HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/2024 - City Council - Agenda -RegularCity Council Meeting
AGENDA
Monday, October 28, 2024, 6:30 PM
Regular Session 6:30 P.M. Council Chambers, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153
WORK SESSION
WORK SESSION IS CANCELLED FOR OCTOBER 28, 2024.
REGULAR SESSION
1.Call to Order
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Bid Openings, Awards, Recognitions
4.Consent Agenda
A.Citizen Comments
Comments from the public, limited to five minutes, on matters not already having a public
hearing at the same meeting.
B.Minutes
Consider acceptance of the October 7, 2024, Work Session and Regular Meeting minutes.
C.Financial Reports
Consider acceptance of the Statement of Revenues and Expenses for the three months ending
September 30, 2024.
5.Old Business
A.Amendment to the City Code - Chapter 106 Zoning
Consider ordinance on second reading enacting Chapter 106, Zoning, Article III, Use and
design standards, section 106-310.25 and amending Chapter 106, Zoning, Article II, District
Regulations, Section 106-214.2(B)(5) Commercial use Types, Article VI. Definitions and use
types, Section 106-602.9 Commercial use types and adopting Section 106-310.25 pertaining to
retail sales, Smoke Shop of the CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA (Adopted
on first reading at the October 7, 2024, meeting.)
6.New Business
A.Vacation of Right of Way
Hold a public hearing on the request of Mount Sinai Properties-Salem, LLC, a Virginia limited
liability company, to consider permanently vacating and disposing of an approximate 1.908
acres of a dead-end street section of Glenmore Drive and consider adoption of Resolution
1484 appointing viewers to review and report on this request. (As advertised in the October 3
and 10, 2024, issues of the Salem Times-Register).
B.Roanoke College Science Center - P hase I
C onsider setting bond for physical improvements and erosion and sediment control and
landscaping for Roanoke College Science C enter - Phase I. Audit - Finance Committee
C .B ojangles Drive T hru I mprov ements
C onsider setting bond for erosion and sediment control for Bojangles Drive T hru
Improvements. Audit - Finance C ommittee
D.B oards and Commissions
C onsider appointments to various boards and commissions.
7.C losed Session
A.Closed Session
Hold a closed session in accordance with Section 2.2-3711 A(1), A(3) and A(8) of the 1950
C ode of Virginia, as amended, for discussion of the following specific matters:
(1) Discussion of a personnel matter pertaining to School Board appointments.
(2) C onsultation with legal counsel employed or retained by a public body regarding specific
legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by such counsel; and Discussion or
consideration of the acquisition of real property for a public purpose, or of the disposition of
publicly held real property, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body.
8.Adjournment
City Council Meeting
MINUTES
Monday, October 7, 2024, 6:30 PM
Work Session 5:45 P.M.; Regular Session 6:30 P.M.
Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153
WORK SESSION
1.Call to Order
A work session of the Council of the City of Salem, Virginia, was held in the
Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, 114 N. Broad Street, Salem,
Virginia, on October 7, 2024, at 5:45 p.m., there being present the following
members of said Council to wit: Renée Ferris Turk, Mayor; James W. Wallace,
III, Vice- Mayor; Council members; Byron Randolph Foley, William D. Jones
(absent), and H. Hunter Holliday; with Renée Ferris Turk, Mayor, presiding;
together with Chris Dorsey, City Manager; Rob Light, Assistant City Manager
and Clerk of Council; Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance; Chuck Van
Allman, Director of Community Development; Will Simpson, City Engineer; and
Laura Lea Harris, Deputy Clerk of Council; and the following business was
transacted;
Mayor Turk reported that this date, place, and time had been set in order for the
Council to hold a work session; and
2.New Business
A.Discussion Items
Update of Major Projects with Community Development
Chuck Van Allman, Director of Community Development, and Will Simpson, City
Engineer, gave a presentation for Council updating them on the major projects
undertaken by Community Development and the Grant funding utilized for each
project. Discussion was held on the projects and explanations shared on the
individual funding sources. Council was able to ask questions and received
clarification. Information was presented on what is involved in applying for and
receiving Grant funding as well as the administration of these projects.
3.Adjournment
There being no further business, Mayor Turk adjourned the meeting at 6:28
p.m.
Item #4B
Date: 10/28/2024
REGULAR SESSION
1. Call to Order
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Salem, Virginia, was called to
order at 6:30 p.m., there being present the following members to wit: Renée
Ferris Turk, Mayor; James W. Wallace, III, Vice-Mayor; Councilmembers:
Byron Randolph Foley, William D. Jones (absent), and H. Hunter Holliday; with
Renée Ferris Turk, Mayor, presiding together with Chris Dorsey, City Manager;
Rob Light, Assistant City Manager and Clerk of Council; Rosemarie B. Jordan,
Director of Finance; Chuck Van Allman, Director of Community Development:
Mary Ellen Wines, Planning and Zoning Administrator; Mike Stevens, Director
of Communications; and Jim Guynn, City Attorney.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Bid Openings, Awards, Recognitions
There were none this evening.
4. Consent Agenda
A. Citizen Comments
Comments from the public, limited to five minutes, on matters not already
having a public hearing at the same meeting.
John Breen, 142 Bogey Lane, was the first citizen to address Council. He spoke of
the need for an update of City Code, Code enforcement, and a "factually beneficial
community vision with supporting, accountable goals".
Karita Knisely, 115 Union Street, spoke to Council in support of Salem's adoption
of the Virginia Maintenance Code in full as well as a rental inspection code and
program. She also offered suggestions on conduction of an inventory of blighted,
vacant, and dilapidated structures and resulting Code enforcement.
Jack Susser, 115 Union Street, shared some of the history and expressed concerns
about health and safety in regard to the structure at 203 Union Street.
B. Minutes
Consider acceptance of the September 9, 2024, Work Session and Regular
Meeting minutes and the September 17, 2024, Special Meeting Work Session
minutes.
The minutes were approved as written.
C. Financial Reports
Consider acceptance of the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for the two
months ending August 2024.
The Financial Reports were received.
5. Old Business
6. New Business
A. Salem City School Board
Hold a public hearing to receive the views of citizens within the School
Division regarding the School Board appointments for the expiring terms ending
December 31, 2024 of two members of the City of Salem School Board. (As
advertised in the September 19, 2024, issue of the Salem-Times Register).
Mayor Turk opened the public hearing.
Mr. Foley asked, for clarification, whether candidates expressing interest in the
School Board positions were required to speak or if they just needed to submit their
application.
Mr. Light clarified that part of the requirement of the State Code was that at the
public hearing, the names of anyone that Council would be considering must be
read. He noted that the City Clerk's office had received a letter of intent and
resumé from the following three individuals: Christopher King, Jacob Quesinberry,
and Teresa Sizemore. He added that anyone else that would like to be considered
must come forward at the public hearing and have their name read.
Teresa Sizemore, 309 Orchard Street, spoke on behalf of herself. She shared with
Council why she felt her experience would benefit the Salem School Board. She
also shared accomplishments that have taken place during her current term on the
School Board. Ms. Sizemore noted that she felt she still had a lot to offer and
would like to continue serving on the School Board. She indicated that she had
submitted her letter of intent, resumé, and letter of recommendation from a former
Assistant Superintendent.
Mr. Foley noted that Mr. King had submitted a statement.
Mr. Light clarified that typically items were not read for citizens in a public hearing,
but that Mr. King had notified the Clerk's office of his regrets and that he had a
conflict this evening.
Council confirmed that they had received a copy of Mr. King's statement.
No one else came forward to speak.
Mayor Turk closed the public hearing. She noted that Council would not take
action this evening. She indicated that Council had all of the information that was
submitted for their review and that they would work with staff and determine the
next steps.
B. Amendment to the City Code - Chapter 106 Zoning
Hold public hearing and consider ordinance on first reading enacting Chapter
106, Zoning, Article III, Use and design standards, section 106-310.25 and
amending Chapter 106, Zoning, Article II, District Regulations, Section 106-
214.2(B)(5) Commercial use Types, Article VI. Definitions and use types,
Section 106-602.9 Commercial use types of the CODE OF THE CITY OF
SALEM, VIRGINIA pertaining to retail sales, smoke shop. (Advertised in the
September 19 and 26 issues of the Salem Times-Register.) (Planning
Commission recommended approval; see page 11-12 of Planning Commission
minutes.)
Mayor Turk requested Mr. Van Allman to comment on this item for the benefit of
the public.
Mayor Turk opened the public hearing.
Mr. Van Allman stated that he had Mary Ellen Wines, Planning and Zoning
Administrator with him this evening to present these changes to Council.
Mary Ellen Wines, Planning and Zoning Administrator, 21 S. Bruffey Street,
explained that the Virginia General Assembly had enacted legislation which allowed
localities to regulate vape stores. This would include any alternative tobacco
stores, cigarette stores, vape stores. This legislation became effective July 1,
2024. Staff is proposing to create a commercial use type, "Retail Sales, smoke
shop," which differentiates from the City's normal retail sales. This allows for
adding a couple of use and design standards. One of these is that the smoke shop
cannot be located within 1000 linear feet of a school, daycare, or after school care;
whether that be a church, school, or private day care. She noted that a map was
included in the packet for Council to see these locations. In addition to that, staff
has requested the addition of a use and design standard that would keep the
windows translucent so that you can see through them. They would not be allowed
to cover them up for safety purposes. In addition, merchandise pertaining to
smoking and vaping will not be allowed to be displayed so that they can be seen
when walking by. Ms. Wines noted that the City currently has several smoke/vape
shops. Those that continue to operate will be considered as legal nonconforming if
this ordinance is approved once it takes effect. However, if they were to vacate the
business for two years or longer, then they would have to fall under the new
regulations as with any type of grandfathering. She also noted that this would be by
Special Exception in the Highway Business District only that they would be
allowed. They would not be allowed in the Downtown or on the periphery of
residential neighborhoods and Council would have to approve the actual location.
Councilman Foley asked if and when marijuana was legalized, would that fall under
different rules at that point.
Ms. Wines confirmed that would not fall under this category.
John Breen, 142 Bogey Lane, noted that he did not have any objections to what was
being proposed, but that he did have concerns about the Highway Business District
that he wished to use this occasion to draw attention to. He asked Council to
request the Planning Commission to review this Code Section.
Mayor Turk closed the public hearing.
Councilman Foley asked if Mr. Breen's suggestions had been discussed at the
Planning Commission meeting. There was discussion and it was confirmed that Mr.
Breen's comments had not been a part of the Planning Commission meeting.
There was some discussion as to whether this was a by-right or Special Exception
situation and of whether to table this item to allow time for further review.
It was confirmed that this was a Special Exception situation.
