi-
nance No. 24125, May 25, 1978; on the east by the
center line of Tuck Street (formerly Clay Avenue,
now vacated); and on the south by the northerly
line of Block 11 of the Lilly View Addition Map and
a portion of Tuck Street which was vacated by Ordi-
nance No. 24125, May 25, 1978.
A copy of the application is available for public inspection
in the Office of the City Clerk, Room 456, Municipal Building.
Ail parties an interest and citizens may appear on the above date
and be heard on the question.
GIVEN under my hand this 25th day of March , 1987.
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Please publish in full twice, once on
Friday, March 27, 1987, and once on
Friday, April 3, 1987, in the Roanoke
Times and World News, Morning Edition.
Please send publisher's affidavit to:
Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 456, Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Please bill to:
Mr. Harry S. Rhodes
Attorney
P. O. Box 1529
Roanoke, Virginia 24007
Office o~ the G~/Oe~
April 3, 1987
File #514
Mr. Harry S. Rhodes
Attorney
P. O. Box 1529
Roanoke, Virginia 24007
Dear Mr. Rhodes:
I am enclosing copy of a repont of the City Planning Commission
recommending that the Council of the City of Roanoke grant the
request of your client, Blue Stone Block, Inc., that an alley
extending through Block 17, Map of Lilly View Addition, between
Light Street and Tuck Street, N. E.; a portion of Purcell Avenue,
N. E., between Light Street and Tuck Street, N. E.; and certain
lots in Block 17 and Block 11, Map of Lilly View Addition, be
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the
City of Roanoke at its meeting on Monday, April 6, 1981, a public
hearing on the abovedescribed request has been set for Monday,
April 13, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, fourth
floor of the Municipal Building.
For your 'information, I am also enclosing copy of a notice of the
public hearing and an Ordinance providing for the street closing,
which were prepared by the City Attorney's Office. Please review
the Ordinance and if you have any questions, you may contact Mr.
William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney, at 981-2431.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eric.
Room4..56 /v~niclpalB~ildlng 215 0'~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, V1rginla24011 (703)98't-2541
Mr. Harry S. Rhodes
Page 2
April 3, 1987
CC:
Mr. Alfred V. Thomas, 1301 Orange Avenue, N. E., Roanoke,
Virginia 24014
Ms. Shirley F. Picarella, 5400 Bernard Drive, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24014
Mr. Gordon N. Dixon, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District
Commission, p. O. Box 2569, Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Mrs. Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Commission
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Charles M. Hufffne, City Engineer
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and
Administrator
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin,
Ms. Doris Layne, Office
Zoning
Community Planning
Secretary, City Planning Commission
of Real Estate Valuation
TO THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
PERTAINING TO THE ALLEY CLOSURE REQUEST OF: '87 ~ ~[~ p2V !
Request from Blue Stone Block, Inc., represented by Harry S. )
Rhodes, Attorney, to permanently vacate an alley shown in )
Block 17, Map of Lilly View Addition, and a portion of a street)AFFI-
known as Light Street and Tuck Street, and certain lots in )DAVIT
Block 17 and Block 11, Map of Lilly View Addition, pursuant to )
Section 15.1-482(b), of the Virginia Code, as amended. )
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) TO-WIT:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that
she is a Secretary to the Roanoke City Planning Commission, and as such is
competent to make this affidavit of her own personal knowledge. Affidavit
states that, pursuant to the provisions of ~15.1-341) Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, on behalf of the Planning Commission of the City of
Roanoke she has sent by first-class mail on the 23rd day of February, 1987,
notices of a public hearing to be held on the 4th day of March, 1987, on
the alley closure captioned above to the agent or owner of the parcels
listed below at their last known address:
PARCEL OWNER, AGENT OR OCCUPANT
3221309 Alfred V. Thomas
Shirley F. Picarella
3221315
ADDRESS
1301 Orange Avenue, NE
Roanoke, VA 24014
5400 Bernard Drive, SW
Roanoke, VA 24014
Me--ha Pace Franklin -
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, in the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, this 23th day of February, 1987.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
Misc. 2/23/87 - Council; C. Mgr.
C~t~ce o~ the O~y
February 17, 1987
File #514
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Ordinance No. 25226, I am enclosing copy of an
amended application from Mr. Harry S. Rhodes, Attorney, repre-
senting Blue Stone Block, Inc., requesting that an alley
extending through Block 17, Map of Lilly View Addition, between
Light Street and Tuck Street, N. E.; a portion of Purcell Avenue,
N. E., between Light Street and Tuck Street, N. E.; and certain
lots in Block 17 and Block 11, Map of Lilly View Addition, be
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed.
Si ncerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
Enc.
CC:
Mr. Harry S. Rhodes, Attorney, P. O. Box 1529 Roanoke,
Virginia 24007 '
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Room456 ~JniclpalBuilcllng 2~5G~urchAve~ue, S.W. Roanc~e,~rginla24011 (703)981-2541
Office of the City C]ef/fl
April 22, 1987
File #51
Mr. Claude D. Carter
Attorney
P. 0. Box 13366
Roanoke, Virginia 24033
Dear Mr. Carter:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28601, rezoning a certain
tract of land lying at the southwest corner of the intersection
of Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N. W., designated as
Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, from C-1, Office and
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District,
which Ordinance was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke
on first reading on Monday, April 13, 1957, also adopted by the
Council on second reading on Monday, April 20, 1987, and will
take effect ten days following the date of its second reading.
Sincere ty,
Mary F. Parker, C~C
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
456 Municipal Iksildlng 215 (~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Vlrglnlo 24011 (703) 981-254~1
Mr. Claude D. Carter
Page 2
April 22, 1987
oc:
Mr. Robert D. Blanton, 2616 Forest Hill Avenue, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Girish R. Desai, 5046 Williamson Road, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. Joseph Anthony, 2301 Liberty Road, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Delia Mae W. Fralin, Three Forest Hill Avenue, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Richard L. Bower, 2501 Spring Hollow Avenue,
N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. Gordon N. Dixon, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District
Commission, P. 0. Box 2569, Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Ms. Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Cor~ission
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and
Administrator
Mr. John R. Marlles,
Ms.
Ms.
Zoning
Chief of Community Planning
Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28601.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE to amend §S36-3 and 36-4, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 206, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City
of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, subject to
certain conditions proffered by the applicant.
WHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have the hereinafter described property rezoned from C-1,
Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial
District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant;
and
WHEREAS,
notice to all
the City Planning Commission, which after giving proper
concerned as required by §36-541, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended and after conducting a public hearing on
the matter, has made its recommendation to Council; and
WHEREAS,
Council
thereof
amended,
given an opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed
rezoning; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the aforesaid applica-
tion, the recommendation made to the Council by the Planning
Commission, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and the matters presented
a public hearing was held on said application by the City
at its meeting on April 13, 1987, after due and timely notice
as required by §36-541, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were
at the public hearing, is of the opinion that the hereinafter
described property should be rezoned as herein provided.
THEREFORE, BE IT OtkDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that §§36-3 and 36-4, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
and Sheet No. 206 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, be
amended in the following particular and no other:
Property described as a parcel located at the southwest corner of
the intersection of Liberty Road, N. W., and Forest Hill Avenue, N.
W., being Lots 10, and 11, Block 6, Plasters Map, designated on Sheet
No. 206 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as Official
Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632 be, and is hereby rezoned from C-I,
Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial
District, subject to those conditions proffered by and set forth in
the Petition to Rezone, as amended by amendment filed with the City
Clerk on March 4, 1987, and that Sheet No. 206 of the Zone Map be
changed in this respect.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke Ciiy Planning Commission
April 13, 1987
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Request from Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith,
represented by Claude D. Carter, Attorney, that two
tracts of land located at the southwest corner of the
intersection of Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N.W.
and designated as Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632,
be rezoned from C-i, Office and Institutional District,
to C-2, General Commercial District.
I. Back~round:
Purpose of rezoning is to permit expansion of an existing
distribution operation. The expansion includes office, repair
and storage space.
B. Original petition was unconditional.
Ce
Public hearin~ before the Planning Commission was held on
February 4. Matter was tabled to allow staff time to research
land use and zoning history of the surrounding neighborhood.
II. Current Situation:
A. Amended petition contains the following proffered condition:
"A convenience store, fast food restaurant or gasoline service
station will not be constructed or operated on the properties
designated as Lots 10 and 11, Block 6, according to the
Plasters Map and further designated as Roanoke City Official
Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632 while these properties are
designated under a C-2, General Commercial District rezoning."
Staff has recommended approval of the amended rezoning
petition.
Room 355 Municipal Building 2t5 Church Avenue, 5.W Roanoke, Virginia 240t I (703) 981 2344
March 4, 1987
Re= Amendment to Rezoning Request of Mr. and Mrs. Claude N.
Smith; Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060532
Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B. Smith do hereby amend their
rezoning petition with the following proffered statement: ~_~
"A convenience store ,{ Will not be ~onstruc~-~ ~-
perated on the prope~%ies designated as Lots 10 and
11, Block 6, according to the Plasters Map and further
designated as Roanoke City Official Tax Nos. 2060631
and 2060632 while these properties are designated under
a C-2, General Commercial District rezoning.,,
Claude N. SEit~'
,<: 'Sm . aude ..
Madeleine B.
Smith, her Attorney-in-Fact
MARTIN HOPKINS
LMON AND CARTER. P C
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
RECEIVED
CITY CI.E?FS OFFICE
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, .Y~RG~N~A
IN RE: Rezoning of a tra~t of land lying on the
southwest corner of the intersection of
Liberty Road, NW, and Forest Hill Avenue, PETITION
NW, from C-l, Office and Institutional TO
District to C-2, General Commercial Dis- REZONE
trict.
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROANOKE:
1. The petitioners, Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B.
Smith, husband and wife, own a certain tract of land located in
the City of Roanoke, Virginia, containing less that 1 acre
which adjoins other propert~ owned by your petitioners, located
on the southwest corner of the intersection of Liberty Road,
B-W, and Forest Hill Avenue, NW, and designated on Roanoke City
Appraisal Maps as official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, being
Lots 10 and 11, Block 6, Plasters Map; the said tract is
currently zoned C-l, Office and Institutional District, a map
of the property to be rezoned is attached as Exhibit A.
2. Pursuant to Article VII of Chapter 36, Code of City of
Roanoke, 1979, as amended, the petitioners request the said
property be rezoned from C-1 Office and Institutional District
to C-2, General Commercial District for the purpose of
constructing a warehouse building which will not be larger than
40 feet by 100 feet in size.
3. The petitioners believe that the rezoning of the said
tract of land will further the intent and purposes of the
City's Zoning Ordinance and its comprehensive plan, in that it
MARTtN. HOPKINS,
EMON AND CARTER, P C
ROANOKE. VIRGINIA
will allow your petitioners to allow the expansion of a
business (State Amusement Company, Inc.) to expand its
operation without havingto move to another location.
4. Attached as Exhibit B are the names and addresses of
the owners of all lots or property immediately adjacent to and
immediately across the street from the property to be rezoned.
