HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/8/2004 - Regular
Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors
Agenda
June 8, 2004
Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for June 8, 2004. Regular meetings are
held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are
held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule
will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be
rebroadcast on Thursdays at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturdays at 4:00 p.m. The meetings
are now closed-captioned. Individuals who require assistance or special arrangements
to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings should contact the Clerk to the
Board at (540) 772-2005 at least 48 hours in advance.
A.
OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 p.m.)
1. Roll Call
2. Invocation:
Pastor Peter Isenberg
New Hope Christian Church
3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag
B.
REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF
AGENDA ITEMS
C.
PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
BRIEFINGS
D.
E.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Request to adopt the Roanoke County School budget for the 2004-2005 fiscal
year. (Jerry Canada, School Board Chair; Dr. Linda Weber, Superintendent)
2. Presentation by Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway and request to
appropriate funding to support the view shed protection project. (Susan J.
Mills, Executive Director; David Hill, Landscape Architect)
3. Request to appropriate $10,000 to the Town of Vinton for its Downtown
Improvement District Grant Program. (Elmer C. Hodge, County
Administrator)
G.
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. First reading of an ordinance approving the execution of an operating
agreement with the City of Roanoke and the Western Virginia Water
Authority, and authorizing the conveyance of real estate to said authority.
(Paul Mahoney, County Attorney)
2. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of an easement to
Appalachian Power Company through property owned by the Board of
Supervisors, Tax Map #028.13-01-27.04 and #028.13-01-27.00, to provide
electric service to Hollins Park, Hollins Magisterial District. (Paul Mahoney,
County Attorney)
3. First reading of an ordinance to increase the salaries of the members of the
Board of Supervisors pursuant to Section 3.07 of the Roanoke County
Charter and Section 15.2-1414.3 of the Code of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney,
County Attorney)
4. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the lease of certain real estate for
the purpose of securing financing for the construction of a new public safety
center and a request to authorize the borrowing of funds. (Dan O'Donnell,
Assistant County Administrator; Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer; Paul
Mahoney, County Attorney)
5. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the acquisition of certain real estate
from Norman D. Mason consisting of approximately 4.83 acres and being
identified as Tax Map No. 28.13-1-27.5 for public park purposes, Hollins
Magisterial District. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney)
H.
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AND ADOPTION OF PROPOSED
BUDGET
1. Resolution adopting the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget, including the fiscal
year 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Plan, for Roanoke County, Virginia.
(Brent Robertson, Budget Director)
2. Second reading of an ordinance appropriating the funds for the fiscal year
2004-2005 budget. (Brent Robertson, Budget Director)
2
I.
APPOINTMENTS
1. Court Community Corrections Program Regional Community Criminal Justice
Board
2. Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire & Rescue
3. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (Appointed by District)
4. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Community
Advisory Committee (CAC)
5. Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority
J.
CONSENT AGENDA
ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED
BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE
RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION
IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
1. Approval of minutes - May 25, 2004
2. Confirmation of committee appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals
(Appointed by District); Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT);
Court Community Corrections Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP) Policy
Board; Roanoke County Cable Television Committee; Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission; Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors
Bureau; Roanoke Valley Detention Commission; and Roanoke Valley
Regional Cable Television Committee
3. Request for renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke
Valley Greenway Commission
4. Designation of voting delegate to the National Association of Counties
Conference to be held on July 16-20, 2004
5. Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $8,000 for the Treasurer's
turnover audit
K.
REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
L.
REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
M.
CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
3
N.
REPORTS
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
3. Board Contingency Fund
4. Future Capital Projects
O.
REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
P.
WORK SESSIONS (4th Floor Conference Room) - 4:30 p.m.
1. Joint work session with the Planning Commission to discuss revisions to the
Community Plan. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner)
2. Work session to conduct training regarding planning and zoning laws in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney; Mike Chandler,
Virginia Tech) Scheduled for 5:30 p.m.
Q
CLOSED MEETING
R.
CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
S.
ADJOURNMENT
4
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
E-I
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Request to adopt the Roanoke County School budget for the
2004-2005 fiscal year
SUBMITTED BY:
Diane D. Hyatt
Chief Financial Officer
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge (II
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The Roanoke County School Board has submitted the attached budget for the 2004-05
fiscal year. The School Board approved this budget at their meeting on May 26, 2004.
The budget includes a 3.5% average salary increase for school employees.
Jerry Canada, Chairman of the Roanoke County School Board, and Dr. Linda Weber,
Superintendent, will attend the Board of Supervisors meeting to present the school budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approving and adopting the attached school board budget for the 2004-
2005 fiscal year.
Roanoke County
Public Schools
~,,1Y Pile.
tJO ~/"
~ ~
0 ~
Z 0
cc 0
i &;
Budget
2004 - 2005
As Amended on May 26, 2004
E-I
E-\
Roanoke County Public Schools
School Board Members
Jerry L. Canada, Chairman
Hollins District
C. Drew Barrineau, Vice Chairman
Windsor Hills District
Marion G. Roark
Catawba District
William A. Irvin, III
Cave Spring District
Michael W. Stovall
Vinton District
"'-
Dr. Linda H. Weber
School Superintendent
Penny A. Hodge, CPA
Director of Budget & Finance
David E. Atkins
Budget Assistant
Sandra K. Thornton
Administrative Specialist
5937 Cove Road, Roanoke, Virginia 24019
www.rcs.k12.va.us
E-I
..... Table of Contents ~
Executive Summary
Superintendent's Budget .Message.......................................................................... I
Mission Statement....................................................................................................2
Budget Calendar.......................................................................................................3
Budget Development Process ..................................................".......................... 4-5
Budget Summary - All Funds ..................................................................................6
Revenues Per Pupil..................................................................................................7
Revenue Summary............................................................................................... 8-9
Operating Fund Expenditures by Budget Categories.............................................lO
Expenditures Per Pupil...........................................................................................11
Expenditure Summary by Department...................................................................12
Average Daily Membership ...................................................................................13
Historical Fund Balance Data ................................................................................14
Other School Funds
Grant Fund ..........................................................."................................................16
Nutrition Fund........................................................................................................17
Textbook Fund.......................................................................................................18
Capital Fund...........................................................................................................19
Debt Fund...............................................................................................................20
Regional Alternative Education Program ..............................................................21
E-\
I SUPERINTENDENT'S BUDGET MESSAGE I
The budget for the 2004-2005 school year provides a much more hopeful picture than
budgets in the past year. Though we still have many unfunded mandates ITom the federal
government, the Virginia General Assembly offered more support for K-12 education
than in previous years.
The additional funding allows us to:
. give a 3.5% salary increase to an employees
. allocate salary adjustments where warranted ITom market comparisons
. put more nurses in our schools
. keep class sizes low
. provide extra assistance to students requiring help with SOLs
While we continue to have needs that require more money, I am extremely pleased that
our budget reflects the priorities we have identified in our Six-Year Plan. As we go
forward we will continue to "chip away" at our goals as outlined in the Six- Year Plan.
A fmal word of thanks to all the General Assembly members who voted to provide this
support and our local government that recognizes and supports our students.
Sincerely,
~ S"P'"""""'"
E-
Roanoke County Public Schools
Mission Statement
"Learning for all, whatever it takes"
It is the mission of Roanoke County Public Schools to ensure that
all students participate in quality learning experiences necessary to
grow, adapt and meet the challenges of a changing world.
Beliefs and Assumptions
. All children can learn.
. The individual school controls enough variables to assure that virtually
all children can be motivated to learn.
. A school's stakeholders are the most qualified people to implement
needed changes.
. School-by-school change is the best hope for reform.
2
Budget Development Calendar
FY 2004-2005
E-I
November 2003
Identification and prioritization of budget initiatives with Principals and Senior
Staff
December 2003
Budget kick-off and distribution of Operating Budget Preparation Instructions to
staff
Budget Development Calendar approved by School Board
Salary Committees begin to formulate salary recommendations
Januarv 2004
Operating Budget Requests submitted to Budget Office by all departments
School Nutrition Services, Textbooks, Debt and Grant Budget Requests submitted
to Budget Office
Draft Operating Budget compilations distributed to Senior Staff
Preliminary revenue projections completed by Budget Office
Review of Operating Budget: Revenues and Initiatives
Enrollment projections presented to School Board
Public comment on FY2005 Operating Budget
Februarv 2004
Review of Operating Budget: Support Services
Review of Operating Budget: Instruction
Review of Operating Budget: Personnel
Salary Teams present recommendations to School Board
Operating Budget discussions - Superintendent and Senior Staff
Presentation of Proposed Operating Budget to School Board
Operating Budget School Board Work Sessions
March 2004
Operating Budget School Board Work Sessions (as needed)
Joint Budget Work Session with Board of Supervisors
Presentation of Executive Budget Summary to School Board
School Board adoption ofFY2004 Operating Budget and Other Fund Budgets
School Board adopted budgets presented to Board of Supervisors
April 2004
Public hearings and discussions with School Board, School Staff and Board of
Supervisors on Operating Budget
Budget Office distributes per pupil cost for public education in accordance with
state law by April 15th.
Mav 2004
Appropriations Resolution approved by the Board of Supervisors
3
Budget Development Process
E-\
The annual budget for the Roanoke County School Public Schools offers citizens an
opportunity to provide full educational opportunities for all students enrolled in the county
schools - pre-kindergarten through adult. The budget cycle can be divided into a five-step
process that includes planning, preparation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation. The
process is driven by two objectives: to develop a budget that will provide every child in the
school system with the best possible educational opportunities and to optimize the use of
available resources. Within this ftamework, the School Board attempts to balance the
educational needs of students with the resources available to the school system ftom local,
state, and federal sources.
Budget Planning
For the fiscal year that begins July 1, the budget planning process starts the prior year when the
School Board adopts a budget calendar. The calendar includes important activities in the
budget process and the dates on which important decisions are scheduled. Once adopted, the
calendar represents the guidelines for the preparation and adoption of the budget for the school
system.
Preparation of the School Budget
Preparation of the school operating budget includes major input ftom each school and input
from budget committees including the following:
Superintendent's Budl!et Committee
Penny Hodge, Chairperson
Linda Weber, Superintendent
Bill Irvin, School Board
Marion Roark, School Board
Drew Barrineau, School Board
Mike Stovall, School Board
Jerry Canada, School Board
Lorraine Lange, Assistant Superintendent
Senior Staff Budl!et Committee
Penny Hodge, Chairperson
Linda Weber, Superintendent
Richard Flora, Director of Operations
Allen Journell, Assistant Superintendent
Lorraine Lange, Assistant Superintendent
Gary Basham, Associate Director ofInstruction
Roger Johnson, Career and Technical Education
Susan Willis, Testing and Remediation
Pat Radcliffe, Pupil Personnel Services
Becky Rowe, Assoc. Dir. Pupil Personnel
Allen Journell, Assistant Superintendent
Tom Hall, Assistant Superintendent
Richard Flora, Director of Operations
Allyn Mitchell, RCEA
Diane Hyatt, Roanoke County
David Atkins, Budget and Finance
Jane James, Director of Technology
Pat Radcliffe, Director, PPS & Special Ed.
Carol Whitaker, Staff Development
Tom Hall, Assistant Superintendent
Dave Trumbower, Classified Personnel
Jane James, Technology
David Atkins, Budget and Finance
Joni Poff, Associate Director, English
Ed Tutle, Nutrition Services
Brenda Chastain, School Board Clerk
Darlene Ratliff, Deputy Clerk
4
E-l
Other Funds
The budget development process for the School Nutrition Program, Textbook, Grant, and
Capital Funds proceed concurrently with the development of the operating budget. The School
Nutrition Program captures the revenues and expenditures for the school breakfast and lunch
program. It is fully funded ftom lunch fees and reimbursements from the state and federal
government. The Textbook Fund accounts for the purchase, sale, and/or rental of textbooks.
This fund is highly subsidized by the School Operating Fund through an interfund transfer.
The Grant Fund is funded by local, federal and state grants. The Capital Fund represents state
funding for school construction and technology. The Debt Fund represents the payment of
principal and interest for loans used to build/renovate school facilities. The Regional
Alternative School is a jointly operated program between Roanoke County and Bedford County
to provide alternative education services for troubled students.
Budget Adoption, Implementation, and Evaluation
The budget for the school division for the next fiscal year is presented at board meetings and
work sessions in February and early March. On or before April 1 of each year, the School
Board adopts the next fiscal year's budget and submits to the Board of Supervisors for
approval. The school division operates as a legally separate component unit. However, the
school division is fiscally dependent upon the County of Roanoke for its funding. The final
adoption and appropriation occur in May of each year. The last step in the budget process is
the evaluation of the financial plan. The results of operation for the fiscal year are set forth
annually in the School Board's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the
Superintendent's Annual School Report to the Virginia Department of Education. The
Roanoke County Public Schools received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in
Financial Reporting by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and
Canada and the Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting by the Association of School
Business Officials Intemational for the 2000-01 and 2001-02 CAFR's. The 2002-03 CAFR has
been submitted to both organizations for review this year. The Certificate of Achievement and
the Certificate of Excellence represent the highest form of recognition in the area of
govemmental accounting and financial reporting. The attainment of both awards represents a
significant accomplishment by a govemment and its management.
FY 2004-05 Special Considerations
The General Assembly adjourned from the regular legislative session on March 13 without
adopting a 2004-05 state budget. On March 17, Governor Warner reconvened the legislative
bodies for a special session. The special session finally culminated in an adopted General
Assembly budget on May 7. The School Board approved a budget based on unknown state
revenues at their March 31 board meeting in accordance with the legal requirement to present
a school budget to the governing body by April 1 of each year. This document represents the
original budget amended to include General Assembly approved state and local revenue
sources and the corresponding expenditure budgets. The state budget impasse has
significantly delayed the ability of the school system to adopt a school budget and issue
personnel contracts this year. The amended budget is scheduled to be adopted by the School
Board on May 25 and the Board of Supervisors on June 8 of this year. However, the General
Assembly budget is also still subject to approval by the Governor in June and could result in
further amendments.
5
E-I
Roanoke County Schools
Budget Summary - All Funds
FY 2004-2005
Budget Budget Increase Percent
Fund 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease) Change
School Operating Fund 104,532,177 112,448,453 7,916,276 7.6%
Grants Fund 3,905,018 4,588,058 683,040 17.5%
School Nutrition Fund 3,871,000 3,959,000 88,000 2.3%
Textbook Fund 965,536 928,016 (37,520) -3.9%
Capital Fund 1,186,193 1,142,335 (43,858) -3.7%
Debt Fund 8,409,277 10,362,924 1,953,647 23.2%
Regional Alternative School 361,143 396,382 35,239 9.8%
Total Funds 123,230,344 133,825,168 10,594,824 8.6%
"--~"-"-~~"~
All School Funds
Operations---
-Grants
Nutrition
/- Textbooks
---Capital
-----Debt
- Alternative Ed
"-"------
6
School Operating Fund
Revenues Per Pupil
E- \
Budget Percent Revenue
2004-05 of Total Per Pupil
10,444,634 9.3% 739
45,635,299 40.6% 3,231
161,153 0.1% II
55,418,522 49.3% 3,923
121,583 0.1% 9
667,262 0.6% 47
112,448,453 100.0% 7,960
14,1261
State Sales Tax
State Revenue
Federal Revenue
Transfer from County
Beginning balance
Other Revenue
Total Revenues
Estimated Average Daily Membership
Transfer úom
County
Transfer úom
Altemative
School
Other
-Sales Tax
---State Revenue
Federal Revenue
7
E-I
School Operating Fund
Revenue Summary
Actual Budget Budget Iucrease
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
State SOQ Revenues
State Sales Tax 9,687,267 9,842,628 10,444,634 602,006
State Basic Aid 26,730,750 26,973,064 32,467,032 5,493,968
Salary Supplement o 109,107 o (109,107)
SOQ - Vocational Ed 658,092 649,288 797,952 148,664
SOQ - Special Ed 3,685,316 3,636,ÓI2 4,770,554 1,134,542
SOQ - Gifted Ed 296,141 292,180 326,045 33,865
SOQ - Remedial Education 222,106 219,135 240,244 21,109
Retirement 896,651 884,612 1,476,178 591,566
Social Security 1,546,516 1,525,753 1,759,483 233,730
Group Life Insurance o o ° o
English as a Second Language o o 89,153 89,153
SOQ - Remedial Summer School 82,066 77,312 98,326 21,014
Total SOQ Revenues 43,804,905 44,209,091 52,469,601 8,260,510
State Incentive Revenues
At Risk 56,805 57,013 107,343 50,330
Disparity: K-3 169,101 175,234 197,836 22,602
SOL Remediation 54,410 56,206 o (56,206)
Lottery 2,016,971 1,819,873 1,876,389 56,516
Dropout Prevention 104,129 o o o
Technology Resource Assistants 90,839 o o o
Student Achievement Block o 90,831 o (90,831)
Total Incentive Revenue 2,492,255 2,199,157 2,181,568 (17,589)
State Categorical Revenues
Voc Ed-State Equipment 8,096 o o °
Voc Ed-State Adult Education 53,765 o o °
Voc Ed-State OccuplTech Ed 110,633 167,892 172,966 5,074
Homebound Payments 45,629 45,435 44,882 (553)
Special Ed - Regional Tuition 855,558 865,740 865,000 (740)
Foster Home Children 310,571 301,996 337,524 35,528
English as a Second Language 40,519 48,626 o (48,626)
Adult Ed Basic 4,277 3,888 8,392 4,504
State Grant Revenue 369 o o o
E-rate Reimbursement 47,998 o o o
Total Categorical Revenue 1,477,415 1,433,577 1,428,764 (4,813)
Total State Revenue 47,774,575 47,841,825 56,079,933 8,238,108
School Operating Fund E-I
Revenue Summary
Actual Budget Budget Increase
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
Federal Revenue
Medicaid Reimbursement 29,351 0 0 0
Federal Land Use 1,634 1,000 1,000 0
Federal Grants 26,963 0 0 0
Voc Ed - Carl Perkins Act 144,928 142,487 160,153 17,666
Total Federal Revenue 202,876 143,487 161,153 17,666
Local Revenue
Local Appropriation-County 54,693,491 55,572,940 55,071,223 (501,717)
Transfer from Gen. - CSA 799,000 0 0 0
Transfer from Gen. Fund - Dental 286,043 347,299 347,299 0
Total Local Revenue 55,778,534 55,920,239 55,418,522 (501,717)
Other Revenue
Beginning Balance (June 30, 2004) 0 0 121,583 121,583
Interest Income 86,908 30,000 60,000 30,000
Rental of School Property 69,850 69,000 52,384 (16,616)
Tuition - Regular School 124,267 126,200 108,000 (18,200)
Tuition - Summer School 119,747 128,880 134,240 5,360
Tuition - Adult Educ 85,561 149,563 149,563 0
Tuition - Preschool (LEAP) 0 25,000 103,680 78,680
Other Miscellaneous Revenue 7,490 1,000 1,000 0
Rebates/Ins Refunds 2,753 2,600 2,600 0
Distance Line Refund 2,291 2,400 0 (2,400)
Alternative School recovered costs 55,220 55,220 36,220 (19,000)
Tuition from Other Localities 24,038 36,763 19,575 (17,188)
Total Other Revenue 578,125 626,626 788,845 162,219
Total School Operating Revenue 104,334,110 104,532,177 112,448,453 7,916,276
9
Operating Fund Expenditures by Budget Categories
E-I
The education of students is a labor-intensive enterprise that is reflected in the allocation
of the financial resources of the school system. For the 2004-05 fiscal year, contract
salaries and fringe benefits represent 80% of expenditures in the operating budget. The
major department budget areas are discussed below.
Classroom Instruction expenditures deal directly with the interaction between teachers
and students in the classroom. This includes the development of curriculum and
instructional programs which support the standards of quality and the administration of
schools and programs in compliance with state, federal, and school board mandates,
policies, and guidelines. Classroom instruction also includes expenditures associated
with educational testing, career education programs, special education services,
homebound instruction, and guidance services.
Personnel is the largest expenditure in the school operating fund. These departments
include the salary and fringe benefit costs for classroom personnel, instructional and
central office support staff, and school administration.
Support services are expenditures related to providing transportation for regular, special,
and summer school programs and the maintenance and operation of all school facilities.
Central support departments include expenditures for the school board, school
superintendent, budget and finance, community relations, pupil assignment, and staff
development. Property insurance for school buildings, employee medical insurance, and
fund transfers for debt and textbooks are budgeted under central support.
Special programs capture the cost of providing summer school and adult education
classes.
10
School Operating Fund
Expenditures Per Pupil
£-1
Budget
2004-05
Percent
of Total
Cost
Per Pupil
Classroom Instruction
Personnel
Support Services
Central Support
Special Programs
5,798,340
87,977,523
5,068,797
13,046,620
557,173
112,448,453
5.2%
78.2%
4.5%
11.6%
0.5%
410
6,228
359
924
39
7,960
100.0%
14,1261
Estimated Average Daily Membership
-~-------
Special Programs
!
Classroom
Instruction
Central Support -
Support Services----
Personnel
----------~ --. ------~-
II
-----
E-I
School Operating Fund
Expenditure Summary by Department
Actual Budget Budget Increase
2002-03 2003-04 2004-2005 (Decrease)
Classroom Instruction:
Instructional Programs 501,673 650,735 820,299 169,564
Deputy Superintendent of Administration 944,251 861,875 1,122,970 261,095
Educational Testing/Remediation 77,327 100,235 100,235 o
Career & Technical Education 406,124 403,343 421,009 17,666
Pupil Personnel! Special Education 1,993,273 2,087,749 2,211,116 123,367
Guidance Services 323,817 329,372 354,277 24,905
Media Services 881,955 768,434 768,434 o
Total Classroom Instruction 5,128,420 5,201,743 5,798,340 596,597
Personnel:
Instructional 62,874,151 61,513,495 66,084,063 4,570,568
Administrative 6,945,902 7,049,633 7,533,377 483,744
Classified 14,230,781 13,590,068 14,360,083 770,015
Total Personnel 84,050,834 82,153,196 87,977,523 5,824,327
Support Services:
Transportation 897,040 907,500 907,500 o
Facilities & Operations 3,730,612 3,731,297 4,161,297 430,000
Total Support Services 4,627,652 4,638,797 5,068,797 430,000
Central Support:
School Board 151,861 163,247 210,494 47,247
Office of the Superintendent 59,785 383,251 440,276 57,025
Budget & Finance 9,522,466 11,220,872 12,135,832 914,960
Community Relations 42,172 46,900 46,900 o
Staff Development 47,736 70,302 70,302 o
Pupil Assignment 99,169 104,741 142,816 38,075
Total Central Support 9,923,189 11,989,313 13,046,620 1,057,307
Special Programs:
Summer School 395,641 399,565 407,610 8,045
Adult & Continuing Education 65,851 149,563 149,563 o
Total Special Programs 461,492 549,128 557,173 8,045
Total School Operating Expenditures 104,191,587 104,532,177 112,448,453 7,916,276
12
Average Daily Membership
E-I
Attendance
Months 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04
Septemher 13.691 13.753 13,881 13,956 13,875 13,852 13,871 13,911 14,094 14,385
October 13,691 13,779 13,923 13.954 13,854 13,840 13,844 13,943 14,125 14,347
November 13.672 13,757 13,896 13,924 13,86] 13,843 13,886 13.938 14,138 14,376
December 13.652 13,754 13,892 13.932 13.868 13,834 13,824 13.941 14.]67 ]4,394
January 13,648 13,767 13,874 13.921 13,837 13,85] 13,843 13,937 ]4.155 14,400
February 13,606 13.817 13,883 13,889 13,795 13.840 13,835 13.910 14,141 14,385
March 13,613 13,816 13,886 13,857 13,782 13,843 13,803 13,905 14.130 14,385
Gain (Loss) (78) 63 5 (99) (93) (9) (68) (6) 36 0
since Sept.
March ADM 13.652 13,72] 13,863 13,898 13,862 13.856 13.865 13,930 14.127 ]4,279
Budget ADM 13,600 13,650 13,776 13,950 13,950 13.825 13,825 13,825 13,830 13,938
Over(under) budget 52 71 87 (52) (88) 3] 40 105 297 34]
NOTE: The above figures do not include Regional School students.
The table and graph reflect variances in Average Daily Membership (ADM) between September and March 30.
State revenue is driven primarily by ADM as of March 30 of each year. This graph shows the fluctuating
student enrollments in previous years.
.-------------- .
Change in Enrollment
March 30 ADM
14,400
14,300
14,200
14,100
14,000
13,900
13,800
13,700
13,600
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ & ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~
Year
1-
13
Historical Fund Balance Data
[-I
Transfer from County General Fund
Fiscal Year Annual One-Time Phase 1 Reserve for Total Increase From Percent
Ended June 30 Appropriation Appropriation Capital Project' New Schools Appropriation Prior Year Increase
1988-89 26,456,000 184,294 26,640,294 1,174,294 4.61%
1989-90 28,717,090 28,7]7,090 2,076,796 7.80%
1990-91 30,576,236 30,576,236 1.859,146 6.47%
1991-92 32,876,578 32,876,578 2,300,342 7.52%
1992-93 32,903,869 32,903,869 27,291 0.08%
1993-94 34,206,283 34,206,283 1,302,414 3.96%
1994-95 36,733,183 800,000 37,533,183 3,326,900 9.73%
1995-96 39,647,773 1,850,000 41,497.773 3,964,590 10.56%
] 996-97 42,550,097 2,000,000 44,550,097 3,052,324 7.36%
1997-98 45,865,244 1,434,815 47,300,059 2,749,962 6.17%
1998-99 46,542,839 2,000,000 48,542,839 1,242,780 2.63%
1999-00 47,941,865 2,000,000 49,941,865 1,399,026 2.88%
2000-01 49,297,791 2,000,000 1,500,000 52,797,791 2,855,926 5.72%
2001-02 52,311,049 2,000,000 1,500,000 55,811,049 3,013,258 5.71%
2002-03 55,040,790 2,000,000 57,040,790 1,229,741 2.20%
2003-04 55,920,239 2,000,000 57,920,239 879,449 1.54%
2004-05 55,4]8,522 2,000,000 57,418,522 -501,717 -0.88%
General School Operations
Fund Balances
Fiscal Year Fund Balance
Ended Operating Operating as a %
June 30 Budget Fund Balance of Budget
1995 71,808,432 1,326,683 1.85%
1996 76,103,239 1,250,706 1.64%
]997 79,912,607 1,122,274 1.40%
1998 83,928,863 1,144,086 1.36%
1999 87,233,241 1,951,696 2.24%
2000 91,081,332 2,475,202 2.72%
2001 95,277,499 3,322,436 3.49%
2002 98,162,402 4,008,278 4.08%
2003 102,259,339 4,190,156 4.10%
2004 110,986.972 TED N/A
14
Other School Funds
E-I
1:-1
School Grant Fund
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Budget Budget Budget Increase
Grant 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
Federal Grants:
Title III 0 0 21,739 21,739
Title I, Part A 593,955 740,228 961,375 221,147
Title V, Part A 59,611 60,013 59,077 (936)
Title II, Part A 51,084 339,435 355,400 15,965
Title II, Part D 0 26,530 25,390 (1,140)
Title IV, Safe & Drug Free Schools 50,370 48,950 47,300 (1,650)
Title VI-B Flow-Thru Funds 2,052,184 2,148,455 2,429,348 280,893
Preschool Mini Grant- I yr 97,456 97,505 92,889 (4,616)
Preschool Mini Grant - 2 yr 0 0 92,900 92,900
Sliver Grant 19,719 31,151 30,636 (515)
School to Work 0 0 0 0
Summer Youth Program 60,000 0 0 0
Technology Literacy Challenge 0 0 0 0
Class Size Reduction 192,747 0 0 0
Refugee - Child School Impact 2,449 4,434 0 (4,434)
3,179,575 3,496,701 4,094,315 597,614
State Grants:
Early Reading Initiative 74,152 74,152 85,194 11,042
Algebra Readiness 81,978 75,000 35,682 (39,318)
Tech Prep - Continuation 110,000 110,000 110,000 0
GED Funding 15,717 16,286 15,717 (569)
High Schools That Work - WBHS 10,850 10,000 7,500 (2,500)
High Schools That Work - CSHS 10,850 10,000 7,500 (2,500)
Preschool Initiative 103,766 103,766 223,037 119,271
School by School 0 6,000 6,000 0
Visually Handicapped Grant 4,124 3,113 3,113 0
Health Incentive Funds 6,044 0 0 0
417,481 408,317 493,743 85,426
Local Grants:
Carilion Nurse Grant 5,000 0 0 0
Transfer from School Operating Fund:
School Nurse Grant 35,000 0 0 0
Total Grant Revenues and Expenditures 3,637,056 3,905,018 4,588,058 683,040
16
E-I
School Nutrition Fund
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Budget Budget Budget Increase
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
Revenues:
Pupil, Adult & Other Sales 3,163,000 3,054,000 3,044,000 (10,000)
Rebates & Refunds 10,000 10,000 1,000 (9,000)
Federal Reimbursement 650,000 725,000 840,000 II 5,000
State Reimbursement 72,000 65,000 64,000 (1,000)
Interest Income 20,000 17,000 10,000 (7,000)
Total Revenues 3,915,000 3,871,000 3,959,000 88,000
Expenditures:
Salaries & Related Costs 2,034,000 2,089,000 2,200,000 111,000
Early Retirement Payments 58,000 58,000 58,000 0
Contractual Services 40,000 40,000 40,000 0
Repairs 20,000 20,000 20,000 0
Travel 3,000 3,000 6,000 3,000
Food Supplies 1,620,000 1,561,000 1,525,000 (36,000)
Equipment 140,000 100,000 50,000 (50,000)
Unappropriated 0 0 60,000 60,000
Total Expenditures 3,915,000 3,871,000 3,959,000 88,000
The School Nutrition program includes all costs associated with providing school meals to students and staff.
The School Nutrition program is completely self-supporting through school nutrition revenues. Expenditures
include the continual upgrading of equipment. This budget is based on the following meal prices
and reimbursement rates:
Meal Prices:
Elementary lunch
Secondary lunch
Reduced price lunch
Adult lunch
Full priced breakfast
Adult breakfast
Reduced breakfast
IT 03-04
1.50
1.75
0.40
2.25
0.75
1.00
0.30
Reimbursement Rates:
IT 04-05
1.60
1.75
0.40
2.25
0.85
1.00
0.30
Breakfast
Reduced priced
Paid breakfast
Free breakfast
State breakfast
$0.90
$0.22
$1.20
none
Lunch
Reduced priced
Paid lunch
Free lunch
State lunch
$1.79
$0.21
$2.19
$0.055
17
Ë-
School Textbook Fund
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Budget Budget Budget Increase
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
Revenues:
Rental Revenue 0 2,500 2,500 0
State Reimbursement 606,890 606,890 534,370 (72,520)
Sale of Receipt Books 2,000 2,000 2,000 0
Sale of Textbooks 46,000 40,000 40,000 0
Payments for Lost Books 4,000 4,000 4,000 0
Transfer from School Operating Fund 310,146 310,146 345,146 35,000
Total Revenues 969,036 965,536 928,016 (37,520)
ExDenditures:
Salaries & Related Costs 61,582 60,726 62,500 1,774
Textbooks - ARBVT 18,000 0 0 0
Textbooks - Literature Adoption 489,000 350,000 0 (350,000)
Textbooks - Art Adoption 35,000 0 0 0
Textbooks - Business Education 15,000 15,000 21,500 6,500
Textbooks - Science 0 o 25,000 25,000
Textbooks - Mathematics 10,500 0 38,500 38,500
Textbooks - Foreign Language 53,000 48,000 53,000 5,000
Textbooks - Special Education 25,000 25,000 25,000 0
Textbooks - Health 115,000 0 0 0
Textbooks - Technology Education 10,000 10,000 17,500 7,500
Textbook Replacement 108,454 162,810 246,036 83,226
Office Supplies 3,500 4,000 4,000 0
Consignment - Secondary 0 2,500 0 (2,500)
SOL Materials 25,000 25,000 25,000 0
Textbooks - Specialty Schools/ARBTC o 22,500 30,000 7,500
Textbooks - Social Studies 0 240,000 264,980 24,980
Laptops 0 o 115,000 115,000
Total Expenditures 969,036 965,536 928,016 (37,520)
The Textbook Fund includes personnel costs for the textbook agent, temporary employees hired as
needed to deliver books, payments for books and materials, and payments for books on consignment.