Ms. Wines noted that there are many issues with the current Zoning ordinance and
that Community Development is aware of them and is in the process of trying to
work through them through the Comprehensive Plan update. She indicated that
after this there would be a total Zoning rewrite. She indicated that Mr. Breen's
concerns this evening were not specifically related to this use. They are related to
the zoning district to which the smoke shops will be allowed but not specific to this
use. By adopting this ordinance, Council is allowing the City to regulate where
these smoke shops go.
Councilman Foley asked if, in theory, Council thought a setback was not far enough
for a specific special exception, it could be addressed at that time, for that specific
use.
Ms. Wines responded affirmatively, if there were an issue with a specific use. She
added that they intended to move forward with reviewing and rewriting the Zoning
Ordinance after they get through the Comprehensive and Corridor Plans and that
there would be a total rewrite of the Zoning Ordinance. She reiterated that Mr.
Breen was correct that there were major issues with some of the regulations and site
development regulations included but that it was not specific to this use. She did
not feel that tabling this issue would address those issues. She said that if Council
wished to have the Planning Commission review those now rather than waiting until
they get through the Comprehensive Plan, that was their purview.
Mayor Turk noted that she felt they had a process in place.
Councilman Foley stated that, having heard from Ms. Wines, he felt that since this
was referring to a Special Exception and Council would be able to limit some of the
concerns, he would make a motion to approve.
Randy Foley motioned to approve ordinance on first reading enacting Chapter 106,
Zoning, Article III, Use and design standards, section 106-310.25 and amending
Chapter 106, Zoning, Article II, District Regulations, Section 106-214.2(B)(5)
Commercial use Types, Article VI. Definitions and use types, Section 106-602.9
Commercial use types and adopting Section 106-310.25 pertaining to retail sales,
Smoke Shop of the CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA. Renee Turk
seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
C. Amendment to the City Code - Chapter 66 Signs
Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of ordinance adding Chapter 66,
Signs, Article I In General, Section 66-11.1, Minor Signs during Voting of the
CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA. (Advertised in the
September 24 and 25 issues of the Roanoke Times.) (Planning Commission
recommended approval at the October 2, 2024 meeting.)
Mayor Turk opened the public hearing.
Robert Andrews, 2431 Post Oak Road, addressed Council and spoke in support of
this amendment. He thanked the Planning Commission and Council for taking
action to correct this situation.
John Breen, 142 Bogey Lane, expressed support of this item but spoke with concern
about the expedition of City Business.
Mayor Turk closed the public hearing.
Mr. Foley asked to clarify that the locations were not being specified in case any
polling locations changed but that we were speaking of designated polling locations.
Mr. Dorsey confirmed that this was referring to designated areas on public property
at which active voting was taking place.
Mr. Holliday asked to confirm that this would still fall under State law.
Mr. Dorsey responded that you could not be within 40 feet and that an area would
be designated for the signs to be placed that would be in compliance if Council
approves this item. He emphasized that this only deals with public property.
H. Hunter Holliday motioned to adopt ordinance adding Chapter 66, Signs, Article I
In General, Section 66-11.1, Minor Signs during Voting of the CODE OF THE
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA. James Wallace seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
D. Administrative Calendar for 2025
Consider adoption of the administrative calendar for 2025.
Mayor Turk noted that Council had received a copy of this and that this had been
discussed. She explained that the administrative calendar was a schedule of
holidays and meetings for the City of Salem.
Randy Foley motioned to adopt the administrative calendar for 2025 as presented.
H Hunter Holliday seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
E. Salem Municipal Golf Course
Consider renewing the lease for the Salem Municipal Golf Course for 2025.
Mayor Turk noted that the City has a golf course that is being leased from the City
by an individual. She clarified that if an amount is earned above a threshold, the
City does recoup money from that for the benefit of the public
Hunter Holliday motioned to renew the lease for the Salem Golf Course.
Mr. Light clarified that typically this lease is renewed by the year with a one-year
option that staff could administratively approve if Council was amenable with this.
Hunter Holliday made the amended motion to authorize the City Manager to finalize
and execute a one-year lease agreement commencing on January 1, 2025, with a
subsequent one-year renewal option. Randy Foley seconded the motion.
Mr. Foley shared a request from some neighbors that something be done to make the
shed less conspicuous.
Mayor Turk noted that staff would be asked to look into this.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
F. Salem Band Boosters
Consider request from the Salem Band Boosters for a donation ($5,638.85)
equal to the amount of admissions tax paid in connection with the annual Drum
Corps International Summer Music Games competition held on July 30, 2024,
at the Salem Stadium
Randy Foley motioned to approve the request from the Salem Band Boosters for a
donation ($5,638.85) equal to the amount of admissions tax paid in connection with
the annual Drum Corps International Summer Music Games Competition held on
July 30, 2024, at the Salem Stadium. H Hunter Holliday seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
G. Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate Downtown Improvement Reserve funding in the
Capital Projects Fund. Audit - Finance Committee
Local funding of $50,000 was included in the General Fund 2023-2024 annual
operating budget for the Downtown Plan. Per directive of the City Manager, these
funds were transferred to the Capital Projects Fund in fiscal year 2024 to become
part of the Downtown Improvements Reserve to fund future Downtown
improvement projects and subsequently needs formal Council appropriation. The
Downtown Improvement Reserve creates a reserve of local funds that allows us to
continue the work on the Downtown Revitalization Project.
James Wallace motioned to appropriate $50,000 to the Transfer from General Fund
-Capital Projects revenue account and to the Downtown Improvements Reserve
expenditure account. Randy Foley seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
H. Appoint Authorized Officials for Investment Program
Consider Resolution 1483 to approve Authorized Officials for Investment
Program. Audit - Finance Committee
The City Finance Department is moving forward with our investment program that
is being coordinated with Davenport & Company, LLC. As part of this program,
the City needed to appoint a trustee for our investments. Wilmington Trust was
selected as our trustee. The agreements that were needed for this account require
us to have City Council approve a list of authorized officials for the account.
Councilman Foley asked if the office should be named rather than the individuals in
the event that anyone listed would leave the position or if it would need to be
amended at the time that a person changed.
Mr. Guynn responded that an individual name was required for a signatory
authority.
James Wallace motioned to adopt Resolution 1483 requesting that City Council
appoint Rosemarie B. Jordan, Tammy H. Todd, Amy R. Morris, and Danielle C.
Crawford as Authorized Officials on this account. H. Hunter Holliday seconded the
motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
7. Closed Session
A. Closed Session
Hold a closed session in accordance with Section 2.2-3711 A(6) of the 1950
Code of Virginia, as amended, for discussion or consideration of the investment
of public funds where competition and bargaining is involved, where, if made
public, initially, the financial interest of the City would be adversely affected.
James Wallace motioned that, in accordance with Section 2.2-3711 A (6) of
the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, Council hereby convenes to closed
session at 7:14 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following specific
matters:
For discussion or consideration of the investment of public funds where competition
and bargaining is involved, where, if made public, initially, the financial interest of
the City would be adversely affected. Randy Foley seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
Mayor Turk noted that no action would be taken this evening.
James Wallace motioned to reconvene at 9:06 p.m. in accordance with Section 2.2-
3712 D. of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended to date, Council certifies that in
closed session only items lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under
the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and only such items identified in the motion
by which the closed session was convened were heard, discussed, or considered by
the Council. Randy Foley seconded the motion.
Ayes: Foley, Holliday, Turk, Wallace
Absent: Jones
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:06 p.m.
Schedule A
Current Year Current Year % of Prior Year
Budget Year to Date Budget Year to Date Variance
Revenues:
Beginning Balance 7-1-24 6,755,255$ -$ 0%-$ -$
General Property Taxes 51,890,783 1,070,771 2% 966,454 104,317
Other Local Taxes 29,110,800 3,014,707 10% 2,946,994 67,713
Permits and Licenses 359,440 79,998 22%74,705 5,293
Fines and Forfeitures 128,500 21,227 17%24,337 (3,110)
Revenue from Use of Money and Property 6,342,391 1,899,650 30% 1,894,444 5,206
Charges for Services 3,711,197 733,927 20% 727,516 6,411
Payment in Lieu of Taxes from Electric Fund 3,160,000 790,000 25%- 790,000
Payment in Lieu of Taxes from Water Fund 147,696 39,238 27%38,141 1,097
Miscellaneous Revenue 376,000 88,762 24% 135,044 (46,282)
Non-Categorical Aid 3,642,803 106,432 3% 101,723 4,709
Shared Expenses 1,933,459 292,013 15% 226,431 65,582
Categorical Aid 10,800,992 2,275,642 21% 1,556,922 718,720
Non-Revenue Receipts 11,846 11,845 100%23,821 (11,976)
Transfer From Other Funds - - 0% 5,319,145 (5,319,145)
Total Revenues 118,371,162 10,424,212 9% 14,035,677 (3,611,465)
Expenditures:
General Government 14,626,020 2,805,208 19% 2,791,222 13,986
Judicial Administration 3,167,603 692,959 22% 765,630 (72,671)
Public Safety 25,368,053 5,859,314 23% 5,984,915 (125,601)
Public Works 19,366,479 2,470,885 13% 2,799,438 (328,553)