WHEREFORE, the petitioners request that the above-.
described tract be rezoned as requested in accordance with the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of city of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted,
CLAUDE N. SMITH AND MADELEINE B.
SMITH
Counse~I 7 /
/
MARTIN, HOPKINS, LEMON AND CARTER, P.C.
P.O. BOX 13366
Roanoke, Virginia 24033
/¢6t /
ZO'D,
%
,:%
EXHIBIT B
Property owners affected by a rezoning request of Claude N. Smith
and Madeleine B. Smith involving Lots 10 and 11, Block 6,
according to the Plasters Map, located on the southwest corner of
the intersection of Liberty Road, NW, and Forest Hill Avenue, NW:
Roanoke City
Official Tax No.
Name and Address of Owner
2060633
2060628
2071612
3080601
3080615
Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B.
2306 Liberty Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Robert Dewey Blanton
2616 Forest Hill Avenue,
Roanoke, VA 24012
Girish R. Desai and Balwant G.
5046 Williamson Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Joseph Anthony
2301 Liberty Road,
Roanoke, VA 24012
Delia Mae W. Fralin
3 Forest Hill Avenue, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Smith
Desai
- 3 -
OATION
1206
P R 0 P 0 S I..' I)
I:t I-.' Z ()N I N (}
HILL
C~L/I~TLANr-j
$'l)
0 I:
III './,ONINC
NUMBER - 32512240
PUBLISHER' S FEE - $80,,56
CLAdDE D CARTER
R C BOX 1]~366
R~AN OKE VA 24033
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF ROANOKE
AFFIDAVIT OF
PUBLICATION
[, (THE UNDERSIGNED) AN OFFICER OF
TIMES-WORLD CORPORATION, WHICH COR-
PORATION IS PUBLISHER OF THE ROANOKE
TIMES & WORLD-NEWS, A gAILY NEWSPAPER
PUBLISHED IN ROANOKE, IN THE STATE OF
VIRGINIA~ k)O CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED
~OTICE WAS PUBLISHED IN SAID NEWSPAPERS
ON THE FOLLOWING DATES
03/27/87 MORNING
04/03/8T MORNING
WITNESS, TftIS 6TH DAY OF APRIL
'____
--~-~F~F IC E~ ~ S~TURE
1987
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO WHOM IT MAy CONCERN:
Pursuant to the provisions of Article VII
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended,
of Chapter 36, Code
the Council of the
City of Roanoke will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, April 13,
1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber in the Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., in the said city, on the
question of rezoning from C-1, Office and Institutional District,
to C-2, General Commercial District, the following property:
A parcel located at the southwest corner of the
intersection of Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N.
W., and designated as Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and
2060632, being Lots 10 and 11, Block 6, Plasters Map.
This rezoning is to be subject to certain conditions prof-
fered by the petitioner. A copy of this proposal is available
for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, Room 456,
Municipal Building. All parties in interest and citizens may
appear on the above date and be heard on the question.
GIVEN under my hand this 25th day of March 1987.
Please publish in full twice, once on
Friday, March 27, 1987, and once on
Friday, April 3, 1987, in the Roanoke
Times and World News, Morning Edition.
Please send publisher's affidavit to:
Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 456, Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Please bill to:
Mr. Claude D. Carter
Attorney
P. O. Box 13366
Roanoke, Virginia 24033
Office c~ ~ne C.y Oe,~
March 23, 1987
File #51
Mr. Claude D. Carter
Attorney
P. O. Box 13366
Roanoke, Virginia 24033
Dear Mr. Carter:
I am enclosing copy of a report of the City Planning Cor~ission
recorr~nending that the Council of the City of Roanoke grant the
request of your clients, Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith, that a
certain tract of land lying on the southwest corner of the inter-
section of Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N. W., designated
as Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, be rezoned from C-1,
Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Co~ercial
District, subject to certain proffered conditions.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the
City of Roanoke at its meeting on Monday, April 6, 1981, a public
hearing on the abovedescribed request has been set for Monday,
April 13, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, fourth
floor of the Municipal Building.
For your information, I am also enclosing copy of a notice of the
public hearing and an Ordinance providing for the rezoning, which
were prepared by the City Attorney's Office. Please review the
Ordinance and if you have any questions, you may contact Mr.
William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney, at 951-2431.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
Room 456 Municipal Building 2t50'~utch A',~,nue, S,W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541
Mr. Claude D. Carter
Page 2
March 23, 1987
cc: Mr. Robert Do Blanton, 2616 Forest Hill Avenue, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Girish R. Desai, 5046 Williamson Road, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. Joseph Anthony, 2301 Liberty Road, No W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24012
Ms. Delia Mae lq. Fralin, Three Forest Hill Avenue, N. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. and Mrs. Richard L. Bower, 2501 Spring Hollow Avenue,
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Corr~nunity Planning
Mrs. Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Commission
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and Zoning
Administrator
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Mr. Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Ms. Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
Mr. William M. Backworth, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
CiTY
~o ~N~ CItY CLERK OF ~RE CItY OF ROANOKE, VTR~INIA
PERTAINING TO THE REZONING REQUEST OF:
Request from Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith, represented by )
Claude D. Carter, Attorney, that two tracts of land located )
at the southwest corner of the intersection of Liberty Road )AFFI-
and Forest Hill Avenue, N.W. and designated as Official Tax )DAVIT
Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, be rezoned from C-i, Office and )
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District. )
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
)
CITY OF ROANOKE )
TO-WIT:
The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that
she is a Secretary to the Roanoke City Planning Commission, and as such is
competent to make this affidavit of her own personal knowledge. Affidavit
states that, pursuant to the provisions of ~15.1-341) Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, on behalf of the Planning Conm~ission of the City of
Roanoke she has sent by first-class mail on the 23rd day of February, 1987,
notices of a public hearing to be held on the 4th day of March, 1987, on
the rezoning captioned above to the agent or owner of the parcels listed
below at their last known address:
PARCEL OWNER, AGENT OR OCCUPANT ADDRESS
2060628 Robert D. Blanton
2616 Forest Hill Ave., NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
2070612
Girish R. Desai
Balwant G. Desai
5046 Williamson Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
3080501
Joseph Anthony
2301 Liberty Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
3080615
Delia Mae W. Fralin
3 Forest Hill Ave., NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
2071611
Richard L. Bower
Kathleen E. Bower
2501 Spring Hollow Ave.
Roanoke, VA 24012
Mar[ha Pace Franklin
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, in the City of
Roanoke, Virginia,
this 23rd day of March, 1987.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
March 4, 1987
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Cor, mission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Section 36-538 of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of an amendment to the
petition of Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith, represented by
Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, requesting that a certain tract
of land lying on the southwest corner of the intersection of
Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N. W., designated as
Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, be rezoned from C-1,
Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial
District, subject to certain proffered conditions.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
cc:
Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, P. O. Box 13366, Roanoke,
Virginia 24033
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Core, unity Planning
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Co~mission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
IIoo~n456 /V~nl~lpolBuildlng 215C~un:hAve~ue, S.W. Roanoke, Virglnia24011 (703)981-2541
"87 FI P,-4 P,!:4
March 4, 1987
Re: Amendment to Rezoning Request of Mr. and Mrs. Claude N.
Smith; Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060532
Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B. Smith do hereby amend their
rezoning petition with the following proffered statement: _;_~
convenzence s~ore 4 wzll not be constructed
, , or
operated on the properties designated as Lots 10 and ~
11, Block 6, according to the Plasters Map and further
designated as Roanoke City Official Tax Nos. 2060631
and 2060632 while these properties are designated under
a C-2, General Commercial District rezoning.,,
Claude N. Slit
M~c~e±elne B. Smith by Claude N.
Smith, her Attorney-in-Fact
C~¢e of r~e O~y Cler~
March 2, 1987
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Section 36-538 of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of an amended petition
from Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, representing Claude N. anO
Madeleine B. Smith, requesting that a certain tract of land lying
on the southwest corner of the intersection of Liberty Road and
Forest Hill Avenue, N. W., designated as Official Tax Nos.
2060631 and 2060632, be rezoned from C-1, Office and
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District, sub-
ject to certain proffered conditions.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
Enco
CC:
Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, p. O. Box 13366,
Virginia 24033
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Mrs. Martha p. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Roanoke,
Commission
Room456 MunlclpolBulldlng 2150nurchA~nue, S,W. Roanoke. Vlrginla24011 (703)981-2541
LAW OFFICES
FEi: 30
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA ~4,033-3366
Febl~,a~y 27, 1987
Ms. Mary F. Parker, Roanoke City Clerk
Rotan 456, Mu~cipal Buildi~
215 Church Aver~le, SW
Roanoke, VA 24011
~: Amendment to Rezoning Request of Mr. and Mrs. Claude N. Smith; Official Tax
Nos. 2060631 and 2060632
We have previously filed a rezoning request applicable %o the above-referenced
properties further identified as Lots 10 and 11, Block 6, according to the Plasters
Map.
This matter was heard initially by the Roanoke City Planning C~m,.~ssion on
February 4, 1987, and was conti~,~_ for an additional hearing on March 4, 1987. Our
rezoning request was for a C-2, General C~i~ercial District rezoning and we now wish
to amend our rezoning petitic~ with the following:
Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B. Smith do hereby amend their rezoning
petition with the following proffered statement:
"A convenience store will not be constructed or operated on the
pzu~erties designated es Lots 10 and 11, Block 6, according to
tb~ Plasters Map and further designated as Roanoke City official
Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632 while these properties are
designated under a C-2, General C~,~_rcial District rezoning
without a further authorization of the Council of the City of
Roanoke. ,,
We would appreciate your forwarding copies of this letter to the appi-upriate
officials with the Roanoke City Planning Cc~,,,,~ssion.
Very truly yours,
MARTIN, HO~AND~p. C.
/ Claude D. Carter
C:
Mr. and Mrs. Claude N. Smith
2306 L~herty Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
TO THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIR~ACL~'¢ ~ ;~ ~ ~E
PERTAINING TO THE REZONING REQUEST OF:
Request from Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith, represented by )
Claude D. Carter, Attorney, that two tracts of land located )
at the southwest corner of the intersection of Liberty Road )AFFI-
and Forest Hill Avenue, N.W. and designated as Official Tax )DAVIT
Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, be rezoned from C-i, Office and )
Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial District. )
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
)
CITY OF ROANOKE )
TO-WIT:
The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that
she is a Secretary to the Roanoke City Planning Commission, and as such is
competent to make this affidavit of her own personal knowledge. Affidavit
states that, pursuant to the provisions of ~15.1-341) Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, on behalf of the Planning Co~ission of the City of
Roanoke she has sent by first-class mail on the 2~h day of January, 1987,
notices of a public hearing to be held on the 4th day of February, 1987, on
the rezoning captioned above to the agent or owner of the parcels listed
below at their last known address:
PARCEL OWNER, AGENT OR OCCUPANT
2060628 Robert D. Blanton
Girish R. Desai
Balwant G. Desai
2070612
3080501
3080615
Joseph Anthony
Delia Mae W. Fralin
2071611 Richard L. Bower
Kathleen E. Bower
ADDRESS
2616 Forest Rill Ave., NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
5046 Williamson Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
2301 Liberty Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
3 Forest Hill Ave., NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
2501 Spring Hollow Ave.
Roanoke, VA 24012
Mai~ha Pace Franklin ~
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, in the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, this 2~h day of January, 1987.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
'87 16
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ROANOKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
The Roanoke City Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on
Wednesday, February 4, 1987, at 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard, in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor,
Municipal Building, in order to consider the following:
Request from Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith, represented by
Claude D. Carter, Attorney, that two tracts of land located at the
southwest corner of the intersection of Liberty Road and Forest
Hill Avenue, N.W. and designated as Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and
2060632, be rezoned from C-i, Office and Institutional District, to
C-2, General Commercial District.