This fund is supported to a large degree by an interfund transfer from the School Operating Fund.
Scheduled Adoptions:
FY2004 - Science
FY2005 - Mathematics & Foreign Language
FY2006 - Language Arts and English Literature 6 - 12
18
School Capital Fund
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Budget
2002-03
Budget
2003-04
Budget
2004-05
Increase
(Decrease)
Revenues:
State Construction Revenue
State Technology Bond
Soft Drink Commission
Total Revenues
274,485 275,193 283,335 8,142
778,000 856,000 804,000 (52,000)
55,000 55,000 55,000 0
1,107,485 1,186,193 1,142,335 (43,858)
Exnenditures:
Phase 2 Capital Projects 274,485 275,193 283,335 8,142
Online SOL Testing Initiative 778,000 856,000 804,000 (52,000)
School Projects 55,000 55,000 55,000 o
Total Expenditures 1,107,485 1,186,193 1,142,335 (43,858)
19
£-1
E-I
School Debt Fund
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Budget Budget Budget Increase
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
Revenues:
Beginning balance o o 10,000 10,000
Transfer /Tom General Fund 6,410,344 5,963,805 8,048,555 2,084,750
Transfer /Tom School Fund 2,585,597 2,445,472 2,304,369 (141,103)
Total Revenues 8,995,941 8,409,277 10,362,924 1,953,647
Expenditures:
Principal on G. O. Bonds 396,823 420,728 485,000 64,272
Principal on VPSA Bonds 3,707,883 3,632,623 4,709,639 1,077,016
Principal on Literary Loans 884,032 884,032 884,032 o
Principal on Lease Purchase Agreements 264,615 116,630 o (116,630)
Interest on G. O. Bonds 337,397 243,054 179,281 (63,773)
Interest on VPSA Bonds 3,075,557 2,801,404 3,835,336 1,033,932
Interest on Literary Loans 313,021 286,333 259,636 (26,697)
Interest on Lease Purchase Agreements 16,613 4,473 o (4,473)
Bank Service Charges o 20,000 10,000 (10,000)
Total Expenditures 8,995,941 8,409,277 10,362,924 1,953,647
20
E-I
Regional Alternative Education Program
Revenue and Expenditure Summary
Budget Budget Budget Increase
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 (Decrease)
Revenues:
Department of Education Grant 72,226 70,529 76,254 5,725
Virginia Business-Education Partnership Grant 56,666 0 0 0
RCPS Transportation Reimbursement 38,000 38,000 19,000 (19,000)
Roanoke County Tuition 70,671 126,307 150,564 24,257
Bedford County Tuition 70,671 126,307 150,564 24,257
Total Revenues 308,234 361,143 396,382 35,239
Expenditures:
Salaries and Fringe Benefits 232,871 283,780 338,019 54,239
Purchased Services 500 500 500 0
Postage 600 600 600 0
LeaselRent of Equipment 2,150 2,150 2,150 0
Travel 800 800 800 0
Office/Medical Supplies 1,600 1,600 1,600 0
Small Equipment 2,100 2,100 2,100 0
Janitorial Supplies 1,500 1,500 1,500 0
Instructional Materials 10,893 10,893 10,893 0
Transfer to Roanoke County:
Transportation 38,000 38,000 19,000 (19,000)
Property Insurance 620 620 620 0
Utilities 16,600 18,600 18,600 0
Total Expenditures 308,234 361,143 396,382 35,239
7,7061 9,0291 9,910 I
Total Projected Cost Per Student 881 I
Roanoke County Cost Per Student 1,767 3,158 3,764 606
Roanoke County Schools and Bedford County Schools operate a regional alternative education
program at the R.E. Cook facility in Roanoke County. This budget includes staffmg for a student
capacity of 40. The budget is funded 50% by Roanoke County and 50% by Bedford County. This budget
includes the transportation costs for Roanoke County students. Transportation for Bedford County
students is paid directly by Bedford.
21
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
~-~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Presentation by Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway and
request to appropriate funding to support the view shed
protection project
Elmer C. Hodge t j-I
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Susan Mills, Executive Director of Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway, and David Hill,
Landscape Architect, will present a briefing to the Board regarding the view shed protection
program.
Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway is a Roanoke County based volunteer organization
founded in 1989. They are comprised of approximately 6,800 members internationally and
serve as a non-profit partner of the Blue Ridge Parkway. The view shed protection project
is a five-phase initiative designed to target the last chance landscape areas. Friends of the
Blue Ridge Parkway is working with other localities along the parkway, and Roanoke
County has been chosen as the first participant due to the last chance landscape
designation. David Hill, in conjunction with the parkway and Friends of the Blue Ridge
Parkway, has completed the planning and design phase of the project which designates
the areas for tree plantings. Roanoke County is being asked to participate in the tree
planting portion of this project. Congressman Goodlatte is very supportive of this initiative
and will be providing a letter of support to the Board under separate cover.
The three most critical sites which have been identified are adjacent to Route 24 (Vinton),
Route 220 (Clearbrook), and Cotton Hill Road (Cave Spring). The five phases of the
project and anticipatèd costs are as follows:
E- d-..
. Development of plans for tree plantings (completed)
. 3 phases of tree plantings at identified sites
. Publication of brochure "How to develop in harmony with the Parkway"
$11,300
78,936
25,623
Funding for the plans has already been secured and the plans have been developed.
Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway is in the process of securing funding for the tree
plantings, and would like to request a contribution from Roanoke County in the amount of
$10,000 per year for three years to support this objective.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding in the amount of $10,000 per year for a period of three years is requested. It is
recommended that the initial grant of $1 0,000 be appropriated from the Board Contingency
Fund, with further review to occur during each year's budget process.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the request to appropriate funds in the amount of $10,000 from the Board
Contingency Fund, with further review to occur in each of the next two year's budget
process.
2. Do not approve the request for funding.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative #1.
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
1=:-:?I
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Request to appropriate $10,000 to the Town of Vinton for its
Downtown Improvement Dîstrict Grant Program
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
On September 24,1996, the Board adopted resolution 092496-8 authorizing a matching
grant program to assist in funding the Williamson Road Corridor Project. The goal of the
grant program was to offer a financial incentive to property owners along the Williamson
Road corridor who wished to make improvements to their property in accordance with the
design guidelines contained in the Williamson Road/Hollins Village Master Plan. The
matching grant funds were used for external improvements to the property for items such
as façade renovations, signage improvements, landscaping, and other external
improvements to property.
In June 24, 2003, the Board adopted ordinance 062403-11 which extended the matching
grant program to fund improvements to the Route 11/460 West Corridor. At that time, it
was noted that the intent was to eventually extend the matching grant program to other
areas of the County.
The Town of Vinton is currently implementing plans for renovations to the building facades
in the downtown district and will be appropriating $15,000 to cover a portion of the costs for
the renovation. The proposed renovations fall within the established guidelines of the
matching grant program, and therefore it requested that the County provide mini-matching
grant funds in the amount of $10,000 to assist in this project.
At a future meeting the County Administrator will submit a proposal to the Board of
Supervisors to extend this matching grant program to the entire County.
E-3
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding in the amount of $10,000 is requested for the Vinton Downtown District
Improvement Program and is available in the matching grant fund maintained by the
Department of Community Development.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Appropriate $10,000 from the matching grant fund to the Town of Vinton.
2. Do not approve the expansion of the program or the appropriation of funds.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative #1.
2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
G-- \
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
First reading of an ordinance approving the execution of an
operating agreement with the City of Roanoke and the
Western Virginia Water Authority, and authorizing the
conveyance of real estate to said authority
SUBMITTED BY:
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Representatives of the City of Roanoke, the Western Virginia Water Authority(WVWA),
and the County of Roanoke have negotiated an operating agreement in order to
implement a full service water and wastewater authority to provide water and
wastewater treatment at the lowest cost and best rate for our citizens and customers.
This operating agreement transfers from the City and the County the water and
wastewater utility facilities to the WVWA. Included in this transfer is all of the real estate
owned by the County and used for these purposes. Under the County Charter and
State Code, any conveyance of real estate can be accomplished only upon the adoption
of an ordinance after notice and public hearing.
A summary of the key provisions of the operating agreement is as follows:
Section 2.1 defines the "System" which is being conveyed to WVWA; and Section 3.7
addresses the real property being conveyed to WVWA, and it references two exhibits
which list the real estate of the City and the County. Attached you will find a copy of
Exhibit B which is the County's list.
Sections 2.2 and 2.3 address the indebtedness and liabilities which are being conveyed
to the WVWA and the commitment by WVWA to pay to the City and the County the
principal and interest due on these bonds.
(;--1
Section 3.3 makes reference to the pending negotiations with the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality concerning a consent order relating to the sewer collection
system and treatment plant.
Section 3.6 provides for the conveyance of the motor vehicles and equipment.
Article V provides for such functions as fiscal agent, accounting, purchasing, fleet
management, GIS, and retirement benefits for the employees.
Section 6.2 addresses the fees and charges for these utility services, and specifically
incorporates the 6-year phase in period and rate schedules recommended by Black &
Veatch. Once equalized, the rates shall remain equal for system users in the City and
the County.
Section 6.3 limits the power of the WVWA to extend water or sewer services, unless
that extension is specifically approved by the City or the County as being in accord with
that locality's adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Section 6.4 addresses a variety of personnel issues.
The first reading of this ordinance is scheduled for June 8, 2004; and the second
reading and public hearing is scheduled for June 22, 2004.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of the attached
ordinance.
This recommendation includes authorizing the Chairman of the Board and the County
Administrator, to execute the operating agreement. It also authorizes the conveyance
of County real estate, and the transfer of motor vehicles, equipment, liabilities and
obligations to the WVWA.
G-I
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF AN OPERATING
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF ROANOKE AND THE WESTERN
VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY, AND AUTHORIZING THE
CONVEYANCE OF REAL ESTATE TO SAID AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the City of Roanoke (the "City") and the County of Roanoke (the
"County") have concluded that a "full service" water and wastewater authority would be
the best vehicle for ensuring the citizens of their localities the most reliable means of
providing water and wastewater treatment at the lowest cost and best rate for
customers, as well as providing the best service; and
WHEREAS, the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act, Title 15.2, Chapter 51,
§§15.2-5100, ill~, Code of Virginia (the "Act"), provides full authority for the City and
the County to create an independent authority that would be responsible for the supply,
treatment, distribution and transmission of water and the collection and treatment of
wastewater; and
WHEREAS, the City and the County have created the Western Virginia Water
Authority (the "Authority"), guided by the following principles:
1.
That the assets and liabilities of the City and of the County water and
wastewater utilities would be merged into one full service authority created pursuant to
the Act, to be responsible for the supply, treatment, distribution, and transmission of
water and the collection and treatment of wastewater.
2.
In establishing and operating the Authority:
(a) Both localities would have equal representation on the Authority's
governing body.
G-\
(b) The assets and liabilities of the City and the County utility systems
would be pooled.
(c) Over a mutually agreeable period of time, the water and wastewater
treatment rates of the City and the County will be equalized;
WHEREAS, in incorporating the Authority, the City and the County agreed that
the purposes for which the Authority was created are to exercise all the powers granted
the Authority to acquire, finance, construct, operate, manage and maintain a water,
wastewater, sewage disposal, and related facilities pursuant to the Act; and
WHEREAS, the real and personal property being conveyed to the Authority is
being made available for other public uses in accordance with Section 16.01 of County
Charter; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 2004, and the
second reading and public hearing was held on June 22, 2004.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1.
That the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, or the County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the
County the Operating Agreement among the Authority, the City and the County. This
Operating Agreement conveys to the Authority the City's and County's water and sewer
systems, and the Authority agrees to provide water and sewer utility services to the City
and County using the system at just and equitable rates to all customers.
2.
That the Authority will assume the liabilities and obligations of the County
relating to the water and sewer system which were incurred in the ordinary course of
Ç-I
business, and it shall pay to the County the principal and interest amounts due on the
outstanding bonds.
3.
That the conveyance of the real property identified in Exhibit B of the
Operating Agreement from the County to the Authority is hereby authorized and
approved.
4.
That the transfer and assumption of the obligations and liabilities identified
in Exhibit D, the transfer of the ownership of the motor vehicles identified in Exhibit I of
the Operating Agreement, and the transfer of the ownership of the equipment and
furnishings identified in Exhibit K of the Operating Agreement from the County to the
Authority is hereby authorized and approved.
5.
That the County Administrator or any Assistant County Administrator is
hereby authorized to execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the
purposes of this ordinance or to effectuate the provisions of the Operating Agreement.
6.
That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its
adoption.
G'-\
OPERATING AGREEMENT
Among
WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY
And
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
And
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
Dated as of
'-
Draft #9
June 2, 2004
ç-
OPERATING AGREEMENT
THIS OPERATING AGREEMENT, dated as of
,_(the
"Agreement"), is made among the CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision
of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "City"), the COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, a
political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "County"), and the WESTERN
VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY (the "Authority"), a public body politic and corporate of
the Commonwealth of Virginia,
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, a recent drought and the need to ensure the long-term supply of water in the
Roanoke Valley, and the need to expand and upgrade the wastewater treatment facility currently
serving the Roanoke Valley, have focused the need for a regional approach to the provision of
water and wastewater treatment services;
WHEREAS, after extensive discussions, representatives of the City and the County
have concluded that a "full service" water and wastewater authority would be the best vehicle for
ensuring the citizens of their localities the most reliable means of providing water and
wastewater treatment at the lowest cost and best rate for customers, as well as providing the best
service;
WHEREAS, the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act, Title 15.2, Chapter 51,
§§15.2-5l00, ~ lliJ.,., Code of Virginia (the "Act"), provides full authority for the City and the
County to create an independent authority that would be responsible for the supply, treatment,
distribution and transmission of water and the collection and treatment of wastewater;
WHEREAS, the City and the County have created the Western Virginia Water Authority
(the "Authority"), guided by the following principles:
Ç-I
1.
That the assets and liabilities of the City and of the County water and wastewater
utilities would be merged into one full service authority created pursuant to the Act, to be
responsible for the supply, treatment, distribution, and transmission of water and the collection
and treatment of wastewater.
2.
In establishing and operating the Authority:
a.
Both localities would have equal representation on the
Authority's governing body.
b.
The assets and liabilities of the City and the County utility
systems would be pooled.
c.
Over a mutually agreeable period oftime, the water and
wastewater treatment rates of the City and the
County will be equalized;
WHEREAS, in incorporating the Authority, the City and the County agreed that the
purposes for which the Authority was
created are to exercise all the powers granted the
Authority to acquire, finance, construct, operate, manage and maintain a fully integrated water,
wastewater, sewage disposal, and related facilities pursuant to the Act. While the Authority is
also authorized by its Articles of Incorporation to acquire, finance, construct, operate, manage
and maintain a stormwater control system and related facilities, pursuant to the Act, the City and
the County desire to and do hereby retain the operation and management of their respective
stormwater management systems and programs for an indefinite period;
WHEREAS, the City and the County have agreed that the initial principal office of the
Authority will be at 2012 South Jefferson Street, Suite 200, Roanoke, Virginia 24014;
WHEREAS, the City and the County have agreed to convey the System, as herein
defined, to the Authority; and,
2
6'~1
WHEREAS, the Authority agrees to accept the System ftom the City and the County,
and to use and operate the System for the benefit of the citizens, businesses and other persons in
the City, the County, and elsewhere.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the representations,
warranties, and agreements contained herein, the City, County and the Authority agree as
follows:
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS
Section 1.1 Definitions
The following words and terms have the following meanings unless the context otherwise
requires:
"Authority" means the Western Virginia Water Authority.
"Closing" means the closing of the transactions contemplated in this Agreement as
provided in Section 8.1.
"Closing Date" means the time and date of the Closing as determined pursuant to Section
8.1.
"City" means the City of Roanoke, Virginia.
"County" means the County of Roanoke, Virginia.
"Localities" means the City of Roanoke and the County of Roanoke collectively.
"System" means all of the City's and the County's water and sewer systems as defined in
Section 2.1.
"Real Property" means the real property included in the System as identified on Exhibit
A (real property of the City to be conveyed to the Authority) and Exhibit B (real property of the
County to be conveyed to the Authority), both of which exhibits are attached hereto.
"Rights and Privileges" means all of the licenses, possessory interests,
unwritten easements and other rights and privileges, including judgments,
possessed, owned or enjoyed by the Localities as of the date of this Operating
Agreement in the current operation of the System including, but not limited to,
3
<;4\
easement rights where parts of the System are on property owned in fee by either
ofthe Localities or where no formal, written easements have been conveyed.
ARTICLE II
PURCHASE AND SALE OF SYSTEM
Section 2.1. Purchase and Sale of Svstem
At the Closing, the Localities agree to sell, assign, transfer, convey, and deliver to the
Authority, and the Authority agrees to purchase, accept and acquire from the Localities, the
System, as defined herein, in its then "as is" condition, including, without limitation, (i) all of the
Real Property and equipment and the Rights and Privileges described on Exhibits A and B
attached hereto, together with any easements or any other interest in land owned by the
Localities for installation and location of any portion of the System or otherwise used by the
Localities in operating and maintaining the System, (ii) all such assets hereafter acquired by the
Localities and used as part of the System prior to the Closing, (iii) all federal, state and local
governmental licenses, permits, and other authorizations and approvals (to the extent that they
are transferable) held by the Localities which are necessary for or used in the operation of the
System, (iv) the rights of the Localities under all contracts and leases relating to the System (to
the extent that they are transferable), (v) all current employees in good standing of the Localities
who are employed to operate the System, and (vi) any and all personal property and cash,
securities, software, inventories, intangible assets, and accounts receivable relating to the
System, including amounts on deposit in the City's and the County's respective water and waste
water enterprise funds. Such assets, employees, and property to be sold and transferred will be
hereinafter referred to collectively as the "System."
4
G-I
Section 2.2 Assumed Liabilities
At the Closing, the Authority will assume the then-existing liabilities and obligations of
the Localities relating to the System which were incurred in the ordinary course of business of
the Localities, a list of which is set forth on Exhibits C (City), and D (County), however, the
Authority will not assume any liabilities with respect to (i) income and ftanchise taxes, (ii)
violations of federal, state or local law, (iii) breaches of contract which occurred before Closing,
(iv) matters which do not relate to the System, or (v) any long term debt incurred in connection
with the System, except as set forth in Section 2.3.
After the June 30, 2004, audits of the
Localities are complete, the Localities will update Exhibits C and D to reflect the then-existing
liabilities and obligations to be assumed by the Authority.
Section 2.3
Locality Comuensation Pavrnents
(a)
The Authority shall pay to the Localities amounts equal to the scheduled
payments of principal and interest due on bonds issued by the Localities in connection with the
System which are currently outstanding. Such payments shall be paid in the amounts and five
working days before the dates shown on Exhibit F (City) and G (County) attached hereto and
shall be made in funds which are immediately available to the Localities. The Authority may
prepay the amounts in accordance with the same terms and rates of the obligations as shown on
Exhibits F and G but such prepayments shall not relieve the Authority of its obligation to pay the
remaining amounts shown in full. If either of the Localities prepay or refund any of such bonds
and realizes net debt service savings, such Locality shall reduce the payments shown on Exhibit
F and G to reflect such net debt service savings. In the event the Authority determines to amend,
refinance, refund or otherwise modify such obligations as are shown on Exhibits C and D, the
Localities will cooperate with the Authority at no cost to the Authority.
5
b-I
(b)
Such payments shall be made exclusively from revenues received by the
Authority from rates, fees, and other charges paid by users of its water and sewer systems and
available to it for such purpose. The Authority agrees to fix, charge, and collect rates, fees and
other charges from users of its water and sewer systems that will be sufficient to make such
payments and to pay all expenses of and other charges against its water and sewer systems and to
revise the same from time to time as may be necessary. Anything herein to the contrary
notwithstanding, the Authority may make such payments ftom the proceeds of any bonds issued
by it for such purpose.
It is the intent of the parties to transfer the revenue bond debt of the Localities' System to
the Authority. If this transfer is not completed by July 1, 2004, the Authority shall pay to the
Localities amounts equal to the scheduled payments due on such bonds in accordance with the
provisions of this section. In addition the Authority shall comply with the revenue covenants in
the trust indentures for these revenue bonds. The Locality Compensation Payments shall be on
parity with these revenues bonds.
Section 2.4 Collection of Accounts Receivable
The Localities agree that the Authority has the right to receive all payments for services
furnished by the System collected on or after the year-end closing procedures for the year ending
June 30, 2004, including all payments for services for the Localities' prior billings, and such
amounts will be paid promptly to the Authority. The obligation to pay any payments that either
Locality may owe to the other for water or waste water service rendered prior to July I, 2004, is
hereby forgiven.
ARTICLE II
REPRESENT A TIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE LOCALITIES
6
b--I
The Localities represent and warrant to the Authority the following as of the date of this
Agreement except as otherwise provided:
Section 3.1 Authority Relative to this Al!reement
The Localities each have the power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement,
to sell and convey the System to the Authority, to carry out their duties and obligations under this
Agreement and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby.
The execution and
delivery of this Agreement by the Localities and the consummation by the Localities of the
transactions contemplated hereby have been duly authorized by the Localities' governing bodies.
No other proceedings on the part of the Localities are necessary to authorize this Agreement and
the transactions contemplated herein.
Section 3.2 Non-Contravention
The execution and delivery by the Localities of this Agreement does not, and the
consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby will not, (i) violate or result in a breach
of any provision of the Localities' charters, (ii) violate or constitute a default under the terms,
conditions or provisions of any note, bond, mortgage, lien, lease, agreement, license, indenture,
instrument, or other instrument or obligation to which the Localities are a party or by which the
Localities or the System is bound, or (iii) violate any order, writ, injunction, arbitration award,
judgment, decree, statute, rule or regulation applicable to the Localities or the System.
Section 3.3
No Litil!ation
Except for certain negotiations with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
concerning a Consent Order relating to the rehabilitation of the Localities' integrated sewer
collection system and the regional treatment plant, there are no actions, suits, claims,
investigations or proceedings (legal, administrative or arbitrative) pending, or to the best of
Localities' knowledge threatened, whether at law or in equity and whether civil or criminal in
7
G-I
nature, before any court, arbitrator, or any governmental department, commission, agency or
instrumentality which would have a material adverse affect upon: (i) any license, grant,
assignment, franchise, right-of-way, easement, or right reasonably necessary for the ownership
and operation of the System; or (ii) the ability of each locality to perform its obligations under
this Agreement. Furthermore, there are no existing judgments, orders, or decrees of any such
court, arbitrator, governmental department, commission, agency or other instrumentality which
have or would have a material adverse effect as described in the preceding sentence.
Section 3.4 Consents and Approvals
Other than as contemplated herein, no notice, consent, approval, waiver or other action of
any kind is required to be obtained by the Localities by virtue of the execution hereof by the
Localities or in connection with the consummation of any of the transactions contemplated
herein.
Section 3.5 Licenses and Permits: Compliance with Laws
The Localities have obtained and hold all licenses, certificates, permits, ftanchises,
approvals and rights from appropriate federal, state or other public authorities required to own
and operate the System and to conduct its business as such business is now being conducted and
for the services it provides.
The Localities agree to cooperate with the Authority in transferring
all permits necessary for the operation of the System to the Authority.
Section 3.6
Personal Propertv
(a)
Motor vehicles. On July 1,2004, the Localities shall transfer, convey, and deliver
to the Authority title to those motor vehicles identified in Exhibit H (vehicles of City to be
transferred to Authority) and Exhibit I (vehicles of County to be transferred to Authority).
Such transfer shall only occur on July I, 2004, if the Authority has in place motor vehicle
liability insurance for such vehicles satisfactory to the Localities. If such insurance is not in
8
Ç-I
place on July 1,2004, such transfer of title shall not occur until such insurance is in place. These
vehicles shall be transferred to the Authority "as is" with no warranties.
(b)
Equipment. On July I, 2004, the Localities shall transfer, convey, and deliver to
the Authority that equipment and office furnishings identified in Exhibits J (equipment and
furnishings valued at over $5,000 to be conveyed to the Authority by the City) and Exhibit K
(equipment and furnishings valued at over $5,000 to be conveyed to the Authority by the
County), as well as all other equipment, office furnishings, and tangible personal property of
lesser value used in connection with the ,S,ystem. This equipment shall be transferred to the
Authority "as is" with no warranties.
Section 3.7 Title to Real Pro )ertv
(a)
The Localities will, as part of the sale of the System to the Authority, convey the
parcels of Real Property described in Exhibits A and B. The Localities will convey title to this
real property by Special Warranty deed, subject to any and all encumbrances and easements of
record. The Localities may reserve the right to use for public recreational purposes some of the
real property to be conveyed.
(b)
The Localities will, as a part of the sale of the System to the Authority, assign to
the Authority their rights to use all water and sanitary sewer easements of record used in
connection with the System.
(c)
The City hereby grants to the Authority a license to use the City's rights-of-way
to maintain and operate the System, subject to such reasonable terms and conditions as may be
established by the City.
(d)
So long as it would not interfere with the operation of the System, the Authority
agrees to reconvey to the Localities at no cost such easements as the Localities may need on the
Real Estate described in Exhibits A and 8 in the future for other public purposes.
9
G-I
(e)
The County reserves the right to construct and operate facilities and programs at
Spring Hollow Reservoir as identified in the Recreation Master Plan for Spring Hollow
Reservoir and approved by the County on
. All construction shall
be coordinated through the Authority.
(t)
The City reserves the right for its residents, and those of Roanoke County, to
continue to use the property at Carvins Cove conveyed to the Authority for public recreation uses
such as, but not limited to, boating, fishing, bicycling, picnicking, horseback riding, and hiking,
subject to such reasonable regulations and user fees as may be established by the Authority.
(g)
The City agrees to maintain all recreational facilities including teunis courts,
public restroom facility, associated fencing, walkways, lighting, and landscaped areas at the
Crystal Spring Water Treatment Plant.
Section 3.8
No Violations of Law
To the best of the Localities' knowledge, their participation in this Agreement does not
cause a violation of any federal, state or local law, statute, rule, regulation or ordinance related to
or in any way connected with matters contained in this Agreement.
Section 3.9
All Assets
The Localities represent and warrant that they are conveying to the Authority all of the
assets of the System owned by the Localities which are currently used for the operation and
maintenance of the System, except as otherwise specifically agreed to by the parties.
Section 3.10
1999 Water A!!reement.
This Agreement and the creation of the Authority supersede the provisions of the
September 30, 1999, agreement between the Localities relating to the sale of water, joint use of
certain water and sewer lines, and metering water flow, and that agreement is terminated
effective July 1, 2004.
10
c.-I
ARTICLE IV
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE AUTHORITY
The Authority represents and warrants to the Localities the following as of the date of
this Agreement, except as otherwise provided:
Section 4.1
Authority Relative to this Al!reement
The Authority has the power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement, to
carry out its duties and obligations under this Agreement and to consummate the transactions
contemplated hereby. The execution and delivery of this Agreement by the Authority and the
consummation by the Authority of the transactions contemplated hereby have been duly
authorized by the Authority's governing body. No other proceedings on the part of the Authority
are necessary to authorize this Agreement and the transactions contemplated herein.
Section 4.2
Nou-Contravention
The execution and delivery by the Authority of this Agreement does not, and the
consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby will not, (i) violate or constitute a default
under the terms, conditions or provisions of any note, bond, mortgage, lien, lease, agreement,
license, indenture, instrument, or other instrument or obligation to which the Authority is a party
or by which the Authority is bound, or (ii) violate any order, writ, injunction, arbitration award,
judgment, decree, statute, rule or regulation applicable to the Authority.
Section 4.3 No Litil!ation
No litigation, proceeding or controversy is pending against the Authority, or to the best of
its knowledge threatened, before any court or any governmental agency which would have a
material adverse effect upon the ability of the Authority to perform its obligations under this
Agreement or the operations of the System.
Section 4.4 Consents and Approvals.
11
6--1
No notice, consent, approval, waiver or other action of any kind is required to be obtained
by the Authority by virtue of the execution hereof by the Authority or in connection with the
consummation of any of the transactions contemplated herein.
Section 4.5
No Violations of Law
To the best of the Authority's knowledge, the participation of the Authority in this
Agreement does not cause a violation of any federal, state or local law, statute, rule, regulation or
ordinance related to or in any way connected with matters contained in this Agreement.
ARTICLE V
COVENANTS OF THE LOCALITIES
Section 5.1
Access to Information.
From the date hereof until the Closing, the Localities will afford the Authority and its
authorized representatives reasonable access, during normal business hours and upon reasonable
notice, to all of the assets, properties, books, records and agreements of the Localities relating to
the System. The Authority will pay all costs of copying any records and all other costs incurred
by the Localities in compliance with this provision.
Section 5.2 Fiscal Al!ent.
The County shall act, until such time as the Authority makes further arrangements, as
fiscal agent for the Authority for a reasonable fee to be established by the County. As fiscal
agent, the County shall process accounting and all disbursements including payroll, purchasing,
general ledger and accounts payable. Authority staff shall have access to the County systems in
order to provide necessary information. All cash of the Authority may be invested by the
County Treasurer in a pooled cash arrangement. Investment income will be allocated to the
Authority on a monthly basis. Separate long term investments may be made in the name of the
Authority.
12
G-I
Section 5.3
Financial! Accountinl!.
(a)
The City agrees to transfer to the Authority its license and rights to use its
Sunguard customer information, receipting, and billing system.
(b) The City will provide network, PC, email, web services, data storage for
billing and in general all ofthe Authority's necessary computer support functions,
in return for reasonable charges for the costs of the same made to the Authority
by the City.
(c)
The County agrees to permit the Authority to use the following County systems,
for a reasonable fee to be established by the County:
1.
Tier Technology Systems for accounting, purchasing, asset
management, and budgeting.
2.
Lawson System for payroll and human resources.
Section 5.4 Fleet Manal!ement.
The Localities agree to provide vehicle maintenance services and fuel to the Authority, at
such reasonable rates as are mutually agreed to by the respective parties may establish either at
the Localities' garages or at the Roanoke County School Division fuel facility.
Section 5.5
Geol!raphic Information.