Health and Welfare 7,137,055 1,537,582 22% 942,813 594,769
Education 26,538,801 7,330,521 28% 7,771,093 (440,572)
Parks, Recreation and Cultural 10,086,964 2,179,826 22% 1,864,768 315,058
Community Development 4,390,653 1,416,482 32% 1,070,465 346,017
Non-Departmental - - 0%4,568 (4,568)
Transfers Out 6,641,356 599,774 9% 9,404,705 (8,804,931)
Contingency 1,048,178 - 0%- -
Total Expenditures 118,371,162 24,892,551 21% 33,399,617 (8,507,066)
Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures -$ (14,468,339)$ (19,363,940)$ 4,895,601$
City of Salem, Virginia
General Fund
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures
For Three Months Ending September 30, 2024
Item #4C
Date: 10/28/2024
Schedule B
-
50,000.00
100,000.00
150,000.00
200,000.00
250,000.00
300,000.00
350,000.00
400,000.00
450,000.00
500,000.00
550,000.00
600,000.00
650,000.00
700,000.00
750,000.00
800,000.00
850,000.00
900,000.00
950,000.00
1,000,000.00
1,050,000.00
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
City of Salem
Sales Tax Summary
For Fiscal Years 2022 - 2025
FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025
Schedule C
50,000.00
100,000.00
150,000.00
200,000.00
250,000.00
300,000.00
350,000.00
400,000.00
450,000.00
500,000.00
550,000.00
600,000.00
650,000.00
700,000.00
750,000.00
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
City of Salem
Meals Tax Summary
For Fiscal Years 2022 - 2025
FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025
Schedule D
-
25,000.00
50,000.00
75,000.00
100,000.00
125,000.00
150,000.00
175,000.00
200,000.00
225,000.00
250,000.00
275,000.00
300,000.00
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
City of Salem
Lodging Tax Summary
For Fiscal Years 2022 - 2025
FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 FY2025
City of Salem, Virginia
Special Revenue Fund
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures
For Period Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule E
Project Total Available Year To
Budget To Date Encumbrances Project Balance Date
Fund Balance, July 1, 2024 -$
Revenues:
ARPA - Election Grant 14,075$ 14,075$ -$ 14,075$ -$ 14,075$
Total Revenues 14,075 14,075 - 14,075 - 14,075
Expenditures:
Election Grant 14,075 14,075 - 14,075 - 14,075
Total Expenditures 14,075$ 14,075$ -$ 14,075$ -$ 14,075
Fund Balance, September 30, 2024 -$
City of Salem, Virginia
Debt Outstanding
For Period Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule F
Balance Principal Balance
7/1/2024 Issuances Payments 9/30/2024
City Debt Outstanding
2013 Public Improvement Bonds 888,125$ -$ (89,425)$ 798,700$
2016B Public Improvement Bonds 297,713 - - 297,713
2019 Public Improvement Bonds 4,065,000 - - 4,065,000
2020 Public Improvement Bonds 1,700,000 - - 1,700,000
2020 Public Improvement Refunding Bonds 4,405,060 - - 4,405,060
2021 Public Improvement Refunding Bonds 805,000 - - 805,000
2022B Public Improvement Bonds 13,916,000 - - 13,916,000
Total City Debt Outstanding 26,076,898 - (89,425) 25,987,473
School Debt Outstanding
2012A Public Improvement Bonds 4,295,250 - (477,250) 3,818,000
2013 Public Improvement Bonds 2,736,875 - (275,575) 2,461,300
2020 Public Improvement Bonds 23,395,000 - - 23,395,000
Total School Debt Outstanding 30,427,125 - (752,825) 29,674,300
Total Debt Outstanding 56,504,023$ -$ (842,250)$ 55,661,773$
City of Salem, Virginia
Capital Projects Fund
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures
For Period Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule G
Project Total Available Year To
Budget To Date Encumbrances Project Balance Date
Fund Balance, July 1, 2024 13,489,570$
Revenues:
Federal Grants 12,922,021$ 2,370,769$ -$ 2,370,769$ 10,551,252$ -$
State Grants 17,015,640 4,238,063 - 4,238,063 12,777,577 -
Proceeds From Debt Issuance 15,015,146 15,015,145 - 15,015,145 1 -
Interest Income 663,818 663,817 - 663,817 1 -
Transfer From General Fund 25,751,022 25,515,120 - 25,515,120 235,902 6,500
Total Revenues 71,367,647 47,802,915 - 47,802,915 23,564,732 6,500
Expenditures:
Next Generation 911 378,493 187,161 30,609 217,770 160,723 -
Fire Station #2 Renovations 432,000 121,953 - 121,953 310,047 16,430
Fire Station #2 Storage Building 515,000 - - - 515,000 -
Fire Station #1 Renovations 654,000 8,826 11,534 20,360 633,640 1,045
Fire Station #3 Renovations 454,000 7,051 4,844 11,895 442,105 -
Colorado St Bridge Replacement 11,778,826 4,599,392 2,054,378 6,653,770 5,125,056 741,185
Apperson Drive Bridge Replacement 9,784,451 1,026,319 455,617 1,481,936 8,302,515 2,510
Jury Room Expansion 900,000 276,786 508,247 785,033 114,967 35,491
Apperson Drive Bridge Repairs #1800 682,432 88,872 35,260 124,132 558,300 6,500
Valleydale Streetscape Improvements 1,500,000 - - - 1,500,000 -
Upland Drive Storm Drain and Curb & Gutter 125,000 - - - 125,000 -
Western Roanoke River Greenway 50,000 1,500 - 1,500 48,500 -
Elizabeth Campus Greenway 2,252,578 203,540 4,245 207,785 2,044,793 6,200
Moyer Sports Complex Renovation 27,903,295 25,753,842 1,332,068 27,085,910 817,385 (1,137,672)
Mason Creek Greenway Phase 3 2,610,681 303,742 182,430 486,172 2,124,509 61,408
Library Flooring Replacement 190,000 - - - 190,000 -
Library Co-working Space 155,000 - - - 155,000 -
Civic Center East/West Fields Restroom 261,070 244,024 - 244,024 17,046 244,024
Longwood Park Restroom Replacement #2 170,000 141,084 - 141,084 28,916 141,028
Kiwanis Park Wall Pads 110,000 - 93,448 93,448 16,552 -
Library Lawn Special Events Space 500,000 - - - 500,000 -
Flood Mitigation-CFPF 78,962 75,013 3,949 78,962 - -
Downtown Impr - E Main St/Market St 5,440,677 2,040,467 2,180,211 4,220,678 1,219,999 694,910
Downtown Impr - E Main St/White Oak 2,311,825 40,332 25,175 65,507 2,246,318 -
Capital Projects Local Reserve 397,629 - - - 397,629 -
Downtown Improvements Reserve 90,350 - - - 90,350 -
Excess Local Funding Reserve 1,641,378 - - - 1,641,378 -
Total Expenditures 71,367,647$ 35,119,904$ 6,922,015$ 42,041,919$ 29,325,728$ 813,059
Fund Balance, September 30, 2024 12,683,011$
City of Salem, Virginia
Capital Reserve Fund
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures
For Period Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule H
Project Total Available Year To
Budget To Date Encumbrances Project Balance Date
Fund Balance, July 1, 2024 17,026,870$
Revenues:
Transfer From General Fund 17,026,870$ 17,026,870$ -$ 17,026,870$ -$ -$
Total Revenues 17,026,870 17,026,870 - 17,026,870 - -
Expenditures:
Capital Reserve 13,107,803 - - - 13,107,803 -
Fire Ladder Truck 2,400,000 - - - 2,400,000 -
Body Cameras and In-Car Camera Replacement 654,067 - 654,004 654,004 63 -
Front Load Dumpster Truck 415,000 408,857 - 408,857 6,143 408,857
Salem Stadium Scoreboard Replacement 200,000 - - - 200,000 -
Civic Center Scoreboard Replacement 250,000 - - - 250,000 -
Total Expenditures 17,026,870$ 408,857$ 654,004$ 1,062,861$ 15,964,009$ 408,857
Fund Balance, September 30, 2024 16,618,013$
Schedule I
Operating Revenues
Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Year to Date
% of
Budget
Prior Year
Year to Date Variance
Sale of Power 50,066,620$ 14,987,378$ 30%11,707,505$ 3,279,873$
Other Electric Revenue 648,370 95,341 15%99,013 (3,672)
Reserve for Encumbrances 1,817,312 - 0%- -
Appropriated from Net Position 250,000 - 0%- -
Total Operating Revenues 52,782,302 15,082,719 29%11,806,518 3,276,201
.
Operating Expenses
Other Power Generation - Operation 125,000 25,790 21%24,024 1,766
Other Power Generation - Maintenance 103,715 28,454 27%8,703 19,751
Purchased Power 26,815,000 8,026,756 30%7,358,998 667,758
Transmission - Operation 10,054,500 2,383,721 24%2,554,472 (170,751)
Transmission - Maintenance 46,750 747 2%758 (11)
Distribution - Operations 1,194,500 273,729 23%269,753 3,976
Distribution - Maintenance 1,609,161 336,333 21%352,230 (15,897)
Customer Service 686,849 177,735 26%162,695 15,040
Administration & General - Operation 2,814,721 7,875 0%69,368 (61,493)
Administration & General - Maintenance 242,000 100,777 42%94,458 6,319
Depreciation - 439,236 0%383,691 55,545
Capital 5,399,755 89,732 2%(157,680) 247,412
Contingency 530,351 - 0%- -
Total Operating Expenses 49,622,302 11,890,885 24%11,121,470 769,415
Income (loss) Before Transfers 3,160,000 3,191,834 685,048 2,506,786
Transfers (Payment in Lieu of Taxes)(3,160,000) (790,000) 25%- (790,000)
Income (loss)-$ 2,401,834$ 685,048$ 1,716,786$ Income (loss)-$ 4,803,668$ 1,370,096$ 3,433,572$
City of Salem, Virginia
Electric Fund
Statement of Operations
For Three Months Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule J
Operating Revenues
Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Year to Date
% of
Budget
Prior Year
Year to Date Variance
Services 7,967,406$ 2,217,757$ 28%1,918,275$ 299,482$
Other Revenue 530,996 105,847 20%116,639 (10,792)
Water Federal Grants Revenue - 11,780 0%- 11,780
Reserve for Encumbrances 5,636,889 - 0%- -
Total Operating Revenues 14,135,291 2,335,384 17%2,034,914 300,470
.
Operating Expenses
Salaries of Personnel 1,136,388 233,965 21%225,684 8,281
Fringe Benefits 479,930 109,950 23%106,618 3,332
Contractual Services 729,307 130,753 18%128,347 2,406
Printing and Binding 2,500 - 0%24 (24)
Advertising 1,000 - 0%- -
Utilities 422,200 134,349 32%99,197 35,152
Communications 5,900 968 16%937 31
Insurance 36,000 1,786 5%1,786 -
Travel and Training 9,800 434 4%890 (456)
Miscellaneous 66,793 36,958 55%36,615 343
Materials and Supplies 331,688 90,279 27%101,714 (11,435)
Depreciation - 216,435 0%213,491 2,944
Capital 3,242,861 69,245 2%(19,710) 88,955
Contingency 265,581 - 0%- -
Total Production Expenses 6,729,948 1,025,122 15%895,593 129,529
Salaries of Personnel 774,961 193,865 25%136,736 57,129
Fringe Benefits 368,938 94,047 25%63,763 30,284
Contractual Services 837,061 249,605 30%187,955 61,650
Printing and Binding 500 - 0%- -
Communications 4,850 1,612 33%879 733
Insurance 36,000 - 0%- -
Lease/Rent of Equipment 2,000 250 13%375 (125)
Travel and Training 7,600 231 3%503 (272)
Miscellaneous 33,193 9,017 27%7,714 1,303
Miscellaneous Credits (290,000) (94,394) 33%(67,272) (27,122)
Materials and Supplies 166,075 5,084 3%47,929 (42,845)
Depreciation - 57,731 0%37,174 20,557
Capital 3,441,949 564,702 16%22,481 542,221
Interest Obligations 1,874,520 (31,973) -2%(36,780) 4,807
Total Distribution Expenses 7,257,647 1,049,777 14%401,457 648,320
Income (loss) Before Transfers 147,696 260,485 737,864 (477,379)
Transfers (Payment in Lieu of taxes)(147,696)(39,238) 27%(38,141) (1,097)
Income (loss)-$ 221,247$ 699,723$ (478,476)$ -
Production
Distribution
City of Salem, Virginia
Water Fund
Statement of Operations
For Three Months Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule K
Operating Revenues
Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Year to Date
% of
Budget
Prior Year Year
to Date Variance
Services 7,220,956$ 1,906,562$ 26%1,752,846$ 153,716$
Other Revenue 182,200 44,615 24%35,349 9,266
Reserve for Encumbrances 732,058 - 0%- -
Appropriated from Net Position 1,685,000 - 0%- -
Total Operating Revenues 9,820,214 1,951,177 20%1,788,195 162,982
.