A copy of said application is available for review in the Office of
Community Planning, Room 355, Municipal Building.
Ail parties in interest and citizens may appear on the above date
and be heard on the matter.
Martha P. Franklin, Secretary
Roanoke City Planning Commission
Please run in the morning edition on Tuesday, January 20, 1987
Please run in the evening edition on Tuesday, January 27, 1987
Please send affidavit of publication to:
Office of Community Planning,
Room 355, Municipal Building,
Roanoke, VA 24011
Please bill:
Claude D. Carter, Esquire
Martin, Hopkins, Lemon and Carter
P.O. Box 13366
Roanoke, VA 24033
982-1000
Office of the C[~'
January 16, 1987
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Section 36-538 of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of a petition and list of
property owners from Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, representing
Claude N. and Madeleine B. Smith, requesting that a certain tract
of land lying on the southwest corner of the intersection of
Liberty Road and Forest Hill Avenue, N. W., designated as
Official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, be rezoned from C-1,
Office and Institutional District, to C-2, General Commercial
District.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
Enc.
cc:
Mr. Claude D. Carter, Attorney, P. O. Box 13366, Roanoke,
Virginia 24033
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Room 456 Munlcipol Building 2t5 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, 'virginia 240t t (703) 98t-254t
MARTIN, HOPKINS,
LEMON AND CARTER, PC.
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROAN~KE'~i~'VII%GINI~
IN RE: Rezoning of a tract of land lying on the
southwest corner of the intersection of
Liberty Road, NW, and Forest Hill Avenue, PETITION
NW, from C-l, Office and Institutional TO
District to C-2, General Commercial Dis- REZONE
trict.
TO THE HONOI~ABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROANOKE:
1. The petitioners, Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B.
Smith, husband and wife, own a certain tract of land located in
the city of Roanoke, Virginia, containing less that 1 acre
which adjoins other property owned by your petitioners, located
on the southwest corner of the intersection of Liberty Road,
NW, and Forest Hill Avenue, NW, and designated on Roanoke City
Appraisal Maps as official Tax Nos. 2060631 and 2060632, being
Lots 10 and 11, Block 6, Plasters Map; the said tract is
currently zoned C-l, Office and Institutional District, a map
of the property to be rezoned is attached as Exhibit A.
2. Pursuant to Article VII of Chapter 36, Code of City of
Roanoke, 1979, as amended, the petitioners request the said
property be rezoned from C-1 Office and Institutional District
to C-2, General Commercial District for the purpose of
constructing a warehouse building which will not be larger than
40 feet by 100 feet in size.
3. The petitioners believe that the rezoning of the said
tract of land will further the intent and purposes of the
city's Zoning Ordinance and its comprehensive plan, in that it
MARTIN, HOPKINS,
LEMON AND CARTER, P.C
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
will allow your petitioners to allow the expansion of a
business (State Amusement Company, Inc.) to expand its
operation without having to move to another location.
4. Attached as Exhibit B are the names and addresses of
the owners of all lots or property immediately adjacent to and
immediately across the street from the property to be rezoned.
WHEREFORE, the petitioners request that the above-
described tract be rezoned as requested in accordance with the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of City of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted,
CLAUDE N. SMITH AND MADELEINE B.
SMITH
Claude D. Carter, Esquire'
MARTIN, HOPKINS, LEMON AND CARTER,
P.O. Box 13366
Roanoke, Virginia 24033
_,.I£AND '
'~°v¢~,~v£ )'. .,;
COUR~LAND
1.07 Ac. ~
EXHIBIT B
Property owners affected by a rezoning request of Claude N. Smith
and Madeleine B. Smith involving Lots 10 and 11, Block 6,
according to the Plasters Map, located on the southwest corner of
the intersection of Liberty Road, NW, and Forest Hill Avenue, NW:
Roanoke City
Official Tax No.
Name and Address of Owner
2060633
2060628
2071612
3080601
3080615
Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B. Smith
2306 Liberty Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Robert Dewey Blanton
2616 Forest Hill Avenue,
Roanoke, VA 24012
Girish R. Desai and Balwant G.
5046 Williamson Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
Desai
Joseph Anthony
2301 Liberty Road,
Roanoke, VA 24012
Delia Mae W. Fralin
3 Forest Hill Avenue, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
- 3 -
STATEMENT OF REZONING
LOCATION & DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ~/~ /Vo. ~/
ZONED dr/'
REQUEST TO BE ZONED
//
FE//~/69~ ~ · ~ ~
Ho~ms, L~o~ ~D C~, P. C.
~0ANOKE, VIRGINIA 24033- 3366 ~.~ coo[ ~o~
January 13, 1987
Ms. Mary Parker
Clerk, City of Roanoke
Municipal Building
Roanoke, VA 24011
Re: Rezoning Request of Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B. Smith
Dear Ms. Parker:
On behalf of Claude N. Smith and Madeleine B. Smith, I am
attaching, herewith, an original and one copy of a Petition to
Rezone requesting that certain property owned by them located on
the southwest corner of Liberty Road, NW, and Forest Hill Avenue,
NW, be rezoned from Commercial 1 District to Commercial 2
District in order that the business, State Amusement Company,
Inc., which is located on adjacent property, can expand its
business operation.
I am also attaching, herewith, a check in the amount of $310
to cover this rezoning request, and our petition includes a map
showing the property to be rezoned as well as the names and
addresses of the adjoining property owners who would be affected
by this rezoning.
We would appreciate your processing this in the normal
manner, and as always, appreciate your interest and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
MARTIN, HOPKINS, ~LEMON AND CARTER, P.C.
Clauae D. Carter
CDC/jeo
Attachments
c: Mr. and Mrs. Claude ~. Smith
2306 Liberty Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24012
MEMBER, COMMONWEALTH LAW GROUP
Office of t~e City Clen~
April 22, 1987
File #51
Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr.
Attorney
P. 0. Box 19028
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Dear Mr. Sapp:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28602, rezoning a certain
tract of land, being a portion of Lot 2, Hemlock Hills
Subdivision, located at 4415 North Road, N. W., designated as
Official Tax No. 6380304, from RS-3, Single Family Residential
District, to C-2, General Commercial District, which Ordinance
was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first
reading on Monday, April 13, 1987, also adopted by the Council on
second reading on itonday, April 20, 1987, and will take effect
ten days following the date of its second reading.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Ene.
Room 456 M,unlclpal Building 215 (~u~-h Avenue, $.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541
Mr. William H. Sapp,
Page 2
April 22, 1987
Jro
CC:
State of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia 23219
Mr. Abney W. Turley, 5102 Tomarisk Circle, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24019
Mr. Donald C. Hatter, 8212 Loman Drive, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24019
Mr. John E. Thornhill, 3915 Winding Way Road, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24015
Mr. James E. Lowe, 4415 North Road, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24019
Mr. Gordon N. Dixon, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District
Corr~ission, P. 0. Box 2569, Roanoke, Virginia 24010
Mr°
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Administrator
Mr. John R. Marlles,
Ms.
Ms.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Earl Bo Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Wilburn Co Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Von W. Moody, fll, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Commission
L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and
Zoning
Chief of Community Planning
Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Corr~nission
Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28602.
AN ORDINANCE to amend §§36-3 and 36-4, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 638, Seetional 1976 Zone Map, City
of Roanoke, to rezone eertain property within the City, subjeet to
certain eonditions proffered by the applieant.
WHEREAS, applieation has been made to the Council of the City of
Roanoke to have the hereinafter described property rezoned from RS-3,
Single Family Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial
District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant;
and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, which after giving proper
notice to all eoneerned as required by §36-541, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended and after conducting a public hearing on
the matter, has made its recommendation to Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said application by the City
Council at its meeting on April 13, 1987, after due and timely notice
thereof as required by §36-541, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, at which hearing all parties 'in interest and citizens were
given an opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed
rezoning; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the aforesaid applica-
tion, the recommendation made to the Couneil by the Planning
Cor~nission, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and the matters presented
at the publie hearing, is of the opinion that the hereinafter
described property should be rezoned as herein provided.
THEREFORE., BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that §§36-3 and 36-4, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended,
and Sheet No. 638 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, be
amended in the following particular and no other:
Property described as the southern 149.87 feet of Lot 2, Hemlock
Hills Subdivision, located at 4415 North Road, designated on Sheet No.
638 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as Official Tax
No. 6380304 be, and is hereby rezoned from RS-3, Single Family
Residential District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to
those conditions proffered by and set forth in the Amended Petition to
Rezone filed with the City Clerk on March 4, 1987, and that Sheet No.
of the Zone Map be changed in this respect.
638
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Raanoke City Planning Commission
April 13, 1987
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Request from Robert Catib that a tract of land located at
4415 North Road, N.W., and designated as a portion of
Official Tax No. 6380304 be rezoned from RS-3, Single
Pamily Residential District to C-2, General Commercial
District, such rezoning to be subject to certain
conditions proffered by the petitioner.
I. Background:
ae
Purpose of the rezoning is to permit the renovation of a
restaurant currently located on the adjacent lot located at
1609 Peters Creek Road (Brown Derby Restaurant).
Be
Original petition was unconditional and sought rezoning of
entire lot, tax no. 6380304.
C. Staff's recommendation was denial of original petition.
II. Current Situation:
me
Amended petition submitted March 4, 1987, seeks to rezone only
that portion of the subject property necessary for renovations
to the Brown Derby Restaurant.
Be
Amended petition is subject to the following proffered
condition:
"a. The subject property shall be constructed in substantial
conformity with the attached site plan, Exhibit 3a and 3b."
Room 355 Municipal Building 2t 5 Churc~ Avenue, 5."~ Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2344
'87 M~ -4
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
IN RE:
Rezoning of Lot 2 Hemlock Hills Subdivision ) AMENDED
located at 4415 North Road, Roanoke, Virginia, ) PETITION
from RS-3, Single-Family Residential ) TO
District, to C-2, General Commercial District. ) REZONE
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROANOKE:
The petitioner Robert M. Catib, owns a lot of land
located in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, containing
less than 1 acre, consisting of Lot 2 Hemlock Hills
Subdivision located at 4415 North Road, and designated
on Roanoke City Appraisal Maps as Official Tax No.