(a)
The Localities will maintain parcel mapping information and provide it to the
Authority in ESRI or some other mutually agreed upon format at cost.
(b)
The Localities will develop a site plan review process with the Authority, and
make appropriate amendments to their codes in order to implement the process.
Section 5.6
Retirement.
13
G-I
(a)
The City agrees to permit those City employees who are covered by the City's
retirement system who transfer to the Authority on July 1, 2004, to remain in such system,
subject to the condition that the Authority shall make such contributions to the City's retirement
plan on behalf of such employees as the City would have made if such employees had continued
to work for the City.
(b)
County employees and new employees hired by the Authority shall be covered
under the Virginia Retirement System (VRS).
Section 5.7 Other Services
The Authority may contract with the Localities to provide such other services ~ both
deem appropriate for a reasonable fee.
ARTICLE VI
COVENANTS OF THE AUTHORITY
Section 6.1. Secure Necessarv Consents. Etc.
The Authority will use its best efforts to obtain all consents, approvals and agreements
required on its part to carry out the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.
Section 6.2 Future Services.
The Authority agrees that it shall provides water and sewer utility services to the
Localities using the System, and any new additions or improvements to the System as it may
undertake, at just and equitable rates to all customers
On and after July I, 2004, the Authority will be responsible for imposing and collecting
fees and charges sufficient to operate the System, as established by the Authority, including fees
for water, wastewater treatment, connection fees, meter charges, and related use fees. It is the
intent and recommendation of the Localities that wastewater and water rates charged their
citizens by the Authority be equalized, using the six-year phase-in period and rate schedules as
recommended by Black and Veatch Corporation in its final rate study report dated February 20,
14
G-
2004. Once equalized, such rates shall remain equal for System users in the City and the
County.
Section 6.3
Extensions of the Svstem.
The Authority shall not construct, establish or authorize an extension of a water or sewer
transmission line that will provide multiple individual service lines or laterals, nor construct,
establish or authorize any pump station or sewer force mains, unless that extension, pump station
or force main is specifically approved by the City or County as being substantially in accord with
that locality's adopted comprehensive plan as provided in Section 15.2-2232 of the Code of
Virginia.
Section 6.4 Personnel.
(a)
It is the intent of the Localities that all of their employees currently employed to
provide services in connection with the System who are in good standing as of July I, 2004, and
whose position with the City or the County is being terminated as of that date, will be offered
employment with the Authority. It is the intent of the Authority to offer such employment.
(b)
On and after July I, 2004, neither the City nor the County shall be responsible for
the payor benefits of those employees hired by the Authority to operate the System, and the
Authority shall be responsible for establishing and providing for its employees on such terms and
conditions as may be established by it, if it chooses to do so, including, but not limited to the
following:
I.
Pay rates, job classification, and job descriptions.
2.
Health insurance.
3.
Dental insurance.
4.
Basic and optional life insurance.
15
G-I
5.
Deferred compensation plan. It is the intent of the parties
that this plan be administered by the International City
Managers Association (ICMA).
6.
"Flex" spending accounts for medical expenses and
dependent care. It is the intent of the parties that the
County's administrator of its accounts, Benefit One,
manage them for the Authority.
7.
Long-term disability and other forms of insurance.
8.
Employee assistance, training and development, and tuition
assistance programs.
9.
Savings bond programs.
(c)
The City agrees to permit employees of the Authority to receive medical
services at its Health Clinic on Kirk Avenue in the City, for such period of time and for
such reasonable fees as may be established by the City.
Section 6.5 Security Services at Carvins Cove
The Authority agrees to provide at no charge security services, maintenance of
fire trails, and fire planning activities for the portions of the Carvins Cove Natural
Reserve being retained by the City for a period of three (3) years. This may be extended
upon mutual agreement by both parties.
ARTICLE VII
CLOSING AND EFFECTIVE DATE
Section 7.1
Time and Place ofClosinl!: Effective Date
a)
The closing (the "Closing") of the transactions contemplated in this Agreement
shall take place July I, 2004. A pre-closing, at which time all documents, instruments and
conditions required to be delivered or satisfied by this Agreement shall be delivered and
satisfied, but held in escrow pending the Closing, shall take place at 10:00 a.m., Roanoke,
Virginia time, on
, - at the offices of
, or at such other time, date and/or place as may be mutually agreed upon in writing
16
Grl
by the parties hereto (the time and date of closing determined as provided herein being
hereinafter referred to as the "Closing Date").
(b)
This Agreement shall take effect when executed by the Localities. The Authority
shall commence operation, and the Localities shall be relieved of all of their obligation to
manage, maintain, and operate the System at 12:01 a.m. on July I, 2004. The Authority may
undertake action, as necessary, to put in place operational systems before July I, 2004, so that
such System will be functional on that date.
ARTICLE VIII
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 8.1
Exnenses: Closine Costs
All expenses incurred by or on behalf of the parties hereto in connection with the
authorization, preparation, execution and consummation of this Agreement, including, without
limitation, all fees and expense of agents, representatives, counsel and accountants employed by
the parties hereto, shall be borne solely by the party who shall have incurred the same, except as
otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. The Authority shall be responsible for all
recording fees, if any, incurred in connection with the conveyances to the Authority pursuant to
this Agreement.
Section 8.2
Cooneration
The parties hereto agree to cooperate in making effective the transactions contemplated
hereby, and each of them will, at the request of the other, join in taking any action which, though
not specified herein, may be reasonably required to be taken in order to consummate the
transactions contemplated hereby.
Section 8.3 Further Assurances
From time to time after the Closing, the Localities will execute such additional
instruments of assignment and conveyance and other documents and take such other actions as
17
G~ I
may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent of this Agreement and to vest title or
convey rights in and to the System in the Authority.
Section 8.4. Notices
Any and all notices herein provided for or relating to the transactions herein provided for
will be in writing and will be deemed to have been sufficiently given to the City and the County
if delivered by hand or mailed, postage prepaid, by first class mail, addressed to:
City Manager
City of Roanoke
215 Church Avenue
364 Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
County Administrator
County of Roanoke
5204 Bernard Drive, S.W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
and to the Authority if delivered by hand or mailed, postage prepaid, by first class mail,
addressed to:
Director, Western Virginia Water Authority
2012 South Jefferson Street, Suite 200
Roanoke, Virginia 24014
Section 8.5 Headinl!s
Section and subsection headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not
to be construed as a part hereof or in any way limiting or amplifying the provisions hereof.
Section 8.6 Entire Al!reement: Modification
This Agreement constitutes and contains the entire agreement of the parties hereto and
supersedes any and all prior negotiations, correspondence, understandings, and agreements
between the parties respecting the subject matter hereof and may not be modified, altered or
changed in any manner whatsoever except by written agreement between the parties hereto.
18
G-I
Section 8.7 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which will be deemed
an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument.
Section 8.8 Successors and Assil!ns
This Agreement will inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors of any
party hereto, but no right or liability or obligation arising hereunder may be assigned or
transferred by any party except by operation of law.
Section 8.9 Governinl! Law
This Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby will be governed by and
construed and enforced in accordance with the laws ofthe Commonwealth of Virginia.
Section 8.10 Survival of Representations. Warranties and Al!reements.
The representations, warranties and continuing agreements of the Localities and the
representations, warranties and continuing agreements of the Authority made in this Agreement
and in the documents delivered pursuant hereto will survive the execution and delivery of this
Agreement and the consummation ofthe transactions contemplated hereby.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the County, and the Authority have caused this
Operating Agreement to be executed in their names by their duly authorized officers as of the
date first above written.
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
By
By
Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Richard C. Flora, Chairman
19
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
ATTEST:
Diane S. Childers, Clerk
ATTEST:
Secretary
Michael T. McEvoy, Chief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION:
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Authority Counsel
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
G-I
By
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
By
Elmer Hodge, County Administrator
WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY
By
Chair
Gary Robertson, Chief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
County Attorney
APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION:
County Attorney
APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION:
Authority Counsel
20
I Properties to be transferred to WVWA
I I
m
Alaoma rank
Alnoma Tank 3546 Londonderrv 87.10-02-03
APCO 1850 Loch Haven Dr. 36.01-01-17.1
Arlinaton Hills 4102 Arlinoton Hills 86.16-04-35
Avenham Tank 4240 Elm View Rd. 77.20-01-50
Belle Haven Tank 3200 Loch Haven Rd. 26.07-01-04
Belle Meade 3927 Belle Meade Dr. 87.05-04-10
SîOHili Booster 4830 West Main St. 64.02-02-10.1
Blackwood Booster 1450 Blackwood Dr. 56.03-02-22.1
Botetourt East #1 & Chivas Tank Chivas Drive Botetourt
Botetourt East #2 5113 Mcintosh Lane 40.09-05-06
Botetourt East #3 4871 North Rome Botetourt
Branderwood 4562 Summerset Dr. 97.07-02-69
Bridlewood 5907 Blackhorse Ln. 86.15-03-65
Bridlewood #1. 2, 3 5613 Bridlewood Dr. 86.15-03-
Bridlewood #1, 2, 3 5611 Bridlewood Dr. 86.15-03-01
Brookfield Sewer Lift 2901 Jae Vallev Rd. 79.01-03-
Brookwood #1 & 2 5671 Roselawn Rd. 86.03-03-04
Brookwood #3 6599 Wood brook Dr. 86.03-03-16
BrusnvMountain Tank 880 Brushv Ridae Rd. 45.01-02-62
Buck Mountain Pumo/PRV 4050 Buck Mountain 97.08-01-42
Buckland Mills Sewer Lift 8545 Barrens Rd. 26.08-06-
Camnbell Hills #2 7001 Campbell Dr. 63.03-01-
Camnbell Hills Booster 6626 Campbell Dr. 72.02-01-
Camobell Hills Sewer Lift 0 West Main St 72.02-01-
CanterburY Tank 5820 Old Locke Ct. 76.19-05-04
Carolvn Heiahts 6020 Cartwriaht Dr. 87.17-06-10
Carriaae Hills Booster 7405 Carriaae Hills Dr. 94.02-04-17
Carriaae Hills Tank 7595 Boxwood Dr. 94.02-01-26-
Carson Rd. Well 4000 Carson Rd. 50.01-01-
Carvins Meadow 7426 Indian Rd. 27.10-07-22
Castle Rock #1 5460A Linda Ln. 76.19-03-09
Castle Rock #2 & 2A 6180 Burnham Rd. 76.03-03-70.1
Castle Rock #3 5225 Cave SprinQ Ln. 76.20-05-08
Castle Rock Tanks 6039 Burnham Rd. 76.03-03-70.2
Cherokee Hills #2 5365 Cherokee Hills 54.04-06-37
Cherokee Hills #4 4816 Cherokee Hills 54.04-04-63
Cherokee Hills Tank 5417 Scout Cir. 54.04-06-41
Chesterfield Court 5423 Downina St. 87.11-02-22
Cotton Hills Sewer Lift 5801 Chaaall Cr. 96.07-02-
Cresthill 4545 Cordell Dr. 76.12-08-25
Crumoacker Tank Crumpacker Drive 40.05-01-31
Deer Run 941 Starmount Ave. 27.09-01-17
Delanev Court 3161 Huffman Ln. 80.01-02-09
DwlOht Hills Vivian Avenue 27.13-06-07
Fairwav Estates Tank 6570 Fairway View Tr. 66.04-01-
Farminadale 5815 Lakemont Dr. 67.14-01-20
Forest Ed e#1 7734 Forest EdQe 95.01-03-02
Forest Ed e#3 7769 Forest EdQe Dr. 95.01-03-26
Forest Ed e#5 Cedar EdQe Road 95.01-03-38
Forest Ed e#6 7745 Bent Mountain 95.01-01-
Forest Edae Tank 8042 Forest Edae Dr. 95.01-03-20
G-I
Exhibit B
I Prooerties to be transferred to WVWA
I I I
i~!!!!I~Ji. r¡ "'!!IfiìimiiiJi
Sewer -if! 0 Shawnee Dr. 55.02-02-11
Four Sixty Tank Crumpacker Dr. 39.00-01-
Friendshia Lane 7933 Carvin St. 27.06-04-
Glenvar #2 387A Ivie Cir. 54.02-02-22
Glenvar #3 477A Dot Cir. 54.02-02-46
Glenvar Booster/PRV 4428 Westward Lake 54.02-04-01
Glenvar Raw Water Puma 4581 Mayfair Dr. 65.00-02-55
Glenvar Tank 4800 Lake Front Dr. 43.00-01-43
Goat Rock Tank 5944 Viewaoint Ave. 64.03-01-
Green Hill #1 2916 Green Hill Dr. 55.04-01-40
Green Hill #2 3011 Green Hill Dr. 55.04-01-67
Green Hill Park Well & Tank 3099 Riveraark Dr. 55.00-01-08
Green Hill PRV 3092 Green Hill Dr. 55.04-01-57
Grisso 5232 Squires Ct. 86.11-01-08
Hamaden Hills #1 & Tanks 1445 Lori Dr. 79.03-02-27
Hampden Hills #2 3016 Woodwav Rd. 79.01-01-33
Hidden Valle #2 & Tank 5602 Sugar Loaf Mtn. 76.01-01-27
Hidden Valle #7 4803 Walton Ln. 67.13-02-10
Hidden Valle #8 6420 Hidden Woods 66.04-03-03
Hidden Valle #9 6428 Fairway View Tr. 66.04-01-38
Hidden Woods Booster 6762 Hidden Woods
Hidden Woods Tank 6808 Hidden Woods 66.04-6-12
Hiahfields 5413 Hiahfields Dr. 86.11-04-06
Hillendale Well (In City of Roanoke Ben St. NW C6420101
Hollins Booster 8438 Reservoir Rd. 18.20-01-18
Hollins Tank Strawberrv Hill Rd. Botetourt
Homewood #3 6531 Old Farm Rd. 76.03-06-11
Homewood Booster 6097 Steealechase Dr. 86.01-02-11
Hunt Ridae 4635 Hunt Ridae Rd. 40.14-1-50
Hunt Ridae Booster 5610 Hunt Ridae Road 40.01-01-01-
Huntina Hills Booster 5557 Huntina Hills Dr. 87.07-01-13
LaBelievue #1 2040 Wesvan Dr. 39.04-01-46
LaBelievue #3/Coachman Booster and 2509 Coachman Cir. 39.02-03-28
LaBelievue #6 2287 Donaaale Dr. 39.12-02-50
LaBelievue #7 1999 SprinGfield Dr. 39.04-01-
LaBelievue Drive Tank 2170 Labellevue Dr. 39.04-01-07
Lavman Lawn 4506B Rosecrest Rd. 86.11-03-08
Loch Haven Tank 4968 Northridae Ln. 37.06-01-76
Lono Ridae Booster 5706 Lona Ridae Cir. 76.09-01-17
Martin Creek #12 7461 CarriaGe Hills Dr. 94.02-01-
Martin Creek #14 7524 Fernway Dr. 94.02-03-08
Martin Creek #3 & 4 Nest 7826 Five Oaks Rd. 95.01-01-46
Martin Creek end of road 7460 Carriage Hills Dr. 94.02-04-07
Martin Creek Parker) 7205 Carriage Hills Dr. 94.02-02-
Merriman Road Sewer Lift 6008 Merriman Rd. 087.17-05-06
Mount Vernon Forest 5405 Chatsworth Dr. 86.15-01-43
Mountain View 6618A Brvant Cir. 28.13-01-39
Munaar Tank Site Starkey Rd. 97.01-01-
North Lakes #3 5619 North Lakes Dr. 36.12-01-23
North Lakes #4 5327 Green Tree Ln. 37.09-08-03
North Lakes #4 Booster & Tank 5325 Green Tree Ln. 37.09-08-02
North Lakes #5 3290 Green Ridoe Rd. 36.12-03-
2
G-J
Exhibit B
I Properties to be transferred to WVW A I
I ~SDrina Ln. I I
INorth _akes #6 ~
North Lakes Booster 4990 Craun Ln 37.14-01-14
NoverWell 1129 Nover Ave. 27.13-02-14
Oak Grove Tank 4530 Glen Heather Dr. 76.07-02-19
Oak RidQe Booster Oak Dr. Ext. 36.03-01-
OQden Booster/Front lot Electric Road 77.20-03-
Oriole Lane Tank 6074 Oriole Ln. 87.17-03-13
Pelham Tank 1800 Dorset Dr.
PenQuin Tank 3649 Kenwick Tr. 87.09-06-07
Pines 4610 Glen Heather Dr. 76.07-02-53
Ponderosa Park 5957 Barbara Cir. 86.20-01-08
Ponderosa Park Tank 5965 Ponderosa Cir. 86.20-01-33
Roselawn Booster 6023 Roselawn Road 86.01-11-20
Scenic Hills 5730 Scenic Hills Dr. 86.19-01-11
Shadwell Booster 5791 Hollins Rd. 28.13-02-
Shadwell Tank 8272 Olde Tavern Rd. 28.00-01-
Smokev Ridae 6250 SmokevRidÒe 76.03-03-74
Southern Hills 4342 Elm View Rd. 87.08-05-03
Southwoods #1 & 2 2699 Willowlawn St. 77.05-06-15
SprinQ Hollow Reservoir 6498 Drv Hollow Rd. 72.00-01-01
Starkey #1 5687 Crvstal Creek Dr. 97.01-02-06
Starke #2 5612 Crvstal Creek Dr. 97.05-01-28
Starke #3 6328 Merriman Rd. 87.18-03-
Starke #5 97.05-01-24
Starke PRV 6657 Merriman Rd. 97.01-02-13
Starke Sewer Lift 6657 Merriman Rd. 97.01-02-13
Summit Ridae Horizontal Tank 2685 Summit Ridae 039.00-01-09
Summit Ridae Vertical Tank 2857 Summit Ridae
Suncrest Heiahts Sewer Treatment Plant 5827 KathlVn Dr. 98.02-01-89
98.02-01-
Suncrest Tank 106 Hill TOD Road 11.01
98.02-01-
Suncrest Well 6415 Suncrest Drive 53.01
The Fairwavs Sewer Lift 1625 Valhalla Ct. 35.04-05-45
The Groves Sewer Lift 0 Monet Dr. 096.07-99-01
5084 Upland Game
UDland Game Tank Rd. 88.17-01-02
72.02-02-
Water Treatment Facilitv 6200 West Main St. 03.01
Waterfall Lake Reservoir 0 Waterfall Dr 28.05-02-25
Wooded Acres PRV 1809 Red Lane Ext. 35.04-02-08
Wvndale 4557 Wvndale Av. 76.07-01-08
3
G-J
Exhibit B
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
~ -,q
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
First reading of an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of an
easement to Appalachian Power Company (APCo) through
property owned by the Board of Supervisors, Tax Map #
028.13-01-27.04 and #028.13-01-27.00, to provide electric
service to Hollins Park, Hollins Magisterial District
SUBMITTED BY:
Pete Haislip
Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism
Elmer C. Hodge e f1
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The North Roanoke Recreation Club, in cooperation with Roanoke County Parks,
Recreation and Tourism, wishes to install lighting at a soccer field at Hollins Park. As part
of this project, Roanoke County has agreed to provide electricity to the site as part of the
lighting project. APCo requires that an easement be granted to accomplish this installation.
The County Attorney's office has developed the attached standard easement documents
for your approval.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Parks, Recreation and Tourism has committed approximately $6,300 to install the electric
line.
ALTERNATIVES:
Adopt the proposed ordinance authorizing the County Administrator to execute the
necessary documents for conveyance of the easement as shown on exhibit A.
G-).,
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance authorizing the County
Administrator to execute the necessary documents for conveyance of an easement as
shown on Exhibit A, attached.
r;-~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO
APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY THROUGH PROPERTY OWNED
BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (TAX MAP #028.13-01-27.04 AND
#028.13-01-27.00) TO PROVIDE ELECTRIC SERVICE TO HOLLINS
PARK IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Roanoke County staff is developing soccer fields at Hollins Park and
requires electrical service to provide for lighting; and,
WHEREAS, Appalachian Power Company (APCO) requires a 10' right of way
and easement for underground transmission lines extending from Hollins Road (Va.
Sec. Rte. 601) along the entry road through the Roanoke County property, designated
on the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map #028.13-01-27.04 and Tax Map
#028.13-01-27.00; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed right of way will serve the interests of the public and is
necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare of citizens of the County of
Roanoke.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1.
That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by
ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 2004, and a second
reading was held on June 22, 2004.
&-~
2.
That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of
Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be
surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to
Appalachian Power Company for the provision of electrical service in connection with
Roanoke County's development of Hollins Park.
3.
That donation to Appalachian Power Company of an easement and right-
of-way for underground transmission lines and related improvements, within the
"PROPOSED 10' EASEMENT AREA" on the County's property (Tax Map #028.13-01-27.04
and #028.13-01-27.00) extending along the park entry road from Hollins Road as shown
on APCO Drawing No. V-1464, dated May 17, 2004, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit A, is hereby authorized and approved.
4.
That the County Administrator, or any assistant county administrator, is
hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be
necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the
County Attorney.
5.
That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
I
i
1
PROPOSED UG
TRANSFORMER
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF ROANOKE COUNTY
PorcellO" 026.13-01-27.00
HOLLINS PARK
CHNO.ESTQH REGION. OO"""'E. VIRGINIA
PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
ON PROPERTY OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF ROANOKE COUNTY
LIlA
"Œ. 0117104
PAW
""-E. """"
~'__!m_~__L_-
COUNTY OF ROANOKE. VIRGINIA
T.D.665000
MAP SECT. 37800182 C2 S. C4
DRAWING NO. V-1464
EXHIBIT A
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
G-~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
First reading of an ordinance to increase the salaries of the members
of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County pursuant to Section
3.07 of the Roanoke County Charter and Section 15.2-1414.3 of the
Code of Virginia
SUBMITTED BY:
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
In June 2003, the Board adopted an ordinance to increase its salaries pursuant to the
provisions of Section 15.2-1414.3 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. This section
of the State Code and Section 3.07 of the County Charter require that any increase in
Supervisors' salaries be accomplished by ordinance after public hearing between May 1
and June 30. Any increase is limited to an annual five (5%) percent inflation factor.
The first reading of this proposed ordinance was held on June 8, 2004, the second reading
and public hearing is scheduled for June 22, 2004.
The current salary for Board members is $13,764.39. There is an additional annual
compensation for the Chairman of the Board at $1,800 and for the Vice-Chairman at
$1,200.
This ordinance increases salaries by 3.5%.
FISCAL IMPACT:
A 3.5% increase would cost $2,408.80 per year ($481.76 each). The new salary for each
Board member would be $14,246.15.
G-3
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
ORDINANCE TO INCREASE THE SALARIES OF THE MEMBERS OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY PURSUANT
TO SECTION 3.07 OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CHARTER AND
SECTION 15.2-1414.3 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, Section 3.07 of the Charter of the County of Roanoke provides for
the compensation of members of the Board of Supervisors and the procedure for
increasing their salaries; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1414.3 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended,
establishes the annual salaries of members of boards of supervisors within certain
population brackets; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has
heretofore established the annual salaries of Board members at $13,764.39 by
Ordinance 061003-4 and further has established the additional annual compensation for
the chairman for the Board to be $1,800 and for the vice-chairman of the Board to be
$1,200; and
WHEREAS, this section provides that the maximum annual salaries therein
provided may be adjusted in any year by an inflation factor not to exceed five (5%)
percent; and
WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was held on June 8, 2004; the
second reading and public hearing was held on June 22, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, that the annual salaries of members of the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, are hereby increased by an inflation factor of
G~~
3.5% pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.07 of the Roanoke County Charter and
Section 15.2-1414.3 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. The new annual
salaries shall be $14,246.15 for members of the Board. In addition, the chairman of the
Board will receive an additional annual sum of $1,800 and the vice-chairman of the
Board will receive an additional sum of $1 ,200.
This ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 2004.
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
G--~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
First reading of an ordinance authorizing the lease of certain
real estate for the purpose of securing financing for the
construction of a new Public Safety Center and a request to
authorize the borrowing of funds
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator
Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge t II
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~;~
-~"1r---L
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The County of Roanoke is in the process of reviewing proposals to construct a Public
Safety Center under the Public-Private Education Infrastructure Act (PPEA). The
proposals were received on June 1, 2004, and will be evaluated over the next month.
The timeline originally anticipated a complete review of the proposals, selection and
negotiations with the winning proposal, and then preparation of an official statement to
sell bonds for the project in October 2004.
It was recently learned that the Virginia Resources Authority (VRA) is very interested in
having the County participate in their spring 2004 pool sale to fund the Public Safety
Center, even though the specifics of the project are still being pieced together. The
County has worked with the VRA in the past, including the recent refinancing of the
water revenue bonds. Issuing bonds through the VRA pool offers many advantages
such as no debt service reserve fund, and the sharing of issuance costs with the other
localities in the pool. The spring pool sale has the following schedule:
~i
June 8
VRA Board of Directors meeting (potential approval of County
application
June 9
Preliminary official statement mailing date
June 15/16 Bond pricing
June 30
Closing
With the current interest rate climate, it is advantageous to make this bond sale.
Interest rates are on the rise, and most analysts believe that interest rates will continue
to increase in the near future. A 75 basis point increase in rates (+0.75%) would cause
an increase of $190,000 in annual debt payments. The next VRA pool sale will price
and sell in December 2004. The County could sell as a stand-alone issue before then,
but would need to be much more specific in the scope of the project to sell as an
individual issue. In addition, it may be several months before the necessary information
is available.
Because of the timetable of the spring 2004 VRA pool sale, the Board will need to take
action to participate at the June 8 meeting. In preparation for this decision, staff will
meet with the Board in closed session on June 7, 2004, to review the basics of the
proposals. Although it will take several more weeks and meetings to arrive at a
selection, staff should have enough information to borrow with confidence that the
project can be completed within a certain amount of funds.
The attached ordinance authorizes the lease of the County's existing Public Safety
Building and land located on Peters Creek Road to the VRA. This lease will secure the
borrowing of funds from the VRA to construct a new Public Safety Center to be located
on Cove Road. It is the intent of this ordinance to substitute the real estate and new
Public Safety Center to be located on Cove Road for the real estate located on Peters
Creek Road. This ordinance authorizes the approval of the prime lease to the VRA, the
financing lease, and the local lease acquisition agreement. The County will lease the
real estate to the VRA under the prime lease. The VRA will lease the real estate back
to the County under the financing lease.
The lease of County real estate and lease-back from the VRA requires the adoption of
an ordinance under the County Charter.
In order to meet the requirements of the VRA and to participate in its June 2004 bond
issue, the County must advise the VRA of its intent to participate in this borrowing. The
County's decision to participate in this borrowing must be communicated to the VRA
immediately; therefore, the Board will have to waive the second reading of this
ordinance. The County Charter requires a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the members of the
Board to waive second reading.
G-~
FISCAL IMPACT:
The lease obligation is composed of principal and interest payments with a maximum
original principal amount of $ with a maximum interest rate of 6% per
annum and a term to maturity not to exceed 30 years. The County will need to make
interest-only debt payments in 2004-05, and begin payments of principal and interest in
2005-06. Funds have been included in the 2004-05 budget to make this payment.
The County's obligation to make payments to the VRA under the financing lease is
subject to annual appropriations by the Board, and does not constitute a pledge of the
full faith and credit or taxing power of the County.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of this ordinance, and
waive the second reading of this ordinance.
G-i
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER, ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA AUTHORIZING THE LEASE OF CERTAIN REAL
ESTATE CONSISTING OF THE EXISTING PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING
AND LAND LOCATED ON PETERS CREEK ROAD TO THE VIRGINIA
RESOURCES AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECURING
FINANCING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW PUBLIC SAFETY
CENTER AND AUTHORIZING OTHER RELATED ACTIONS
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Roanoke,
Virginia (the "County") intends to obtain funds to finance a project consisting of (i) the
design, construction, furnishing and equipping of a public safety center on certain land
to be acquired by the County (collectively, the "Real Estate"), which is to be owned and
operated by the County, (ii) the acquisition of public safety equipment for the County
and (iii) paying the costs related to the financing (collectively, the "Project");
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is in the best interest of the County
to enter into a lease arrangement in order to obtain funds to finance the Project;
WHEREAS, the Board is authorized, pursuant to Section 15.2-1800 of the Code
of Virginia of 1950, as amended, to lease any improved or unimproved land held by the
County and in accordance with Section 15.2-1800B no public hearing is required with
respect to such lease to the Virginia Resources Authority;
WHEREAS, the second reading of this Ordinance is being waived by the Board
by four-fifths vote pursuant to Section 18.04 of the County Charter;
WHEREAS, Virginia Resources Authority or its designee ("VRA") intends to
issue its Infrastructure Revenue Bonds (Virginia Pooled Financing Program), Series
2004A (the "VRA Bonds"), to loan a portion of the proceeds to the County pursuant to
(;-~
the terms of a Local Lease Acquisition Agreement (the "Local Lease Acquisition
Agreement") and a Financing Lease (defined herein) (the "Lease Obligation");
WHEREAS, the County will enter into a Prime Lease (the "Prime Lease") with
VRA whereby the County will lease certain real estate consisting initially of the existing
public safety building and related land located on Peters Creek Road and subsequently
the Real Estate consisting of the new public safety center to be located on Cove Road
(collectively, the "Leased Property") to VRA;
WHEREAS, the County will enter into a Financing Lease (the "Financing Lease")
with VRA whereby VRA will lease the Lease Property back to the County and which
Financing Lease will secure the Lease Obligation;
WHEREAS, the County will cause the Project to be developed on the Real
Estate;
WHEREAS, the County intends to repay the Lease Obligation out of
appropriations from the County's General Fund;
WHEREAS, there have been presented to this meeting drafts of the following
documents (the "Documents") proposed in connection with the foregoing:
(a)
(b)
the Prime Lease;
the Financing Lease; and
(d)
the Local Lease Acquisition Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA:
-2-
6-~
1.
Approval of Leasinq Arranqement and Lease Obliqations. The leasing
arrangement with VRA to accomplish the financing of the Project for the benefit of the
County is hereby approved.
2.
Approval of Prime Lease. The leasing of the Leased Property to VRA
pursuant to the terms of the Prime Lease is hereby approved.
3.
Approval of the Financinq Lease. The leasing by the County of the
Leased Property pursuant to the terms of the Financing Lease is hereby approved.
4.
Approval of the Terms of the Documents. The County Administrator or the
Director of Finance, either of whom is authorized to act, is authorized to approve the
final details of the Documents.
5.
Approval of the Terms of the Lease Obliqation. The Lease Obligation
shall be composed of principal and interest components having a maximum original
principal amount of $
, shall accrue interest at a maximum interest rate
of 6% per annum, and shall have a term to maturity not exceeding approximately thirty
(30) years after origination of the Lease Obligation.
Following the pricing of the corresponding VRA Bonds, the Chairman or County
Administrator shall evidence his approval of the final terms and purchase price of the
Bonds by executing and delivery to VRA the Local Lease Acquisition Agreement, which
shall be in substantially the form presented to this meeting, with such completions,
omissions, insertions and changes not inconsistent with this Resolution as may be
approved by the officer executing the Local Lease Acquisition Agreement. The actions
of the Chairman or County Administrator in determining the final terms and the
- 3 -
G--~
purchase price of the Bond shall be conclusive, and no further action shall be necessary
on the part of the County.
6.