Operating Expenses
Salaries of Personnel 952,012 183,616 19%178,815 4,801
Fringe Benefits 432,026 91,230 21%87,724 3,506
Contractual Services 3,454,354 638,881 18%590,580 48,301
Printing and Binding 1,500 - 0%351 (351)
Advertising 1,500 - 0%- -
Utilities 4,500 936 21%936 -
Communications 14,850 3,456 23%3,262 194
Insurance 15,000 - 0%- -
Lease/Rent of Equipment 1,800 250 14%375 (125)
Travel and Training 12,000 1,606 13%2,040 (434)
Miscellaneous 40,693 11,463 28%14,660 (3,197)
Miscellaneous Credits (270,000) (58,514) 22%(57,009) (1,505)
Materials and Supplies 93,420 18,057 19%11,889 6,168
Depreciation - 360,294 0%348,890 11,404
Capital 2,856,114 42,176 1%97,238 (55,062)
Interest Obligations 1,803,283 1,777 0%17,751 (15,974)
Contingency 407,162 - 0%- -
Total Operating Expenses 9,820,214 1,295,228 13%1,297,502 (2,274)
Income (loss) before Transfers - 655,949 490,693 165,256
Income (loss)-$ 655,949$ 490,693$ 165,256$
City of Salem, Virginia
Sewer Fund
Statement of Operations
For Three Months Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule L
Operating Revenues
Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Year to Date
% of
Budget
Prior Year
Year to Date Variance
Shows/rentals 373,000$ 74,762$ 20%83,486$ (8,724)$
Box office shows 1,500,000 175,489 12%211,431 (35,942)
Merchandise and commissions 250,800 30,572 12%79,931 (49,359)
Static advertising 55,000 9,375 17%8,875 500
Miscellaneous income 20,000 2,112 11%7,301 (5,189)
Interest Income 1,000 62 6%277 (215)
Salem Fair 645,000 672,481 104%609,533 62,948
Reserve For Encumbrances 178,614 - 0%- -
Appropriated from Net Position 272,190 - 0%- -
Total Operating Revenues 3,295,604 964,853 29%1,000,834 (35,981)
Operating Expenses
Salaries of personnel 1,451,908 371,918 26%377,508 (5,590)
Fringe benefits 547,769 117,396 21%121,047 (3,651)
Maintenance and contractual services 399,487 46,892 12%52,397 (5,505)
Printing and binding 500 - 0%- -
Advertising 23,000 16,807 73%3,726 13,081
Utilities 323,000 134,364 42%87,883 46,481
Communications 12,700 2,493 20%2,384 109
Insurance 30,500 - 0%- -
Leases and Rentals 3,200 2,639 82%- 2,639
Travel and training 11,600 42 0%4,572 (4,530)
Miscellaneous 108,267 32,035 30%27,632 4,403
Show expense 1,450,000 185,997 13%217,009 (31,012)
Fair expense 625,363 543,368 87%619,643 (76,275)
Materials and supplies 38,000 11,714 31%6,812 4,902
Capital 1,107,954 - 0%267,177 (267,177)
Depreciation - 75,691 0%68,338 7,353
Total Operating Expenses 6,133,248 1,541,356 25%1,856,128 (314,772)
Income (loss) Before Transfers (2,837,644)(576,503) (855,294)278,791
Transfers 2,837,644 491,910 17%462,747 29,163
Income (loss)-$ (84,593)$ (392,547)$ 307,954$ 0.00
City of Salem, Virginia
Salem Civic Center
Statement of Operations
For Three Months Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule M
Operating Revenues:
Current Year
Budget
Current Year
Year to Date % of Budget
Prior Year Year
to Date Variance
Catering 655,785$ 121,052$ 18%184,175$ (63,123)$
Concessions 137,833 12,559 9%8,782 3,777
Moyer Concessions 65,000 30,842 47%- 30,842
Salem High Concessions 8,500 4,916 58%3,306 1,610
Appropriated from Net Position 54,916 - 0%- -
Total Operating Revenues 922,034 169,369 18%196,263 (26,894)
.
Operating Expenses:
Salaries of personnel 305,459 68,440 22%67,805 635
Fringe benefits 111,075 21,590 19%23,959 (2,369)
Contractual services 9,465 5,791 61%1,400 4,391
Printing and binding 300 - 0%- -
Laundry and Cleaning 2,500 - 0%- -
Communications 200 48 24%43 5
Insurance 2,000 - 0%- -
Travel and training - - 0%179 (179)
Miscellaneous 24,848 7,224 29%6,297 927
Materials and supplies 254,331 45,151 18%53,532 (8,381)
Capital 54,916 - 0%- -
Depreciation - 872 0%1,008 (136)
Total Catering Expenses 765,094 149,116 19%154,223 (5,107)
Salaries of Personnel 58,030 10,790 19%8,638 2,152
Fringe Benefits 15,246 1,800 12%1,176 624
Contractual services 25,000 - 0%1,380 (1,380)
Miscellaneous 150 (1) -1%(14) 13
Materials and Supplies 29,000 4,577 16%4,403 174
Total Concessions Expenses 127,426 17,166 13%15,583 1,583
Salaries of Personnel 37,000 9,593 26%- 9,593
Fringe Benefits 11,698 2,552 22%- 2,552
Contractual services 2,500 7,859 314%- 7,859
Miscellaneous - (41) 0%- (41)
Materials and Supplies 21,000 10,594 50%- 10,594
Total Moyer Expenses 72,198 30,557 42%- 30,557
Salaries of Personnel 4,461 1,749 39%472 1,277
Fringe Benefits 1,676 434 26%192 242
Contractual 2,500 - 0%525 (525)
Materials and Supplies 1,807 1,083 60%1,240 (157)
Total Salem High Expenses 10,444 3,266 31%2,429 837
Income (loss) Before Transfers (53,128)(30,736)24,028 (54,764)
Transfers 53,128 - 0%- -
Income (loss)-$ (30,736)$ 24,028$ (54,764)$
Moyer Concessions
Salem High Concessions
City of Salem, Virginia
Salem Catering and Concessions
Statement of Operations
For Three Months Ending September 30, 2024
Catering
Concessions
City of Salem, Virginia
Water and Sewer Capital Fund
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures
For Period Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule N
Project Total Available Year To
Budget To Date Encumbrances Project Balance Date
Fund Balance, July 1, 2024 13,575,000$
Revenues:
Transfer From General Fund 13,575,000$ 13,575,000$ -$ 13,575,000$ -$ -$
Total Revenues 13,575,000 13,575,000 - 13,575,000 - -
Expenditures:
North Salem Water Improvements 6,200,000 - - - 6,200,000 -
Roanoke River Upper Sewer Rehab 7,000,000 - - - 7,000,000 -
Wiley Ct Sewer Improvements 375,000 - - - 375,000 -
Total Expenditures 13,575,000$ -$ -$ -$ 13,575,000$ -
Fund Balance, September 30, 2024 13,575,000$
Schedule O
Budget
Current Year
Year to Date
Percent
to Date
Prior Year Year
to Date Variance
Beginning Net Position -$ 9,399,213$ 7,846,412$ 1,552,801$
Revenue
Premiums Paid - City 6,016,000 986,983 16% 979,156 7,827
Premiums Paid - School 5,150,000 838,953 16% 857,540 (18,587)
Premiums Paid - Retirees 697,500 195,272 28% 181,016 14,256
Dental Premiums Paid 590,600 102,419 17% 101,716 703
Interest Earnings 475,000 48,314 10% 39,728 8,586
Miscellaneous 5,000 1,574 31% 3,060 (1,486)
Total Year to Date Revenues 12,934,100 2,173,515 17% 2,162,216 11,299
Expenses
Health Claims 11,700,266 1,936,459 17% 1,704,097 232,362
Dental Claims 590,600 94,678 16% 71,018 23,660
Employee Health Clinic 532,884 72,610 14% 65,873 6,737
Consulting Services 105,250 17,300 16% 16,477 823
Miscellaneous 5,100 4,408 86% 4,170 238
Total Year to Date Expenses 12,934,100 2,125,455 16% 1,861,635 263,820
Ending Net Position -$ 9,447,273$ 8,146,993$ 1,300,280$
City of Salem, Virginia
Health Insurance Fund
Statement of Revenues and Expenses
For Two Months Ending August 31, 2024
City of Salem, Virginia
Schedule of Deposits and Investments
For Period Ending September 30, 2024
Schedule P
FV as a
Cash Value Net Change Fair Value % of
9/30/2024 in Fair Value 9/30/2024 Portfolio
Demand & Time Deposits
Concentration Account 49,084,188$ -$ 49,084,188$ 30.1%
Payroll Account 10,524 - 10,524 0.0%
Revenue Recovery Account 11,979 - 11,979 0.0%
Utility Billing Account 53,165 - 53,165 0.0%
Box Office Account 951,394 - 951,394 0.6%
Held as Fiscal Agent of:
Cardinal Academy 970,785 - 970,785 0.6%
Court Community Corrections 1,405,222 - 1,405,222 1.0%
Held on Behalf of:
Economic Development Authority 411,852 - 411,852 0.3%
Total Demand & Time Deposits 52,899,109 - 52,899,109 32.6%
Investments
Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) 109,360,206 - 109,360,206 67.0%
Held on Behalf of:
Economic Development Authority LGIP 607,763 - 607,763 0.4%
Total Investments 109,967,969 - 109,967,969 67.4%
Total Deposits and Investments 162,867,078$ -$ 162,867,078$ 100.0%
Item #5A
Date: 10/28/2024
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
AGENDA ITEM: Chapter 106 Code Changes
Consider ordinance on second reading enacting Chapter 106,
Zoning, Article III, Use and design standards, section 106-
310.25 and amending Chapter 106, Zoning, Article II, District
Regulations, Section 106-214.2(B)(5) Commercial use Types,
Article VI. Definitions and use types, Section 106-602.9
Commercial use types and adopting Section 106-310.25
pertaining to retail sales, Smoke Shop of the CODE OF THE
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA (Approved on first reading at the
October 7, 2024, meeting.)