6380304. This lot is currently zoned as RS-3,
Single-Family ResidentiaI District. A copy of the
zoning map is attached as Exhibit 1. A copy of a map
showing the location of surrounding buildings is
attached as Exhibit 2. A copy of the site plan is
attached as Exhibit 3 and 3a.
o
Pursuant to Article VII of Chapter 36, Code of the
City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the petitioner
requests that the southern 149.87 feet of said
property (indicated on Exhibit l) and described as
follows:
BEGINNING at a point 100 feet S. 10 deg. 0 min. W.
of a point on the southerly side of North Road (20
feet wide) 175.5 feet easterly from the point of
intersection of the said south side of said road
produced to intersection with the centerline of
Peters Creek Road; thence S. 86 deg. 30 min. E.,
80.5 feet to a point; thence S. 10 deg. 0 min. W.,
149.87 ft to a point; thence with the north line
of Lot no. "2-A", N. 86 deg. 30 min. W., 80.5 feet
to a point; thence with the dividing Iine between
Lots nos. 1 and 2, N. 10 deg. 0 min. E., 149.87
feet to the place of Beginning, and being the
center section of Lot 2, Section 1, according to
the map showing subdivision of Alice B. Thomas, of
record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court
for the County of Roanoke, Va., in Plat Book 1,
page 338.
be rezoned from RS-3, Single-Family Residential
District, to C-2, General Commercial District, for the
purpose of renovating and improving a restaurant
currently located on the adjacent lot at 1609 Peters
Creek Road (6380302).
The petitioner believes that the rezoning of the said
lot will further the intent and purposes of the City's
Zoning Ordinance and its comprehensive plan, in that
it will:
Provide room for expansion and improvements
the restaurant located at ~609 Peters Creek
Road.
to
The current iot on which the restaurant is
located is inadequate to provide space for open
space and buffer area between the restaurant and
surrounding properties.
Other commercial properties along Peters Creek
Road are deeper than the lot on which the
restaurant is located.
The additiona! space would be used to move the
restaurant back from Peters Creek Road, provide
a buffer between properties in back of the
restaurant and provide additiona! parking space.
The expansion of the restaurant would not create
traffic problems.
The current lot on which the restaurant is
located is within the flood zone. Improvements
include raising the leveI of the restaurant
above the flood zone plane.
g. Improvements and expansion to the restaurant
will provide additionaI tax revenues.
h. The restaurant does not serve aIcoholic
beverages.
i. Drainage for water runoff is inciude on the site
plan.
Attached as Exhibit 3 are the names and addresses of
the owners of all lots or property immediately
adjacent to or immediately across the street from the
property to be rezoned.
The rezoning shai1 be subject to the following
proffered condition:
- 3
The subject property shall be constructed in
substantial conformity with the attached site
plan, Exhibit 3a and 3b.
WHEREFORE, the petitioner requests that the above-described
lot be rezoned as requested in accordance with the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted,
William H. Sapp, Jr.
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box ~9028
Roanoke, VA 24019
366-6589
William H. Sapp,' ~
Counsel for Petitioner
Robert M. Catib
February 28, ~987
90£08~
' u
dYW 9NINOZ
~Nt]Z]~ Oi NOIili3d
N~C~ OR ktACY, ~
.495
20Ac
!~ ~ ~ $gNIOlInB IN~DV['O¥2 ±IaIHX3
: 699AC ' 3NOZ3~ Ol NOIlIi3d
Tax No.
6380304
6380305
6380202
6380301
6380401
6380303
PETITION TO REZONE
EXHIBIT 4
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
Name
Petitioner
State of Virginia
Abney W. Tunley
Donald C. Hatter
John E Thornhi11
James Edward Lowe
Address
Richmond, VA
5102 Tomarisk Cir. NW, Roanoke, VA 24019
8212 Loman Dr. NW, Roanoke, VA 240~9
3915 Winding Way Rd. SW, Roanoke, VA 24015
4415 North Rd. NW, Roanoke, VA 24017
;~i
~i
0
-!
0
~'~ NUMBER - 32512545
PUBLISHER'S FEE - $77.52
& W[~RLO-NEWS
MM H SAPP JR
PO R~X 19028
ROANOKE VA 24019
STATE OF VIRGINIA
= ITY OF RCANOKE
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, (THE UNDERSIGNED) AN OFFICER OF
TIMES-WORLD CORPORATION, WHICH COR-
PORATION IS PUBLISHER OF THE Rt]ANOKE
TIMES & WORLD-NEWS, A DAILY NEWSPAPER
PU~3LISHED IN ROANOKE, IN THE STATE OF
VIRGINIA, DO CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED
~JOTICE WAS PUBLISHED IN SAID NEWSPAPERS
ON THE FOLLOWING DATES
D3/27/87 MORNING
04/03/87 MORNING
~ITNESS, THIS 6TH DAY OF APRIL 1987
......
OFFICER'S SIGNAT/(JRE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Pursuant to the provisions of Article VII of Chapter 36, Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the Council of the
City of Roanoke will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, April 13,
1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber in the Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., in the said city, on the
question of rezoning from RS-3, Single Family Residential
District, to C-2, General Commercial District, the following pro-
perty:
The southern 149.87 feet of Lot 2,
Hemlock Hills
Subdivision, located at 4415 North Road, and designated
on Roanoke City Appraisal Maps as Official Tax No.
6380304.
This rezoning is to be subject to certain conditions prof-
fered by the petitioner. A copy of this proposal is available
for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, Room 456,
Municipal Building. Ail parties in interest and citizens may
appear on the above date and be heard on the question.
GIVEN under my hand this 25th day of Narch 1987.
Please publish in full twice, once on
Friday, March 27, 1987, and once on
Friday, April 3, 1987, in the Roanoke
Times and World News, Morning Edition.
Please send publisher's affidavit to:
Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 456, Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Please bill to:
Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr.
Attorney
P. Oo Box 19028
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Office of the City Clerk
March 23, 1987
File #51
Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr.
Attorney
P. 0. Box 19028
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Dear Mr. Sapp:
I am enclosing copy of a report of the City Planning Corm~ission
recorr~ending that the Council of the City of Roanoke grant the
request of your client, Robert M. Catib, that a certain tract of
land, being a portion of Lot 2, Hemlock Hills Subdivision,
located at 4415 North Road, N. W., designated as Official Tax No.
6380304, be rezoned from RS-3, Single Family Residential
District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain
proffered conditions.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the
City of Roanoke at its meeting on Monday, April 6, 1981, a public
hearing on the abovedescribed request has been set for Monday,
April 13, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, fourth
floor of the Municipal Building.
For your information, I am also enclosing copy of a notice of the
public hearing and an Ordinance providing for the rezoning, which
were prepared by the City Attorney's Office. Please review the
Ordinance and if you have any questions, you may contact Mr.
William M. Itackworth, Assistant City Attorney, at 981-2431.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
I~oo¢'n456 Mun~clpalBuilding 215 C~urch Avenue, S,W. Roanc:~e, Vlrginia24011 (703)981-254~
Mr. William Ho Sapp, Jr.
Page 2 ~'
March 23, 1987
cc: State of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia 23219
Mr. Abney W. Turley, 5102 Tomarisk Circle, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24019
Mr. Donald C. Hatter, 8212 Loman Drive, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24019
Mr. John Eo Thornhill, 3915 Winding Way Road, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24015
Mr. James E. Lowe, 4415 North Road, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24019
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Comn~nity Planning
Mrs. Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Commission
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Corrgnission
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and Zoning
Administrator
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Mr. Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Ms. Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
CiTY CL~'.~:t~ '~'F!6~:'
TO THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
'87 2?
PERTAINING TO THE REZONING REQUEST OF:
Request from Robert M. Catib, represented by William H. )
Sapp, Jr., Attorney, that a tract of land located at 4415 )
North Road, N.W., Official Tax No. 6380304, be rezoned from)AFFIDAVIT
RS-3, Single Family Residential District to C-2, General )
Commercial District. )
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) TO-WIT:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that
she is a Secretary to the Roanoke City Planning Commission, and as such is
competent to make this affidavit of her own personal knowledge. Affidavit
states that, pursuant to the provisions of ~15.1-341) Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, on behalf of the Planning Commission of the City of
Roanoke she has sent by first-class mail on the 23rd day of February, 1987,
notices of a public hearing to be held on the 4th day of March, 1987, on
the rezoning captioned above to the agent or owner of the parcels listed
below at their last known address:
PARCEL OWNER, AGENT OR OCCUPANT ADDRESS
6380305 State of Virginia Richmond, VA 23219
6380202 Abney W. Turley 5102 Tomarisk Cir., NW
Roanoke, VA 24019
6380301 Donald C. Hatter 8212 Loman Drive, NW
Roanoke, VA 24019
6380401 John E. Thornhill 3915 Winding Way Road, SW
Roanoke, VA 24015
6380303 James E. Lowe 4415 North Road, NW
Roanoke, VA 24019
Martha Pace Franklin
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, in the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, this 23rd day of February, 1987.
Notary Public /
My Commission Expires:
March 4, 1987
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Section 36-538 of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, [ am enclosing copy of an amended petition
from Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr., Attorney, representing Robert M.
Catib, requesting that a certain tract of land, being a portion
of Lot 2, Hemlock Hills Subdivision, located at 4415 North Road,
N. W., designated as Official Tax No. 6380304, be rezoned from
R$-3, Single Family Residential District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain proffered conditions.
Sincerely,
MFP:se
Eric.
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr., Attorney, P. O. Aox 19028,
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Mrs. Martha p. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
I~'n456 MunlclpalBuildlng 215 Church Avenue, $.W. Roonoke, Virginla240.1,1 (703)98"1-254,1
WILLIAM H. SAPP, JR.
CITY
P, O. BOX 19028
5219 PETERS CREEK RD., N.W.
ROANOKE, VA. 24019
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT
ATTORNEY AT LAW
(703) 366-658~
March 3, 1987
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL Of THE
CITY OF ROANOKE:
After reviewing the comments of our planning staff, I have
revised the petition of Robert M. Catib for rezoning, to
address the concerns expressed in their report.
Paragraph 2 has been amended to ask for rezoning of only
that portion of Lot 2 that is necessary for renovations to
the Brown Derby Restaurant.
Paragraph 3(e) has eliminated any reference to an exit on
North Road.
The Site Plan with these changes has been incorporated into
the petition as Exhibit 3a and 3b.
Your favorable recommendation on this request would be
appreciated.
Yours very truly,
Misc. 2/23/87 - Council; C. Mgr.