Payments under Financina Lease. The County agrees to pay all amounts
required by the Financing Lease, including any amounts required by Section 5.1(b) of
the Financing Lease, including the "Supplemental Interest," as provided in such section.
7.
Execution and Recordation of Documents. The Chairman of the Board,
the County Administrator and the Director of Finance, each of whom is authorized to
act, are authorized and directed to execute the Documents and deliver them to the other
parties thereto. The Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator and the Director
of Finance, each of whom is authorized to act, are further authorized to cause the Prime
Lease and the Financing Lease to be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court
of Roanoke County.
8.
Form of Documents. The Documents shall be in substantially the forms
submitted at this meeting, which are hereby approved, with such completions,
omissions, insertions and changes as may be approved by the Chairman of the Board,
the County Administrator and the Director of Finance, each of whom is authorized to
act, the execution by the Chairman of the Board, the County Administrator or the
Director of Finance to constitute conclusive evidence of the approval of any such
completions, omissions, insertions and changes.
9.
Essentialitv of the Project. The Project is hereby declared to be essential
to the efficient operation of the County, and the County anticipates that the Project will
continue to be essential to the operation of the County during the term of the Financing
Lease.
- 4-
G-lJ
10.
Annual Budaet. While recognizing that it is not empowered to make any
binding commitment to make such payments beyond the current fiscal year, the Board
hereby states its intent to make annual appropriations for future fiscal years in amounts
sufficient to make all such payments and hereby recommends that future Boards do
likewise during the term of the Financing Lease. The Board directs the Director of
Finance, or such other officer who may be charged with the responsibility for preparing
the County's annual budget, to include in the budget request for each fiscal year during
the term of the Financing Lease an amount sufficient to pay all amounts coming due
under the Financing Lease during such fiscal year. As soon as practicable after the
submission of the County's annual budget to the Board, the County Administrator is
authorized and directed to deliver to VRA evidence that a request for an amount
sufficient to make the payment of all amounts payable under the Financing Lease has
been made. Throughout the term of the Financing Lease, the County Administrator
shall deliver to VRA within 30 days after the adoption of the budget for each fiscal year,
but not later than July 1, a certificate stating whether an amount equal to all amounts
due under the Financing Lease which will be due during the next fiscal year has been
appropriated by the Board in such budget. If at any time during any fiscal year of the
County throughout the term of the Financing Lease, the amount appropriated in the
County's annual budget in any such fiscal year is insufficient to pay when due the
amounts payable under the Financing Lease, the Board directs the Director of Finance,
or such other officer who may be charged with the responsibility for preparing the
County's annual budget, to submit to the Board at the next scheduled meeting, or as
- 5 -
G-~
promptly as practicable but in any event within 45 days, a request for a supplemental
appropriation sufficient to cover the deficit.
11.
Payment of Lease Obliaation is Subject to Appropriation. The County's
obligation to make payments to VRA pursuant to the Financing Lease is hereby
specifically stated to be subject to annual appropriation therefor by the Board, and
nothing in this Resolution or the Documents shall constitute a pledge of the full faith and
credit nor taxing power of the County nor compel the Board to make any such
appropriation.
12.
Reimbursement Declaration. The County has made and expects to make
out of temporary funds certain expenditures in connection with the Project for which the
County reasonably expects to be reimbursed as permitted by Treasury Regulation
Section 1.150-2 issued pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended,
from the proceeds of the Lease Obligation. The maximum principal amount of the
Lease Obligation is expected to be the amount set forth in paragraph 5.
13.
Disclosure Documents.
The County authorizes and consents to the
inclusion of information with respect to the County to be contained in VRA's Preliminary
Official Statement and VRA's Official Statement in final form, both prepared in
connection with the sale of bonds to be issued by VRA, a portion of the proceeds of
which will be used to purchase the Lease Obligation. If appropriate, such disclosure
documents shall be distribute in such manner and at such times as any of them shall
determine. The County Administrator is authorized and directed to take whatever
actions are necessary and/or appropriate to aid VRA in ensuring compliance with
Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12.
- 6-
G-~
14.
Tax Documents. The County Administrator is authorized to execute a
Nonarbitrage Certificate and Tax Compliance Agreement or any related document (the
"Tax Documents") setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the
Lease Obligation and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to
comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Tax
Code"), including the provisions of Section 148 of the Tax Code and applicable
regulations relating to "arbitrage bonds." The County covenants that the proceeds from
the issuance and sale of the Lease Obligation will be invested and expended as set
forth in the Tax Documents, to be delivered simultaneously with the issuance and
delivery of the Lease Obligation and that the County shall comply with the other
covenants and representations contained therein.
15.
Other Actions. All other actions of the officers of the County in conformity
with the purpose and intent of this resolution are hereby approved and confirmed. The
officers of the County are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver all
certificates and instruments and to take all such further action as may be considered
necessary or desirable in connection with the execution and delivery of the Documents
in connection with the Lease Obligation.
16.
Repeal of Conftictinq Resolutions. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in
conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
17.
Waiver of Second Readinq. The Board hereby waives the second reading
of this Ordinance.
18.
Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately.
- 7 -
G-LJ
CERTIFICATE OF CLERK
The undersigned Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke,
Virginia, hereby certifies that:
1. A regular meeting (the "Meeting") of the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "Board"), was held on June 8, 2004, at which the
following members were present and absent:
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
2. The following Ordinance was duly adopted at the Meeting by the
recorded affirmative roll-call vote of four-fifths of all of the members elected to the
Board, the ayes and nays being recorded in the minutes of the Meeting as shown
below:
MEMBER
VOTE
3. Attached hereto is a true and correct copy of the foregoing
ordinance as recorded in full in the minutes of the Meeting.
4. The attached ordinance has not been repealed, revoked, rescinded
or amended and is in full force and effect on the date hereof.
WITNESS my signature and the seal of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, this
- day of June, 2004.
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of the County of Roanoke, Virginia
[SEAL]
IIFIN\204364.\
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
G-5
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
First reading of an ordinance authorizing the acquisition of
certain real estate from Norman D. Mason consisting of
approximately 4.83 acres and being identified as Tax Map
No. 28.13-1-27.5 for public park purposes, Hollins
Magisterial District
SUBMITTED BY:
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
COUNTY ADMINISTRATO~ ~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The County has been contacted by Norman D. Mason regarding the availability of a
4.83 acre parcel of real estate located on Hollins Road adjacent to an 8.874 acre parcel
currently owned by the County and containing two soccer fields, a playground, and
parking lot. This 4.83-acre parcel is available for sale at a cost of $250,000.
The acquisition of this property will help alleviate an identified deficit in park acreage
and field facilities in the North County area. After a series of public neighborhood
meetings, a master plan will be devised for the development of this park property
consistent with the community needs.
This parcel was originally part of a larger tract developed by the County and known as
the Mountain View Farms Technological Park. The property was rezoned in 1983 to 11
with Protective Covenants. The County will petition to have this parcel rezoned to R-1
and will also request the modification of the Protective Covenants on the 4.83 acres.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is requested that the Board appropriate $255,000 from the year-end surplus
($250,000 to pay the purchase price and $5,000 to cover any ancillary costs associated
with this acquisition).
1
f;-S
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the purchase of this property to enhance the development of a park
in the Hollins Road area of the County. Staff further recommends that the Board ratify,
confirm, and approve the County Administrator's execution of the contract to acquire
this property on behalf of the County.
2
G-S
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER, ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL
ESTATE FROM NORMAN D. MASON CONSISTING OF
APPROXIMATELY 4.83 ACRES AND BEING IDENTIFIED AS TAX MAP
NO. 28.13-1-27.5 FOR PUBLIC PARK PURPOSES
WHEREAS, a deficit in park acreage and field facilities has been identified in the
North County area; and
WHEREAS, real estate consisting of approximately 4.83 acres owned by Norman
D. Mason and adjacent to an 8.874 acre parcel currently owned by the County and used
as a County park is available for sale at the price of $250,000; and
WHEREAS, the acquisition of this real estate will enhance the current park
property and protect the public interest in same; and
WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the
acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the
first reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 2004, and the second reading and
public hearing was held on June 22, 2004.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1.
That the purchase of 4.83 acres of real estate (Tax Map No. 28.13-1-27.5)
located on Hollins Road owned by Norman D. Mason for the sum of Two Hundred Fifty
Thousand Dollars ($250,000) is hereby authorized and approved.
2.
That the Board does hereby ratify, confirm, and approve the County
Administrator's execution of a contract to acquire this property on behalf of the County.
1
G-5
3.
That there is hereby appropriated the sum of Two Hundred Fifty-five
Thousand Dollars ($255,000) from the Year End Surplus to pay all the costs of this
acquisition.
4.
That the County Administrator or Assistant County Administrator are
hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of
Roanoke County in this matter as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of this
real estate, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney.
5.
That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
2
County Park Property
27.
RC8.S
Mason Property
2'"
ill
27.3
,.~.
O'pou/ Fom", S,Ni", /"O
272
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
\-\ -\
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Resolution adopting the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget,
including the fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvement Plan,
for Roanoke County, Virginia
SUBMITTED BY:
Brent Robertson
Director of Management and Budget
Elmer C. Hodge t;f
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMIN~M~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Attached is a resolution approving the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget for Roanoke County,
Virginia. This resolution is detailed by fund and includes unappropriated balances for the
General Government, Capital, Water and Sewer Funds. The School's budget is included in
the overall County budget as presented in the attached resolution.
The figures presented for adoption have been developed by staff from budget work
sessions with the Board of Supervisors through the May 11,2004 meeting. The proposed
budget was submitted to the Board on April 20, 2004 and a public hearing on the proposed
budget was held on April 27. 2004.
Prepared in conjunction with the fiscal year 2004-2005 budget, the fiscal year 2005-2009
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) is included as part of this resolution. The CIP summary
(by departmental request) is attached. The proposed CIP represents an inventory of the
County's capital needs for the next five years. On April 27, 2004 there was a public
hearing to secure citizen comments on the County's fiscal year 2005-2009 CIP. The
adoption of this document does not represent an appropriation of funds.
The adoption of the budget is being requested to fulfill our legal requirements of adopting
and then having a first and second reading of the appropriation ordinance before July 1,
H-l
2004 and to allow adequate time for County and School staff to prepare and disburse
employment contracts, institute pay changes, and other administrative tasks necessary for
final budget implementation.
Approval of the County budget is for informative and fiscal planning purposes only and
does not actually commit or appropriate funds for expenditure. The commitment of funds
will not occur until the second reading and approval of the FY 2004-05 appropriation
ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the fiscal year 2004-2005 Budget and fiscal year 2005-2009
Capital Improvement Plan.
H-- I
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET FOR
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, Section 15.2-2503 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides
that the governing body of the County shall prepare and approve an annual budget; and
WHEREAS, said budget shall be prepared and approved for informative and fiscal
planning purposes only; and
WHEREAS, this budget contains a complete itemized and classified plan of all
contemplated expenditures and all estimated revenues and borrowings for the ensuing
fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, a brief synopsis of said budget was published as required by the
provisions of Section 15.2-2506 of the State Code, and the public hearing as required
thereon was held on April 27, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia:
1.
That there is hereby approved the annual budget for Fiscal Year 2004-2005
for Roanoke County, Virginia, as shown on the attached Schedules.
2.
That the preparation and approval of this budget is for informative and fiscal
planning purposes only.
Revenue Estimates
General Fund
General Government
General Property Taxes
Other Local Taxes
Permits, Fees & Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Interest Income
Charges for Services
Commonwealth
Federal
Other
Total General Government
Comprehensive Services
E-911 Maintenance
Law Library
S B & T Building
VJCCCAILife Skills
Recreation Fee Class
internal Services
County Garage
Total General Fund
Debt Service Fund - County
Capital Projects Fund
Internal Service Fund
Water Fund
Beginning Balance
Total Water Fund
Sewer Fund
Beginning Balance
Total Sewer Fund
School Operating Fund
School Cafeteria Fund
School Capital Fund
School Debt Fund
Regional Alternative School
School Grants Fund
School Textbook Fund
Total School Funds
Total Revenues All Funds
Less: Transfers
Total Net of Transfers
County of Roanoke
Budget Adoption
FY 2004-2005
Adopted
FY 2004-05
93,189,846
26,485,000
633,577
599,200
403,900
2,397,200
9,010,728
2.650,000
859,115
136,228,566
5,037,171
970,000
41,735
404,273
271,669
981,694
2,974,293
346,392
147,255,793
3,035,130
3,584,345
957,700
10,269,207
2,000,000
12,269,207
6,359,649
2,500,000
8,859,649
112,448,453
3,959,000
1,142,335
10,362,924
396,382
4,588,058
928,016
133,825,168
309,786,992
(81,370,548)
228,416,444
Schedule A
¡.t-I
County of Roanoke
Budget Adoption
FY 2004-2005
Adopted
FY 2004-05
Proposed Expenditures
General Fund
General Government
General Administration
Constitutional Officers
Judicial Administration
Management Services
Public Safety
Community Services
Human Services
Non-Departmental
Transfers to School Operating Fund
Transfers to Capital Fund
Transfers to County Garage
Transfers to Debt Service Fund
Other
Total General Government
2,712,828
8,936,527
1,110,435
2,851,441
17,273,121
10,552,518
14,014,169
5,840,504
55,418,524
3,584,345
134,318
10,589,136
3,210,700
136,228,566
5,037,171
970,000
41,735
404,273
271,669
346,392
981,694
2,974,293
147.255,793
3,035,130
3.584,345
957,700
10,107,110
2.162,097
12,269,207
6,853,146
2,006,503
8,859,649
112,448,453
3,959,000
1.142,335
10,362,924
396,382
4,588,058
928,016
133.825,168
309,786,992
(81,370,548)
228,416,444
Comprehensive Services
E-911 Maintenance
Law Library
S B & T Building
VJCCCAILife Skills
County Garage
Recreation Fee Class
Internal Services
Total General Fund
Debt Service Fund - County
Capital Projects Fund
internal Service Fund
Water Fund
Unappropriated Balance
Total Water Fund
Sewer Fund
Unappropriated Balance
Total Sewer Fund
School Operating Fund
School Cafeteria Fund
School Capital Fund
School Debt Fund
Regional Alternative School
School Grants Fund
School Textbook Fund
Total School Funds
Total Expenditures All Funds
Less: Transfers
Total Net of Transfers
Schedule A
}t-I
County of Roanoke
Budget Adoption
FY 2004-2005
Adopted
FY 2004-05
In addition to the above revenues and expenditures, $2,000,000 from the Unappropriated
Balance is appropriated to a Reserve for Contingency for unanticipated or emergency
expenditures; and funds allocated to the Unappropriated Fund Balance must be
appropriated by the Board of Supervisors before such funds may be expended.
Schedule A
l-t-I
County of Roanoke Schedule B
Budget Adoption FY 2004-2005
FY2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program Summary of Projects
Estlm;rtØ(l CapltaIEX )Øndltures. FY2005-2009
PRIOR Year TOTAL Total Project
Department I Project Name Funding 2004-2005 2005'2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 FYOS.09 Cost
General Administration
Economic Development
Valleypointe - Phase II $0 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000
Center tor Research & Technology $5,867,300 $657,650 $657,650 $657,650 $657,650 $657.650 $3,266,250 $9,155,550
Economic Development Subtotal $5,867,300 $1,157,650 $1,157,650 $1,157,650 $1,157.650 $1.157,650 $5,766,250 $11,655,550
Constitutional Officers
Sherlff
Jail Renovations $0 $0 $15,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $15.000,000 $15,000,000
Sheriff Subtotal $0 $0 $15,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $15,000,000 $15.000,000
Treasurer
Upgrade Remittance Processing Machine $0 $0 $135,952 $0 $0 $0 $135,952 $135,952
Treasurer Subtotal $0 $0 $135,952 $0 $0 $0 $135,952 $135,952
Management Services
Real Estate Valuation
Field Data Collection System $0 $0 $64,677 $0 $0 $0 $64,677 $64,677
Real Estate Valuation Subtotal $0 $0 $64,677 $0 $0 $0 $64,677 $64,677
Public Safety
Fire & Rescue
Upgrade/Replace Paging Capabilities $0 $796,463 $0 $0 $0 $0 $796,463 $796,463
EMS Data Reporling System $0 $0 $135,000 $0 $0 $0 $135.000 $135,000
Station Security System $0 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $0 $150,000 $150,000
Station Fuel Control System $0 $0 $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $120.000 $120,000
Bay Heater Upgrades $0 $0 $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $90,000 $90,000
Vinton Rescue - New 6uilding $0 $400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $400,000 $400,000
Back Creek Station Add"ion $0 $0 $30,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $330,000 $330,Ooo :¡:
Hanging Rock New Station $0 $0 $0 $500,000 $1.500,000 $0 $2.000,000 $2,000,000 I
Hollins Road New Station $0 $0 $0 $0 $600,000 $1,600,000 $2,200,000 $2,200,000
County of Roanoke Schedule B
Budget Adoption FY 2004-2005
FY2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program Summary of Projects
E$!IIT1_!ød.C_pJIa>'.E¡(p.,hdJlures FY200$-2009
PRIOR Year TOTAL Total Project
Department I Project Name Funding 2004-2ooS 2005'2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008.2009 FYOS'lJg Cost
Bunk Room Additions $0 $0 $0 $0 $30,000 $300,000 $330,000 $330,000
Fire & Rescue Subtotal $0 $1,196,483 $525,000 $800,000 $2,130,000 $1,900,000 $6.551,463 $6,551,483
Police
Evidence Vault Addition $0 $0 $54,600 $0 $0 $0 $54,600 $54,600
Bomb Disposal Unit $0 $0 $146,712 $0 $0 $0 $146.712 $146,712
South County Police Precinct $0 $0 $0 $265.000 $0 $0 $265.000 $265,000
Police Subtotal $0 $0 $201,312 $265.000 $0 $0 $466,312 $466,312
Public Safety
Public Safety Center $0 $6,000,000 $7.500,000 $6,500.000 $0 $0 $20,000.000 $20,000,000
600 MHz Radio System Upgrade $0 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $10.000,000 $10,000,000
Public Safety Subtotal $0 $11,000,000 $12,500,000 $6,500.000 $0 $0 $30,000.000 $30,000,000
Community Services & Development
Community Development
VDOT Revenue Sharing $5,246,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $Soo,OOO $2,500,000 $7,746,000
GIS Phase II - Integration $157,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $150,000 $307,000
GIS - New Color Scanner/Printer $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $50,000
GIS-NewServer $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $0 $50,000 $50.000
Regional SW MgUFlood Control $0 $0 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,000.000 $7,500,000 $7,500.000
Community Development Subtotal $5,403,000 $550,000 $2,600,000 $2,050,000 $2,550,000 $2,500.000 $10,250,000 $15,653,000
General Services
Garage at Kessler Mill Road $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Recycling Trailers $0 $0 $50.000 $50,000 $0 $0 $100,000 $100,000
General Services Subtotal $0 $0 $1,050,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $1,100,000 $1,100,000
Human Services
Greenway Devetopment
Roanoke River Greenway - East $0 $0 $250,000 $75.000 $75,000 $75,000 $475,000 $475,000
Mudlick Creek Greenway $26,322 $0 $160,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75.000 $365,000 $413,322
Tinker Creek Greenway $0 $0 $140,000 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $410,000 $410,000 -4-
Greenway Development Subtotal $26.322 $0 $550,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $1,270,000 $1,296,322 \
County of Roanoke Schedule B
Budget Adoption FY 2004-2005
FY2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program Summary of Projects
EStimated .Ca )llal.ExþenditurØ$.FY2005-2O09
PRIOR Year TOTAL Total Project
Department I Project Name Funding 20040-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 FY05-09 Cost
Library
HQ Library Replacement $0 $0 $0 $4,330,000 $6.492,000 $0 $10,822,000 $10,822.000
Glenvar Library Expansion $0 $0 $0 $792,000 $1,188,000 $0 $1,980,000 $1,980,000
Mt Pleasant Library Replacement $0 $0 $0 $279,500 $409,000 $0 $688,500 $688.500
Vinton Library Renovation $0 $0 $0 $400,000 $610,000 $0 $1.010,000 $1,010.000
Bent Mountain Library Expansion $0 $0 $0 $171,625 $0 $0 $171,625 $171,625
Library Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $5,973,125 $8.699,000 $0 $14,672,125 $14,672,125
Parks & Recreation
Tennis Court Resurtacin9 $45.000 $0 $230,000 $0 $0 $0 $230,000 $275.000
Brambleton Center $271,500 $0 $305,500 $70,000 $0 $0 $375,500 $647.000
Burton Complex $0 $0 $309,000 $50,000 $0 $0 $359.000 $359,000
Improvements for Parkin9 Areas $0 $0 $695,250 $0 $0 $0 $695,250 $695,250
Camp Roanoke $50,000 $0 $203,500 $0 $0 $0 $203,500 $253,500
Starkey Park $0 $0 $1,206,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,206,000 $1,206,000
Walrond Park Phase III $0 $0 $319,000 $0 $0 $0 $319,000 $319,000
Green Hill Park Phase III $0 $0 $592,500 $0 $0 $0 $592,500 $592,500
Whisperin9 Pines $0 $0 $240,500 $0 $0 $0 $240,500 $240,500
Playgrounds $0 $0 $100,000 $25,000 $0 $0 $125,000 $125,000
Garst Mill Park Improvements $35,000 $0 $195,000 $0 $0 $0 $195,000 $230,000
Picnic Shelters $0 $0 $50,000 $25,000 $25,000 $0 $100,000 $100,000
Hollins Park $163,000 $0 $235,000 $0 $0 $0 $235,000 $398,000
Vinyard Park Phase III $0 $0 $352,000 $180,000 $0 $0 $532,000 $532,000
Family Water Park $0 $0 $0 $4,725,000 $0 $0 $4,725,000 $4,725,000
Parks & Recreation Land Bank $0 $0 $350,000 $0 $250,000 $0 $600,000 $800.000
Sprin9 Hollow Park $75,000 $0 $1,035,000 $425,000 $545,000 $0 $2,005,000 $2,080,000
Parks & Recreation Subtotal $639.500 $0 $6,418,250 $5,500,000 $820,000 $0 $12,738,250 $13,377,750
Infernal Services
Information Technoto9Y
HP Mi9ration $1,450,000 $1,000,000 $900,000 $750,000 $450,000 $0 $3,100.000 $4,550,000 :¡::
Network Infrastructure UP9rade $0 $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150.000 $50.000 $350,000 $350,000 I
County of Roanoke
Budget Adoption FY 2004-2005
Schedule B
FY2005-2009 Capital Improvement Program Summary of Projects
Estimated CapItal Expenditures FY2005-20O9
In-Building RF Coverage System
Information Technology Subfofal
PRIOR Year
Funding 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009
$0 $0 $65,000 $0 $0 $0
$1,450,000 $1,000,000 $1,035,000 $650,000 $600,000 $50,000
TOTAL
FY05.oo
Total Project
Cost
Department I Project Name
$65,000
$3,535,000
$65,000
$4,965,OOO
$5,84'7,650 $101,572,249 $114,960,371
Utilities
Util~ies - Water
VDOT Projects $150,000 $50.000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $250,000 $400,000
North Water Transmission Line $2.200,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $2,450,000
Summerdean Watertine Replacement $0 $250.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 $250,000
Strawberry Mounfain Tank $0 $0 $130,000 $0 $0 $0 $130,000 $130,000
Utilities - Water Subtotal $2,350,000 $550,000 $160,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $660,000 $3,230,000
Utilities - Sewer
Sanitary Sewer Repair & Replacement $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000
Utilities - Sewer Subtotal $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000
~
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
\-h~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Second reading of an ordinance appropriating the funds for the fiscal
year 2004-05 budget
SUBMITTED BY:
Brent Robertson
Director of Management and Budget
Elmer C. Hodge cfJ
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
¡e,~cn,,~ ~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The fiscal year 2004-2005 budget was presented to the Board of Supervisors on April 27, 2004.
A budget public hearing was held on April 27, 2004 to receive written and oral comment from
citizens concerning the proposed budget and fiscal year 2005-2009 Capital Improvements
Program (CIP). Attached for your approval is the 2004-2005 fiscal year budget appropriation
ordinance.
The total County budget is $309,786,992. This includes all inter-fund and intra-fund transfers.
The budget net of transfers is $228,416,444.
At the April 27, 2004 Board of Supervisor's meeting, the County Administrator presented the
proposed Roanoke County budget, which included the approved Roanoke County Schools
Budget. At that time, a state budget had not been finalized and both County and School
administrative staff included conservative estimates of state revenues for inclusion in the
proposed budget. At long last the state has adopted a budget and the following information
details the projected fiscal impact to Roanoke County and Roanoke County Schools.
Roanoke County Schools
The final state budget included $7,832,955 in additional funds for Roanoke County Schools, an
increase of $2,050,955 from the original estimate of $5,782,000. The School Board will
incorporate these changes into their budget and will approve an adjusted budget at their meeting
H-~
on May 26,2004. The adjusted School budget will be brought to the Board of Supervisors at the
June 8, 2004 meeting for approval. Based on discussions with School staff, it is anticipated that
the adjusted Schools budget will include employee raises at 3.5%.
Roanoke County Government
Compensation Board Raises: Additional state revenue of $98,000 is included for raises for
constitutional officers and employees. Sheriff's Department will receive a 4.8% increase and all
other constitutional employees will receive 3%. Funding for these raises is effective December
1,2004. Due to the County's supplement of Comp Board salaries, these employees will receive
the same raises as general County employees.
Jail Per-Diem Reimbursements: Additional funds of $145,000 have been included for the
reimbursement of housing state prisoners in the jail. This increase restores much of the state
reductions over the last 2 years.
Emerqencv Funded Positions - Jail: Additional funding of $95,940 has been allocated for 4
additional emergency funding positions in the jail due to increasing inmate population. These
positions are funded for a 12 month period and are reviewed annually by the Comp Board.
Based on the additional state funding for both the Schools and County, the operating transfer to
schools has been reduced by $944,627. Of these funds, $804,627 has been allocated for future
debt service of County capital projects and $190,000 has been allocated to increase employee
raises from 3% to 3.5%, consistent with the proposed School salary increases.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The format of the appropriation ordinance conforms to the reporting basis used at year-end in
the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. This presentation allows the same level of budget
comparison as is required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for financial reporting
purposes. This format will also consistently apply the appropriation on a fund basis for County
Funds as has been used to appropriate School funds in the past.
There have been no changes from the first reading of the appropriation ordinance held on May
25, 2004. Staff recommends approval of the second reading of the 2004-2005 fiscal year
budget appropriation ordinance. Staff also recommends approval of the attached Classification
Plan for fiscal year 2004-2005. .
I+-~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE 2004-05 FISCAL
YEAR BUDGET FOR ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, upon notice duly published in the newspaper, a public hearing was
held on April 27, 2004 concerning the adoption of the annual budget for Roanoke
County for fiscal year 2004-05; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, approved
said budget on June 8, 2004, pursuant to the provisions of Section 13.02 of the
Roanoke County Charter and Chapter 25 of Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as
amended; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this appropriation ordinance was held on May 25,
2004, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 2004, pursuant to
the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1. That the following appropriations are hereby made from the respective funds
for the period beginning July 1, 2004, and ending June 30, 2005, for the functions and
purposes indicated:
County of Roanoke
Adopted FY 2004-2005 Budget
June 8, 2004
I+-~
Revenues:
General Fund:
General Government
Comprehensive Services
E-9ll Maintenance
Law Library
VJCCCNLife Skills
SB & T Building
Recreation Fee Class
Internal Services
County Garage
Total General Fund
Debt Service Fund - County
Capital Projects Fund
Internal Service Fund - Risk Management
Water Fund
Beginning Balance
Sewer Fund
Beginning Balance
School Funds:
Operating
Cafeteria
Capital
Debt
Regional Alternative School
Grant
Textbook
Total School Fund
Total All Funds
$ 136,228,566
5,037,171
970,000
41,735
271,669
404,273
981,694
2,974,293
346,392
$ 147,255,793
$ 3,035,130
$ 3,584,345
$ 957,700
$ 10,269,207
2,000,000
12,269,207
$ 6,359,649
2,500,000
8,859,649
$ 112,448,453
3,959,000
1,142,335
10,362,924
396,382
4,588,058
928,016
$ 133,825,168
$ 309,786,992
County of Roanoke
Adopted FY 2004-2005 Budget
June 8, 2004
If-¡
Expenditures:
General Government:
General Administration
Board of Supervisors
County Administrator
Community Relations
Asst. Co. Administrators
Human Resources
County Attorney
Economic Development
Total General Administration
Constitutional Officers
Treasurer
Commonwealth Attorney
Commissioner of the Revenue
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Sheriff's Office
Care & Confinement of Prisoners
Total Constitutional Officers
Judicial Administration
Circuit Court
General District Court
Magistrate
J & DR Court
Court Service Unit
Total Judicial Administration
Management Services
Real Estate Assessments
Finance
Public Transportation
Management and Budget
Procurement Services
Total Management Services
$
347,485
237,425
206,787
313,073
552,399
453,433
602,226
2,712,828
$
$
720,643
650,406
687,383
873,333
1,418,184
4,586,578
8,936,527
$
$
197,068
40,878
1,655
13,429
857,405
1,110,435
$
$
901,398
1,136,998
273,000
223,138
316,907
2,851,441
$
County of Roanoke }t~
Adopted FY 2004-2005 Budget
June 8, 2004
Public Safety
Police $ 8,549,696
Fire and Rescue 8,723,425
Total Public Safety $ 17,273,121
Community Services
General Services $ 289,305
Solid Waste 4,590,879
Community Development 4,051,608
Building Maintenance 1,620,726
Total Community Services $ 10,552,518
Human Services
Grounds Maintenance $ 1,826,281
Parks and Recreation 2,497,333
Public Health 459,403
Social Services 6,213,719
Contributions-Human Service, Cultural, Tourism 430,703
Library 2,220,204
VPI Extension 94,129
Elections 272,397
Total Human Services $ 14,014,169
Non-Departmental
Employee Benefits $ 2,256,237
Miscellaneous 890,000
Internal Service Charges 2,694,267
Total Non-Departmental $ 5,840,504
County of Roanoke H-~
Adopted FY 2004-2005 Budget
June 8, 2004
Transfers to Other Funds
Transfer to Debt - General & Schools $ 10,589,136
Transfer to Capital 3,584,345
Transfer to Schools 55,071,225
Transfer to Schools - Non Recurring 0
Transfer to Schools - Dental Insurance 347,299
Transfer to Internal Services 957,700
Transfer to Comprehensive Services 2,153,000
Transfer to County Garage 134,318
Total Transfers to Other Funds $ 72,837,023
Unappropriated Balance
Board Contingency 100,000
Total General Government $ 136,228,566
Comprehensive Services $ 5,037,171
E-91l Maintenance $ 970,000
Law Library $ 41,735
VJCCCNLife Skills $ 271,669
SB & T Building $ 404,273
Recreation Fee Class $ 981,694
Internal Services
Management Information Systems $ 2,494,259
Communications 480,034
County Garage $ 346,392
Total Internal Services $ 3,320,685
Total General Fund $ 147,255,793
County of Roanoke I+-~
Adopted FY 2004-2005 Budget
June 8, 2004
Debt Service Fund - County $ 3,035,130
Capital Projects Fund $ 3,584,345
Internal Services Fund - Risk Management $ 957,700
Water Fund $ 10,107,110
Unappropriated Balance 2,162,097
12,269,207
Sewer Fund $ 6,853,146
Unappropriated Balance 2,006,503
8,859,649
School Funds:
Operating $ 112,448,453
Cafeteria 3,959,000
Capital 1,142,335
Debt 10,362,924
Regional Alternative School 396,382
Grant 4,588,058
Text Book 928,016
Total School Funds $ 133,825,168
Total All Funds $ 309,786,992
H-~
2. That the County Administrator may authorize or delegate the authorization of
the transfer of any unencumbered balance or portion thereof from one department to
another within a fund.