SUBMITTED BY: Max Dillon, Planner
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
In July of 2024, the Virginia General Assembly adopted legislation allowing localities to
regulate the retail sale locations of tobacco products, nicotine vapor products, alternative
nicotine products, or hemp products intended for smoking for any such retail sale location
and may prohibit a retail sale location on property within 1,000 linear feet of a child day
center of a public, private, or parochial school.
As a result, staff proposes creating a use type, “Retail Sales, smoke shop,” which distinguishes
general retail sales from the retail sale of tobacco, nicotine, or hemp products. That new use
type will be permitted in the HBD Highway Business District zoning designation by Special
Exception Permit, and would be subject to the following use and design standards:
No retail sale location of tobacco products, nicotine vapor products, alternative
nicotine products, or hemp shall be located within 1000 feet of a child day care center
or a public, private, or parochial school.
All windows and doors facing the street right of way shall be maintained as
transparent and shall not be tinted or obscured. Smoking, vaping or other related
products and paraphernalia shall not be displayed as to be seen from adjacent
properties.
Existing businesses that fall into this new use type can remain in a legal nonconforming status
until they cease to operate for a period of two years or longer.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Recommend approval of the proposed code in conjunction with Section 15.2 912.4 of the
Code of Virginia.
Planning Commission
MINUTES
Wednesday, September 11, 2024, 7:00 PM
Work Session 6:00PM Regular Session 7:00PM Council Chambers Conference
Room, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street:
WORK SESSION
1. Call to Order
A work session of the Planning commission of the City of Salem, Virginia, was held
in Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, at 6:00
p.m. on September 11, 2024; there being present said Commission members to wit:
Denise P. King, Reid Garst, Mark Henrickson; Jackson Beamer; and Nathan Routt,
constituting a legal quorum, presided together with Chris Dorsey, City Manager and
Executive Secretary, ex officio member of said Commission; Jim Guynn, City
Attorney; Mary Ellen Wines, Planning & Zoning Administrator; Maxwell S. Dillon,
Planner, and the following business was transacted:
Chair King called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and reported that this date,
place, and time had been set for the Commission to hold a work session.
2. New Business
A. Discussion of items on the September agenda
1. Zoning Ordinance amendments
a. Storage containers
b. Retail sales, smoke shops
3. Adjournment
Chair King adjourned the meeting at 6:51pm
REGULAR SESSION
1. Call to Order
The regular meeting of the Planning commission of the City of Salem, Virginia, was
held in Council Chambers, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, at 7:00 p.m. on
September 11, 2024; there being present said Commission members to wit: Denise
P. King, Reid Garst, Mark Henrickson; Jackson Beamer; and Nathan Routt,
constituting a legal quorum, presided together with Chris Dorsey, City Manager and
Executive Secretary, ex officio member of said Commission; Jim Guynn, City
Attorney; Mary Ellen Wines, Planning & Zoning Administrator; Maxwell S. Dillon,
Planner, and the following business was transacted:
Chair King called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and reported that this date,
place, and time had been set in order for the Commission to hold a regular meeting.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call
All members of the Commission were in attendance.
4. Consent Agenda
A. Minutes Consider acceptance of the minutes from the August 14, 2024, work
session and regular meeting.
On motion by Commissioner Henrickson seconded by Commissioner Routt
the minutes of the August 14, 2024, meeting were accepted.
Chair King introduced Nathan Routt as the newest member of the
commission.
5. Old Business
Item A. Amendment to the City code Chapter 106 Zoning. Hold a public hearing to
consider amending Chapter 106, Zoning, Article IV Development Standards, section
106-406 miscellaneous provisions of the CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA pertaining to storage containers. Continued from the June 2024 meeting.
Chair King opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. and asked if anyone would like to
speak to this matter.
Mary Ellen Wines, Planning & Zoning Administrator, 21 S. Bruffey Street, appeared
before the Commission recalling a time around 2017 when the city came to realize
that storage containers or shipping containers had become an extremely popular
and economical way for businesses to store products, merchandise, and inventory.
As a result of the multitudes of containers that had been inundated in the City, it
became apparent to some that it is possible that these containers could potentially
be a detriment to our major corridors and could be without regulation. So, in 2017
an ordinance was adopted that would allow storage containers only on a temporary
basis, (30) thirty days in residentially zoned properties and (90) ninety days in
commercial and industrially zoned properties. Enforcement on that was difficult as
staff was limited. As enforcement was increased due to the addition of the Codes
Compliance Investigator position it was quickly obvious that that businesses needed
that economical storage and that keeping them on a temporary basis really does not
help them in the long run. As the ordinance was reviewed, a balance between the
needs of the businesses and the detriment to the community was hard to reach.
Staff is now presenting a code amendment that would allow permanent storage
containers on commercial and industrial properties. Residential properties will stay
the same. Residents can get a permit and keep a container for (30) thirty days while
they are doing work on the home, or while they are moving. If the resident needs
additional time, an extension can be granted. If there is a building permit associated
with the container then the storage container can stay as long as the permit is
active and construction is continuing. As for commercial and industrial properties,
new regulations to bring a balance have been proposed. The regulations would
state that no vehicle truck body, detachable semitrailer, manufactured home, mobile
home, bus trailer, recreational vehicle, or similar equipment shall be used as a
storage container in any zoning district. Shipping containers and mobile storage
containers, however, can be allowed for non-residential or agriculturally zoned
properties. If these containers are only needed for a short period of time, a zoning
permit may be issued to allow the temporary use making these containers not to
have to adhere to some of the requirements in the proposed ordinance. If these
containers need to be temporarily allowed in the right of way, then a Right of Way
permit would be needed, and the regulations would apply to this situation per the
City’s engineering division. If these containers are found to be used as a building for
occupancy, swimming pool, or a storage container home and if it adheres to the
Uniform Statewide Building Code, then it does not have to adhere to this section
either. If a current building permit has been obtained, the containers do not have to
adhere to these regulations. If used on a permanent basis for commercial zoned
property they would be limited to (2) two containers per acre. There is no limitation
on industrially zoned property. If the property is less than (1) one acre (1) one
storage container will be permitted. If multiple parcels are owned that are adjacent
or contiguous, then the containers can be consolidated on one parcel without
having to spread them throughout the adjacent properties. All containers must be
placed in a location that does not encroach upon parking spaces, drive aisles, fire
lanes, landscaping or stormwater management areas. These containers need to be
placed where they will not inhibit sight distances so there will be no safety issues.
Each container shall be reported to the Commissioner of the Revenue’s office for
tax purposes. This is not a new regulation, just reiterating that they should be
reporting them. No container shall display any type of signage. No container shall
be connected to any public utility services. The stacking storage containers will be
prohibited. If the property using the storage container is adjacent to residential
property it will be required to have a landscape buffer installed. Additional
standards will apply to the City’s major corridors including Main Street, Wildwood
Road, 4th Street, Thompson Memorial, College Avenue, Electric Road, Texas Street,
Roanoke Boulevard, Apperson Drive, South Colorado Street, and Lynchburg
Turnpike. These major corridors should be protected as they are the entrances into
the city for visitors and future business owners. All containers in the above-
mentioned areas shall be painted a singular neutral color, such as black, white, gray,
brown, cream, beige, and taupe. All containers must be maintained free of rust, free
of deterioration, graffiti, and other decomposition. Containers shall have a maximum
length of (20) twenty feet and must be placed behind the front building line of the
principal structure.
Vice-Chair Garst stated he would like to commend Ms. Wines and her staff for all
the hard work they put into this presentation.
Chair King asked if anyone else had any comments. With no reply, Chair King
thanked Ms. Wines.
Chair King asked if there was anyone else to speak on this matter.
Duane Smith introduced himself and stated his address as 1020 S. College Ave. Mr.
Smith being in favor of these amendments, spoke to them being a great
improvement over the existing rule of carte blanche not being allowed that was
adopted in 2017. Mr. Smith questioned if the current containers would be
grandfathered or not.
Ms. Wines answered that containers that were in place prior to 2017 would be
considered grandfathered.
Mr. Smith, wanting clarification, stated anything prior to 2017, anything (7) seven or
(8) eight years ago.
Ms. Wines responded that as long as it has not moved or been replaced it would be
considered legal nonconforming.
Chair King clarified that the 2017 date was when the current zoning went into
effect.
Mr. Smith stated that his biggest concern with all of this was that most of the
people who own the containers that are getting the most complaints are
grandfathered in. He explained that he has a number of these containers for his
properties, and some of his tenants also have them. Most of the containers are
excluded; they are grandfathered and meet these rules because he is already
proactive about the regulations for his properties. Mr. Smith noted that he knows of
some containers in the valley that have brought about the complaints, and the
problem with most of those containers is that they are also grandfathered. This
status will not change anything regarding their appearance or location.
He questioned the solution for new businesses that may move into space, find they
need extra storage, and encounter the same issues his tenants have faced —
outgrowing their space but not wanting to move. While there is an option for
adding on, they often have inventory that becomes excessive, requiring them to
free up some space. He provided the example of one tenant who has equipment he
is not currently using, which is stored in a container. Mr. Smith believes these
regulations may still restrict new businesses in their potential for growth, despite
the need for some rules.
If the requirement is that the containers should be painted a neutral color, then all
containers, even those in place before 2017, should adhere to this rule. He pointed
out that some containers look quite bad, and there are many old items around, like
old trucks and buildings. Mr. Smith agreed that the current proposal is much better
than what is in place now. He acknowledged that if all the rules were enforced,
about 400 people in town would be upset. The City of Salem itself has a couple
dozen of these containers, including tractor trailers and box trucks that have had
their frames removed, all of which are grandfathered and do not meet current
regulations. Carter Machinery has a whole row of them.
Mr. Smith thought the rules could still be tweaked a bit. While he sees the proposal
as a positive step forward, he is unsure how to appease existing concerns without
making things difficult for those who may need additional storage. He pointed out
that this approach would not resolve the issues regarding eyesores, especially since
some containers have been in place for much longer than others.
He felt that this amendment is an improvement over the current situation,
especially compared to a scenario where no one is allowed to have a container. He
noted that in his neighborhood, everyone has an outbuilding to store items like
lawnmowers, which parallels the need for commercial buildings to have space for
storage. The reason for containers at his properties arose from incidents of theft;
the Salem Police Department advised him to secure items. The only way to lock
things up in a fenced lot is to place them in a container. Mr. Smith mentioned that
he stores his lawn equipment, pipes, wire, and other items that would typically be in
a shed or outside within a container.