Office of t~e City
February 17, 1987
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Section 36-538 of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of a petition and list of
property owners from Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr., Attorney, repre-
senting Robert M. Catib, requesting that a certain tract of land
being Lot 2, Hemlock Hills Subdivision, located at 4415 North
Road, N. W., designated as Official Tax No. 6380304, be rezoned
from RS-3, Single Family Residential District, to C-2, General
Commercial District.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
EnCo
CC:
Mr. William H. Sapp, Jr., Attorney, P. O. Box 19028,
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
P, oom 456 Municipal Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Vlrglnio 24011 (703) 981-254t
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
IN RE:
Rezoning of Lot 2 Hemlock Hills Subdivision ) PETITION
located at 44~5 North Road, Roanoke, Virginia, ) TO
from RS-3, Single-Family Residential ) REZONE
District, to C-2, General Commercial District. )
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROANOKE:
The petitioner Robert M. Catib, owns a lot of land
located in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, containing
less than 1 acre, consisting of Lot 2 Hemlock Hills
Subdivision located at 44~5 North Road, and designated
on Roanoke City Appraisal Maps as Official Tax No.
6380304. This lot is currently zoned as RS-3,
Single-Family Residential District. A survey of the
property to be rezoned is attached as Exhibit ~. A
copy of the zoning map is attached as Exhibit 2.
Pursuant to Article VII of Chapter 36, Code of the
City of Roanoke (~979), as amended, the pet~itioner
requests that the said property be rezoned from RS-3,
Single-Family Residential District, to C-2, Genera1
Commercial District, for the purpose of renovating and
improving a restaurant currently located on the
adjacent lot at ~609 Peters Creek Road (6380302).
The petitioner believes that the rezoning of the said
lot wi1! further the intent and purposes of the City's
Zoning Ordinance and its comprehensive plan, in that
it will:
a o
Provide room for expansion
the restaurant located at
Road.
and improvements to
1609 Peters Creek
b o
The current lot on which the restaurant is
inadequate to provide space for open space
buffer area between the restaurant and
surrounding properties.
and
Other commercial properties along Peters Creek
Road are deeper than the lot on which the
restaurant is located.
The additional space would be used to move the
restaurant back from Peters Creek Road, provide
a buffer between properties in back of the
restaurant and provide additional parking space.
- 2 -
The side roads, North Road and Mountain View
Drive are not congested, but the additional
space would provide an alternative exit on North
Road, a short dead end street.
The current lot on which the restaurant is
located is within the flood zone. Improvements
include raising the level of the restaurant
above the flood zone plane.
g. Improvements and expansion to the restaurant
will provide additional tax revenues.
h. The restaurant does not serve alcoholic
beverages.
Attached as Exhibit 3 are the names and addresses of
the owners of all lots or property immediately
adjacent to or immediately across the street from the
property to be rezoned.
WHEREFORE, the petitioner requests that the above-described
lot be rezoned as requested in accordance with the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert M. Catib February
William H. Sapp, Jr.
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 19028
Roanoke, VA 24019
366-6589
10, 1987
EXHIBI$ 1 ZONING ~AP' ~
.._.6380319 .~_?__ -- -- ~ .
,~'5. 0 ~5. 0
- 4 -
EXHIBIT 2 - SURVEY
--~/~" ·
', 0
- 5 -
Tax No.
6380304
6380305
6380202
6380301
6380401
6380303
PETITION TO REZONE
EXHIBIT 3
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
Name
Petitioner
State of Virginia
Abney W. Turley
Donald C. Hatter
John E Thornhill
James Edward Lowe
Address
Richmond, VA
5102 Tomarisk Cir. NW, Roanoke, VA
8212 Loman Dr. NW, Roanoke, VA 24019
3915 Winding Way Rd. SW, Roanoke, VA
4415 North Rd. NW, Roanoke, VA 24017
24019
24015
Office ~ the City Clen~
April 22, 1987
Pile #51
Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr.
Attorney
P. 0. Box 720
Roanoke, Virginia 24004
Dear Mr. Layman:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 28603, rezoning a tract of
land containing 12.37 acres, located on the westerly side of
Grandin Road Extension, south of Airview Road, S. W., designated
as a portion of Official Tax Nos. 5090204 and 5090203, from RS-l,
Single Family Residential District, to RG-1, General Residential
District, subject to certain proffered conditions, and repealing
Ordinance No. 28385, adopted by the Council on Monday, October
20, 1986, which Ordinance No. 28603 was adopted by the Council of
the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, April 13, 1987,
also adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, April
20, 1987, and will take effect ten days following the date of its
second reading, and at such time as the applicant files with the
City Clerk a fully executed Conditional Zoning Performance Bond
in the total amount of $65,000.00
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Eno.
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Awnue, S.W. Roanc~e, Virginia 240t I (703) 981-254t
M,. Daniel F. Layman,
Page 2
April 22, 1987
Jr.
cc:
Southwes~ Plaza Associate8 Ltd., c/o Lat Purser & Associates,
230 Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Ms. Elizabeth Logan, c/o Ms. Virginia C. Logan, 34 Townsend
Street, Port Chester, New York 10573
Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Smith, 4706 Grandin Road E~tension,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. William D. Coleman, P. O. Bo~ 13274, Roanoke,
Virginia 24032
Mrs. Helen E. Eljer, 4902 Grandin Road, Apt. 317, Roanoke,
Virginia 24015
Mr. and Mrs. Luther J. Martin, 4816 Grandin Road Extension,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Fairington Apartments of Roanoke, 4922 Grandin Road
Extension, Roanoke, Virginia 24016
F & M Associates, P. Oo Box 90, Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Marvin Ao Poll, 4734 Norwood Street, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. ~Vaiter Wo Tyree, 4724 Norwood Street,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mrs. Helen R. Reed, 4716 Norwood Street, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Timothy L. Strawn, 4710 Norwood Street,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. John S. Eubank, 1920 Airview Road, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24016
Mr. Albert Jo Wahl, 1926 Airview Road, S. Wo, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. John W. Chandler, 1934 Airview Road,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Donald Eo Bowies, 1942 Airview Road, So
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Ms. Carolyn W. Parker, 4645 Grandin Road Extension, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018 .
Ms. Ruth M. York,' 4905 ~Voodmar Drive, Roanoke, Virginia
24018
Mr. Randall Lonnie Pizzino, 1916 Lytham Drive, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Fred Wo McEimurray, 4818 Norwood Street, So
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Marion Ao Turner, 4810 Norwood Street, So
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. John Ko Shoemaker, 4806 Norwood Street, S.
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr° and Mrs. William A° McBroom, 4756 Norwood Street, So
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Mr° William J. Moody, 4743 Norwood Street, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24016
Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Gilsdorf, 4740 Norwood Street, S.
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Harvey C. Switzer, 4906 Norwood Street, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. Daniel F. Layman,
Page 3
April 22, 1987
Jro
cc:
Cot, mission,
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Administrator
Mr. John R. Marlles,
Ms.
Ms.
Gordon N. Dixon, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District
Zoning
Chief of Community Planning
Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Corr~nission
Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
P. O. Box 2569, Roanoke, Virginia 24010
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Susan S. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Co,~tission
L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Ronald B. Miller, Building Corr~issioner and
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 20th day 0f April, 1987.
No. 28603.
AN ORDINANCE to amend §§36-3 and 36-4, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 509, Sectional 1976
Zone Map, City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the
City, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant;
and to repeal Ordinance No. 28385.
WHEREAS, applieation has been made to the Council of the City
of Roanoke to have the hereinafter described property rezoned
from RS-I, Single Family Residential District, to RG-1, General
Residential District, subject
the applicant; and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No.
to certain conditions proffered by
28385, adopted October 20, 1986,
Council approved the rezoning of the hereinafter described pro-
perty to RG-1, General Residential District, subject to certain
conditions proffered by the applicant, but this Ordinance has
not yet become effeetive by virtue of the fact that the required
Conditional Zoning Performance Bond has not been filed with the
City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, whieh after giving
proper notiee to all eoneerned as required by §36-541, Code of
the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended and after condueting a
public hearing on the matter, has made its recommendation to
Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on said application by the
City Council at its meeting on April 13, 1987, after due and
timely notice thereof as required by §36-541, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, at which hearing all parties in
interest and citizens were given an opportunity to be heard, both
for and against the proposed rezoning; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the aforesaid appli-
cation, the recommendation made to the Council by the Planning
Commission, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and the matters pre-
sented at the public hearing, is of the opinion that the herein-
after described property should be rezoned as herein provided.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that §§36-3 and 36-4, Code of
amended, and Sheet No. 509 of
of Roanoke, be amended in the
the City of Roanoke (1979), as
the Sectional 1976 Zone r~p, City
following particular and no other:
Property described as a tract of land on the westerly side of
Grandin Road Extension south of Airview Road, containing 12.37
acres, more or less, designated on Sheet No. 509 of the Sectional
1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as a portion of Official Tax Nos.
5090204 and 5090203 (said tract does not include a portion of
these two parcels consisting of 2.1 ac~es fronting on Airview
Road, varying in depth from 200 feet, more or less, on its
westerly boundary to 100 feet, more or less, on its frontage with
Grandin Road Extension, which portion is
Family Residential District), be, and is
RS-l, Single Family Residential District,
to remain RS-l, Single
hereby rezoned from
to RG-1, General
Residential District, subject to those conditions proffered by
and set forth in the petitioner's Amended Petition to Rezone
(To Change Proffered Conditions) filed with the City Clerk on
February 17, 1987, and that Sheet No. 509 of the Zone Map be
changed in this respect.
BE IT FURTHER OP~DAINED that this ordinance shall not take
effect until the applicant shall have filed with thc City Clerk a
fully executed Conditional Zoning Performance Bond, pursuant to
§36-55(a)(3), Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, in
the total amount of $65,000, conditioned upon the completion of
those physical improvements to the rezoned property proffered by
the applicant and specified and described in a report dated
October 10, 1986, of the Zoning Administrator to the Office of
City Planning, a copy of which has been filed with the City
Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Ordinance 28385, adopted October
20, 1986, be and it is hereby REPEALED.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke City Planning Commission
April 13, 1987
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Request from Atlantic States Development Co., Agent for
Nicholas and Ann Munger, represented by Daniel F. Layman,
Jr., Attorney, that certain conditions proffered in
conjunction with the rezoning of certain tracts of land
located on the westerly side of Grandin Road Extension,
south of Airview Road, S.W., Official Tax Nos. 5090204
(part) and 5090203, be changed.
I. Back,round:
Property was rezoned from RS-1 to RG-1 subject to the
following conditions:
The tract as rezoned will be used for a maximum of 192
single family attached dwelling units (condominiums).
The construction of the project will be subject to
approval from the necessary state authorities for all
condominium documents.
The site will be developed in substantial conformity
[with] utilizing the site plan prepared by Lumsden and
Associates, dated August, 1986, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject only to such
changes as are specifically required by the City during
site plan review.
The storm water retention facility on the property will
be constructed and designed to handle a 20-year storm.
Petition was approved by City Council on October 20, 1986.
Ordinance rezontng property was subject to the posting of a
bond by the petitioner in the amount of $65,000. Said bond
has not yet been posted.
Room 355 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S,'gX Roanoke, Virginia 240t 1 (703) 981-2344
II. Current Situation:
III.