3. That all funded outstanding encumbrances, both operating and capital, at
June 30, 2004, are re-appropriated to the 2004-05 fiscal year to the same department
and account for which they are encumbered in the previous year.
4. That appropriations designated for capital projects will not lapse at the end of
the fiscal year but shall remain appropriated until the completion of the project or until
the Board of Supervisors, by appropriate action, changes or eliminates the
appropriation. Upon completion of a capital project, staff is authorized to close out the
project and transfer to the funding source any remaining balances. This section applies
to appropriations for Capital Projects at June 30, 2004, and appropriations in the 2004-
05 budget.
5. That all school fund appropriations remaining at the end of the 2003-04 fiscal
year not lapse but shall be appropriated to the School Capital Improvements Fund in
fiscal year 2004-05.
6. That all General Fund appropriations remaining unexpended at the end of the
2003-04 fiscal year not lapse but shall be re-appropriated as follows:
a) 40% of these unexpended appropriations shall be transferred to the un-
appropriated Capital Fund Balance;
b) 60% of these unexpended appropriations shall be re-appropriated to the same
department for expenditure in fiscal year 2004-05 as provided by Resolution
042396-5.
f-~
7. That Two Million Dollars from the Unappropriated Fund Balance is hereby
appropriated to a Reserve for Contingency for unanticipated or emergency expenditures
that may arise during the 2004-05 fiscal year; and money allocated to the
Unappropriated Fund Balance must be appropriated by the Board of Supervisors before
such money may be expended.
8. This ordinance shall take effect July 1, 2004.
Classification Plan
FY 2004 - 2005
MINIMUM
MIDPOINT
MAXIMUM
GRADE HOURLY ANNUAL HOURLY ANNUAL HOURLY ANNUAL
8 7.7992 16,222 9.6719 20,117 11.5447 24,012
9 8.1891 17,033 10.1557 21,123 12.1222 25,214
10 8.5985 17,884 10.6635 22,180 12.7283 26,474
11 9.0284 18,779 11.1966 23,288 13.3647 27,798
12 9.4799 19,718 11.7566 24,453 14.0331 29,188
13 9.9540 20,704 12.3442 25,675 14.7345 30,647
14 10.4518 21,739 12.9617 26,960 15.4714 32,180
15 10.9742 22,826 13.6095 28,307 16.2447 33,788
16 11.5230 23,967 14.2901 29,723 17.0570 35,478
17 12.0991 25,166 15.0045 31,209 17.9098 37,252
18 12.7039 26,424 15.7548 32,769 18.8056 39,115
19 13.3393 27,745 16.5424 34,408 19.7456 41,070
20 14.0062 29,132 17.3697 36,128 20.7331 43,124
21 14.7065 30,589 18.2380 37,935 21.7696 45,280
22 15.4418 32,118 19.1501 39.832 22.8583 47,545
23 16.2140 33,725 20.1077 41,824 24.0013 49,922
24 17.0247 35,411 21.1130 43,915 25.2010 52,418
25 17.8759 37,181 22.1686 46,110 26.4612 55,039
26 18.7696 39,040 23.2770 48,416 27.7843 57,791
27 19.7081 40,992 24.4409 50,837 29.1736 60,681
28 20.6935 43,042 25.6628 53,378 30.6321 63,714
29 21.7281 45,194 26.9461 56,047 32.1639 66,900
30 22.8149 47,454 28.2935 58,850 33.7720 70,245
31 23.9554 49,827 29.7081 61,792 35.4608 73,758
32 25.1532 52,318 31.1935 64,882 37.2337 77,446
33 26.4109 54,934 32.7532 68,126 39.0955 81,318
34 27.7317 57,681 34.3909 71,533 41.0502 85,384
35 29.1181 60,565 36.1104 75,109 43.1027 89,653
36 30.5739 63,593 37.9158 78,864 45.2578 94,136
37 32.1028 66,773 39.8118 82,808 47.5208 98,843
38 33.7079 \ 70,112 41.8024 86,948 49.8967 103,785
39 35.3933 73,618 43.8923 91,295 52.3914 108,974
40 37.1629 77,298 46.0872 95,861 55.0114 114,423
41 39.0211 81,163 48.3915 100,654 57.7619 120,144
42 40.9722 85,222 50.8111 105,687 60.6500 126,152
43 43.0205 89,482 53.3515 110,971 63.6824 132,459
44 45.1716 93,956 56.0191 116,519 66.8665 139,082
4=
.
,."
Classification Plan and Unclassified Schedule for employees in the service of Roanoke County for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2004,
as herein set forth in the following words and figures:
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
FY 2004 - 2005
Part I . Classified Positions
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
8 815 Custodian Nonexempt General Services 5 16.222 20,117 24,012
9 o 17.033 21,123 25.214
10 614 Clerk Typist Nonexempt Social Services 2 17,884 22.180 26,474
10 618 Couner Nonexempt Finance 1 17,884 22.180 26,474
10 855 Refuse Collector Nonexempt General Services 6 17,884 22.180 26,474
11 885 Utility Maintenance Worker Nonexempt Utility 4 18,779 23,288 27,798
12 608 Civil Process Clerk II Nonexempt Sheriff 1 19,718 24,453 29,188
12 673 Secretary Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tounsm 1 19.718 24,453 29,188
12 673 Secretary Nonexempt Finance 1 19.718 24,453 29,188
12 685 Tax Clerk I Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 3 19,718 24,453 29,188
12 689 Treasurer Clerk I Nonexempt Treasurer 2 19,718 24,453 29,188
12 840 Motor Equipment Operator I Nonexempt Utility 8 19,718 24,453 29,188
12 850 Parks Maintenance Worker Nonexempt Parks. Recreation & Tourism 10 19,718 24,453 29,188
12 872 Stormwater Maintenance Worker Nonexempt Community Development 2 19.718 24,453 29,168
13 600 Account Clerk Nonexempt Finance 3 20,704 25.675 30.847
13 600 Account Clerk Nonexempt Utility 1 20,704 25.675 30,847
13 621 Customer Service Representative Nonexempt Finance 4 20,704 25,675 30,647
13 621 Customer Service Representative Nonexempt General Services 2 20.704 25,675 30,847
13 621 Customer Service Representative Nonexempt Real Estate Valuation 2 20,704 25,675 30,847
13 621 Customer Service Representative Nonexempt Social Services 4 20,704 25,675 30,847
13 621 Customer Service Representative Nonexempt Utility 2 20,704 25.675 30.847
13 653 Meter Reader Nonexempt Utility 2 20,704 25,675 30,847
13 661 Police Records Clerk Nonexempt Police 3 20,704 25,675 30,847
13 732 Motor Equipment Operator II Nonexempt Utility 5 20.704 25,675 30,847
13 827 Food Service Technician Nonexempt Parks. Recreation & Tourism 1 20,704 25,675 30,847
13 840 Motor Equipment Operator I Nonexempt Community Development 2 20,704 25,675 30,847
13 840 Motor Equipment Operator I Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tounsm 5 20,704 25,675 30,847
14 536 Library Assistant Nonexempt Library 13 21,739 26,960 32,180
14 560 Recreation Technician Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tounsm 1 21,739 26,960 32,180
14 576 Social Services Aide II Nonexempt Social Services 2 21,739 26,960 32,18°+
;.,
Page 1
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
14 604 Assistant Re9istrar Nonexempt Re9istrar 1 21,739 26,960 32,180 .
14 626 Deputy Clerk of Circuit Court I Nonexempt Clerk of the Circuit Court 1 21,739 26,960 32.180
14 665 Real Estate Clerk II Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 1 21,739 26,960 32.180
14 686 Tax Clerk II Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 3 21,739 26,960 32.180
14 690 Treasurer Clerk II Nonexempt Treasurer 4 21.739 26,960 32,180
14 752 Utility Line location Technician Nonexempt Utility 2 21.739 26,960 32,180
14 776 Water Operator IV Nonexempt Utility 1 21.739 26,960 32,180
14 805 Corrections - Food Services Director ExempUCompensatory Sheriff 1 21,739 26.960 32,180
15 622 Customer Service Representative II Nonexempt Community Development 4 22,826 28.307 33.788
15 659 Payroll Clerk Nonexempt Finance 1 22,826 28,307 33,788
15 697 Warrants/Evidence Clerk Nonexempt Police 1 22,826 28,307 33,788
15 732 Motor Equipment Operator II Nonexempt Community Development 1 22,826 28,307 33.788
15 760 Wastewater Maintenance Mechanic Nonexempt Utility 1 22.826 28,307 33.788
16 358 land Use Compliance Coordinator Nonexempt Real Estate Valuation 1 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 468 Control Room Operator Nonexempt Sheriff 2 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 564 Senior Library Assistant Nonexempt Library 4 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 602 Accounts Coordinator Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tourism 1 23,967 29.723 35,478
16 602 Accounts Coordinator Nonexempt Police 1 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 602 Accounts Coordinator Nonexempt Social Services 2 23,967 29,723 35,4,8
16 616 Computer Operator Nonexempt Information Technology 2 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 643 Income Tax Coordinator Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 1 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt Board of Supervisors 1 23,967 29,723 35.478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 1 23,967 29.723 35,478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt General Services 1 23,967 29.723 35,478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt Human Services 1 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tourism 2 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt Police 3 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 655 Office Support Specialist Nonexempt Utility 1 23,967 29,723 35.478
16 663 Program Support Specialist Nonexempt Community Oevelopment 2 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 663 Program Support Specialist Nonexempt Court Services 1 23,967 29.723 35,478
16 663 Program Support Specialist Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 1 23,967 29.723 35,478
16 663 Program Support Specialist Nonexempt Libra", 1 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 663 Program Support Specialist Nonexempt Finance 1 23.967 29,723 35,478
16 663 Program Support Specialist Nonexempt Sheriff 1 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 687 Tax Clerk III Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 2 23,967 29.723 35,478 =r=
,..,
Page 2
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
16 691 Treasurer Clerk III Nonexempt Treasurer 3 23.967 29,723 35,478 .
16 724 Laboratory Technician Nonexempt Utility 2 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 744 Solid Waste Equipment Operator Nonexempt General Services 23 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 780 Water Operator III Nonexempt Utility 5 23,967 29,723 35,478
16 810 Crew Leader Nonexempt General Services 3 23,967 29,723 35,478
17 249 L~e Skills Mentorin9 Program Mentor Exempt/Compensatory Court Services 3 25,166 31.209 37,252
17 384 Tax Compliance Deputy Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 1 25,166 31,209 37,252
17 452 Communications Officer I Nonexempt Police 6 25,166 31,209 37,252
17 620 Customer Service Coordinator Nonexempt Community Development 1 25,166 31,209 37,252
17 620 Customer Service Coordinator Nonexempt General Services 1 25,166 31,209 37,252
17 620 Customer Service Coordinator Nonexempt Social Services 1 25,166 31,209 37,252
17 627 Deputy Clerk of Circuit Court II Nonexempt Clerk of the Circuit Court 3 25,166 31.209 37,252
17 651 le9al Secretary Nonexempt Commonwealth's Attomey 3 25,166 31.209 37,252
17 651 legal Secretary Nonexempt County Attomey 1 25.166 31.209 37,252
17 662 Payroll Technician Nonexempt Finance 2 25,166 31,209 37,252
17 667 Real Estate Clerk Supervisor Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 1 25.166 31,2!J9 37,252
17 700 Automotive Mechanic Nonexempt General Services 4 25.166 31,209 37,252
17 781 Water Operator II Nonexempt Utility 2 25.166 31,209 37,25-2
18 333 Eligibility Worker Nonexempt Social Services 15 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 345 Equipment Technician Nonexempt General Services 2 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 454 Communications Officer II Nonexempt Police 17 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 528 Human Resources Assistant Exempt/Compensatory Human Resources 3 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 558 Recreation Programmer Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tourism 9 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 606 Business Ordinance Inspector Nonexempt Commissioner of the Revenue 1 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 624 Deputy Assistant General Re9istrar Nonexempt Registrar 1 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 631 Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Nonexempt Board of Supervisors 1 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 632 Economic Development Administrative Assistant Nonexempt Economic Development 1 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 671 Risk Management Specialist Nonexempt Finance 1 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 704 Buildin9 Maintenance Technician Nonexempt General Services 4 26,424 32,769 39,115
18 708 Electrician Nonexempt Utility 1 26,424 32.769 39,115
18 715 Heavy Truck Mechanic Nonexempt General Services 1 26,424 32,769 39.115
18 716 Laboratory Technician Supervisor Nonexempt Utility 1 26,424 32,769 39.115
18 733 Motor Equipment Operator III Nonexempt Utility 2 26,424 32,769 39.115
18 736 Senior Water Operator Nonexempt Utility 2 26,424 32,769 39.115
18 842 Parks Crew leader Nonexempt Parks. Recreation & Tourism 7 26,424 32,769 39.115
:¡:
.
Page 3 /
Grado Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
18 846 Parks Maintenance Service Specialist Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tourism 1 26,424 32,769 39,115
19 324 Electrical Inspector Nonexempt Community Development 1 27,745 34,408 41,070
19 336 Employment Services Worker ExempUCompensatory Social Services 1 27,745 34,408 41,070
19 343 En9ineering/GIS Technician I Nonexempt Community Development 2 27,745 34,408 41,070
19 348 Fraud Investi9ator Nonexempt Social Services 1 27,745 34,408 41,070
19 360 Plumbing and Med1anicallnspector Nonexempt Community Development 1 27.745 34,408 41,070
19 381 Senior Eligibility Worker Nonexempt Social Services 6 27.745 34,408 41,070
19 428 Police Community Services Officer Nonexempt Police 3 27.745 34,408 41,070
19 539 Office Budget Specialist Nonexempt Information Technology 1 27,745 34,408 41.070
19 628 Deputy Clerk of Circuit Court III Nonexempt Clerk of the Circuit Court 5 27.745 34,408 41,070
19 705 Building Maintenance Technician II Nonexempt General Services 3 27,745 34,408 41.070
20 201 Assistant Cataloger ExempUCompensatory Library 1 29.132 36,128 43.124
20 202 Assistant Reference Librarian ExempUCompensatory Library 1 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 284 Social Worker ExempUCompensatory Social Services 18 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 344 Engineering/GIS Technician II Nonexempt Community Development 1 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 363 Pollution Abatement Inspector Nonexempt Utility 3 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 383 Social Services Trainer/Case Reader ExempUCompensatory Social Services 1 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 416 Firefighter/EMT Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 33 29,132 36,128 43,12'1
20 442 Police Officer-UnWorm Division Nonexempt Police 58 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 456 Communications Officer III Nonexempt Police 5 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 470 Deputy Sheriff Nonexempt Sheriff 37 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 532 Legal Assistant Nonexempt County Attomey 1 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 588 VictimlWitness Coordinator Nonexempt Commonwealth's Attomey 1 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 726 Lead Senior Water Operator Nonexempt Utility 2 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 820 Stormwater Maintenance Foreman Nonexempt Community Development 2 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 845 Parks Maintenance Foreman Nonexempt Parks, Recreation & Tourism 3 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 865 Solid Waste Collection Foreman Nonexempt General Services 2 29,132 36,128 43,124
20 875 Utility Maintenance Foreman Nonexempt Utility 6 29,132 36,128 43,124
21 265 Recreation Pro9ram Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Parks, Recreation & Tourism 4 30,589 37,935 45,280
21 308 Combination Code Compliance Inspector Nonexempt Community Development 9 30,589 37,935 45,280
21 382 Senior Pollution Abatement Inspector Nonexempt Utility 1 30,589 37,935 45,280
21 408 Logistics Technician Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 1 30,589 37,935 45,280
21 426 Crime Analyst ExempUCompensatory Police 1 30,589 37,935 45,280
21 512 Buyer Nonexempt Finance 2 30,589 37,935 45,280
21 556 Recreation Marketing Specialist ExempUCompensatory Parks, Recreation & Tourism 1 30,589 37,935 45,280 :¡:::.
.
y'
Page 4
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
22 206 Associate Planner ExempUCompensatory Community Development 3 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 207 Financial Info Systems Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Finance 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 280 Senior Social Worker ExempUCompensatory Social Services 7 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 292 Volunteer Recruiter/Marketin9 Administrator ExempUCompensatory Fire and Rescue 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 300 Appraiser ExempUCompensatory Real Estate Valuation 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 321 Development Review Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Community Development 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 327 Electronic Services Specialist ExempUCompensatory Library 1 32,118 39.832 47,545
22 327 Electronic Services Specialist ExempUCompensatory Social Services 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 346 Engineering/GIS Technical Supervisor Nonexempt Community Development 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 354 Microcomputer Technician ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 2 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 378 Senior Employment Services Worker ExempUCompensatory Social Services 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 418 Paramedic/Firefighter Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 42 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 443 Police Officer II - Uniform Div. Nonexempt Police 12 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 446 Police-Crime Prevention Officer Nonexempt Police 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 458 Communications Training Officer Nonexempt Police 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 460 Lead Communications Officer Nonexempt Police 5 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 476 Deputy Sheriff-Facility Maintenance Supervisor Nonexempt Sheriff 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 479 Deputy Sheriff - LIDS Technician Nonexempt Sheriff 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 484 Deputy Sheriff - Training Nonexempt Sheriff 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 489 Deputy Sheriff-Rehabilitation Nonexempt Sheriff 5 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 490 Deputy Sheriff-Librarian Nonexempt Sheriff 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 492 Deputy Sheriff-Medical Nonexempt Sheriff 6 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 493 Deputy Sheriff-Inmate Records Nonexempt Sheriff 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 629 Deputy Clerk of Circuit Court IV ExempUCompensatory Clerk of the Circuit Court 4 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 635 Executive Secretary Nonexempt County Administrator 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 660 Payroll Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Finance 2 32,118 39,832 47,545
22 870 Solid Waste Operations Supervisor ExempUCompensatory General Services 1 32,118 39,832 47.545
22 880 Utility Maintenance Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Utility 1 32,118 39,832 47,545
23 222 Divisional Librarian ExempUCompensatory Library 2 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 312 Communications Technician Nonexempt Information TecI1nology 5 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 330 Eligibility Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Social Services 3 33.725 41,824 49,922
23 374 Real Estate Technology Support ExempUCompensatory Real Estate Valuation 1 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 376 Senior Combination Code Compliance Inspector Nonexempt Community Development 0 33.725 41,824 49,922
23 412 Fire Inspector ExempUCompensatory Fire and Rescue 2 33.725 41,824 49,922 :¡::
23 414 Fire Lieutenant Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 12 33.725 41,824 49,922 I
~
Page 5
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
23 438 Police Officer-Criminallnvestigator Nonexempt Police 14 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 693 Utility Billing Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Finance 1 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 714 FleeUGarage Supervisor ExempUCompensatory General Services 1 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 764 Water Distribution Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Utility 1 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 764 Water Production Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Utility 1 33,725 41,824 49,922
23 873 Stormwater Operations Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Community Development 1 33,725 41,824 49,922
24 210 Branch Librarian ExempUCompensatory Library 3 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 233 Business Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Fire and Rescue 1 35.411 43,915 52,418
24 233 Business Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Social Services 1 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 247 Life Skills Mentorin9 Program Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Court Services 1 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 254 Parks Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Parks, Recreation & Tourism 3 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 263 Recreation Program Manager ExempUCompensatory Parks, Recreation & Tourism 4 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 351 Geographic Information Systems Coordinator Nonexempt Community Development 1 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 366 Programmer ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 2 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 424 Administrative Analyst ExempUCompensatory Police 1 35,411 43,915 52,418
24 444 Police - Records Unit Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Police 1 35,411 43.915 52,418
24 462 Administrative Analyst ExempUCompensatory Sheriff 1 35,411 43.915 52,418
25 140 Chief Deputy Commissioner of Revenue ExempUCompensatory Commissioner of the Revenue 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 144 Chief Deputy Treasurer ExempUCompensatory Treasurer 1 37.181 46,110 55,039
25 232 Financial Analyst ExempUCompensatory Finance 2 37.181 46,110 55,039
25 237 Budget Analyst ExempUCompensatory Budget 1 37.181 46,110 55,039
25 256 Planner ExempUCompensatory Community Deveiopment 2 37.181 46,110 55.039
25 266 Reference and Adult Services Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Library 1 37,181 46,110 55.039
25 282 Social Work Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Social Services 3 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 337 Employment Services Supervisor ExempUCompensatory Social Services 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 355 Network Specialist ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 37,181 46.110 55,039
25 427 Police Officer - Sgt - Academy Asst Dir/Grants Admin ExempUCompensatory Police 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 436 Police Officer - Sgt - Professional Standards ExempUCompensatory Police 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 440 Police Officer - Sergeant Nonexempt Police 12 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 450 Chief Communications Officer ExempUCompensatory Police 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 466 Deputy Sheriff - Sgt - ClassificationlTreatment Nonexempt Sheriff 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 477 Deputy Sheriff - Sgt - Inmate/Jail Services Nonexempt Sheriff 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 478 Deputy Sheriff - Sgt -Inmate Records Nonexempt Sheriff 1 37,181 46,110 55,039
25 482 Deputy Sheriff - Sergeant Nonexempt Sheriff 10 37,181 46,110 55,039 +
25 495 Deputy Sheriff - Sgt -Investigator Nonexempt Sheriff 1 37,181 46.110 55,039 I
}-i
Page 6
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
25 496 Deputy Sheriff - S9t - Medical Nonexempt Sheriff 1 37,181 46,110 55,039 "
26 150 Clerk to the Board ot SupelVisors ExempUCompensatory Board ot SupelVisors 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 212 Budget Administrator ExempUCompensatory Budget 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 214 Civil Engineer I ExempUCompensatory Community Development 2 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 242 Human Resources Consultant ExempUCompensatory Human Resources 2 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 289 Tourism/Event Coordinator ExempUCompensatory Parks. Recreation & Tourism 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 315 Computer Operations SupelVisor ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 352 IT Project Manager ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 369 Programmer/Analyst ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 2 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 375 Senior Appraiser ExempUCompensatory Real Estate Valuation 8 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 386 Technical SelVices SupelVisor ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 410 Fire Captain Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 8 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 411 Fire Captain - Fire Prevention Nonexempt Fire and Rescue 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 740 Sewer Operations Manager ExempUCompensatory Utility 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
26 772 Water Operations Manager ExempUCompensatory Utility 1 39,040 48,416 57,791
27 228 Fadlities Manager ExempUCompensatory General SelVices 1 40.992 50,837 60,681
27 250 Network Engineer ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 2 40,992 50,837 60,681
27 286 Solid Waste Manager ExempUCompensatory General SelVices 1 40,992 50,837 60,6St
27 310 Communications Shop SupelVisor ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 40,992 50.837 60,631
27 432 Police Officer - Lieutenant Nonexempt Police 4 40,992 50.837 60,681
27 434 Police Officer, Lieutenant SelVices/CID Division ExempUCompensatory Police 2 40,992 50,837 60,681
27 480 Deputy Sheriff - Lieutenant ExempUCompensatory Sheriff 6 40,992 50.837 60.681
28 138 Chief Deputy Clerk of the Circu~ Court ExempUCompensatory Clerk of the Circuit Court 1 43.042 53,378 63,714
28 164 Public Information Officer ExempUDiscretionary Community Relations 1 43.042 53,378 63,714
28 226 Economic Development Specialist ExempUCompensatory Economic Development 2 43,042 53,378 63,714
28 920 Registrar ExempUDiscretionary Registrar 1 43,042 53,378 63,714
29 191 Finance Manager ExempUDiscretionary Finance 1 45,194 56.047 66,900
29 195 Purchasing Manager ExempUDiscretionary Finance 1 45,194 56.047 66,900
29 216 Civil En9ineer II ExempUCompensatory Community Development 2 45,194 56,047 66,900
29 216 Civil Engineer II ExempUCompensatory Utility 2 45.194 56,047 66,900
29 227 Engineer/Plans Examiner ExempUCompensatory Community Development 1 45,194 56,047 66,900
29 231 Database Administrator ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 45,194 56,047 66,900
29 270 Risk Manager ExempUDiscretionary Finance 1 45,194 56,047 66,900
29 291 Traffic Engineer ExempUCompensatory Community Development 1 45,194 56.047 66,900 :¡:
\
29 293 System Analyst ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 4 45,194 56.047 66,900 )-'
Page 7
Grade Code Title Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
29 402 BaUalion Chief-Operations ExempUCompensatory Fire and Rescue 3 45,194 56,047 66.900
29 404 Battalion Chief-Trainin9 ExempUCompensatory Fire and Rescue 1 45,194 56,047 66.900
29 405 Battalion Chief - EMS Operations ExempUCompensatory Fire and Rescue 1 45,194 56,047 66,900
30 110 Assistant Director of General Services ExempUDiscretionary General Services 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
30 116 Assistant Director of Library Services ExemptlDiscretionary Library 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
30 118 Assistant Director of Parks ExemptlDiscretionary Parks, Recreation & Tourism 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
30 124 Assistant Director of Recreation ExemptlDiscretionary Parks. Recreation & Tourism 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
30 132 Building Commissioner ExempUCompensatory Community Development 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
30 278 Senior Planner ExemptlDiscretionary Community Development 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
30 294 Stormwater Operations Manager ExempUCompensatory Community Development 1 47,454 58,850 70,245
31 203 Application Services Manager ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 49,827 61,792 73,758
31 209 Business Architect ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 49.827 61,792 73,758
31 388 Technical Service Manager ExempUCompensatory Information Technology 1 49,827 61,792 73,758
31 430 Police Officer - Captain ExempUDiscretionary Police 1 49.827 61,792 73,758
31 472 Deputy Sheriff-Captain ExempUDiscretionary Sheriff 2 49.827 61.792 73,758
32 106 Assistant Director of Economic Development ExempUDiscretionary Economic Development 1 52,318 64,882 77,446
32 114 Assistant Director of Human Resources ExempUDiscretionary Human Resources 1 52,318 64,882 77.446
32 122 Assistant Director of Real Estate Valuation ExempUDiscretionary Real Estate Valuation 1 52,318 64,882 77.4413
32 126 Assistant Director of Social Services ExempUDiscretionary Social Services 1 52,318 64,882 77,446
32 215 Chief Planner ExempUDiscretionary Community Development 1 52,318 64,882 77,446
32 400 Division Chief - Support & Community Service ExempUDiscrebonary Fire and Rescue 1 52,318 64,882 77,446
32 403 Division Chief - Operations ExempUDiscrebonary Fire and Rescue 1 52,318 64,882 77,446
32 422 Division Chief - Administration ExempUDlscretionary Fire and Rescue 1 52,318 64,882 77,446
33 108 Assistant Director of Finance ExempUDlscrebonary Finance 2 54.934 68.126 81,318
33 128 Assistant Director of Utility ExempUDiscretionary Utility 1 54.934 68.126 81,318
33 142 Chief Deputy Sheriff ExemptlDiscretionary Sherif! 1 54.934 68.126 81,318
34 100 Assistant Chief of Police ExemptlDiscretionary Police 2 57.681 71,533 85,384
34 104 Assistant Director of Community Development ExempUDiscretionary Community Development 1 57,681 71,533 85,384
34 115 Assistant Director of IT ExempUDiscretionary Information Technology 1 57,681 71,533 85.384
34 130 Budget Director ExempUDiscretionary Budget 1 57,681 71,533 85.384
34 176 Director of Library Services ExempUDiscretionary Library 1 57,681 71,533 85,384
34 184 Director of Real Estate Valuation ExempUDiscretionary Real Estate Valuation 1 57,681 71,533 85,384 :c
34 274 Senior Assistant Commonwealth.s Attorney ExempUCompensatory Commonwealth's Attomey 3 57,681 71,533 85,384
34 276 Senior Assistant County Attorney ExempUCompensatory County Attorney 2 57,681 71,533 85,384
35 136 Chief Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney ExempUCompensatory Commonwealth's Attorney 1 60,565 75.109 89,653
Page 8
Grade Code TItle Status Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint Maximum
36 168 Director of Finance ExempUDiscretionary Finance 1 63,593 78,864 94,136
36 170 Director of General Services ExempUDiscretionary General Services 1 63,593 78,864 94,136
36 180 Director of Parks, Recreation & Tourism ExempUDiscretionary Parks, Recreation & Tourism 1 63,593 78,864 94,136
36 166 Director of Social Services ExempUDiscretionary Social Services 1 63,593 78,864 94,136
37 146 Chief of Fire and Rescue ExempUDiscretionary Fire and Rescue 1 66,773 82,808 98,843
37 148 Chief of Police ExempUDiscretionary Police 1 66,773 82,808 98,843
37 162 Director of Community Development ExempUDiscretionary Community Development 1 66,773 82,808 98,843
37 166 Director of Economic Development ExempUDiscretionary Economic Development 1 66,773 82.808 98,843
37 174 Director of Human Resources ExempUDiscretionary Human Resources 1 66,773 82.808 98,843
37 178 Director of Information Technology ExempUDiscretionary Information Technology 1 66,773 82.808 98,843
37 188 Director of Utility ExempUDiscretionary Utility 1 66.773 82.808 98,843
38 145 Chief Financial Officer ExempUDiscretionary County Administrator 1 70,112 86.948 103,785
39 102 Assistant County Administrator ExempUDiscretionary Human Services/Management 2 73.618 91,295 108,974
40 0 77.298 95,861 114.423
41 154 County Attorney ExempUDiscretionary County Attomey 1 81.163 100,654 120,144
42 0 85,222 105,687 126.152
43 0 89.482 110,971 132.459
44 152 County Administrator ExempUDiscretionary County Administrator 1 93,956 116,519 139.0ð2
Total Classified Positions 844
::;::
,
1-'
Page 9
II)
c
z .2
5 :;
a.:gæ
Z Q 'g
0 N Q
~ ' !E
« o:t II)
(.) Q II)
- Q IG
!!: ~ g
g¡u.::;)
5
(.)
=
1:
IG
a.
H-~
¡
'"
E~~"'~~~~~
.
z
~
g
~
'"
~ ~
Hj 1] ~
L~ ~~ Ii;
'; > ;11 ~
~ " 'E " E ro
i!sss8~
~
~
g¡,
8'.
ã;' "
E .
g 8
« ~
.w a
:; .=
'¡ij u
~ .1'
'" § :¡¡
~ ~ ~
UJ U U
~
0
'"
.¡¡;
0
..
'0
~
'"
Iii
ro
ü
e
::J
~
t-
-8", '" ... '" ... '" ... 0
8 g g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Grade
10
Note:
17
Note:
19
Note:
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
FY 2004 - 2005
Part III - Grant Funded and Temporary Full-Time Positions with Benefits
Code
614
Title
Status
Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint
Social Services
Court Services
Court Services
17,884 22,180
25,166 31,209
27,745 34,408
27,745 34,408
27,745 34,408
27,745 34,408
27,745 34,408
29,132 36,128
32,116 39,832
33.725 41,824
37,181 46,110
19
N~:
19
Note:
Clerk Typist
Nonexempt
Social Services
Social Services
19
Note:
19
N~:
20
Note:
Position funded through CSA and Local Funds
235 Court and Mentor Specialist
ExempVCompensatory
Court Services
Commonwealth's Attorney
Sheriff
19
22
Note:
23
Note:
25
Note:
VJCCCA Grant for a period ending June 30, 2005.