People are interested in purchasing containers, but due to the ongoing discussions,
they are uncertain about making such a commitment. He emphasized that these
containers are definitely needed and that rules should encourage people to maintain
their surroundings. There is a significant gray area surrounding this topic, and
residential properties require some provisions as well. He suggested that the
timeframe for compliance could be extended from 30 days to 90 days, as projects
like kitchen remodels often take longer. Most people do not want a container sitting
in their front yard indefinitely.
Mr. Smith acknowledged that Ms. Wines and her team had worked hard on this
initiative, and he believes it is much better than before. However, he admitted
uncertainty about whether this would be the definitive solution, though he views it
as an improvement. He expressed hope that some of the existing issues would be
addressed, as they draw attention to the containers located at his properties.
Chair King asked Mr. Smith if the new zoning amendment, allowing tenants to have
storage containers, would make them happy as long as they were maintained.
Mr. Smith responded that, based on some conditions outlined in a particular
paragraph, some of his properties would still not be allowed to have a container due
to their locations on major streets with additional restrictions. He noted that they
might be allowed to have one 20-foot container but not two, as they would need a
40-foot one. He emphasized that all containers should be presentable, even those
that aren’t visible. He mentioned that College Avenue impacts several of his
properties, and while some farther down are zoned industrial, others on College
Avenue, 8th Street, or 9th Street remain visible. He questioned whether this meant
he would need to put a fence around everything, noting that a 9-foot-tall container
would require a 10-foot fence, which would not adequately hide an 8-foot fence in
front of it.
Ms. Wines clarified that a landscape buffer is required, not a fence, explaining that a
12-foot fence could be just as intrusive as the storage container itself.
Mr. Smith reiterated that while this amendment is better, he hated to see some
tenants potentially without storage because of it. He felt there should be some
leeway in the regulations. He pointed out that many thoroughfares, like Apperson
Drive, have numerous containers. Skyline Door and Valley Printing have them
behind their businesses, which can be seen from the street. The containers along
West Main Street are also numerous and will be grandfathered, so their appearance
won’t change. He noted that the city cannot require their removal, as most owners
didn’t spend $6,000 on a storage container for no reason; they genuinely needed
them. After sharing his thoughts, Mr. Smith said he wouldn’t fuss about the
amendment, acknowledging it is a significant improvement, but he wasn’t sure it
fully captures the spirit of what the Commission intends the ordinance to achieve.
He stated that when one needs a storage container, it is essential, but it shouldn't
look like an old rusty bucket is thrown in the yard.
Mr. Garst asked Mr. Smith if he still had concerns about the goal of the code to
clean up the visibility of these corridors, reiterating that this might not happen
because the vast majority of containers are grandfathered in.
Mr. Smith replied that between Andrew Lewis and Advanced Auto Parts, there are
probably a hundred containers in that area, which aren’t noticeable unless someone
is specifically looking for them. However, some on Apperson and 4th Street stand
out significantly. He noted that these grandfathered containers have attracted
attention to the rest of them, leaving the answer unclear.
Chair King remarked that some jurisdictions have outlawed storage containers,
while acknowledging that businesses do need them.
Mr. Smith replied that in Roanoke City, particularly on Shenandoah Avenue,
containers are everywhere. He stated that while residential neighborhoods don’t
need them, many businesses do, as they often prefer them over wooden storage
buildings, which are less durable and secure. He noted that storage containers are
sealed to keep out bugs, mice, and weather. He mentioned that he has items that
store better in a storage container than in his own basement, as these containers
are designed for shipping and can withstand various weather conditions. He cited
examples of areas using containers for low-income or affordable housing, stacking
them to create complexes.
Mr. Hendrickson inquired about the term "grandfathering," asking when it applies—
upon property sale or other conditions.
Ms. Wines explained that containers are grandfathered until they are moved in any
way, shape, or form.
Mr. Hendrickson questioned whether this means that if someone sells a property,
the storage container could remain indefinitely.
Ms. Wines clarified that while it could stay, if it is replaced or used for different
merchandise and then moved, it loses its grandfathered status.
Mr. Hendrickson expressed appreciation for the definition of grandfathering.
Ms. Wines elaborated that the only way to effect change is through development,
similar to how new landscaping requirements come about. She noted that while
containers last a long time, they might need to be switched out eventually. If no
amendment is in place when they are moved, then no change will occur.
Mr. Routt asked if there was any way to bypass the grandfathering status.
Mr. Garst added if there is a different way to regulate those containers that are
grandfathered.
Mr. Routt sought clarification on how certain containers received grandfathered
status.
Ms. Wines explained that there are uses and structures that don’t conform to the
new code, which are considered legal nonconforming and may remain. However,
they cannot be forced to meet the new code, and the only option is to move
forward.
Mr. Hendrickson inquired about alternative ways to regulate the existing containers,
particularly those considered eyesores or grandfathered in.
Ms. Wines responded that changes cannot be made through the zoning ordinance,
but property maintenance codes might provide some form of regulation. Anything
in the zoning ordinance falls under the legal nonconforming status.
Mr. Smith expressed a desire to see the eyesores cleaned up without punishing past
or future property owners. He noted that if containers are needed and not
detrimental to neighboring properties, they are a benefit. He considered the
amendment better than the 2017 ordinance and preferable to having no containers
allowed at all. He compared wooden storage buildings to metal containers, stating
that the former aren’t even equal to the latter.
Ms. Wines stated that it would require significant research from the zoning
department to determine which containers are grandfathered. She explained that
some have been in place for a while but may have been switched out over the
years. If any changes were made after 2017, those containers wouldn’t be
grandfathered, despite their long-standing presence. She acknowledged that this
would be a difficult and time-consuming process.
Mr. Smith remarked that this situation would affect companies like Lewis Gale and
Carter Machinery. He noted that Lewis Gale has had containers around which they
have built with infrastructure, and some are even wired.
Mr. Hendrickson sought clarification about whether someone could place a wooden
building, such as those sold by Leonard or Anchor, on the property without
distinction from a metal storage container.
Ms. Wines responded that under the current code, they could.
Mr. Hendrickson noted that this regulation seems inconsistent.
Mr. Wines clarified that it is regulated, as a permit is required.
Ms. Wines further explained that wooden buildings are considered accessory
structures and thus are subject to regulations.
Mr. Smith added that obtaining a permit for an accessory structure is possible.
Ms. Wines affirmed that in commercial and industrial areas, there are fewer
regulations.
Mr. Beamer reiterated that storage containers are superior to wooden buildings.
Mr. Smith remarked that while he could have a row of wooden buildings, he could
not have a row of shipping containers, stating that the latter are a better structural
option.
Mr. Garst questioned whether a storage container is considered an accessory
structure.
Ms. Wines confirmed that they are not.
Mr. Smith contended that there should be no distinction between a wooden
building and a storage container since both are delivered and moved in similar ways,
differing only in material.
Ms. Wines clarified that storage buildings must meet building code requirements,
such as foundation and anchoring, which adds additional regulatory layers that
storage containers do not have. A mobile storage container is not classified as an
accessory structure and is treated differently.
Mr. Beamer noted that wooden structures must maintain a five-foot setback.
Ms. Wines confirmed this is dependent on the zoning district, stating that
commercial and industrial zones have zero side yard setbacks, while residential
zones require a five-foot setback.
Mr. Smith commented on the complexity of the regulations, noting that they are
evolving as the prevalence of shipping containers in the U.S. increases, with a
significant percentage never leaving the country.
Ms. Wines stated that shipping containers are industrial, possessing a different
aesthetic. She pointed out that while some corridors contain industrial properties,
there must be a balance since there is no perfect ordinance that will satisfy
everyone.
Mr. Smith expressed his support for most aspects of the ordinance, emphasizing
that the needs of tenants in the future are his primary concern.
Chair King stated that a zoning ordinance can be amended.
Mr. Smith reiterated his support for most of the ordinance but expressed that it
remains restrictive for new businesses, particularly those that are growing. He
noted that his tenants typically rent containers after needing additional space for
over ten years, and as the property owner, he does not want them to move.
Mr. Beamer noted that many tenants often lack alternative locations.
Chair King thanked Mr. Smith for his comments and inquired if anyone else wished
to speak on the matter.
Barney Horrell, of 3553 Carvins Cove Road, addressed the Commission, stating that
he initially had no intention to speak but began reflecting on the true purpose of
planning and zoning. He emphasized that planning and zoning involve long -term
goals for a community and that creating an ordinance like this signifies a long-term
vision for where the community is headed. He cautioned that attempting to tailor
an ordinance to address immediate concerns may be misguided.
Chair King asked if anyone else had anything to add. With no further response, the
public meeting was closed at 6:51 PM.
Chair King solicited comments or motions from the commissioners.
Mr. Hendrickson acknowledged the validity of both Mr. Smith's and Mr. Horrell's
comments, thanking them for their input.
Commissioner Beamer echoed Mr. Hendrickson’s sentiments, appreciating the
insights shared. He recognized that while the ordinance was anticipated, the
discussion highlighted areas for improvement. He expressed gratitude for everyone
involved in compiling information for the ordinance and noted that with two new
commissioners, a collective effort is needed to finalize the ordinance, suggesting it
might be prudent to move the decision to the following month’s meeting. He
proposed appointing Mr. Smith to a committee for further discussion.
Commissioner Garst agreed that some good points were brought up. One being
concerned about the unattended consequences of people just home-steading these
containers and not improving them because they are grandfathered. The problems
are not going to be rectified by this change. The biggest offenders are not going to
be incentivized to make the changes this is trying to make.
Commissioner Beamer commended Commissioner Garst.
Chair King asked for any other comments. No one came forward. She asked for a
motion.
Commissioner Beamer made a motion to table the amendment until the November
meeting.
Chair King asked if there was a 2nd.
Commissioner Henrickson asked if an amendment could be made to the motion to
work a little bit more in a direction to solve the issues that have been raised. Let
staff work on it a little more.
Commissioner Routt stated that was the intent of the motion. Knowing the planning
and zoning department worked hard on it and gave the commission ample
opportunity to see several drafts. Now that it is in front of the Commission it seems
different, like it is real. If it were tabled it shouldn’t be left up to the planning and
zoning department to come up with something, help is going to be needed. The help
should come from the Commission or other people, it needs to be a collaborative
effort.
Chair King stated that there seems to be a real problem with the storage containers
that may be grandfathered and any further change in what we have in front of us is
still not going to resolve that issue. We need to start somewhere. We can always
amend zoning ordinances, but we need to start somewhere.
Commissioner Garst asked if it should be put on property maintenance.
Commissioner Beamer stated that he would amend his motion that we continue to
the November meeting. The Commission needs to work with staff to address the
concerns brought before the Commission.
Chair King asked if there was a 2nd
Commissioner Henrickson seconded the motion.