Petitioner has determined that the project may be more
feasible if it were developed as a townhouse project with each
unit being subdivided and sold, fee simple.
Changes requested by the petitioner require that the original
condition which proffered a single specific site plan be
changed to proffer alternative forms of development.
Petitioner has requested that the original conditions be
replaced with the following:
The tract, as rezoned, will be used for a maximum of 192
single family attached dwelling units (condominiums) or
100 townhouse units. To the extent that condominiums are
constructed on the property, the construction of the
project will be subject to approval from the necessary
state authorities for all condominium documents.
The site will be developed in substantial conformity with
either (i) the site plan for condominium development
prepared by Buford T. Lumsden and Associates, P.C., dated
August, 1986, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit C, or (ii) the site plan for townhouse
development prepared by Buford T. Lumsden and Associates,
P.C., dated January, 1987, a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit D, depending on the alternative finally
selected by the petitioner. In either case, the site
plan will be subject to such changes as may be required
by the City during site plan review.
The storm water retention facility on the property will
be constructed and designed to handle a 20-year storm.
Neighborhood meeting resulted in generally positive response
to the townhouse design. Concerns related to architectural
detail, phasing of construction and purchase price of units.
Plannin~ staff has recommended approval of the requested
change in conditions.
Issues:
A. Land use.
B. Zoning.
C. Traffic.
D. Utilities.
E. Neighborhood.
F. Comprehensive Plan.
IV. Alternatives:
A. City Council approve the requested change in conditions.
Land use becomes multi-family. Major change from
previous rezoning is the change in overall density which
drops from 15 units per acre to 8 units per acre.
Development plans call for all units to be sold either as
fee simple lots or as condominium units. The potential
drop in the density of the project makes it more
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and the
scale of the townhouse buildings will be more in keeping
with the visual character of the area.
Zonin~ remains RG-1 subject to the posting of the
performance bond ($65,000). Change in conditions will
not affect zone classification or the required
performance bond.
Traffic volumes would be reduced by approximately
one-half.
Utilities would be addressed during site plan and
subdivision review. Projected sewer flows and water
demands may be reduced if townhouses are constructed.
Contract with two private developers, not including the
petitioner, to improve the sanitary sewer system is
pending Council's approval.
Neighborhood concerns related to storm water, sanitary
sewer, and other issues were addressed satisfactorily
with the original petition. Change in conditions should
further resolve the neighborhood issues by reducing
traffic and utility demands, maintaining original buffers
and greenspace, and permitting a development which is
more compatible with the surrounding area.
Comprehensive Plan would be followed. Site has been
designated for residential development. Proposed
townhouse design increases the compatibility of the
project with the surrounding neighborhood.
B. City Council deny the requested change in conditions.
Land use would remain multi-family with the development
being limited to 192 condominium units and 5 single
family dwellings.
Zonin~ would remain RG-1 provided a performance bond is
posted.
3. Traffic would be unchanged from the original petition.
4. Utilities would be unchanged from the original petition.
5. Neighborhood would be unchanged from the original
petition.
Comprehensive Plan would be followed. Original 192
condominium is compatible with the neighborhood.
V. Recommendation:
By a vote of 4-0 (Messrs. Bradshaw and Price and Mrs. Goods absent)
the Planning Commission recommends approval of th requested change
in conditions. The townhouse design alternative not only makes the
project more feasible for the developer, but also improves the
project from the point of view of neighborhood compatibility.
The Planning Commission also recommends that the posting of a
performance bond in the amount of $65,000 be made a contingency of
the ordinance.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael M. Waldvogel, Vice Chairman
Roanoke City Planning Commission
JEM:mpf
attachment
cc: Assistant City Attorney
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator
Attorney for the Petitioner
VIRGINIA:
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE
IN RE:
Rezoning to change proffered
conditions for a tract of land
containing 12.37~ acres lying
on the west side of Grandin
Road Extension south of Airview
Road
AMENDED
PETITION TO REZONE
(TO CHANGE
PROFFERED CONDITIONS)
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ROANOKE:
(1) By Ordinance No. 28385, adopted by this Council on
October 20, 1986, the property which is the subject of this
petition (identified by Official Tax Nos. 5090203 and 5090204)
was rezoned from RS-l, Single-Family Residential District, to
RG-1, General Residential District, subject to certain con-
ditions proffered by the then petitioner, The Murchison Compa-
ny. A copy of that ordinance is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
A map showing the subject property is attached hereto as
Exhibit B. The petitioner hereunder is Atlantic States Devel-
opment Co., agent for Nicholas and Ann Munger, who acquired the
subject property pursuant to assignment of contract rights from
The Murchison Company. The principals in Atlantic States
Development Co. are the same as those in The Murchison Company.
(2) Subsequent to adoption of said ordinance, the peti-
tioner has concluded that market conditions may not permit a
successful development of the property in exactly the manner
prescribed by the conditions to which the previous rezoning was
made subject. Specifically the petitioner believes that a
townhouse development might better fit the current housing
needs of the area than the condominium development previously
proposed. Accordingly, the petitioner wishes to amend the
present zoning conditions to allow somewhat more flexibility in
design of the project, while still maintaining the neighbor-
hood-protective features of the conditions.
(3) Therefore, pursuant to Article VIII of Chapter 36 of
the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the peti-
tioner requests that the conditions made a part of Ordinance
No. 28385, adopted by this Council on October 20, 1986, be
replaced by the following conditions, by which the petitioner
will abide in development of the property:
(a) The tract as rezoned will be used for a maximum
of 192 single-family attached dwelling units (condominiums) or
100 townhouse units. To the extent that condominiums are
constructed on the property, the construction of the project
will be subject to approval from the necessary state author-
ities for all condominium documents.
(b) The site will be developed in substantial
conformity with either (i) the site plan for condominium
development prepared by Buford T. Lumsden & Associates, P.C.
dated August 1986, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit C, or (ii) the site plan for townhouse development
prepared by Buford T. Lumsden & Associates, P.C. dated January
-2-
1987, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D, depend-
ing on the alternative finally selected by the petitioner. In
either case, the site plan will be subject to such changes as
may be required by the City during site plan review.
(c) The storm water retention facility on the
property will be constructed and designed to handle a twen-
ty-year storm.
(4) Attached as Exhibit E are the names and addresses of
the owner or owners of all property immediately adjacent to or
immediately across a street or road from the property which is
the subject of this petition.
WHEREFORE, the petitioner requests that the conditions
proffered in connection with and made a part of Ordinance NO.
28385 of this Council be changed as set forth above, in accor-
dance with the provisions of the
of Roanoke.
Dated: February 17, 1987
Daniel F. Layman, Jr.
Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove
105 Franklin Road, S.W.
P. O. Box 720
Roanoke, VA 24004
Zoning Ordinance of the City
Respectfully submitted,
ATLANTIC STATES DEVELOPMENT CO.,
Agent for Nicholas and Ann
Of Counsel
Counsel for Atlantic States Development Co.,
Nicholas and Ann Munger
Agent for
-3-
IN THE C~UNCIL OF THE CITY OF I{OANOK~, VIRGINIA,
The 20th day of October, 1986.
No. 28385.'
AN ORDINANCE to amend gg36-3 and 36-4. Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979). as amended, and Sheet No. 509, Sectional 1976
Zone ~ap. City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within tile
City, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant.
WItEREAS, application has been made to tile Council of the City
of Roanoke to hava the hereinafter described property rezoned
from RS-l,' Single Family Residential District, to ltG-l, General
Residential District, subject to certain conditions proffered by
the applicant; and
WHEREAS, tile City Planning Conunission, ~vhich after giving
proper notice to all concerned as required by §36-541. Code of
the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended and after conducting a
public hearing on the matter, has made its reco.unendation to
Council; and
WIIEREAS, a public hearing was held oil said applicatio~ by tile
City Council at its meeting on October 13, 1986, after due ,and
timely notice thereof as required by §36-541, Code of ti~e City of
Roanoke'(1979), as amended, at which heari,,g all parties in
interest and citizens were given an opportunity to be heard, botll
for and against the proposed rezon,ing; and
WHEREAS. this Council, after considering the aforesaid appli-
cation, tile reeolmnendation made to the Council by tile ,Planning
Coe~nission, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and tile matters pre-
sented at the public hearing, [e of the opinion that ti~e herein-
after described property' should be rezoned as herein provided.
· TIIEREFORE0 BE IT OP~AINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that g$38-3 and 36-4,' Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, and Sheet No. 509 of the Sectional 1976 Zone rdap, City
of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other:
~ Proper.ry. described as a tract of land on the westerly side of
Grandin Road Extension south of Airview Road, containing 12.37
acres, more or less, designated on Sheet Ho. 509 of the Sectional
1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as a portion of Official Tax ~os.
5090204 al~d 5'090203 (said tract does not include a portion' of
these two parcels consisting of 2.1 acres £rol~ting on Airvlew
Road, varying in depth from 200 feet, more or less, ca itc
westerly boundary to 190 feet, more or less, o~ its frontage with
Grandin Road Exte~lsion, which portion is to remai~l RS-I, Single
Family Residential Dis'trier), be, and is hereby'rezo~led from
ItS-l, Si~lgle Family Residential District, to ttG-l, General
Residential District, subject to those co~lditio~ls proffered by
and set forth in the petitioner*s Second Ame~lded Petition to
Rezone filed with .the City Clerk on August 25, 1986, and that
Sheet No. 509 of the Zone Map be changed in this respect.
BE IT FUI~£HEIt ORDAI~IED that this ordil,ance sl~all slot take
effect until the applicant sl~all I~ave filed witii the City Clerk a
fully executed Conditional Zoning Performance Bond, pursuant to
$36-55(a)(3), Code of tile City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, in
the total amount of $65,000, conditioned upo,~ the oon~pletion of
October 10, 1986, of the Zoning Administrator to tits Office
City Planning, a copy o~ which has been filed with the City
Clerk.
those physica! iutprovements to tile rezoned property proffered by
the applicant and specified and described in a report dated
of
ATTEST:
LIST OF ADJOINiNg PROPERTY OWNERS
1. Southwest Plaza Associates Ltd.
Partnership
c/o Lat Purser & Associates, Inc.
230 Trvon Street
Charlotte, MC 28202
2. Elizabeth Logan
c/o Virginia C. LogaE!
34 Townsend Street
Fort Chester, New York 10573 .
Robert W. arid I.lary L. Smith
4706 (;randill Road Extension,
Roa~loke, VA 24018
SW
4. William D. ~nd Sally T. Coleman
P. O. Box 1327~
Koanoke, VA 24032
10.
11.
Helen Erb Eller
4902 Grandin Road, Apt.
Roanoke, VA 24015
317
Luther J., Jr., and Louise E. IIartiit
4818 Grandiu Road Exte,ision, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
Fairington Apartmeuta of Roanoke
4922 Grandiu Road Extension, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
James, Jr., ~iartir~ Luther &etais
4818 Grandiu Road Extension, SW
Roanoke,. VA 24018
F & H Associates
P. O. Box 90
Roanoke, VA 24018
Marviu A. and Arleue G. Poff
4734 Horwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
Walter William and Viole~ T.