229 Community ServiceJRestitution Officer
ExempVCompensatory
Social Services
Police
FinanceJSocial Services
Maximum
26,474
37,252
41,070
41,070
41,070
41,070
41,070
43,124
47,545
49,922
55.039
Unclassified
VJCCCA Grant for a period ending June 3Q, 2005.
284
Social Worker
ExempVCompensatory
Risk Management
:+:..
I
r
TANF Grantfor a period ending May 31,2005.
284 Social Worker
ExempVCompensatory
Title IV-E Funds
548
Probation Officer Aide
ExempVCompensatory
VJCCCA Grant for a period ending June 30, 2005.
587
VIctim Witness Assistant Coordinator
Nonexempt
Position funded through the Department of Criminal Justice Services until June 30, 2005.
470
Deputy Sheriff
Nonexempt
Compensation.Board emergency funded positions for a period of one year ending June 30, 2005.
217
Comprehensive Services Act Coordinator
ExempVCompensatory
Position funded through CSA and Local Funds
438
Police Officer. Criminal Investigator
Nonexempt
VSTOP Grant for a period ending December 31 , 2004.
232 Financial Analyst
ExempVCompensatory
Title IV-E Funds
699
Workers Compensation Rehabilitation Worker
Nonexempt
Total Grant Funded and Temporary Positions
Page 11
32
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
FY 2004 - 2005
Part IV - Roanoke Valley Television - Government and Educational Access
Grade Code TItle
16 390 Television Producer
20 204 Assistant Station Manager
26 134 Cable Television Gov't Access Coordinator
Status
ExempUCompensatory
Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint
Cable Television 3 23,967 29,723
Maximum
35.478
ExempUCompensatory
Cable Television
29.132
36,128
43,124
ExempUCompensatory
Cable Television
39,040
48,416
57.791
Total Roanoke Valley Tetevision Positions
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
FY 2004 - 2005
Part V - Roanoke Valley Greenway Project
Grade
25
Code Title
272 Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator
Status
ExempUDiscretionary
Oepartment No. Emp. Mtnlmum Midpoint
Greenway Project 1 37,181 46,110
Maxtmu,"
55,039 .
Total Roanoke Valley Greenway Project
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
FY 2004 - 2005
Part VI - Roanoke Area libraries
Grade
25
Code Title
371 RAL Automation Coordinator
Status
ExempUCompensatory
Department No. Emp. Minimum Midpoint
Library 1 37,181 46,110
Maximum
55,039
Total Roanoke Area Libraries
Totat Shared Posttions
::¡::
~
Page 12
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
CLASSIFICATION PLAN
FY 2004 - 2005
Total Positions
Classified Positions
Unclassified Positions
844
10
-.B.
886
Grant Funded and Temporary Full-Time Positions with Benefits
Total County Positions
Roanoke Valley Television - Government and Educational Access
Roanoke Valley Greenway Project
Roanoke Area Libraries
Total Roanoke Valley Television/Greenway ProjecVRAL Positions
5
1
.1
7
":;:.
,
y
Page 13
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
T\-5
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards
SUBMITTED BY:
Diane S. Childers
Clerk to the Board
Elmer C. Hodge ê H
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
1. Court Community Corrections Program Regional Community Criminal Justice
Board
The three-year term of John M, Chambliss, Jr" will expire on July 1,2004.
2. Length of Service Awards Program (LOSAP) for Fire & Rescue
Mr. Phil Wilmott, who represents the Volunteer Rescue Squads, has submitted his
resignation. His four-year term will expire January 1, 2006.
3. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (Appointed by District)
The following three-year terms will expire on June 30, 2004: Jack W. Griffith, Cave
Spring Magisterial District; David A. Thompson, Hollins Magisterial District; and Bobby
G. Semones, Vinton Magisterial District.
4. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Community Advisory
Committee (CAC)
The late Lee B. Eddy served on this committee without a term limit. The County has
three representatives on this Committee and the Board is asked to appoint a citizen
-
:Cl-b
and/or representative of the community, business, education, health care or civic
interests rather than staff members.
5. Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority
The two-year terms of Doug Chittum and Jill Loope, alternate member, will expire on
July 1, 2004.
2
Jí-r
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET
FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE
DESIGNATED AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for June 8,
2004, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred
in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5,
inclusive, as follows:
1. Approval of minutes - May 25, 2004
2. Confirmation of committee appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals
(Appointed by District); Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT);
Court Community Corrections Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP) Policy
Board; Roanoke County Cable Television Committee; Roanoke Valley-Alleghany
Regional Commission; Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau;
Roanoke Valley Detention Commission; and Roanoke Valley Regional Cable
Television Committee
3. Request for renewal of agreement to provide office space to the Roanoke Valley
Greenway Commission
4. Designation of voting delegate to the National Association of Counties
Conference to be held on July 16-20, 2004
5. Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $8,000 for the Treasurer's
turnover audit
That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law
to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant
to this resolution.
1
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO,
~-Q
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Confirmation of committee appointments to the Board of
Zoning Appeals (Appointed by District); Community Policy and
Management Team (CPMT); Court Community Corrections
Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP) Policy Board; Roanoke
County Cable Television Committee; Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission; Roanoke Valley Convention
and Visitors Bureau; Roanoke Valley Detention Commission;
and Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee
SUBMITTED BY:
Diane S. Childers
Clerk to the Board
Elmer C. Hodge ê /I
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The following nominations were made at the May 25, 2004 Board meeting.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS (APPOINTED BY DISTRICT)
Supervisor Wray nominated Kevin T. Barnes, Cave Spring Magisterial District, to serve an
additional five-year term which will expire on June 30, 2009.
COMMUNITY POLICY AND MANAGEMENT TEAM (CPMT)
Supervisor Flora nominated Rita J. Gliniecki to serve an additional three-year term which
will expire on June 30, 2007.
COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS ALCOHOL SAFETY ACTION PROGRAM (ASAP)
~-~
POLICY BOARD
Supervisor Flora nominated Ray Lavinder to serve an additional two-year term which will
expire on June 30, 2006.
ROANOKE COUNTY CABLE TELEVISION COMMITTEE
Supervisor Flora nominated David R. Jones to serve an additional three-year term which
will expire on June 30, 2007. Individuals appointed to this committee are automatically
appointed to serve on the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee.
ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION
Supervisor Flora nominated Michael A. Wray and F. Kevin Hutchins to serve additional
three-year terms which will expire on June 30, 2007.
ROANOKE VALLEY CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU
Supervisor Flora nominated Thomas A. "Pete" Haislip to serve an additional two-year term
which will expire on June 30, 2006.
ROANOKE VALLEY DETENTION COMMISSION
Supervisor Flora nominated John M. Chambliss, Jr. to serve an additional four-year term,
retroactive to June 30, 2002, which will expire on June 30, 2006.
ROANOKE VALLEY REGIONAL CABLE TELEVISION COMMITTEE
Supervisor Flora nominated David R. Jones, member-at-Iarge, to serve an additional three-
year term on the Roanoke County Cable Television Committee. As a result, Mr. Jones will
automatically be re-appointed to an additional term on the Regional Cable Television
Committee. This term will expire on June 30, 2007.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the above appointments be confirmed.
2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
J-~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Request for renewal of agreement to provide office space to
the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission
SUBMITTED BY:
Liz Belcher
Greenway Coordinator
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge ê f{
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
When the position of Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator was established in 1996, the
Greenway Commission office was initially housed at the Fifth Planning District Commission
(now the Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission). In June 1997, Roanoke
County offered to house the Greenway Coordinator at the Roanoke County Administration
Center (RCAC). The Greenway Commission accepted this offer, and the office was moved
to the RCAC in October 1997 under a three-year agreement, which was renewed in 2000
for an additional three-year term. Per the agreement, the County serves as fiscal agent
and provides office space, computer, desk, and a telephone. The Greenway Commission
pays all direct bills for additional furniture, copying, telephone service, supplies, and mail.
The Greenway Commission requests the renewal of this agreement for an additional five-
year term in order to continue housing the Greenway Commission office at RCAC.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All direct bills, salaries, and fringe benefits are paid out of the Greenway Commission
budget. The County absorbs the cost of the office space, utilities, janitorial service, and
fiscal reports.
J-:3
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Renew the agreement to provide office space to the Greenway Commission for an
additional five-year term.
2. Do not renew the agreement to provide office space to the Greenway Commission for
an additional five-yearterm.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative #1, renew the agreement to provide office to the Greenway
Commission for an additional five-year term.
S-~3
Deleted, 0"°"",
THIS AGREEMENT. made and entered into this I"day of Julv 2004tÞLa!,~- - - -(;= Deleted: 1997
Deleted, 2000
between the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY. VIRGINIA,
(hereinafter referred to as "County") and the ROANOKE V ALLEY GREENWAY
COMMISSION (hereinafter referred to as "Commission").
WITNESSETH
That for and in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants contained
herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1.
County agrees to serve as fiscal agent for the Commission. to receive and expend
funds, and to keep appropriate records. The County shall not be responsible for
~ 1 Deleted, "'y,""i",
the preparation of .grantaJ>plicat!o.ns _or !eQo.,!s~9!' þ.e~~lf 9f th_e_Ço.lI1rni~s!o.n.. - - " - c'-~" -{ Deleted, reimb~~=",. co, m
2.
County agrees to provide payroll and other employee services and benefits for the
~_,,1Deleted"OO"¡;""0'
Commission.staffconsistent with_County policies apl'licableto _County --
employees, except the provisions of the grievance procedure shall not be available
to the members and employees of the Commission.
3.
County agrees to provide procurement services for the Commission consistent
with County code and policies.
4.
County agrees to provide a minimal level of clerical staff support, as available, for
the Commission. recognizing that volunteers will be used when possible.
5.
County agrees to allow the Commission to use property owned by County.
-1 Deleted: ",d'mI'"""ri""',,
including aDoroximatelv ,200 sguare feet of office space locatedat the- Roaooke- - -,,'
-1 Deleted, fo,offi".p",
County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive.,in _accordance with the terms -,,'
and conditions set forth in this agreement. Commission is authorized to use the
off-street parking spaces adjacent to the structure. The Collntv in its so!c
discretinn reserves the richt to provide alternative ollice space in any uther
County facility upon thirty (30) davs written notice to the Cullllllissiun.
6.
County agrees to provide basic office furniture, a computer, and a telephone
instrument.
7.
, { Deteted: rh"",
The tenn of this agreement shaH be !ìY.e.xe!l~s, §~i~ _«,r!T' ~o- C-')tl1tp~!lc:e- ~ uJy J , - - - -,,'
\2
....r- ,
Deteted: O"obe, I. 2000
2QQ1,.- andto continue until~30,~ _This agreement may be canceled or - - _/.' Deteted: t997
,,- -
, Deteted: Septembe,
ternnnated by either party upon two- (2) month's notice in writing or any date that ~:,' Deteted: 2003
may be mutuaHy agreed upon.
8.
County will maintain the property described in paragraph 5, above, and provide
janitorial services sinnlar to the quality and level of services provided to other,
similar County facilities.
9.
Comnùssion has exannned and knows the condition of the prennses and has
received same in good order and repair, and that no representation as to the
condition or repair thereof has been made by the County prior to or at the
execution of this agreement that are not expressed herein. The premises shaH be
Deteted: 2000
returned to County at the expiration of this agreement in such good condition and
-. - .",{Deteted:"
state of repair, ordilli!!:y" :",_e,,-,: ~,!d. ~e,,-,: al!'!'Y¡;d ~O!, .c_o_IIl~ss~on.s)1!111 !>~ - - - - .
responsible for the safety and security of the leased premises. In an emergency it
shaH be the responsibility of the Commission to notify either the Roanoke County
Police Department or the Roanoke County Department of General Services, as
appropriate.
10.
During the term of this agreement, County will provide and pay for aH utilities
(water. sewer, electric, and solid waste services) which may be necessary to the
Commission for the reasonable and proper use and enjoyment of the premises by
the Commission. In addition, the County shall allow the Commission to use
conference rooms and meeting facilities and storage space for equipment and files
on the premises on a space available basis. Commission may use County office
equipment. such as copiers, fax machines. telephones and other office support
equipment, if temporarily available and not required for any governmental
purposes. The avaHability of conference rooms, meeting facilities or office
equipment is solely within the discretion of the County. Commission shall be
responsible for its postage, office supplies, copier charges, Internet access
charges, and the total cost of its telephone billings and charges.
II.
This agreement represents the entire understanding between the parties and may
not be modified or changed except by written instrument executed by the parties.
12.
This agreement shall not be assigned by the Commission without the express,
written approval of the County.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals:
ROANOKE COUNTY GREENWAY COMMISSION
BY
:5-3
~ ' { Deleted: Leo B. Eddy
Lucv R. Ellett,::- ~ha!t;. - - - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - -- -- c'- -{ Deleted: ""'"
:s: '3
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ROANOKE COUNTY
By
Elmer C. Hodge - County Administrator
Approved as to form:
Paul Mahoney
Roanoke County Attorney
State of Virginia
County of Roanoke, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this - day of
,2QQ;\. by Lucy R_. Ellett.Chai,,_on beha!f_~(tI1~ ~!,anokeValley_-
Greenway Commission
Notary Public
- Deleted: 2000
- Deleted: 1997
Deleted: Loe B. Eddy,
Deleted: -
My commission expires:
State of Virginia,
County of Roanoke, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _day
I of .' ~ by },IIl15'~ ç, !l_o~ge,- County Administrator onJ)_e_h~!(o! < = - ~ Deleted: 2000
the Board of SupervIsors of Roanoke County. - Deleted: 1997
Nowy Public
My commission expires:
I Approved by Ordinance.on,,-~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
nnnnn
Deleted: 101497-9
Deleted: Ootol><, 14
Deleted: 2000
Deleted: 1997
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
::T-4
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Designation of voting delegate to the National Association of
Counties Conference, July 16 - 20,2004
Elmer C, Hodge ¿ it
County Administrator
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The National Association of Counties Annual Conference will be held July 16- 20,2004, in
Phoenix, Arizona. Supervisor Wray plans to attend this conference and is willing to serve
as the voting delegate for Roanoke County at the business meeting. The Credentials
Identification Form must be returned to NACo by June 25, 2004.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors confirm the designation of Supervisor
Wray to serve as Roanoke County's voting delegate and that the credentials form be
forwarded to NACo.
s-~
MEMORANDUM
ELECTION OF SECOND VICE PRESIDENT
To:
County Executives, Parish Presidents, Borough Mayors and
County Board Chairpersons
Karen Miller, NACo President
May 14,2004
Voting Credentials - 2004 Annual Conference
From:
Date:
Subject:
We are preparing for NACo's 69th Annual Conference to be held July 16-20,2004 in
Maricopa County, Arizona. We need your help to ensure that your county can participate in the
association's annual election of officers and policy adoption for this year's American County
Platform.
In order to vote, a county must have paid its membership dues, and have one paid
registrant for the conference, according to NACo bylaws. Please indicate on the enclosed
form the name of the voting delegate and altemate(s) authorized to pick up your county's voting
materials. Additionally, the chief elected official of your county must sign the form. Please
use the enclosed checklist before returning the form.
In addition, state association executive directors or presidents are entitled to pick up
unclaimed credentials on Monday, July 19. If you do not want the state association to receive
your voting materials, please check the box on the enclosed form. Please review the enclosed
"Credentials F.A.Q." before returning the form.
Please mail or fax ONLY the enclosed form to the following address by FRIDAY, JUNE 25.
Emily Landsman
Fax # (202) 393-2630
Or:
Credentials Committee
c/o Emily Landsman
National Association of Counties
440 First Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Membership Coordinator Emily Landsman can be reached at (202) 942-4242 or
elandsman@naco.org should you have questions regarding voting procedures. We look forward
to seeing you in Maricopa County.
..
~OO1360
NACo 2004 Credentials (Voting)
Identification Form
J-~
.
Please complete and return or fax this form by June 25, 2004 to:
NACo' Attn: Emily landsman. 440 First SI. NW. Washington, DC 20001
or Fax: (202) 393-2630
or have the voting delgate(s) carry it with them to the conference and present it at the Credntials Desk.
Please type or print in block letters.
County I Parish I Borough
State
IT]
Designated Delegate
First Alternate
Second Alternate
This form must be signed by the Chief Elected Official from your county. Submissions without an appropriate
signature will not be accepted.
Signature:
Board President I Chair I County Executive I Judge I Mayor signature required
Date
Print name and tole
. . Please read the proxy section in "Credentials FAa" before filling out this section.
.
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
3-5
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Request to appropriate funding in the amount of $8,000 for the
Treasurer's turnover audit
SUBMITTED BY:
F. Kevin Hutchins
Treasurer
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge &
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~~
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
In December 2003, Mr. Fred Anderson retired as Treasurer of the County of Roanoke after
twenty-eight years of service.
Section 58.1-3136 of the Code of Virginia requires that a turnover audit be performed upon
the death, resignation, removal, retirement or other termination of a county or city treasurer
in accordance with the specifications of the Auditor of Public Accounts specifications for
Audits of Counties, Cities, and Towns.
The purpose of the turnover audit is to establish the outgoing treasurer's accountability at
the date he or she leaves office. The Code of Virginia requires the Auditor of Public
Accounts to audit state funds held by the treasurer whenever a treasurer leaves office,
The local government is required to hire an independent certified public accountant to audit
local and other funds held by the treasurer.
The Auditor of Public Accounts audited the state funds held by the treasurer in February
2004 and issued a report stating that the funds were accounted for appropriately. KPMG
LLP audited all local and other funds held by the treasurer in March 2004 and will issue
J-5
their final report within the next several weeks. It is anticipated that the report will also
document that all local and other funds were accounted for appropriately.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Auditor of Public Accounts audited state funds held by the treasurer at no cost to the
County. Independent certified public accountants, KPMG LLP, were hired to audit the local
and other funds held by the treasurer at a cost of $ 8,000.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the appropriation of $8,000 from the Board Contingency Fund to cover
the cost of the Treasurer's turnover audit performed by KPMG LLP.
GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
% of General
Amount Fund Revenues
Prior Report Balance $8,977,656 6.60%
Addition from 2002-03 Operations 1,483,629
Audited Balance at June 30, 2003 10,461,285
July 1, 2003 Explore Park Loan Repayment 25,000
February 10. 2004 Presidential primary for 2004 (24,180)
May 11, 2004 Community Policy and Management Team funding (820,000)
mandated services for youth with special needs
Balance at June 8, 2004 9,642,105 7.09%
Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only.
Balance from above $9,642,105
$9,642,105 7.09%
N-
Note: On December 18,1990, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the
General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25% of General Fund Revenues
2003 - 2004 General Fund Revenues $135,971,831
6.25% of General Fund Revenues $8,498,239
Submitted By
Rebecca E. Owens
Director of Finance
Approved By
Elmer C. Hodge t! IF
County Administrator
CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
Amount
Audited Balance at June 30, 2003 $360,172.56
Transfer from Department Savings 2002-03 274,972.00
Remaining funds from completed projects at June 30, 2003 419.66
10/28/2003 Equipment and software for electronic records management (73,057.00)
system for Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's Office
10/28/2003 Reimbursement from Water Fund for debt service payments 11,000,000.00
made related to Spring Hollow Reservoir
2/10/2004 Addition to the Bent Mountain Library (28,057.00)
3/9/2004 Acquisition of Woltz Property (145,000.00)
Balance at June 8, 2004 $11,389,450.22
Submitted By
Rebecca E. Owens
Director of Finance
Approved By
Elmer C. Hodge é'1f
County Administrator
N-J
RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
Amount
From 2003-2004 Original Budget $107,940.00
July 8, 2003 Appropriation towards Roanoke Regional Airport Alliance (8,193.00)
July 22, 2003 Appropriation towards Project 50 Capital Campaign (10,000.00)
July 22, 2003 Reserve towards Project 50 Capital Campaign (5,000.00)
August 12, 2003 Appropriation for debris removal and stablilization (15,000.00)
December 16, 2003 Appropriation for Office Support Specialist in the Clerk to (15,000.00)
the Board of Supervisor's Office
April 27, 2004 Appropriation for Planning and Zoning Work Session (600.00)
Balance at June 8, 2004 $54,147.00
Submitted By
Rebecca E. Owens
Director of Finance
Approved By
Elmer C. Hodge t!' II
County Administrator
N-3
N-Lj
FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
Savings from 1996-1997 debt budget $670,000.00
Transfer from County Capital Projects Fund 1,113,043.00
FY1997-1998 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00
Savings from 1997-1998 debt fund 321,772.00
FY1998-1999 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000.00
FY1999-2000 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000
Less increase in debt service (1,219,855) 780,145.00
Savings from 1998-1999 debt fund 495,363.00
FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000
Less increase in debt service (1,801,579) 198,421.00
FY 2001-2002 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000
Less increase in debt service (465,400)
Savings from 2001-02 debt fund 116,594 1,651,194.00
FY 2002-2003 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000
Less increase in debt service (2,592,125) (592,125.00)
FY 2003-2004 Original budget appropriation 2,000,000
Less increase in debt service (2,202,725) (202,725.00)
Balance at June 8, 2004 $8,435,088.00
Reserved for Future School Operations
FY2000-2001 Original budget appropriation $1,500,000.00
July 11, 2000 SW Co Regional Stormwater (290,000.00)
FY2001-2002 Original budget appropriation 1,500,000.00
July 1, 2001 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle (1,858,135.00)
July 1, 2002 School Budgeted Start-Up Costs HVHS/Glenvar Middle (35,047.00)
July 1, 2002 Transfer to Operating in original 2002-03 Budget (566,818.00)
July 1, 2003 Transfer to Operating in original 2003-04 Budget (250,000.00)
Balance at June 8, 2004 -
Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens
Director of Finance
Approved By Elmer C. Hodge ttJf
County Administrator
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO.
~-I
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 4, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Joint Work Session on the Draft Community Plan
SUBMITTED BY:
Janet Scheid
Chief Planner
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
This is a joint work session with the Planning Commission to review the Draft Community
Plan. Staff will discuss draft policy recommendations, review recently conducted citizen
meetings and discuss the schedule for completion of this project.
Copies of the draft chapters of the Community Plan are attached for your review. This
information is also available on the Department of Community Development web site.
Roanoke County, VA
Page I of I
f- \
Roanoke County Community Plan
DRAFT
as of May 5. 2004
Please note these chapters are DRAFTS only.
These documents are Adobe Acrobat documents and will be updated regularly.
Introductiort - PLEASE READ
DRAFT - Economlo:: I)~evelopment
DRAFT - Growth M-<lnagement
DRAFT - Stormwilte!' Management
PRAFT - TransDortation
DRAFT - Utilities
Commel'lt Form
You may download the Comment Form to make written comments prior to the meeting in your
community or
Email your comments to us at:
plannina@roanakecoUl!f~
**Please see "Community Meetings" an the left of this page for the meeting schedule**
For additional information, please contact Planning staff, 772-2068.
http://www.roanokecountyva.gov/www.RoanokeCountyVA.gov IT emplates/PrintT emplate.a... 6/4/2004
1>-)
May 5, 2004
Dear Roanoke County Residents:
The Roanoke County Department of Community Development has reviewed and
is recommending revisions to the Community Plan. This Plan, adopted by the
Board of Supervisors in 1999, is a long-range plan for the County. It is a
blueprint for the future growth and development of the County and covers a time
period from 1999 to 2010. If kept current, the Plan can provide direction in
making decisions about land development, public services and resource
protection. In order to keep this plan up to date, the County is committed to
reviewing, and revising where necessary, the plan every five years.
The revisions being recommend at this time are to those sections of the Plan
where staff has seen significant changes over the last 5 years and include: 1)
Storm water Management - The regulations governing how storm water is
handled are changing in all localities and the County will be implementing new
guidelines and regulations to control not just the quantity of storm water but also
the quality; 2) Utilities - The formation of the Western Virginia Water Authority
has brought about changes in this area; 3) Transportation - The on-going issues
of improvements to 1-81, the route of 1-73 and the lack of State funding for road
improvements in Roanoke County are reasons for updating this section; 4)
Economic Development -The County is seeing more redevelopment of sites
rather than greenfield developments. This trend necessitates changes to site
development procedures, citizen input processes, public information and the
need for more design guidelines; 5) Growth Management -Although the
population of Roanoke County continues at a slow but steady pace «1% per
year) the number of new housing units built over the last five years (1999-2003)
averages about 7% (or 456 units) per year. Where this growth occurs has
important implications for infrastructure needs and resource protection.
The Roanoke County Planning Commission has scheduled a series of
community meetings to receive citizen input on the revisions to the Community
Plan. This series of meetings follows a year-long process that included
researching and gathering information from other localities, reviewing what has
worked and what has not worked in the current Community Plan, holding
worksessions with the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, and
convening and holding five meetings with the Smart Growth Task Force that
included citizens, realtors, home builders and staff.
Purpose of Community Meetings
The purpose of these meetings is to allow staff to present information to citizens
about the suggested revisions to the Community Plan and to invite and receive
citizens' non-binding advice on these revisions.
1>-1
The Planning Commission will review the citizen advice received during these
meetings. The Commission will make a recommendation to the Board of
Supervisors. The Board will review the information and make decisions
regarding the Plan.
The community meetings are being structured in such a way as to allow
maximum participation by citizens, provide access to information and solicit
written and oral comments that will be considered seriously by the decision-
makers. This meeting format will allow the Planning Commission and the Board
of Supervisors the opportunity to obtain valuable advisory opinions on issues of
importance to the community.
Status of Current Community Plan Implementation
The Community Plan defines policies for the future development of Roanoke
County. These policies are generally implemented through revisions and
modifications to the zoning ordinance. The Plan adopted in 1999 includes an
Implementation schedule in Chapter 8. This schedule is broken down between
programs to be implemented and policies to be implemented and is further
broken down into two timeframes - 1999 through 2001 and 2002 through 2008.
A review of the programs to be implemented shows the majority completed.
Citizen participation has been increased throughout the planning process and
although a newsletter or County Page in the newspaper have not been
developed, great strides have been made utilizing the internet and County web
page. Agendas, minutes, meeting schedules and related documents are all
posted on the County web page and readily accessible to thousands of citizens.
The Roanoke County Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism has not
revised their Master Plan but has been involved in many greenway activities
including construction of the Roanoke River greenway project. The Board of
Supervisors adopted the Cluster Development Ordinance in the spring of 2000,
interstate districts were adopted by the Board in 2000 and the Subdivision
Ordinance was revised and adopted by the Board in 2002. Private road
standards were developed as part of the Cluster Development Ordinance and
have been applied in other districts such as Planned Residential Developments.
Other work is still to be done such as a Tree Protection Ordinance. Work has
begun on an ordinance to manage clear-cutting activities on non-agricultural
lands. The Cluster Ordinance needs to be reviewed and revised and other
ordinances will be scheduled as a result of the revised Community Plan.
f-I
6. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DRAFT May 5, 2004
Introduction
Economic development is a dynamic public program in Roanoke County. This activity is
defined as, "the process of creating wealth through the mobilization of human, financial,
capital, physical, and natural resources to generate marketable goods and services." The
economic development process is of critical importance to the continued high quality of
life in Roanoke County and the ability of the County to provide a high level of public
services to citizens. Roanoke County's economic development mission is:
"To attract and retain to the County quality jobs and investment that diversifY
the economy, broaden the tax base, and provide long-term employment
opportunities for area residents. "
Roanoke County established an economic development program in 1985 and
implemented an economic development strategy to establish the initial goals and
objectives for implementation. Subsequently, the Board of Supervisors re-adopted an
economic development strategy in 1987 and 1989, with business plans being adopted
annually thereafter.
The Economic Development 5-Year Business Plan FY 2001-2006 adopted in July of
2000 was intended to complement the Economic Development Strategy and the1985
Comprehensive Plan. The Business Plan focused on four economic opportunity areas
into which economic activity would be promoted. The emphasis was to identify potential
commercial and industrial sites that could be developed and marketed by the County as
"product" for economic development opportunities, and then to attract new businesses to
those sites. A series of public actions, including proposed capital improvements,
rezonings and coordination with VDOT primary and secondary road planning were
recommended to implement the Business Plan.
The Plan sets forth details of implementation activities and impact measures for the
primary program areas of marketing and business recruitment, product development
business retention and expansion and community/workforce development. The economic
development goals and objectives are generally described below.
1.
To market the County's industrial/commercial property and attract
compatible business and industry to the community, and to
increase the commercial and industrial tax base and related
employment opportunities.
2.
To encourage the retention and growth of local enterprise by creating
and maintaining a positive business climate countywide.
Economic Development-Draft - 1
f-I
3.
To create and maintain a marketable inventory of quality
industrial/commercial real property sufficient to meet market demand.
4.
To promote and encourage regional participation in economic
development activities, programs and services.
Issues and Opportunities
Competition among land uses for developable land: There is a limited amount of
developable land in Roanoke County. Residential uses and tax-exempt activities
are the major land uses competing with economic development for developable
land. Potential commercial and industrial sites need to be identified, rezoned and
reserved for future development.
Identify economic opportunity areas: The 1992 Economic Development Strategv
delineated the 1-81 corridor, North County/Hollins Road, the Route 460 East
Corridor, West County, Explore Park and the Southwest County/419 Corridor as
economic opportunity areas. Since 1992, significant economic development
activities have occurred in these areas. The following activities have occurred in
the implementation of the Economic Development Strategv, and Business Plan:
1-81 Corridor - Coordinate with VDOT and Community Development to
evaluate the impact on economic opportunity areas and ensure the preservation,
creation and enhancement of marketable commercial/industrial property.
Participate in interchange design and land use and coordinate any public policy
changes necessary to encourage development in these areas.
North County/Hollins Road - The Hollins Road area development included the
expansion of a Country Inn & Suites, a renovation of a Days Inn and the planned
construction of a new Fairfield Inn. Staff continues to monitor and evaluate the
interchange realignment at exit #146 for proposed 1-81 development
opportunities.
Route 460 East Corridor - The Valley Gateway Business Park and industrial
shell building showed significant activity with the sale of 42 acres to Integrity
Windows for a 200,000 s.f. manufacturing facility, employing 350 people, and a
project investment of$32 million. The shell building was contracted by a
developer who seeks to occupy the facility with a suitable industrial tenant.
Commercial development was also active with the attraction of a Wal-Mart Super
Center, and a Lowe's Home Improvement Center. Staff will continue to identify
and market developable property in this area to include the remaining Valley
Gateway property and the Jack Smith Industrial Park.
West County - Phase I development of the County owned 456-acre Center for
Economic Development-Draft - 2
'(-\
Research and Technology has been completed. Glenmary Drive has been
reconstructed, and utility and road extensions along Corporate Circle have been
implemented. Engineering design and related improvements to Phase II
development have been also been completed and include a second extension of
Corporate Circle, utility lines, the construction of a regional storm water
management basin, lighting installation, and landscaping enhancements.