Commissioner Garst stated that he wants to make sure that the work that we do
addresses the current problems with appearance as well as sets forth the vision of
what we are trying to do in the future.
Chair King called for a roll call.
Mr. Routt, aye; Mr. Henrickson, aye; Mr. Beamer, aye; Mr. Garst, aye; Chair King,
nay.
Chair King asked for the second item to be read.
6. New Business
A. Amendment to the City Code – Chapter 106 Zoning
Hold public hearing to consider enacting Chapter 106, Zoning, Article III, Use and
design standards, section 106-310.25 and Amending Chapter 106, Zoning, Article
II, District Regulations, Section 106-214.2(B)(5) Commercial use Types, Article VI.
Definitions and use types, Section 106-602.9 Commercial use types of the CODE
OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA pertaining to retail sales, smoke shop.
Chair King opened the public hearing at 7:42pm
Max Dillon, Planner, 21 S. Bruffey Street appeared before the Commission stating
he hoped he had a little more of a straightforward item to present to the
Commission. He stated in July of 2024, the Virginia General Assembly adopted
legislation allowing localities to regulate the retail sale locations of tobacco
products, nicotine, vapor products, alternative nicotine products, or hemp products
intended for smoking. For any such retail sale location the City may prohibit a retail
sale location on property within (1,000) one thousand linear feet of a child day care
center of a public, private, or parochial school. As a result, staff proposes creating a
use type, “Retail Sales, smoke shop,” which distinguishes general retail sales from
the retail sale of tobacco, nicotine, or hemp products. That new use type will be
permitted in the HBD Highway Business District zoning designation by Special
Exception Permit, and would be subject to the following use and design standards:
• No retail sale location of tobacco products, nicotine vapor products, alternative
nicotine products, or hemp shall be located within (1,000) one thousand feet of
a child day care center or a public, private, or parochial school.
• All windows and doors facing the street right of way shall be maintained as
transparent and shall not be tinted or obscured. Smoking, vaping, or other
related products and paraphernalia shall not be displayed as to be seen from
adjacent properties.
Existing businesses that fall into this new use can remain in a legal nonconforming
status until they cease to operate for a period of two years or longer.
Chair King asked if anyone had any questions for Mr. Dillon.
Mr. Beamer asked if the cigarette store near Andrew Lewis Middle school would be
grandfathered in.
Mr. Dillon answered if it is currently operating it would be allowed to continue to
operate until the use changes or it is vacant for (2) two or more years.
Mr. Henrickson inquired about the store on Chestnut Street because it is located
near First United Methodist they have a daycare, there is one behind Ridge View
Bank.
Mr. Routt pointed out that the store on Chestnut Street is just a convenience store
and it is not affected by this ordinance.
Mr. Dillon noted that cigar and hookah lounges are not included in this definition.
They have been considered a use not provided in the past and they will be
continued to be interpreted that way.
Chair King asked if anyone else wanted to speak. With no one speaking up the
public meeting closed at 7:45pm.
Chair King inquired if there were any comments from Commissioners, if not a
motion would be entertained.
Commission Reid moved to recommend approval as written.
Commissioner Routt seconded the motion.
Mr. Routt, aye; Mr. Henrickson, aye; Mr. Beamer, aye; Mr. Garst, aye; Chair King,
aye.
Chair King adjourned the meeting at 7:46 pm.
Page 1 of 3
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND, REVISE, AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 106, ZONING,
ARTICLE II, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTIONS 106-214 HIGHWAY BUSINESS
DISTRICT; SECTION 106-214.2(B)(5) PERTAINING TO PERMITTED USES; ARTICLE
III, USE AND DESIGN STANDARDS, SECTION 106-310 COMMERCIAL USES,
ARTICLE VI, DEFINITIONS AND USE TYPES, SECTION 106-600 DEFINITIONS,
SECTION 106-602.9 PERTAINING TO COMMERCIAL USE TYPES AND ADOPTING
SECTION 106-310.25 PERTAINING TO RETAIL SALES, SMOKE SHOP OF THE
CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, THAT
SECTION 106-214.2(B)(5), AND SECTION 106-602.9 OF CHAPTER 106, OF THE
CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA BE AMENDED, REVISED, AND
REORDAINED AND SECTION 106-310.25, BE ADOPTED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 106
ZONING
ARTICLE II. - DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Sec. 106-214. - HBD—Highway business district.
Sec. 106-214.2. Permitted uses.
(A) The following uses are permitted by right in the HBD Highway Business District, subject to all other
applicable requirements contained in this chapter. An asterisk (*) indicates that the use is subject to
additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article III, use and design standards.
(B) The following uses are permitted by special exception in the HBO Highway Business District, subject
to all other applicable requirements contained in this chapter. An asterisk (*) indicates that the us e is
subject to additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article III, use and design
standards.
5. Commercial Use Types
Adult Business*
Automobile Dealership, Used*
Automobile Repair Services, Major*
Dance Hall
Flea Market
Hospital
Manufactured Home Sales*
Massage Parlor
Pawn Shop
Personal Storage*
Retail Sales, smoke shop*
Truck Stop
Page 2 of 3
Article III. Use and design standards
Section 106-310. Commercial uses
Sec. 106-310.25. Retail sales, smoke shop.
(A) General standards:
1. No retail sale location of tobacco products,
nicotine vapor products, alternative nicotine
products, or hemp shall be located within 1000
feet of a child day care center or a public, private,
or parochial school.
2. All windows and doors facing the street right of
way shall be maintained as transparent and shall
not be tinted or obscured. Smoking, vaping or
other related products and paraphernalia shall not
be displayed as to be seen from adjacent
properties.
Article VI. Definitions and use types
Section 106-600. Definitions
Sec. 106-602.9. Commercial use types
Retail sales, smoke shop. Establishments for the sale of tobacco,
nicotine, and hemp products, as defined in Section 15.2-
912.4 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, including
paraphernalia, cigar and hookah products.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days after its final passage.
Page 3 of 3
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
H. Hunter Holliday, III
William D. Jones -
Byron Randolph Foley -
James W. Wallace, III –
Renee F. Turk –
Passed:
Effective:
Mayor
ATTEST:
H. Robert Light
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia
Item # 6A
Date: 10/28/2024
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE: October 28, 2024
AGENDA ITEM: Hold a public hearing on the request of Mount Sinai Properties-
Salem, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, to consider
permanently vacating and disposing of an approximate 1.908
acres of a dead-end street section of Glenmore Drive and
consider adoption of Resolution 1484 appointing viewers to
review and report on this request. (As advertised in the October
3 and 10, 2024, issues of the Salem Times-Register).
SUBMITTED BY: Rob Light, Assistant City Manager
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City of Salem received a request from Mount Sinai Properties-Salem, LLC, a Virginia
limited liability company to vacate an approximate 1.908 acres of a dead-end street section of
Glenmore Drive. This section of Glenmore Drive is located off of and bounded on the north by
Lynchburg Turnpike. It is bounded on the west by tax parcels 149-2-2 and 149-2-3; on the
south by tax parcels 156-2-3 and 156-2-2; on the southeast by tax parcel 155-1-2; and on the
east by tax parcels 156-2-1 and 150-2-1.
Note that there are two sections of Glenmore Drive in the City that do not connect. The road
section for which vacation is requested relates to the portion bounded by properties zoned as
Heavy Manufacturing that is accessed from Lynchburg Turnpike only. No portion of Glenmore
Drive located in the residential area to the south is being requested or considered.
Section 15.2-2006 of the Code of Virginia below addresses the process for consideration of
such requests:
§ 15.2-2006. Alteration and vacation of public rights-of-way; appeal from decision.
In addition to (i) the powers contained in the charter of any locality, (ii) any powers now
had by such governing bodies under the common law or (iii) powers by other provisions
of law, public rights-of-way in localities may be altered or vacated on motion of such
governing bodies or on application of any person after notice of intention to do so has
been published at least twice, with at least six days elapsing between the first and
second publication, in a newspaper having general circulation in the locality. The notice
shall specify the time and place of a hearing at which persons affected may appea r and
be heard. The cost of publishing the notice shall be taxed to the applicant. At the
conclusion of the hearing and on application of any person, the governing body may
appoint three to five people to view such public right -of-way and report in writing any
inconvenience that would result from discontinuing the right-of-way. The governing body
may allow the viewers up to fifty dollars each for their services. The sum allowed shall
be paid by the person making the application to alter or vacate the public right-of-way.
From such report and other evidence, if any, and after the land owners affected thereby,
along the public right-of-way proposed to be altered or vacated, have been notified, the
governing body may discontinue the public right-of-way. When an applicant requests a
vacation to accommodate expansion or development of an existing or proposed
business, the governing body may condition the vacation upon commencement of the
expansion or development within a specified period of time. Failing to commence within
such time may render the vacation, at the option of the governing body, void. A certified
copy of the ordinance of vacation shall be recorded as deeds are recorded and indexed
in the name of the locality. A conditional vacation shall not be recorded until the
condition has been met.
Any appeal shall be filed within sixty days of adoption of the ordinance with the circuit
court for the locality in which the public right-of-way is located.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Council hold a public hearing pursuant to Section 15.2-2006 of the Code
of Virginia on the vacation request, and upon closing of the public hearing to consider a
resolution appointing viewers to evaluate and report on this request to Council.
DRAWN BY:SHW
CHECKED BY:DSH
j:
\
2
1
\
0
0
\
0
3
\
0
3
2
1
0
1
0
4
.
0
0
c
a
r
t
e
r
m
a
c
h
i
n
e
r
y
-
s
a
l
e
m
c
a
mp
u
s
b
l
d
g
s
\
s
u
r
v
e
y
\
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
2
0
2
4
-
0
6
-
0
6
p
l
a
t
.
d
w
g
ROANOKE /RICHMOND / NEW RIVER VALLEY / SHENANDOAH VALLEY
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
06-25-2024
j:
\
2
1
\
0
0
\
0
3
\
0
3
2
1
0
1
0
4
.
0
0
c
a
r
t
e
r
m
a
c
h
i
n
e
r
y
-
s
a
l
e
m
c
a
mp
u
s
b
l
d
g
s
\
s
u
r
v
e
y
\
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
2
0
2
4
-
0
6
-
0
6
p
l
a
t
.
d
w
g
ROANOKE / RICHMOND / NEW RIVER VALLEY / SHENANDOAH VALLEY
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
06-25-2024
j:
\
2
1
\
0
0
\
0
3
\
0
3
2
1
0
1
0
4
.