4724 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
Iyree
5090201
'5090102
5090103
5090104
5090105
5090101
5090124
5090206
5090205
5080404
5080405
12.
Helen R. Reed
4716 Nozwood Street,
Roanoke, VA 24018
SW
13. Timothy L. and Deboral~ H.
4710 Norwood Street, S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080406
5080407
14.
John S. Eubank
1920 Airview Road,
Roanoke, VA 24018
SW
Albert J. and Margaret D. Wahl
1928 Airview Road, S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24018
16. John W. and Conseanc. L. Chandler
1934 Airview Road, SW
Roaonke, VA 24018
17. Donald E. and Wilma G. Bowles
1942 Airview Road, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
18.
20.
Caroly~ W. Parker
4645 Grandtn Road Extensio~,
Roanoke, VA 24018
Ruth llartin York
4905 Woodmar Drive
Roanoke., VA 24018
SW
Randall Lonnie Pizzino
1~16 Lytham Drive
Roanoke, VA 24018
21. Fred W, and Hary Ann llcElmurray
4818 llorwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
22. Marion A. and Rachel B. Turner
4810 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 240i8
23. John K. and Jane S. Shoemaker
4806 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 240i8
5080103'
5080104
5080105
5080106
5080107
5090215
5100714
5100715
5100716
5100717
24. William A. and Dorothy M. McBroom
4756 Norwood Street, S.W.
Roanoke,- VA 24018
25.
William J. Moody
4748 Norwood Street
Roa~oke, VA 240L8
26.
Robert W. aud Catherine Gilsdorf
4740 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
27.. Harvey C., Jr. & Doris [{.Switzer
4906 [[orwood ST., SW
Roanoke, Va. 24018
5080401
5080402
5080403
5100801
FEB 19 ~
-- --'--'"' '- - ,Roanoke Office of Commuai(y
~2J5~''/~'4/~¢'~ /~F~'z'/~~''' ROANLiKE TIMES & WOFLD-NENS
NUMBER - 32512300
PUt~L ISHEF,' S FEE - $106,40
DANIEL F LAYMAN
P C BOX 720
CITY
'87 A? IO P7,:5]
ROANOKE VA 24004
STATE OF VIRGINIA
' ITY OF ROANOKE
AFFIDAVIT CF PUBLICATION
I, ITHE UNDERSIGNEOI AN OFFICER OF
TIMES-WORLD CORPORATION, WHICH COR-
PORATION IS PUBLISHER OF THE ROANOKE
TIMES & WORLD-NEWS, A DAILY NEWSPAPER
~UBLISHED IN ROANOKE, IN THE STATE OF
VIRGINIA, DO CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED
~OTICE W&S PUBLISHED IN SAID NEWSPAPERS
ON THE FOLLOWING DATES
03/27/87 MORNING
O~/03/87 MORNING
WITNESS,
T~J~ DAY OF A, PRIL 1987
,' .........
OFFICE~ 'S SIGNATURE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO W}IOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Pursuant to the provisions of Article VII of Chapter 36, Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the Council of the
City of Roanoke
1987, at 7:30
Building, 215
question of
District, to
property:
A tract
Road Extension
acres, more or
Sectional 1976
will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, April 13,
p.m., in the Council Chamber in the Municipal
Church Avenue, S. W., in the said city, on the
rezoning from RS-l, Single Family Residential
RG-1, General Residential District, the following
of land on the westerly side of Grandin
south of Airview Road, containing 12.37
less, designated on Sheet No. 509 of the
Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as a portion
of Official Tax Nos. 5090204 and 5090203 (said tract
does not include a portion of these two parcels con-
sisting of 2.1 acres fronting on Airview Road, varying
in depth from 200 feet, more or less, on its westerly
boundary to 100 feet, more or less, on its frontage with
Grandin Road Extension, which portion is to remain RS-l,
Single Family Residential District.
This rezoning is to be subject to certain conditions prof-
feted by the petitioner. A copy of this proposal is available
for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, Room 456,
Municipal Building. All parties in interest and citizens may
appear on the above date and be heard on the question.
GIVEN under my hand this 25th day of }~rch
1987.
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Please publish in full twice, once on Friday, March 27,
and once on Friday, April 3, 1987, in the Roanoke Times
and World News, Morning Edition.
1987,
Please send publisher's affidavit to:
Please bill to:
Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 456, Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr.
Attorney
P. O. Box 720
Roanoke, Virginia 24004
Office of the City C]e~
March 23, 1987
File #51
Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr.
Attorney
P. O. Box 720
Roanoke, Virginia 24004
Dear Mr. Layman:
I am enclosing copy of a report of the City Planning Corr~rission
recommending that the Council of the City of Roanoke grant the
request of your client, The Atlantic States Development Company,
Agent for Nicholas and Ann Munger, to change the conditions of
rezoning of a tract of land containing 12.37 acres, located on
the westerly side of Grandin Road Extension, south of Airview
Road, S. W., designated as a portion of Official Tax Nos.
5090204 and 5090203, which property was previously rezoned from
RS-l, Single Family Residential District, to RG-1, General
Residential District, subject to certain proffered conditions,
pursuant to Ordinance No. 28385, adopted by the Council on second
reading on Monday, October 20, 1986.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the
City of Roanoke at its meeting on Monday, April 6, 1981, a public
hearing on the abovedescribed request has been set for Monday,
April 13, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, fourth
floor of the Municipal Building.
For your information, [ am also enclosing copy of a notice of the
public hearing and an Ordinance providing for the rezoning, which
were prepared by the City Attorney's Office. Please review the
Ordinance and if you have any questions, you may contact Mr.
William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney, at 981-2431.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enco
Roo~'n 456 Munici~x~t Building 2t § C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 240t I C703) 981-2541
Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr.
Page 2 -'
March 23, 1987
cc: Southwest Plaza Associates Ltd., c/o Lat Purser & Associates,
230 Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Ms. Elizabeth Logan, c/o Ms. Virginia C. Logan, 34 Townsend
Street, Port Chester, New York 10573
Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Smith, 4706 Grandin Road Extension,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. William D. Coleman, P. Oo Box 13274, Roanoke,
Virginia 24032
Mrs. Helen E. Eller, 4902 Grandin Road, Apt. 317, Roanoke,
Virginia 24015
Mr. and Mrs. Luther J. Martin, 4818 Grandin Road Extension,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Fairington Apartments of Roanoke, 4922 Grandin Road
Extension, Roanoke, Virginia 24018
F & M Associates, P. O. Box 90, Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Marvin A. Poll, 4734 Norwood Street, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Walter W. Tyree, 4724 Norwood Street, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mrs. Helen R. Reed, 4716 Norwood Street, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Timothy L. Strawn, 4710 Norwood Street, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. John S. Eubank, 1920 Airview Road, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. Albert J. Wahl, 1928 Airview Road, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. John W. Chandler, 1934 Airview Road, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Donald E. Bowles, 1942 Airview Road, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Ms. Carolyn W. Parker, 4645 Grandin Road Extension, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Ms. Ruth M. York, 4905 Woodmar Drive, Roanoke, Virginia
24018
Mr. Randall Lonnie Pizzino, 1916 Lytham Drive, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Fred W. McElmurray, 4818 Norwood Street,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Marion A. Turner, 4810 Norwood Street, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. John K. Shoemaker, 4806 Norwood Street, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. William A. McBroom, 4756 Norwood Street,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. William J. Moody, 4748 Norwood Street, Roanoke, Virginia
24018
Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Gilsdorf, 4740 Norwood Street,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mr. and Mrs. Harvey C. Switzer, 4906 Norwood Street, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018
Mr. W. Robert He,'bert, City Manager
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Mr. John ~. Marlle$, Chief of Community Planning
Mrs. Susan $. Goode, Chairman, City Planning Corr~ission
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner and Zoning
Administrator
Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals
Mr. Von W. Moody, III, Director of Real Estate Valuation
Ms. Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Wilburn Co Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
FERTAINI~G TO T~E ¢~ANGE IN ¢O~ITIONS OF: %7 FEW 23 ??
Request from The Atlantic States Development Company, )
represented by Daniel F. Layman, Attorney, that certain )
conditions proffered in conjunction with the rezoning of )AFFIDAVIT
certain tracts of land located on the westerly side of )
Grandin Road Extension, south of Airview Road, S.W., )
Official Tax Nos. 5090204 and 5090203, be changed. )
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) TO-WIT:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that
she is a Secretary to the Roanoke City Planning Cormnission, and as such is
competent to make this affidavit of her own personal knowledge. Affidavit
states that, pursuant to the provisions of ~15.1-341) Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, on behalf of the Planning Commission of the City of
Roanoke she has sent by first-class mail on the 23rd day of February,
1987,, notices of a public hearing to be held on the 4th day of March,
1987, on the rezoning captioned above to the oarner or agent of the parcels
listed below at their last known address:
PARCEL OWNER, AGENT OR OCCUPANT ADDRESS
5090201
5090102
5090103
5090104
5090105
5090101
5090206
5090125
5090205
5090404
5090405
Southwest Plaza Associates Ltd.
c/o Lat Purser & Associates
Elizabeth Logan
c/o Virginia C. Logan
Robert W. & Mary L. Smith
William D. & Sally T. Coleman
Helen E. Eller
Luther J. & Louise E. Martin
Fairington Apartments of Rke.
F & M Associates
Marvin A. & Arlene G. Poff
Walter W. & Violet T. Tyree
230 Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
34 Townsend Street
Port Chester, NY 10573
4706 Grandin Road Ext.
Roanoke, VA 24018
P.O. Box 13274
Roanoke, VA 24032
4902 Grandin Rd. Apt. 317
Roanoke, VA 24015
4818 Grandin Road Ext.
Roanoke, VA 24018
4922 Grandin Road Ext.
Roanoke, VA 24018
P.O. Box 90
Roanoke, VA 24018
4734 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
4724 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080406 Helen R. Reed 4716 Norwood Street, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080407 Timothy L. & Deborah M. Strawn 4710 Norwood Street, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080103 John S. Eubank 1920 Airview Road, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080104 Albert J. Wahl 1928 Airview Road, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080105 John W. & Constance L. Chandler 1934 Airview Road, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080106 Donald E. & Wilma G. Bowles 1942 Airview Road, SW
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080107 Carolyn W. Parker 4645 Grandin Road Ext.
Roanoke, VA 24018
5090215 Ruth M. York 4905 Woodmar Drive
Roanoke, VA 24018
5100714 Randall Lonnie Pizzino 1916 Lytham Drive
Roanoke, VA 24018
5100715 Fred W. & Mary Ann McElmurray 4818 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5100716 Marion A. & Rachel B. Turner 4810 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5100717 John K. & Jane S. Shoemaker 4806 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080401 William A. & Dorothy M. McBroom 4756 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080402 William J. Moody 4748 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5080403 Robert W. & Catherine Gilsdorf 4740 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
5100801 Harvey C. & Doris H. Switzer 4906 Norwood Street
Roanoke, VA 24018
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, in the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, this 23rd day of March, 1987.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
Misc. 2/23/87 - Council; C. Mgr.