Additionally, Novozymes Biologicals, a manufacturer of enzymes for agricultural
products was recruited to the CRT as the first tenant in the Center. Their initial
investment was $12 million with the creation of 25 new jobs for a research and
development and administration office. Their Phase II manufacturing facility is
planned for construction in 2004.
Southwest County/419 corridor - New investment/construction included several
commercial enterprises such as the 419 West Restaurant, Carlo's Brazilian
Restaurant, Ruby Tuesday's and Fink's Jewelers. Other commercial
developments occurred along Brambleton Avenue with Gold's Gym, Freddie's
Sunset Grill, Blue Magnolia Restaurant and a Martin German Imports vehicle
sales operation. Activity along Route 220 included a new Land Rover, Mercedes,
Volvo and Jaguar dealership and the implementation of a 220 Clearbrook corridor
overlay district.
Maps of the Economic Opportunity Areas are included in this section. These
maps include existing commercial and industrial areas and potential economic
opportunity sites for future use. Economic Opportunity Areas are intended to
provide for future economic development, conform to future land use
designations and be an overlay on the land use maps of the Community Plan.
Product development for sites and buildings: Roanoke County needs an inventory
of commercial and industrial sites in order to successfully compete in economic
development. The identification of potential sites is the initial step in the process
of converting an undeveloped property into a "ready to go" commercial or
industrial site. The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County
implemented a rezoning study of potential commercial and industrial sites in
1995-96 and rezoned 117 acres for such uses. While many of the county's
commercial and industrial properties are now zoned appropriately, they are not
considered to be "ready to go sites," due to the numerous development challenges
that continue to exist on these sites. The Department of Economic Development
remains actively involved in the Capital Improvement Plan process by
recommending specific improvement projects for funding that will create ready to
go sites for development. Many of these sites will not be developed until
significant capital infTastructure improvements are undertaken by the County.
Historically, Roanoke County has initiated the location of publicly owned
industrial parks such as Valley TechPark (177 acres) and the Roanoke County
Center for Research and Technology (456 acres), and has participated as a partner
in the development of Valley Pointe (52 acres in Phase I), Valley Gateway (108
Economic Development-Draft - 3
/P~\
aces), the Jack Smith Industrial Park (68 acres), and the Vinton Business Center
(99 acres), Roanoke County also participated with The Greater Roanoke Valley
Development Foundation to construct a 75,000 foot expandable shell building in
Valley Gateway, and is participating with the development of Valley Pointe Phase
II (180 acres). The County's role is to provide marketable commercial and
industrial sites and buildings so that we can respond favorably and promptly to
inquiries proposing expansions and relocations.
Targeting business and industry: The Roanoke Valley Economic Development
Partnership markets the Roanoke Valley as a business location and serves as a
point of contact for companies seeking to relocate to or expand within the Valley.
The Partnership has targeted automotive and transportation related, wireless
communications, printing, biosciences/life sciences, medical devices, large office
and corporate headquarters. Roanoke County concurs with this list and adds large
commercial projects and technology based companies that pay salaries and wages
in excess of the median wage rate for the region.
Using qualitv measures to evaluate economic development opportunities: The
series of community workshops held in the planning areas of the County
confirmed that the quality of economic development is important to the citizens.
The appearance and the impacts on the local community are important factors to
consider in proposing new projects in areas adjacent to residential areas. Roanoke
County pursued a design "charette" with the citizens residing adjacent to both the
Vinton Business Center and the Roanoke County Center for Research and
Technology. This process has resulted in a Master Plan that the County and Town
recently qualified by hiring a marketing firm to review the economic feasibility of
the various land uses proposed in the Master Plan. Retention of natural
vegetation, site and building design criteria, open space preservation and the
adoption of protective and restrictive covenants are some of the quality measures
adopted in the Master Plan process which will not be compromised as
development occurs.
Assisting economic development through its public private partnerships: Roanoke
County has adopted a public-private partnership policy to assist businesses with
expansion and relocation opportunities. The policy was revised and adopted by
the Board of Supervisors in 2002, which expanded the flexibility of the program
to allow for incentives to be offered for retail businesses that provide significant
revenue for Roanoke County. This action signifies the value of retail business
operations and their positive impact on the County. Funds are annually
appropriated to an economic development fund and administered for projects in
accordance with the policy, which gives staff the ability to offer incentives to
targeted businesses. The County will consider financing eligible public
improvements and employee training costs as a partnership if there is a "payback"
or return on investment from new taxes/fees generated by a commercial or
industrial project. Typical partnerships involve extensions of water and sewer
service and related utility connection fees. All projects are subject to the
Economic Development-Draft - 4
'7-)
execution of a perfonnance agreement between the County and the private entity
to insure that a proposed development meets its investment goals. Partnership
agreements are audited by the County staff to detennine if the projected taxes and
fees are being generated by a partnership project.
Business Retention & Expansion: Roanoke County carries out an ongoing
existing business visitation program to companies located witilln the County.
These visits provide a confidential update of a company's products, markets,
operations and growth potential. The goal is to retain and facilitate expanded
investment and employment within Roanoke County. Existing businesses are
eligible for public-private partnership assistance. The Economic Development
staff also coordinates district roundtables, hosts a Business Partners TV show, and
publishes a business newsletter. Coordination with other County offices and State
and Federal agencies to address issues raised by existing businesses is also a
function of this program.
Redevelopment Efforts: Roanoke County encourages redevelopment through a
broad based community development approach that includes citizens, business
and the County as partners. The County recognizes that redevelopment efforts
should be primarily private sector driven, but is often approached with the
involvement of both the public and private sectors. For example, Tanglewood
Mall is in a state of decline due to high vacancy rates, and County staff is
partnering with the mall management to offer assistance in attracting quality
retailers as tenants.
County Staff is also assisting the Town of Vinton with revitalization efforts for
their downtown area, and continues to support the marketing and development of
the Vinton Business Center. Staff will also be participating in Vinton's
comprehensive planning process in 2003.
Redevelopment efforts for the 460 corridor in West Salem have been delayed due
to VDOT's postponing of a significant road widening project in this area. Delays
have occurred due to funding considerations, and staff is prepared to assist with
this project once funding is restored, and the project is renewed. The Dixie
Caverns interchange at Exit #\32 off ofI-81 and the Hollins Exit #146 are also
areas concentration for future development opportunities. Staff will continue to
monitor and evaluate the land uses in these areas, and the corridor study to
implement a work plan for future development/redevelopment initiatives. In
many County redevelopment efforts, public monies are used to leverage private
funds for property improvement and development. County staff serves as a
partner and a facilitator in these projects, assisting all parties with accomplishing
their goals.
Assisting business startups. small business development and Workforce training:
The Economic Development staff has many contacts in both the public and
private sectors. The Commonwealth of Virginia, the Department of Business
Economic Development-Draft - 5
rp-I
Assistance (DBA), the Service Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE), the New
Century Venture Center, regional agencies (such as TAP), local colleges and
universities and the regional Small Business Development Center (SBDC) are
available to assist citizens seeking to start a business. County staff offers referrals
to these resources, which contributes to the growth of new businesses in Roanoke
County.
Objectives
A.
Strengthen existing business retention efforts and assist companies with
expansion opportunities within Roanoke County.
B.
Attract new industry to the County that will enhance and diversify the industrial
base.
C.
Identify potential commercial and industrial sites and pursue opportunities to add
these properties to the "product" inventory of the County.
D.
Increase public awareness of business activities and their role in the economic
base of Roanoke County.
E.
Identify areas for community development projects that will allow the citizens,
businesses and County to jointly improve a geographic area.
F.
Identify potential public-private partnerships that will enhance economic
development in Roanoke County.
Implementation Strategies
1.
Implement the economic development program areas described in the Economic
Development Business Plan including Business Retention and Expansion,
Business Attraction, Product Development and Regional Cooperation. (Obj. A,
B, C, D, E, F,)
2.
Implement all three development phases of the Roanoke County Center for
Research and Technology. (Obj. B, C, F)
3.
Identify sites and opportunities for future business park development. (Obj. C, E)
4.
Continue to monitor the 1-73 development process for economic opportunities.
(Obj. C, E)
5.
Redevelop the West Main Street (Route 460) corridor. (Obj. A, D, E, F)
Economic Development-Draft - 6
6.
Continue the land acquisition program to identify, reserve and rezone Economic
Opportunity Areas for future development needs. (Obj. C)
7.
Development of regional publicly owned business parks. (Obj. A, B, C, D, F)
The following Economic Opportunity Area maps include existing commercial and
industrial areas and potential economic opportunity sites for future use. The blue areas
identified on these maps as "Other" are areas that have not been specifically identified at
this time as future commercial or industrial areas. They are areas where, based upon their
location, access or topography, some potential for future economic opportunity exists.
Economic Development-Draft - 7
't>-l
~-,
ROANOKE COUNTY REVISED COMMUNITY PLAN
DRAFT GROWTH MANAGEMENT CHAPTER
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
MAY 4,2004
Roanoke County planning staff has developed the following general policy
recommendations for the revised Community Plan. While the Community
Plan defines policies for the future development of Roanoke County it is
the Zoning Ordinance that implements these policies. The
recommendations Dresented in this document are not sDecific zonina
ordinance revisions. Those will be developed, drafted and undergo public
review after the Board of Supervisors approves the Community Plan.
Roanoke County staff has reviewed all the information that has been
presented in the Task Force meetings, researched other local and state
ordinances, reviewed the 1985 and 1998 Roanoke County Community Plans
and listened to the concerns expressed by the RRHBA, citizens, Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors. During this process, zoning, slope
and utility maps have been generated and studied. It is apparent that the
impacts of past residential growth are not exclusive to anyone quadrant of
the County but are widespread. Of the almost 500 single-family residential
building permits issued in 2003, 28% were issued in the Catawba
Magisterial District - more than in any other district of the County. The
Bonsack area of the Hollins District and the Vinton District accounted for
another 30-35% of the permits issued.
The Board of Supervisors have made clear the following growth
management objectives:
1. Decrease density in rural areas.
2. Proactively manage the extension of water and sewer services
beyond their current boundaries.
3. Protect steep slopes and ridgelines.
4. Control runoff from residential lots.
The following policy recommendations result from the study and analysis
of these objectives:
1. Decrease density in rural areas: Staff recommends revising the AR,
AG-1 and AG-3 districts to increase lot size and frontage
requirements. This recommendation will include provisions for open
space developments that will allow smaller lot sizes and lot
averaging as a trade-off for the dedication of open space. The
Growth Management-Draft-1
/1-\
specific changes will be determined through the process of adopting
the zoning ordinance amendments.
2. Proactively manage the extension of water and sewer services: It is
clear that the availability of public water and sewer, among other
things, greatly influences the development and density of land.
Sewer pump stations have made the extension of public sewer
feasible to areas of the County where it would not otherwise be.
Staff recommends identifying and mapping a "fringe" area,
contiguous to the current utility services boundary, that will
accommodate growth over the next 5-10 year period of time. Outside
and beyond this fringe area, staff is recommending that no new
utility lines be extended, no new pump stations be built and no new
community well systems be allowed without the benefit of a Section
15.2-2232 public review.
3. Protect steep slopes and ridgelines: Efforts have been underway for
close to 10 years now to protect ridgelines and steep mountain
slopes. Meetings have been held with landowners, stakeholders and
decision-makers. Discussions have occurred with the Planning
Commission and the Board of Supervisors. We have watched with
interest as Botetourt County has publicly struggled with some of
these difficult issues. Recently, the State Building Code was revised
to require more stringent building standards on slopes in excess of
33%. Staff is recommending that a set of development/design
guidelines and regulations be adopted for development on steep
slopes. The precise slope percentage will be determined after more
research and analysis is conducted but will be specified in the future
zoning ordinance amendment. Staff is also recommending that no
development be allowed above a specific slope percentage to be
determined. The ordinances to follow the adoption of the
Community Plan recommendations will need to determine not only
the slope percentage above which either prohibition or
design/development standards kick in but also a minimum acreage
that exceeds those percentages prior to regulation.
To address the objective expressed by the Board of Supervisors,
staff also recommends that a Mountain Zoning District be mapped
and implemented. This proposed district would prohibit multi-family
residential, commercial and industrial development within the district
and provide limitations on clearing, grading, building height and
distance from ridgeline for all other development. Specifics of this
ordinance would be researched and analyzed after the adoption of
the Community Plan.
In addition, staff recommends that an ordinance be developed and
adopted to prohibit the clear-cutting of trees, in certain zoning
Growth Management-Draft -2
~-\
districts, under certain circumstances. Attention must be given to
the provisions of State Code dealing with silviculture activities.
4. Control run-off: New State Building Code standards, in combination
with slope regulations, should adequately address this Board
objective.
The ConceDts of Growth Manaaement
Growth means development. If it is the goal of Roanoke County to
continue to develop then the decision becomes one of where and how and
not if. In Roanoke County, over the last 5 years, we have issued an average
of 450 single-family building permits per year. If we want this trend to
continue, or assume that it will continue, then the question becomes where
do we want to direct this growth to occur. If it is the goal of Roanoke
County to preserve rural lands, steep slopes, mountain ridges and view
sheds as the Board has stated, then to be successful in that endeavor, we
must provide for compact, multiuse development, infill and
redevelopments in the more urban areas of Roanoke County. We must
conserve our resources by promoting compact and mixed-use
developments and development that is contiguous to existing
development. This type of development requires less extensive
infrastructure, makes use of existing infrastructure, utilizes less land and
provides for multiple forms of transportation.
Staff recommends that the following comprehensive planning goals be
adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors:
. Encourage orderly growth in the County in order to meet future
demand while considering cost to taxpayers, developers and the
environment.
. Guide future growth and development to areas served by existing
public facilities and services, or that can be served economically;
promote compact and contiguous development; focus County
funding on developments that meet these goals.
. Insure that an adequate supply of appropriate land is made available
for commercial and industrial development; recognize the imbalance
in the Roanoke County tax base between residential and
commercial/industrial and the cost of providing services to
residential developments versus agricultural lands, or commercial
and industrial facilities.
. Preserve, protect and enhance historic, cultural, farm, open-space
and recreational land and structures; use conservation easements to
purchase development rights; guide growth in locations and patterns
that protect these resources.
Growth Management-Draft -3
?":P - \
Other growth management recommendations: There is a desire for greater
coordination and communication between the staffs of the County and the
School Board. There is the need for more precise information regarding
the relationship between new residential developments and future impacts
on local school populations and capacities. The build out of developments
over a period of time, type and price range of new housing, flucuations in
student populations from existing residential developments and
consideration of school capacities on a county-wide as opposed the school
district basis must all be factored into this analysis. Much as a Traffic
Impact Study addresses the increased traffic to a road network as a result
of a proposed development and makes recommendations for road
improvements to address this increased traffic, a School Impact Study
must address the broad impacts of residential development on the
Roanoke County school system as a whole. As information on traffic
impacts is provided to decision-makers so should information on school
impacts.
The following additional recommendations result from community
meetings held over the last 8 months and multiple work sessions with the
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.
Growth Management-Draft -4
/'P-I
Agricultural Zoning Districts
Establish a horizontal distance of public water and/or sanitary sewer extensions
that would require a Section 15.2-2232 review.
Allow sanitary sewer lift stations only where planned/needed to service major
extensions, and only by a Section 15.2-2232 review.
Require a Section 15.2-2232 review for any proposed community well system.
Develop formula for evaluating and planning for urban service areas by
delineation of rural v. urban zoning districts, rural v. urban "Future Land Use
Designation" in Community Plan, criteria and requirements for a Section 15.2-
2232 review, extent of existing gravity sewer service, and slope factors.
Revise Future Land Use plan descriptions of "Rural Village" and "Village Center"
designations to address criteria for a Section 15.2-2232 review of possible
extensions of public water and sanitary sewer.
Explore purchase of development rights program.
AR district
. Establish minimum lot area, regardless of whether or not served by pubic
water and sanitary sewer
. Consider requiring public water and sanitary sewer for major subdivisions
(~5Iots)
AG1 and AG3 districts
. Evaluate shifting AG1 -+ AG3
. Evaluate new AG5, AG10 zoning districts
. Consider relaxing some setback, lot configuration and lot development
standards
. Consider limited private road system to serve minor subdivision « 5 lots)
. Consider requiring public water and sanitary sewer for major subdivision
(~510ts)
Rural Village Centers
. Reevaluate existing rural villages, look at mix of uses, potential for
allowing more uses
. Explore possibility of rezoning to NC, Neighborhood Commercial if water
and sewer can be made available
Growth Management-Draft -5
'f- \
POTENTIAL POLICIES TO ENCOURAGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT
Purpose: The purpose of this section is to encourage infill development in areas with
existing infrastructure investments as a means of achiev ing balanced growth with
efficient land use and distri but ion of urban services.
The specific objectives of infill and redevelopment are to:
allow flexibility in housing location, type and density:
provide flexibility in lot size, configuration, and vehicle access to facilitate infill
development;
provide clear development standards that promote compatibility between new and
existing development;
encourage development of needed housing in close proximity to employment and
services:
promote neighborhood preservation and enhancement thr ough redevelopment of
underutilized properties;
encourage mixed use development to complete neighborhoods and provide housing
close to jobs;
Some of the ways that infill and redevelopment projects can be encouraged are by
changing or revising certain regulations;
0 Use Regulations
Regulations should be structured to allow a mix of uses and to
encourage certain desired types of uses, such as residential infill
development in urban core areas.
Incentives such as density bonuses or reduced parking
requirements, if developers provide certain publicly desired
features or benefits, such as more affordable units or improved
accessibility to transit service.
0 Zoning Districts
Encourage infill on certain vacant, abandoned, passed over, or
underutilized parcels of land within built-up areas of the County.
Allow a mix of housing types with a potential mix of commercial as
well such as apartments over commercial.
0 Design Standards
Permitting accessory dwellings
Permitting flag lots
Shared driveway poli cies
Frontage requirements
Building setbacks
Parking requirements
Sidewalks in residential development
Growth Management-Draft-6
"f- )
Cluster Zoning District
The revised Community Plan recommends that the Cluster Development
Ordinance be modified. The following sections must be addressed in a revised
ordinance:
. Street and Access Requirements including: 1) length of private streets; 2)
number of dwelling units allowed on any single private street; and 3)
private street design requirements.
. Conservation Areas, Primary and Secondary: review and clarify definitions
including section relating to slope.
. Open Space Requirements: relationship to lots and property lines
Neighborhood Commercial District
This zoning district currently exists in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance but
has never been applied to any property. Its intention is to allow identified
neighborhoods to function as villages - offering opportunities for limited retail,
commercial and service oriented activities in a neighborhood setting. The
revised Community Plan will propose that specific properties along
collector and arterial roads, suitable for low intensity retail sales and
services, be inventoried and rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial District
to accommodate urban mixed-use developments. In addition, the Community
Plan will propose that the Zoning District be modified as follows:
. Total District Size: increase from current maximum of 3 acres
. Permitted Uses: expand commercial uses allowed (retail) and consider
including limited residential
. Strengthen use and design standards including site development, lighting,
landscaping, signage and maximum square footage requirements
. Revise minimum parking requirements and establish maximum parking
requirements in the District; revise shared parking limitations
. Encourage public uses within this District such as public branch libraries,
police sub-stations, etc.
In addition, the Community Plan will address the issue of allowing higher-density
residential in the immediate neighborhoods surrounding these identified
Neighborhood Commercial Districts.
Growth Management-Draft-7
7-\
EXISTING RURAL "VILLAGE CENTERS" I RURAL "NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL" NODES - Not restricted to maximum acreage limits
1.
Catawba - across Catawba Mountain at the intersection of VA 311 and
secondary Routes 698 and 779
2.
Mason's Cove - in Mason's Valley at the southern foot of Catawba
Mountain along Route 864 approximately 1.5 miles northwest of its
intersection with VA 311
3.
Mount Pleasant - along VA 116, 1.5 miles south of the Roanoke City
Limits
4.
Red Hill - north of Back Creek on U.S. 220 approximately 3 miles south of
the Blue Ridge Parkway overpass
5.
Clearbrook - east of Buck Mountain along U.S. 220 approximately 1 mile
south of the Blue Ridge Parkway overpass
6.
Poages Mill - along U.S. 221 approximately 2 miles southwest of Cave
Spring Junior High School
7.
Back Creek - along U.S. 221, 0.5 mile west of Poages Mill, south of Lost
Mountain
8.
Martin's Creek - along U.S. 221, 1 mile southwest of Back Creek at the
foot of Bent Mountain
9.
Airpoint - along U.S. 221 at the northeastern face (top of) Bent Mountain
10. Bent Mountain - along U.S. 221, 1.5 miles south of Airpoint
11. Adney Gap - along U.S. 221 at the Roanoke County - Floyd County
border
These rural locations exemplify areas that contain institutional, light commercial,
agricultural production and service businesses and parks and recreation uses adjoining
low to middle density residential development (1 to 3 units per acre). These areas
serve as the focus of activity for larger Rural Villages around them.
Growth Management-Draft -8
1-1
EXISTING URBAN "NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL" NODES - Normally
restricted to a maximum 3 - 5 acres each
1.
Colonial Avenue - northeast of its intersection with Thompsons
Lane; encompasses roughly 1.6 acres zoned C-1 and C-2
2.
Feather Road - "Country Crossroads" west of its intersection with
Route 24 containing 2.06 acres zoned C-2 conditional
3.
Hardy Road Service Retail - convenience market, Route 634,
zoned C-2 including less than 3 acres
4.
Challenger Avenue - convenience, service retail and offices, zoned
C-2 conditional including approximately 4 acres northeast of
Roanoke City Limits
5.
Oak Grove - neighborhood scale shopping mall, zoned C-2
containing offices, personal service, specialty retail and fast food
situated on 3.46 acres
6.
Glen Heather - southeast of its intersection with Electric Road,
zoned C-2 and C-2 conditional including professional office,
personal service and convenience retail uses on 2.5+ acres
7.
Promenade Park - southeast of the intersection of Colonial Avenue
and Electric Road, neighborhood scale shopping mall and car wash,
zoned C-2 conditional including specialty and service commercial on
4.6+ acres
8.
Hanging Rock - north and south of the intersection ofVA311 and
Electric Road containing convenience retail, service commercial and
club facilities on approximately 10 acres
9.
Hollins I Plantation - C-2 northeast of this intersection including
general and specialty retail and banking uses on roughly 5 acres
10. Creekside North - Route 11 near Botetourt border, 3.1 acres, C-2
retail
These urban locations are delineated for low-intensity retail and service
establishments on contiguous or individual parcels served by public water and
sewer. Such areas are situated on a residential collector, minor arterial or
principal arterial roadways where the commercial/institutional node is under 5
acres in size and clearly serves surrounding residential development as well as
focusing on highway retail with building scales in approximate proportion to
residential development around them. Sample uses include convenience stores,
Growth Management-Draft -9
family restaurants, personal services, day care, schools, churches and parks and
recreation and general and medical offices.
Growth Management-Draft -10
?-\
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
f-\
ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN
Storm water Management
Introduction
Stormwater management is the planned control of surface water runoff resulting from
rainfall in order to prevent flooding and pollution. All development creates an impact to
the overland flow of rain water, studies have shown that there is a direct correlation
between development and water quality degradation/flood volume, and this element
provides direction for ensuring that development impacts are mitigated by stormwater
management facilities and water quality best management practices. This section of the
Roanoke County Community Plan establishes a goal for minimizing the flooding of lands
and the degradation of water quality.
A number of regulatory and safety factors influence stormwater management in Roanoke
County. These include federal, state, and locallocal, state, and federal regulations such as
the Roanoke cCounty Sstormwater Oordinance, the Virginia Stormwater Management
Handbook, and the County's Virginia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
MS-4 Permit # V AR-O40022. Prioritizing drainage basins which need improvement
through stream inventories and watershed impact assessment, addressing pollutant load
and flood reduction techniques, inventorying stormwater management facilities and their
condition through the storm sewer system mapping program, and recommending capital
improvements projects to improve stormwater quality are all goals of Roanoke County.
This section of the Roanoke County Community Plan establishes an overall goal of
minimizing the impact of development on flooding and minimizing the degradation of
water quality. The goals objectives and implementation strategies policies of this section
proposed that direct Roanoke County will to monitor maintenance of existing stormwater
facilities and will also work towards meeting or exceeding the compliance
requirementstandardss of the Federal Govemment's National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System.
Objectives and iPolicies mplementation strategies are presented to address issues in five
primary areas of concem: (I) managing the stormwater effects of new
developmentdrainage on private property, (2) managing the stormwater effects of
redevelopmentexisting stormwater problems, (3) managing stormwater
quantitystormwater discharge control, (4) managing stormwater and stream qualitywater
and stream quality, and (5) correcting existing drainage stormwater management
financingdeficiencies. Performance standards for stormwater discharge are applied to
new development to prevent downstream degradation. These standards are to be initially
imposed through regulation, but alternative methods such as developer contributions to
public facilities will be provided when feasible alternatives can be identified. Detailed
drainage system studies are proposed to identify feasible off-site discharge control
opportunities and to identify other drainage conditions which warrant County action.
More general policies for preserving water quality include the protection of natural
StormwaterManagement-Draft - I
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
r-:p.. I
drainage corridors and the incorporation of water quality consideration into various
aspects of stormwater management. Implementing riparian buffer regulations to filter
run-off, reducing stream temperatures, providing open space and wildlife habitat and
preventing development of parking lots and structures within close proximity of a stream
corridors are means of protection. Many drainage issues involve conditions that raise
questions concerning the division of public and private responsibility. Polices conceming
existing conditions emphasize a thorough study to identify conditions which may warrant
County action either to correct problems on County property or to assume a new level of
responsibility for those that are now considered private. The creation of a framework for
informed decisions concerning the expansion of the County role is proposed. The County
has also determined that regional stormwater management facilities can provide a viable
alternative to individual on-site controls and will work to include regional facilities as an
important component of the countywide stormwater management program. Participating
in a watershed-wide stormwater management study to reduce flooding, improve site
designs, and improve groundwater quality and quantity are all goals. Stormwater
management regulations should be revised where applicable, so that land development
activities can be reviewed and developed from a watershed-wide perspective. Until such
time, regional or community facilities should be approved on a case-by-case basis taking
into consideration all state and federal stormwater management compliance regulations. .
In summary, the Stormwater Management Policy presented in this section emphasizes
prevention of future problems and the development of information and procedures
necessary for a proper evaluation of stormwater management practices. Consistent with
the nature of the Community Plan, the policy is general and is intended to be a guide for
more specific implementation actions.
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 2
2
May 5, 2004 ~ DRAFT
~)
Goal #1
Drainage on Private Property
Objectives
.
Reduce future property damage, nuisance flooding and requests for public
assistance.
Protect water quality and reduce the potential for flooding and erosion damage by
preventing encroachment into natural watercourse areas and
Continue storm sewer drainage system studies to identify existing and future
flooding and erosion damage.
Re-evaluate current county policy for stormwater basin inspections and
maintenance acceptance.
.
Implementation Stratel!ies
.
Evaluate the existing floodplain regulations to determine if amendments are
needed to reduce the exposure of new structures to flooding.
Preserve the natural character of drainage ways.
Apply appropriate standards for the alteration of private drainage facilities.
Work to upgrade the County's floodplain mapping to provide more accurate data
on future flooding evaluations.
.
.
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 3
3
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
?-,
Goal #2
Existing Stormwater Problems
Obiectives
The current understanding of existing stormwater problems indicates a level of
severity which demands substantial immediate action by the County. The current
system of responsibility provides remedies either by the affected party or through
legal measures to obtain relief from a party causing the problem. Nevertheless,
requests for County assistance can be expected, and considerable opinion that the
County should expand efforts exists. Any actions to expand County responsibilities
for the correction of existing stormwater problems should be supported by a thorough
analysis of needs, proper solutions, and appropriate levels of public and private
responsibility. These conclusions support the following objectives for policy related
to existing stormwater problems:
.
To provide a high level of performance for drainage facilities on County property
and for facilities necessary to manage the off-site effects of drainage from County
property.
To establish the financial capacity, information base and decision procedure
necessary for the assumption by the County of currently private drainage
responsibilities when conditions warrant such intervention.
To recognize that continuing validity of private responsibility for a large portion
of the drainage system and to maintain a consistent, understandable, and
supportive posture regarding private responsibilities.
To increase coordination with V-DOT in urban Bio-inftastructure installation and
maintenance.
To develop a system for the identification, correction and financing of a
comprehensive storm sewer illicit discharge connections program.
.
Implementation Stratel!ies
The policies recommended below are intended to retain aspects of current practices
which are working well, to adjust certain policies to minimize conflict over
responsibilities, and to initiate expansion of County responsibilities for existing
drainage systems when such expansion serves the public interest. The following
policies are recommended:
Continue studies necessary to identify deficient drainage structures and conditions
on County property, evaluate the effect of these conditions both on and off
County property using watershed impact analysis, identify appropriate corrective
measures, and establish priorities for implementation. The purpose of this policy
may be accomplished as a part of the drainage basin studies recommended in
other elements of the overall Stormwater Management Program as outlined in the
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 4
4
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
"1-1
.
current stormwater maintenance program and the County's Virginia Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System MS-4 Permit # V AR-040022.
Initiate studies necessary to identify feasible drainage projects on private
property, establish the justification for County assumption of responsibility for
these projects, and establish priorities for implementation. This policy may also
be accomplished as part of a comprehensive drainage basin study which serves
many purposes.
Maintain annual capital budgeting for drainage improvements. Identify feasible
projects which require scheduled maintenance and an annual budget. As the
results of storm sewer system drainage studies identify additional projects, the
budget level may be increased accordingly. Development of a drainage utility
approach to funding shall be considered. Any program of sufficient magnitude to
justify the creation of a drainage utility may require bond funding to support
major capital costs in the early stages.
Use guidelines which recognize need, equity, and public purpose in determining
the appropriateness of the County assuming responsibility for privately owned
drainage facilities.
Develop an information/education program to increase citizen awareness of
private drainage responsibilities and potential stormwater effects.
Develop an ordinance prohibiting illegal discharges into the storm drain system.
.
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 5
5
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
7-1
Storm water Dischar!!:e Control
Goal #3
Objectives
Stormwater Discharge Control
. Managing the stormwater effects of new development.
Managing the stormwater effects of re-development.
. Managing stormwater quantity.
. Managing stormwater and stream quality.
Correcting and funding existing drainage deficiencies.
To prevent significant increases in the potential for property damage, nuisances,
or other negative impacts of stormwater. by controlling stormwater discharge
from new development.
.To apply discharge control methods which are economically, aesthetically, and
environmentally acceptable, as well as effective in stormwater management.
. To equitably allocate the costs of controlling increases in stormwater discharge to
properties which are the sources of the increase.
Policieslmplementation Stratel!ies
.
Controlling, through regulation or ordinance, stormwater discharge from new
development in pre and post construction.
To apply discharge control methods (stormwater best management practices)
which are economically, aesthetically, and environmentally acceptable, as well as
effective in stormwater management.
Develop a system for stormwater discharge control which emphasizes
regional/community facilities. In addition, appropriate levels of on-site control
for new development should be applied to a particular site where immediate
downstream degradation or flooding issues exist.
Incorporate in site plan review, considerations for potential pre and post
construction stormwater impact.
Develop ordinance and regulation to prohibit illegal and illicit stormwater
connections.