0
0
c
a
r
t
e
r
m
a
c
h
i
n
e
r
y
-
s
a
l
e
m
c
a
mp
u
s
b
l
d
g
s
\
s
u
r
v
e
y
\
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
\
2
0
2
4
-
0
6
-
0
6
p
l
a
t
.
d
w
g
ROANOKE / RICHMOND / NEW RIVER VALLEY / SHENANDOAH VALLEY
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
06-25-2024
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, OCTOBER 28, 2024:
RESOLUTION 1484
A RESOLUTION providing for the appointment of not less than three nor more
than five freeholders, any three of whom may act, as viewers in connection with the
application of Mount Sinai Properties-Salem, LLC to permanently vacate a dead-end
street section of Glenmore Drive, specifically described below.
NOW, THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, that
William R. Shepherd, Wendel Ingram, Jr., and Frank P. Turk be and they are hereby
appointed as viewers to view an approximate 1.908 acres of a dead-end street section of
Glenmore Drive. Glenmore Drive is located off of and bounded on the north by
Lynchburg Turnpike. It is bounded on the west by tax parcels 149-2-2 and 149-2-3; on
the south by tax parcels 156-2-3 and 156-2-2; on the southeast by tax parcel 155-1-2; and
on the east by tax parcels 156-2-1 and 150-2-1. #198-3-7),
as provided by Section 15.2-2006 of the Code of Virginia, as amended to date, and to
report in writing, whether or not in their opinion any, and if any, what inconvenience
would result from permanently vacating said right of way.
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
H. Hunter Holliday –
William D. Jones –
Byron Randolph Foley –
James W. Wallace III –
Renee F. Turk –
ATTEST:
_______
H. Robert Light
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia
Item #: 6.B.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE: October 28, 2024
AGENDA ITEM: Roanoke College Science Center - Phase I
Consider setting bond for physical improvements and
erosion and sediment control and landscaping for Roanoke
College Science Center - Phase I. Audit - Finance
Committee
SUBMITTED BY: Chuck Van Allman, Director of Community Development,
Director of Community Development
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City Engineer’s office has reviewed the estimate for physical improvements and
erosion and sediment control and landscaping for Roanoke College Science Center -
Phase I located at 240 N. Market Street.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the project be bonded in the amount of $115,322.00 for a time
frame for completion set at twelve (12) months.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.Rke College - Bond Estimate & Letter - 10-8-2024
Item #: 6.C.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE: October 28, 2024
AGENDA ITEM: Bojangles Drive Thru Improvements
Consider setting bond for erosion and sediment control for
Bojangles Drive Thru Improvements. Audit - Finance
Committee
SUBMITTED BY: Chuck Van Allman, Director of Community Development
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City Engineer's office has reviewed the estimate for erosion and sediment control
for Bojangles Drive Thru Improvements located at 1590 West Main Street.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the project be bonded in the amount of $4,640.00 for a time
frame for completion set at twelve (12) months.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.Bojangles Bond Estimate & Ltr
October 28, 2024
Council of the City of Salem
Salem, Virginia 24153
Dear Council Members:
For your information, I am listing appointments and vacancies on various boards and commissions:
Board or Commission Recommendation
Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission Recommend reappointing Dr. Steven L. Powers for a three-year
term ending November 8, 2027.
Vacancies
Board of Zoning Appeals Need one alternate member, Remainder of five-year term
ending November 13, 2028.
Roanoke River Blueway Advisory Committee Need one member, two-year term
Sincerely,
Laura Lea Harris
Laura Lea Harris
Deputy Clerk of Council
Item #6D
Date: 10/28/2024
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
October, 2024
MEMBER EXPIRATION OF TERM
BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE
Term of Office: 3 years (3 terms only)
Denise P. King 12-31-24
Rev. C. Todd Hester 12-31-25
Dr. Forest Jones 12-31-26
AT LARGE MEMBERS:
Patrick Kenney 12-31-25
Helen Ferguson 12-31-26
Bobby Russell 12-31-24
BOARD OF APPEALS (USBC BUILDING CODE)
Term of Office: 5 years
Steve Poff 1-01-26
Robert S. Fry, III 1-01-28
Patrick Snead 1-01-25
Ray Varney 5-11-25
Joseph Driscoll 1-01-28
ALTERNATES:
David Hodges 12-12-26
Chelsea Dyer 8-09-25
David Botts 1-01-29
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF REAL ESTATE
ASSESSMENTS
Term of Office: 3 years (appointed by Circuit Court)
Wendel Ingram 11-30-24
N. Jackson Beamer, III 11-30-24
David A. Prosser 11-30-25
Janie Whitlow 11-30-26
Kathy Fitzgerald 11-30-24
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Term of Office: 5 years (appointed by Circuit Court)
F. Van Gresham 3-20-27
Frank Sellers 3-30-28
Steve Belanger 6-05-29
Gary Lynn Eanes 3-20-25
Tom Copenhaver 3-20-27
ALTERNATES:
Tony Rippee 10-12-28
Jeff Zoller 3-1-28
Vacant 11-13-28
CHIEF LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS (CLEO)
CONSORTIUM
No Term Limit
H, Hunter Holliday
Alternate: Vacant
MEMBER EXPIRATION OF TERM
COMMUNITY POLICY AND MANAGEMENT TEAM
No term limit except for Private Provider
(Names) (Alternates)
Rosie Jordan Tammy Todd
Laura Lea Harris Crystal Williams
Kevin Meeks Joshua Vaught Amy Cole
Jasmin Lawson
Cathy Brown Leigh Frazier Howard Shumate
Heather Gunn Courtenay Alleyne
Deborah Breedlove
Mark Chadwick
Parent Rep-Vacant Vacant
Sue Goad Chrissy Brake
Randy Jennings Bridget Nelson
Vacant Mandy Hall
Sean Slusser Seth Chamberland
Health Dept. - Vacant Vacant
Wendel Cook Jessica Cook
*Note: Rosie Jordan will serve as Fiscal Agent
For the City of Salem
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Term of Office: 4 years (Requires Oath of Office)
William Q. Mongan 3-09-27
Paul C. Kuhnel 3-09-28
J. David Robbins 3-09-28
Cindy Shelor 4-10-25
Jason Fountain 3-09-25
Sean B. Kosmann 12-14-24
Joe Curran . 12-14-24
FAIR HOUSING BOARD
Term of Office: 3 years
Betty Waldron 7-01-25
Melton Johnson 7-01-26
Cole Keister 8-09-27
Pat Dew 3-01-27
Janie Whitlow 4-09-27
MEMBER EXPIRATION OF TERM
FINE ARTS COMMISSION (INACTIVE)
Term of Office: 4 years
Cameron Vest 5-01-15
Julie E. Bailey Hamilton 5-01-15
Brenda B. Bower 7-26-12
Vicki Daulton 10-26-12
Hamp Maxwell 10-26-12
Fred Campbell 5-01-13
Rosemary A. Saul 10-26-13
Rhonda M. Hale 10-12-14
Brandi B. Bailey 10-12-14
STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES
LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING
Term of Office: 3 years
John P. Shaner 3-01-27
Partnership for a Livable Roanoke Valley (INACTIVE)
Term of Office: Unlimited
PERSONNEL BOARD
Term of Office: 2 years
William R. Shepherd 6-09-25
J. Chris Conner 8-12-25
Margaret Humphrey 8-12-25
Garry Lautenschlager 11-23-24
Teresa Sizemore-Hernandez 4-26-25
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
NPDES CITIZENS' COMMITTEE
Term of Office: 4 years
Mark Henrickson 7-31-26
Denise “Dee” King 7-31-26
Nathan Routt 7-26-27
Reid Garst 7-31-26
N. Jackson Beamer 8-28-27
REAL ESTATE TAX RELIEF REVIEW BOARD
Term of Office: 3 years
David G. Brittain 2-14-25
Wendel Ingram 6-11-27
Daniel L. Hart 2-14-27
ROANOKE REGIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION
Term of Office: 4 years
Dale T. Guidry 7-1-28
ROANOKE RIVER BLUEWAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Term of Office: 2 years
Jeff Ceasar 6-30-24
Vacant 6-30-25
MEMBER EXPIRATION OF TERM
ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL
COMMISSION
Term of Office: 3 years
H. Hunter Holliday 6-30-27
Dee King 6-30-26
James W. Wallace, III 6-30-27
ROANOKE VALLEY BROADBAND AUTHORITY
Term of Office: 4 years
H. Robert Light 12-14-27
Mike McEvoy (Citizen At-large) 12-13-25
ROANOKE VALLEY DETENTION COMMISSION
No Terms
Member Alternate
Vacant Rosemarie Jordan
ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMMISSION
Term of Office: 3 years
Dr. Steven L. Powers 11-08-24
Russ Craighead 7-25-25
Skip Lautenschlager 9-26-26
ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY
Term of Office: 4 years
Rob Light 12-31-27
ROANOKE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
ORGANIZATION (TPO) POLICY BOARD
Term of Office: 3 years
Renee F. Turk 6-30-26
H. Hunter Holliday 6-30-26
Alternate: Byron R. Foley 6-30-26
SCHOOL BOARD OF THE CITY OF SALEM
Term of Office: 3 years
Nancy Bradley 12-31-24
Teresa Sizemore-Hernandez 12-31-24
Andy Raines 12-31-25
Stacey Danstrom 12-31-25
Macel Janoschka 12-31-26
SOCIAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD
Term of Office: 4 years, 2 term limit
Heath Rickmond 12-01-26
TOTAL ACTION FOR PROGRESS
Term of Office: 2 years
Byron Randolph Foley 11-13-25
(vacant - full-time alternate)
MEMBER EXPIRATION OF TERM
TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE (TTC)
Term of office: 3 years
Crystal Williams 6-30-26
Josh Pratt 6-30-26
Alternate: Vacant 6-30-26
Alternate: Max Dillon 6-30-26
VIRGINIA WESTERN COMMUNITY COLLEGE LOCAL
ADVISORY
Term of Office: 4 years (2 terms only)
Dr. Forest I. Jones, Jr. 6-30-26
VIRGINIA’S BLUE RIDGE BOARD
Term of Office: No term limit
Chris Dorsey
John Shaner
WESTERN VIRGINIA EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES COUNCIL
Term of office: 3 years
Deputy Chief Matt Rickman 12-31-25
WESTERN VIRGINIA REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL
FACILITY AUTHORITY
Term of Office: 4 years (Requires Oath of Office)
Tommy Miller 2-3-26
Chris Dorsey 2-3-28
Crystal Williams (Alternate) 2-3-26
H. Robert Light (Alternate) 2-3-28
WESTERN VIRGINIA REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY
Term of Office: 1 year – Expires 12-31-24
(Requires Oath of Office)
William D. Jones
Alternate: Byron R. Foley
Rosemarie Jordan
Alternate: Chris Dorsey
April M. Staton
Alternate: Chief Deputy-Major Steve Garber