Of, ce of ~e Ci~' Clerk
February 18, 1987
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
Pursuant to Section 36-538 of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of an amended petition
from Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney, representing Atlantic
States Development Company, Agent for Nicholas and Ann Munger,
requesting a change in the conditions of rezoning of a tract of
land containing 12.37 acres, located on the westerly side of
Grandin Road Extension, south of Airview Road, S. W., designated
as a portion of Official Tax Nos. 5090204 and 5090203, which pro-
perty was previously rezoned from RS-l, Single Family Residential
District, to RG-1, General Residential District, subject to cer-
tain proffered conditions, pursuant to Ordinance No. 28385,
adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, October 20,
1986.
Si ncerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
Enco
cc:
Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney, P. O. Box 720,
Roanoke, Virginia 24004
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Mrs. Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Room 456 Munlcipat Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 98t-2541
December 5, 1986
File #51
Mrs. Susan S. Goode
Chairman
City Planning Commission
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Goode:
I am enclosing copy of a petition from Mr. Edward A. Natt,
Attorney, representing The Murchison Company, a Texas
Corporation, requesting a change in the conditions of rezoning of
a tract of land containing 12.37 acres, located on the westerly
side of Grandin Road Extension, south of Airview Road, S. W.,
designated as Official Tax Nos. 5090204 and 5090203, which pro-
perty was previously rezoned from RS-l, Single Family Residential
District, to RG-1, General Residential District, subject to cer-
tain proffered conditions, pursuant to Ordinance No. 28385,
adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, October 20
1986. '
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
Eric o
cc: Mr. Edward A. Natt, Attorney, 1919 Electric Road, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Mrs. Martha p. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission
Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Mr. William M. Hackworth, Assistant City Attorney
Roc~456 MunlCll:~alBulldl~g 215~'~'chAv~'~ue,$.W. Floanoke, Vlrglnla2,~1011 (703)981-2541
OSTERHOUDT, FEKGUSON, NATT, AH~CX~;~
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
24018-1699
November 26, 1986
Ms. Mary Parker, Clerk
Circuit Court, City of Roanoke
215 Church Avenue, SW
Roanoke, VA 24011
RE:
Change in Conditions 12.37 Acres
on Western Side of Grandin Road
Extension, City of Roanoke
Dear Ms. Parker:
Enclosed please find an Amended Petition to Amend
Conditions on the above parcel of land which was rezoned by
City Council by Ordinance No. 28385. I would appreciate
your referring this to the Planning Commission so that it
may be placed on the December agenda.
Your attention to this matter is appreciated.
Very truly yours,
OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT,
AHERON & AGEE, P.C.
Edward A. Natt ~
/bp
Encl.
cc: Steve Valentine
Suite 1460
1300 Post Oak Boulevard
Houston, TX 77056
OSTER~DUDT, FERGUSDN
NATT, AH£RON & AGEE
ATT~RN£YS-A?-LAW
RGANDK~, VIRGINIA
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE~
IN RE:
Rezoning of a tract of land containing )
approximately 12.37 acres lying on the )
westerly side of Grand±n Road Extension )
south of A±rview Road, from RS-i, Single-)
Family Residential District to RG-1, )
General Residential District, subject to )
certain conditions )
VIRGINIA
PETITION
TO
REZONE
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROANOKE:
1. The Petitioner, The Murchison Company, a Texas
Corporation, has a contract to purchase a certain tract of
land located in the City of Roanoke, containing 12.37 acres,
more or less, located on the westerly side of Grandin Road
Extension south of Airv±ew Road, and designated on Roanoke
City Appraisal Maps as official Tax Nos. 5090204 and
5090203, said tract is currently zoned RS-i, Single-Family
Residential. A map of the property to be rezoned is
attached as Exhibit "A".
2. Pursuant to Article VII and Article VIII of
Chapter 36, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended,
the Petitioner requests that a portion of the said property
containing 12.37 acres, more or less, be rezoned from RS-i,
Single-Family Residential District, to RG-1, General
Residential District, subject to certain conditions set
forth below, for the purpose of constructing thereon a
single family attached residential complex of 120 units.
~STERHDUDT, F£REUSDN
NATT, AHER~N & A;E£
ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW
3. The Petitioner believes that the rezoning of
the said tract of land will further the intent and purposes
of the City's Zoning Ordinance and its comprehensive plan,
in that it will enhance the economic value of the City of
Roanoke and that the use thereof will be in general
conformity with existing uses in the area.
4. The Petitioner hereby proffers and agrees that
if the said tract is rezoned as requested, that the rezoning
will be subject to, and that the Petitioner will abide by,
the following conditions:
(a) The tract as rezoned will be used for a
maximum of 120 townhouse dwelling units. The construction
of the project will be subject to approval from the
necessary state and local authorities.
(b) The site will be developed in substantial
conformity with utilizing the site plan prepared by Balzer &
Associates, dated November 7, 1986, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit B.
(c) The storm water retention facility on the
property will be constructed and designed to handle a twenty-year
storm.
5. Attached as Exhibit C are the names and addresses
of the owner or owners of all lots or property immediately
adjacent to or immediately across a street or road from the
property to be rezoned.
2
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner requests that the above-
described tract be rezoned as requested in accordance with
the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Roanoke.
Respectfully submitted this ~ ~ day of RI ~ ,
1986.
Respectfully submitted,
THE MURCHISON COMPANY
Edward A. Natt, Esquire
OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT,
AHERON & AGEE, P.C.
1919 Electric Road, S. W.
Roanoke, VA 24018
Of Counsel'
3
Crdice of the C.i~y Cle~
April 22, 1987
File #207
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 28606, authorizing a right
of entry onto certain City property within the Roanoke Centre for
Industry and Technology to Advance Stores Company, Incorporated,
in order to permit the construction of a facility thereon, which
Ordinance was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on
first reading on Monday, April 13, 1987, also adopted by the
Council on second reading on Monday, April 20, 1987, and will
take effect ten days following the date of its second reading.
Sincere ly,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc·
CC:
Mr. Nicholas F. Taubman, Advance 'Stores Company, inc., P. O.
Box 2710, Roanoke, Virginia 24001
Mr. John W. F. Haner, Esquire, P. O. Box 20009, Roanoke,
Virginia 24018-0505
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief of Economic Development and
Grants
I~:x:~n456 MunlcipalBuildlng 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virgtnla24011 (703)98~-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28606.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE authorizing
perry within the Roanoke Centre
Stores Company, Incorporated, in
facility thereon.
a right of entry onto certain City pro-
for Industry and Technology to Advance
order to permit the construction of a
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that the
City Manager and the City Clerk are authorized, for and on behalf of
to seal and attest, respectively, an agree-
Company, Incorporated, giving said Company
to enter upon the 28.1 acre tract within the
the City, to execute and
ment with Advance Stores
and its agents the right
Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology which is the subject of and
is further described in the Option Agreement dated September 24, 1986,
by and between the City and Nicholas F. Taubman, as amended February
17, 1987, such right of entry to permit the beginning of construction
of a distribution and warehouse facility thereon, and to require that
the City be indemnified, held harmless, and insured by Advance Stores
Company, Incorporated, such agreement to be approved as to form by the
City Attorney.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
CITY [:~ ~-;;' ": :?FiCE
Roanoke, Virginia
April 13, 1987
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Advance Stores Company, Inc., Right-of-Entry
Site 7, Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology
I. Background:
Nicholas F. Taubman is purchasing Site 7 in the Roanoke Centre
for Industry and Technology to construct a distribution and
warehouse facility for Advance Auto.
City of Roanoke is responsible for the grading on the Advance
project and has entered into a contract with Thomas Bros.,
Inc. for site preparation, to be completed by June 15.
Construction of the building is now scheduled to begin May 1,
45 days prior to completion of City grading. Advance will
have to work on City-owned property, and has therefore
requested that they be granted right-of-entry to begin their
building prior to actual transfer of the land.
City of Roanoke would be indemnified by Advance Stores
Company, Inc., as a part of the right-of-entry agreement, and
would be held harmless for any risks associated with the
construction of the project on City-owned land. Advance will
also be required to insure the City's interest during this
period. A similar arrangement we entered into with
Orvis, Inc., to allow that company to begin its building
construction, and Advance will be expected to agree to the
same terms.
II. Issues:
A. Timing.
B. Economic development program.
III. Alternatives:
Authorize the City Manager to execute a right-of-entry
agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney allowing
Advance Stores Company, Inc., to enter City property, Site 7
in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology, for the
purpose of constructing a distribution and warehouse facility.
Members of Council
Page 2
Timing is critical to meet Advance proposed construction
schedule.
Economic development program of the City of Roanoke would
be aided by the timely completion of the Advance
facility.
Do not authorize the City Manager to execute a right-of-entry
agreement for Advance.
1. Timing of construction would be Jeopardized.
Economic development program of the City of Roanoke would
be hurt by delays in the Advance project.
IV. Recommendation:
It is recommended that City Council approve Alternative A,
authorizing the City Manager to execute a right-of-entry agreement
allowing Advance Stores Company, Inc., to enter City property, Site
7 in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology, for the
purpose of constructing a distribution and warehouse facility on
the same terms and conditions that Orvis, Inc., was permitted a
right-of-entry.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH: DWE: kds
cc:
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Brian J. Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development and Grants
Nicholas F. Taubman, Advance Stores Company, Inc.
John W. F. Haner, Esquire
Office of the City Cler~
April 22, 1987
File #132
Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 28619, establishing the
date of a Special meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke,
to be held on Tuesday, April 28, 1987, at 7:30 p.m., in the
Coliseum of the Roanoke Civic Center, for the purpose of holding
a public hearing to receive comments of the public with respect
to the City Manager's recommended budget for Fiscal Year 1987-88,
which Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, April 20, 1987.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eno.
CC: Mr.
Mr.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. Barry L. Key, Budget and Systems
Mr. David H. Dew, Budget/Management Analyst
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration
Public Safety
Mr. Bob E. Chapman, Manager, Roanoke Civic Center
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of lfuman Resources
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
and
Room4,..56 Munlcl~oalBuildlng 2150~urchAv~'~ue, S.W. Roanoke, Vlrginia24011 (703)98t-254'~
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 20th day of April, 1987.
No. 28619.
A RESOLUTION establishing the date of a Special Meeting
of the Council of the City of Roanoke.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that a Special Meeting of Council be held on the 28th day of
April, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. in the Coliseum of the Roanoke
Civic Center, 710 Williamson Road, N. E., in said City for
the purpose of holding a public hearing to receive comments
of the public with respect to the City Manager's recommended
budget for Fiscal Year 1987-1988, with respect to a proposed
increase in the cigarette tax and with respect to a proposed
meal tax, such public hearing to be duly advertised as re-
quired by law.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.