This general policy related to discharge is intended to combine the strengths of
on-site and off-site approaches, while minimizing the weakness of either
approach. Accomplishment may require studies to create a fee in lieu of on-site
facilities when plans have been approved for better off-site improvements. These
improvements may include strategically located improvements. Design criteria
for the discharge control system will be subject to further detailed consideration,
but the following are appropriate:
.
.
1. Control the peak flow for the two and twenty-five year storm events
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 6
6
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
~-,
2. No increase in peak discharge after development
3. Stormwater Best Management Ppractices that enhance water quality
4. Provisions for future maintenance
5. Authority and standards for the County to either require on-site
performance, to accept alternative methods, or require fees in lieu of
performance
6. A fee system based on the average cost of site control
Continue storm sewer drainage system studies to identify feasible regional
facilities and other facility improvements that may be constructed as alternatives
to on-site discharge control. The ongoing program of the storm sewer drainage
system study will be necessary to establish the location and feasibility of regional
facilities as part of the discharge control system.
The storm sewer drainage system studies should also identify actions which can
be taken to expand the capacity of existing drainage systems to accommodate
increased flow. Structural modifications and channel improvements may be the
preferred management approach in some situations.
Continue to prioritize and evaluate watershed and urban bio-infrastructure health
through the stream inventory and storm sewer system mapping programs.
.
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 7
7
May 5, 2004 ~ DRAFT
'7-1
Drainal!e on Private Property
Obiectives
"To reduce future DroDertv damage. nuisance flooding and requests for Dublic
assistance bv aDDlving aDDroDriate standards for the alteration of Drivate drainage
facilities.
.To Drotect water Qualitv and reduce the Dotential for flooding and erosion damage bv
preventing encroachment into natural watercourse areas and bv Dreserving the
natural character of drainagewav.
.Continue stonn sewer drainage svstem studies to identifv existing and future
flooding and erosion damage.
Policies
.Evaluate the existing floodDlain regulations to detennine if amendments are needed
to reduce the exDosure of new structures to flooding. Work to uDgrade the
County's floodDlain maDDing to Drovide more accurate data on future flooding
evaluations.
Goal #4
Water Quality
Water Quality
Obiectives
To sustain a stonnwater and stream water quality program which meets federal
stonnwater discharge pennit requirements, state water quality standards and local
needs.
To preserve the natural character, ecological processing functions and biological
integrity of drainage ways.
To incorporate water quality considerations into County actions related to public
facilities and development regulations.
PoliciesImDlementation Stratel!ies
Evaluate the County's stonnwater and stream quality policies to meet federal
stonnwater discharge pennit requirement, state water quality standards and to
address as well as local needs. Components of the County's plans should include
discharge controls on new development, drainage basin and regional basin
studies, illegal discharge identification and control, retrofit projects, water quality
monitoring, and public education and participation programs.
StonnwaterManagement-Draft - 8
8
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
~-\
Preserve the natural character of drainage ways by greenway acquisition,
floodproneflood prone area regulation, drainage corridor protection, public design
and construction, and the application of other public resources that may be
identified in the future. The intent of this policy is to apply the various powers
and resources of the County to the preservation of natural features which prevent
pollutants from entering streams and reduce potential economic cost due to
flooding, stream erosion and urban Bio-infrastructure degradation.
Incorporate water quality management practices into discharge control regulations
and County design, construction and maintenance practices. Water quality and
receiving water impacts willshould be considered during the design, construction,
and maintenance of drainage facilities on County properties. Water quality
willshould be fully considered as one of the factors which may justify assumption
by the County of responsibility for the maintenance of drainage systems,
including existing facilities on property which is currently privately owned.
Encourage where applicable, Low Impact Development Standards (LID's) to help
alleviate stormwater quality or quantity issues within the county.
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 9
9
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
?-I
Existine: Stormwater Problems
Objectives
The current understanding of existing stormwater problems does not indicate a level
of severity which demands substantial immediate action bv the Countv. The current
svstem of responsibilitv provides remedies either bv the affected party or through
legal measures to obtain relief from a partv causing the problem. Nevertheless.
reQuests for Countv assistance can be expected, and considerable opinion that the
City should expand efforts exists. Anv actions to expand Countv responsibilities for
the correction of existing stormwater problems should be supported bv a thorough
analvsis of needs. proper solutions, and appropriate levels of public and private
responsibility. These conclusions support the following obiectives for policv related
to existing stormwater problems:
.To provide a high level of performance for drainage facilities on County
property and for facilities necessarv to manage the off-site effects of drainage
from County property.
.To establish the financial capacitv, information base and decision procedure
necessarv for the assumption bv the County of currentlv private drainage
responsibilities when conditions warrant such intervention.
.To recognize that continuing validitv of private responsibility for a large portion
of the drainage svstem and to maintain a consistent. understandable. and
supportive posture regarding private responsibilities.
Policies
The policies recommended below are intended to retain aspects of current practices
which are working well. to adjust certain policies to minimize conflict over
responsibilities. and to initiate expansion of Countv responsibilities for existing drainage
svstems when such expansion serves the public interest. The following policies are
recommended:
.Continue studies necessarY to identifv deficient drainage structures and conditions
on County property, evaluate the effect of these conditions both on and off
County property, identify appropriate correctiye measures. and establish priorities
for implementation. The purpose of this policv mav be accomplished as a part of
the drainage basin studies recommended in other elements of the overall
Stormwater Management Program.
.Initiate studies necessarv to identifv feasible drainage proiects on private property.
establish the iustification for County assumption ofresponsibilitv for these
proiects, and establish priorities for implementation. This policv mav also be
accomplished as part ofa comprehensive drainage basin study which serves manv
purposes.
.Maintain annual capital budgeting for drainage improvements. Identifv feasible
projects which an annual budget could be established. As the results of storm
sewer svstem drainage studies identifv additional proiects. the budget level mav
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 10
10
May 5, 2004 - DRAFT
7-1
be increased accordinglv. Development of a drainage utility approach to funding
shall be considered. Anv program of sufficient magnitude to justifv the creation
of a drainage utility mav require bond funding to support major capital costs in
the earlv stages.
.Use guidelines which recognize need, equitv. and public purpose in determining the
appropriateness of the Countv assuming responsibility for privatelv owned
drainage facilities.
.Develop an information/education program to increase citizen awareness of private
drainage responsibilities and potential stormwater effects.
Goal #5
Stormwater Management Financing
Storm water Management Financing
Objective
.
To develop an equitable system of stormwater financing based on relative
contributions to the stormwater problem based on impervious surface assessment,
water quality impact and watershed impact mitigation.
PoliciesImplementation Stratel!ies
.
Develop a system for financing the public costs of controlling stormwater
discharge from new development. A development fee system and/or stormwater
utility district confined to basins with regional controls may provide financing for
public facilities to be used instead of on-site controls.
Use general County revenues to finance the correction of drainage deficiencies
affecting existing development until annual costs reach a level that justifies a
drainage utility approach to financing. The storm sewer drainage system studies
may identify additional needs and could lead to a substantially expanded County
Role in drainage facility construction and maintenance. If such an expansion
should occur, the creation of a drainage utility approach to annual financing may
be feasible. A drainage utility may be justified if widespread needs and long-term
annual funding requirements are identified. Drainage utility fees would be
charged to each property in the County based on the amount ofuncontrolled
runoff from the property as indicated by impervious area.
Identify target areas for future stormwater management facilities.
StormwaterManagement-Draft - 11
11
'1>- )
Γ1ffiJ1
~
2004 Community Plan
County Of Roanoke, Virginia
Γ1ffiJ1
~
Transportation
l Introduction
Roanoke County has become a vital employment, retail, residential, and
entertainment center for Southwest Virginia. Along with this growth and
expansion, the County is experiencing the consequent transportation dilemmas
that much of the nation is undergoing. In order to remedy the problems, one
must closely examine travel characteristics, statistics, and trends to gain insight
into the quandary. The population of the United States increased 33% from 1970
to 1998, while the workforce increased 66% over that same period. That means
that about 55 million more people are commuting daily to work and the majority
of those, some 88%, travel in an automobile. That means over 48 million more
commuters by automobile on the road every day. The incredible magnitude of
the problem becomes clear when one examines the data and realizes that the
amount of vehicle miles traveled is almost doubling (increased 72% from 1980 to
1998) while the amount of road mileage/capacity is holding steady as new roads
are not being funded and built (total u.S. roadway lane-miles increased by only
3.6% during the same time period) (All statistics from Bureau of Transportation
Statistics).
Comprehensive and forward-looking solutions are necessary to address these
problems and to meet the transportation needs of Roanoke County residents,
visitors, and businesses. The Transportation element of the Community Plan
provides a policy and program framework for these solutions. Transportation
projects and plans developed and implemented within Roanoke County are
guided by this framework. By achieving the goals set forth in this Plan, Roanoke
County will provide accessible, attractive, economically viable and
Transportation-Draft - 1
?-\
environmentally sound transportation options that meet the needs of residents,
employers, employees, and visitors for safe and convenient and efficient travel.
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and the Commonwealth of
Virginia owns, constructs, and maintains all of the public roads in the County.
However, the County does have considerable input and say into what
transportation projects are supported and funded within the County; and a close
working relationship is and will be maintained with VDOT on County
transportation issues. Roanoke County will also continue to participate in the
Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization to continue
comprehensive transportation planning and to promote and provide additional
opportunities for effective citizen input in concert with neighboring jurisdictions.
Utilizing this Transportation element of the Community Plan and working in
coordination with adjoining localities and the aforementioned entities will enable
the County of Roanoke to achieve the goals laid out herein.
It should be noted that this element of the Community Plan is a policy document
rather than a transportation proposal; no specific projects or changes in traffic
planning are mandated.
II Transportation Components of Compo Plan
A. Goal: To consider present and future transportation implications when
making land use decisions.
i. Objective: To encourage growth where adequate roads and other
transportation systems exist; to plan, design, and construct
transportation infrastructure in areas where development is desired.
a. Strategy: Growth Management Measures --
Transportation is one of the keys that unlock the door to
irresponsible growth. Without the emergence of transportation,
sprawl and suburban development would not exist. Additional
transportation infrastructure, if not planned and placed in a
reasonable context, leads to a furtherance of ad-hoc sprawl. The
Transportation - Draft - 2
f~\
question arises, if transportation is a key factor in the creation and
growth of sprawl, how is it a growth management tool?
Every metropolitan area in the nation is shaped by the way its
public infrastructure is financed and by the timing and
geographical sequencing by which that public inÍÌ'astructure is
built. Generally, infrastructure can be financed by developers or
by taxpayers; it can be targeted geographically according to a
specific desired sequence; or it can be allowed to be constructed
anywhere within the area. By design or by accident, these policies
help to determine the geographical pattern of growth within a
region.
Therefore, a growth management policy is simply an attempt to
deliberately use public land acquisitions, land use regulations, and
infrastructure investments to contain, influence, or direct growth to
specific geographical locations to meet the needs of the locality.
The County should attempt to negate taxing the existing
transportation infrastructure with over-development by ensuring
that if the existing roadway cannot handle the expected trips
generated by a proposed development, then accommodations
would be made by the developer or the taxpayers to safely and
efficiently carry the expected traffic levels.
One such containment/growth management tool the County can
consider implementing is an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
(APFO). (Currently. under the Commonwealth of Virginia law. a
local government cannot adopt and implement an APFO. At the
time of the writing of this Comprehensive Plan. there is much
debate and discussion occurring with Virginia lawmakers on this
topic. County staff will continue to monitor the progress of said
proposal and determine if this strategy is applicable to the County
and how it should best be implemented.) Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinances help local governments avoid the negative
impacts of rapid growth, such as insufficient sewer capacity and
traffic congestion. The main objective of APFOs is to ensure that
new development has adequate urban services. They serve to give
local governments more control over the timing and location of
new development and pace the construction of public facilities to
keep up with the demands of new residential development. While
an APFO can direct growth in areas that can provide the necessary
infrastructure for development, it can also curb growth in areas
intended to remain rural. Many localities already have some
standards even though they have not formally adopted an APFO.
In principle, land-use planning, zoning, and public facility plans
should prevent development in areas that lack adequate levels of
urban services. In practice, however, APFOs encourage better
monitoring of urban service levels, and make clear the levels of
service that must be available before development happens. The
Transportation - Draft - 3
Emphasis to
provide
mobll~ ortrafflc
with limited
access to lard
"'-p- \
key aspect of APFOs is that local governments can withhold or
delay approval of developments in areas where adequate urban
services are unavailable.
As the Roanoke Valley continues to grow, the demands of an
increasing population create potential threats to the County's
quality oflife: threats such as eroding livability, declining
mobility, and rising transportation costs. Without careful planning
designed to manage this new growth and implementation of some
of the aforementioned strategies, these threats could become
reality.
b. Strategy: Balance Land Use Objectives with Street
Functional Capabilities -- Transportation road networks
provide two divergent objectives (see Figure T-l). One objective
is to provide efficient mobility from one location to another,
usually accomplished at the sacrifice of limiting access to adjacent
land (e.g., limited access highway/freeway). The other objective is
to provide access to each parcel of land, usually at the sacrifice of
rapid, efficient movement from location to location (e.g., local or
subdivision road). In between these two extremes of the
transportation network spectrum, you will find many of the
roadways that are located in Roanoke County.
Functional Street Classification
Emphasis to
provide access
to land and
with IImlled
mobll~
Figure T-l: Objectives/Emphasis of Functional Street Classifications
It is important to first establish and then assign a functional street
classification to each roadway within the County; and then to
institute a policy framework for balancing our land use objectives
with the functional street classifications. The idea behind this
practice is to ensure that inadequate roads, or roads that were never
intended to handle large traffic volumes, are not overtaxed. It is
also the intent of County staff to ensure that the access
Transportation - Draft - 4
-:r_1
requirements of each land use designation are properly addressed
by the roads in the respective classifications.
Rather than "reinventing the wheel", the County will utilize the
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) functional street
classifications. This is done for uniformity and clarity since the
County is already using VDOT street classification in its Pavement
Management System (mentioned in this element of the
Comprehensive Plan). VDOT's functional classifications are
based on mobility and accessibility. The streets and highways are
grouped into classes according to the character of service they are
intended to provide. The VDOT system parallels the federal
classification system except that Federal Major Collectors are
designated as Minor Arterials in the State system.
The two major categories of roadways are Rural and Urban
Functional Classification Systems. The distinction between Rural
and Urban is based on population figures reported by the Bureau of
Census. An Urbanized area is defined as one having a population
exceeding 50,000 people. A Small Urban area is designated by the
Bureau of Census having a population between 5,000 and 50,000.
Rural areas are all areas not designated Urbanized or Small Urban
(i.e., less than 5,000 people).
Under the heading of Rural Functional Classification System, the
classifications and their subsequent criteria and characteristics are
as follows:
~ Rural Principal Arterial (e.g., US 220, between Franklin
County line and Blue Ridge Parkway)
Serves corridor movements of substantial statewide
or interstate travel;
. serves all urban areas of 50,000 and over population
and a majority of those over 25,000 people;
provide an integrated network without stub
connections;
Primary function is the movement of traffic, access
for individual properties is a secondary
consideration
~ Rural Minor Arterial (e.g., VA 221, between Floyd
County line and Rte. 688 Cotton Hill Rd)
. Link cities and large towns;
Provide service to corridors with trip lengths and
travel density greater than those served by rural
collectors or local systems;
Transportation - Draft - 5
,,?-I
Design should be expected to provide for relatively
high overall speeds with minimum interference to
through movement;
Direct access to individual property owners is
discouraged.
» Rural Major Collector (e.g., VA 311 Catawba Valley
Drive, from v.. mile North of Rte 419 to Craig County line)
Provide service to larger towns not directly served
by higher systems;
Link the larger towns to nearby larger towns or
routes of higher classification;
. Serve the more important intra-county travel
corridors;
Entrance controls (such as rum lanes, signals, signs,
combined access points, etc.) should be utilized.
» Rural Minor Collector (e.g., VA 711 Tinsley Road, near
Bent Mountain Elementary School)
Spaced at intervals consistent with population
density;
To collect traffic from local roads and bring all
developed areas within a reasonable distance of a
collector road
. Provide service to the remaining smaller
communities.
» Rural Local (e.g., VA 617 Pitzer Road, from Blue Ridge
Parkway to Franklin County line)
Serves primarily to provide direct access to adjacent
land;
. Provide service to travel over relatively short
distances as compared to collectors or other higher
systems;
Includes all facilities not on one of the higher
systems.
The Urban Functional Classification System includes the following
classes and criteria:
» Urban Principal Arterial (e.g., Rte. 11 Williamson Road,
between Roanoke City and Botetourt County lines.)
Serves the major center of activity of a metropolitan
area;
Highest traffic volume corridors;
Roads serving the longest trip desires;
Carry a high proportion of the total urban area
travel on a minimum of mileage
Transportation - Draft - 6
'r-~
Limited access highway, direct access to individual
properties is controlled.
~ Urban Minor Arterial (e.g., VA 720 Colonial Avenue,
from Roanoke City line to Rte 221 Brambleton Ave.)
Should interconnect with and augment the urban
principal arterial system and provide service to trip
of moderate length at a lower level of travel
mobility than principal arterials;
Includes all arterials not classified as a principal and
contains facilities that place more emphasis on land
access and offer a lower level of traffic mobility.
~ Urban Collector (e.g., VA 630 Kessler Mill Road, from
the City of Salem line to Rte 311)
Provides land access and traffic circulation within
residential neighborhoods, commercial, and
industrial areas;
Distributes trips from the arterials through these
areas to their ultimate destination;
Collects traffic from local streets and channels it to
the arterial system.
~ Urban Local (e.g., VA 1658 Cresthill Drive, from Rte 682
Garst Mill Rd to Rte 1647 McVitty Rd)
All facilities not on one of the higher systems;
Serves primarily as direct access to abutting land;
. Serves as access to the higher order systems;
. Through traffic movement is deliberately
discouraged.
Once the functional street classification system is applied to the
County's roads, the next step is to establish the framework for
balancing land use objectives with those classifications. The
following table, Table T-I, serves to accomplish that goal. In the
first column are the County'sNDOT's functional street
classifications. The second column contains the County's various
land use designations that staff recommends as applicable and
pertinent to the street classification. The land use designations are
used to identify areas around the County where similar land use
activities occur, and are used in conjunction with the Future Land
Use Guide and this Community Plan (please refer to Roanoke
County Community Plan Land Use Guide for further explanation
of the designations).
Transportation - Draft - 7
'7-1
Functional Street Classification Applicable Land Use Deslanations
Rural Preserve
Rural Principal Arterial Rural Village
Villaae Center
Rural Preserve
Rural Minor Arterial Rural Village
Villaae Center
Rural Major Collector Rural Preserve
Rural Villaae
Rural Preserve
Rural Minor Collector Rural Village
Conservation
Rural Preserve
Rural Local Rural Village
Conservation
Transition
Urban Principal Arterial Core
Princioal Industrial
Transition
Urban Minor Arterial Core
Development
Neighborhood Conservation
Urban Collector Transition
Develooment
Urban Local Neighborhood Conservation
Develooment
Table T-l: Functional Street Classifications vs. Land Use Designations
For example, consider the land use designation "Core". As defined
by the Land Use Guide, Core is a future land use area where high
intensity urban development is encouraged. Land uses within core
areas may parallel the central business districts of Roanoke, Salem,
and Vinton. Core areas may also be appropriate for larger-scale
highway-oriented retail uses and regionally-based shopping
facilities. Some common Core land use types are: general retail
shops and personal services, office and institutional uses, and
limited industrial uses. One of Core's land use determinants is
access. Locations that are or can be served by an arterial street
system are grouped into the Core category. Therefore, based on
these determinants and the criteria outlined in the Land Use Guide
for the Core designation, it is sensible to recommend Urban Minor
Arterial and Urban Principal Arterial as the functional street
classifications that could accommodate development that could
occur in the Core areas. Urban Local and Urban collector roads
Transportation - Draft - 8
~-I
would not address the requirements of most Core area
developments, hence they are not recommended.
It is important to point out that the recommendations presented in
Table T -1 are not requirements or to be viewed as deterrents to a
developer. Rather, they should be seen as a guide for developers
and County planners in making land use decisions. A prospective
developer or planner could determine what land use designation
the prospective site is located in and the functional classification of
the road serving the development, refer to Table T -I in this
document, and determine whether the adjacent roadway is capable
of meeting the needs of the development. Once again, this policy
framework is not intended to be a disincentive or restriction to
development, but rather a planning tool to aid in balancing the
established land use objectives with the capabilities of the road
network that serves them.
Along the same lines of thought, the County staff, specifically the
Traffic Engineering department, desires to reserve the right to
request a traffic impact study in situations where staff feels it is
necessary, Currently, only the Virginia Department of
Transportation or the Director of the Department of Community
Development can request a traffic impact study.
c. Strategy: Long Range Transportation Plan issues --
Federal regulations, implemented as a result of the Transportation
Equity Act for the 21" Century (TEA-21), require urbanized area
MPO's to develop and approve a financially constrained long
range multimodal transportation plan. The Long Range
Transportation Plan (LRTP) is intended to guide the region in
creating a more efficient, responsive, and environmentally-
sensitive transportation system over the next twenty to twenty-five
years. The plan examines transportation issues/trends and offers a
list of specific projects for addressing the region's mobility needs.
The LRTP provides the context from which the region's
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), a capital
improvement program for implementing highway, transit, and
bikeway projects, is drawn.
VDOT prepares travel demand forecasts using computer
simulation models that relate travel demand to socioeconomic
factors. Using the computer model, trips forecasted for the horizon
year are assigned to the existing plus committed transportation
network. The resulting traffic distribution is then analyzed to
determine at what Level of Service (LOS) the traffic would
Transportation - Draft - 9
'(-I
operate. Recommendations are then made to eliminate existing
and projected deficiencies in the network.
The Roanoke Valley MPO is required to conduct a review of the
LRTP on a periodic basis, ideally updating the LRTP every five
years. The review takes into account changes in socioeconomic
and land use factors and trends. It also includes an evaluation of
how well the travel demand forecasting process simulates actual
travel. County staff works with the Roanoke Valley MPO and the
RV ARC to consider VDOT's recommendations and compare those
recommendations and projects to the County's future land use,
zoning, impacts to the corridor, smart growth factors, etc. The
final product, following the County's review and submittal to
VDOT, is an updated LRTP. The plan may also be amended as a
result of changes in projected Federal, State and local funding,
major improvement studies, congestion management system plans,
interstate interchange justification studies, and environmental
impact studies.
Please refer to Table T-2: Roanoke Study Area 2025
Recommendations & Priorities for the routes on the current LRTP
and the recommended improvements (as submitted by Roanoke
County staff. For the approved LRTP, see the Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission website --
http://www.rvarc.org/worklwork.htm). This represents a
prioritized list of the County staff's recommendations and
comments for each road section that VDOT has recommended
based on their models. Note that the "U" and "R" designations in
the "VDOT/Roanoke Co. Recommends" column represent Urban
and Rural, respectively, The number that follows the "U" or "R" is
the number of lanes proposed.
It should be pointed out that the County has recommended
allocation of funds (relatively more than has been allocated in the
past) to be set aside for miscellaneous items such as traffic signals,
signal optimization, spot improvements, intersection re-design,
transit, bike and pedestrian improvements, and technological
solutions to transportation deficiencies.
Transportation - Draft - 10
Long Range Plan
Roanoke Study Area 2025 Recommendations & Priorities
Jurisdiction - Roanoke County (Primary Routes)
Priority Primary F",ility Fmm To Length Exist. VDOT Roanoke Co Roanoke Co Comments
Route (mi) Lanes Recommeods Recommends
1 11/460 Lee Hwy Rte612 WCLSaiem 1.91 3L R4L R4L Already bein9 done; could be removed from lisl
2 221 Benl Mtn. 1.05miW .35miS 3.34 2L R4L R4L 4L prior 10 Ihis section; pmperties have already been
694 Rle 897 boughllhmugh S-Iums, some plans have been done
3 11 Williamson Roanoke Rte 117 1.49 2L U4L U4L Agree, don'l wanl a bottleneck; high priority 1m County
CL
Roanoke R-O-W has been bought, wide R-O-W; a 10101
4 115 Piantation CL Rle11 2.19 2L U4L U4L developmenl in area; widen Ihis lakes trallic off Peters
Cr.
Roanoke Why nol conlinue to Franklin Co. Une? U6L trom Roan.
5 220 Franklin S Rte 715 CL 3.72 4L R6L U6UR6L City line 10 Yellow Mln Rd, R6L from Yellow Mtn Rd 10
F"'nklin CL
6 116 Jae Valley Rle 664 Roanoke 1.24 2L R4L R224' Downgrade 10 R2 24'; goes under BR Parkway; keep on
CL Ihe lisl, ve"l important for Smnh Mtn Lake
7 460 Challenger Roanoke Botelourt 1.98 4L R6L U6L Change to U6L; pmposed commercial developmenl in
CL CL this area
For planning purposes keep iI8-lane? 8 lanes pmbably
8 419 Electric Rd. Rle 220 Starkey 0.83 4L U8L U8L or U6L won'l work, would hurt real eslale, 8L nol the answer;
need 10 focus on 220 interchange; possibly 6L or 4L with
frontage roads
9 419 Electric Rd. Starkey SCL Salem 4.58 4L U6L U6L Agree, especially if upgrade sectioin prior to Ihis one
10 116 Jae Valley Franklin CL Rte 664 1.94 2L R224' R224' Smith Mln Lake big att",clion; lots 01 curves and bad
terrain; would be major $ 10 increase lanes
11 221 Bramblelon Rte 689 Rle419 0.99 4L U6L U4L 4L should accommodale 1",lIic volumes; major impacts il
widen; may be removed Imm list
Table T-2: Roanoke Study Area 2025 Recommendations & Priorities - Primary Routes
Transportation-Draft - II
~
Long Range Plan
Roanoke Study Area 2025 Recommendations & Priorities
Jurisdiction - Roanoke County (Secondary Routes)
Priority Secondary Focility From ro Length ExIst. VDOT Roanoke Co Roannke Co. Commen~
Route (ml) Lanes Recommends Recommends
1 601 Hollins Rte 115 083 mi S 1.36 2L R224' R224' On 6-yr plan; R-O-W already acquired
Rte 627
2 720 Colonial Penn Electric Rd 0.53 2L R222' R224' On 6-yr plan; being designed as R2 24'
Forest
3 679 Buck Mtn Starkey Rte 220 2.25 2L R224' U2L Proposed development in area; BR Parkway in area;
change to Urtan designation on whole section
4 613 Merriman Starkey Rte 1640 1.16 2L R224' U2L On 6-yr plan; Scoping meeting held; upgrade to U2L
5 634 Hardy Vinton CL Bedford CL 0.99 2L U4L U4L Industrial park in the area; some R-o-W being acquired;
BR Parkway passes over section; keep U4L
6 904 Starkey Rte613 Eden Ave 1.39 2L U4L U4L Lots of industry and residential development in area; U4L
7 625 Hershberger Roanoke Rte 115 0.60 2L U4L U3L(inct. AUempt to match Roanoke City recommendation
CL lWfL)
U3L (inct. Residential, rough terrain; 4L too much, wouldn't fit in
8 682 Garst Mill Brambleton Grandin 1.44 2L U4L lWfL) corridor; decrease to 1-through lane in each direction wi
CenterTum Lane
9 687 Penn Forest Colonial Starkey 1.25 2L R224' U2L Change to U2L
10 720 Colonial Brambleton Penn 0.34 2L U4L U2L Change to U2L to match what's being built on Colonial &
Forest McVitty
-
Table T-2 continued: Roanoke Study Area 2025 Recommendations & Priorities - Secondary Routes
Transportation-Draft - 12
-,cl
1>-- ,
B. Goal: To make efficient use of Roanoke County's taxpayers' money
allocated for transportation projects.
i. Objective: To utilize staff expertise, knowledge, and abilities in
making road improvement, design, and maintenance funding
decisions.
a. Strategy: Pavement Management System for
Six- Year Secondary System Construction Plan and
Revenue Sharing decisions -- The Six-Year Secondary
System Construction Plan is VDOT's plan for the allocation of
road construction funds for a six year period. The Six-Year Plan
provides improvements to all roads with route numbers of 600 and
above. It consists of a priority list of projects and a financial
implementation plan. The Plan is based on local projects and
priorities adopted by the County Board of Supervisors.
Roanoke County and VDOT are continuously reviewing and
updating the Six-Year Plan. Staff receives requests throughout the
year concerning secondary roads in Roanoke County. In deciding
which projects should be included in the Six-Year Plan and/or
Revenue Sharing program, staff considers traffic counts, existing
and future development, pavement conditions, drainage, safety,
and the economic benefit to the County.
In the latter part of each year (usually November-December),
VDOT and the Board of Supervisors hold a joint public hearing
about these road improvement projects. After receiving public
input, the Board of Supervisors adopts a resolution establishing the
top priorities in road improvement projects for the next six years.
As is usually the case, the Board of Supervisors approves a priority
list of road improvement projects that would cost, in total, in
excess of available funds over the six-year planning period. With
such a list developed, subsequent VDOT Six-Year Plans can be
prepared and revised in response to available annual funds.
The Revenue Sharing program is slightly different. Whereas State
money exclusively is used to fund major road
improvement/reconstruction projects in the Six-Year Plan, the
County must contribute financial resources for Revenue Sharing
projects such as routine/preventive maintenance and smaller scale
improvement projects. VDOT annually provides counties the
opportunity to receive State matching funds for the construction,
maintenance, and improvement to roads in the State's highway
system. Roanoke County, a participant in the program, must
match dollar for dollar Secondary road improvements within the
County. The Commonwealth of Virginia allocates $15 million for
the matching program and limits localities to $500,000 each
Transportation-Draft - 13
'1>-'
(dependent on the number of counties that participate in the
program, the value may be increased or decreased proportionately).
VDOT and County staff review and evaluate streets and drainage
requests throughout the year. There is also contact made with the
County's Economic Development Department, Utility Department,
and VDOT's area superintendents.
As a result of ever limited State and Federal funding, road
construction funds must be carefully expended and road needs
carefully identified and programmed. In the past, the County staff
has used engineering judgment and opinion to select and prioritize
road improvement projects in the County. However, the County is
attempting to implement a pavement management system to
identify maintenance options, help prioritize competing road
sections for immediate attention, and anticipate future
deterioration. Under the new system, the County will create and
archive an inventory of all the roads in the County (utilizing staff
GIS capabilities), assess the current condition of the road, select
the appropriate treatment, prioritize the projects, and model its
future budget requests. The pavement management system offers a
rational, systematic approach, enhances professional judgment, and
provides statistical backing for fund-allocations. The desired
consequence of utilizing a pavement management system is
selecting the right treatment, for the right road, at the right time,
ensuring the tax-paying public gets the best value for their dollars.
County staff has met with VDOT representatives to discuss their
pavement management policy. VDOT uses a pavement
management plan for the primary/interstate roads in the Salem
District but do not presently have a plan in effect for the
secondary/subdivision roads. VDOT has recommended that the
County implement a plan for its secondary roads, predominantly
for selecting and prioritizing projects in the Revenue Sharing
program. VDOT staff has reviewed the software and
methodologies that the County plans on using for its pavement
management system and had no objections. Both entities have
agreed to work in one accord on this undertaking to ensure the best
results. At the writing of this element of the Community Plan, the
inventory of the County roads is nearly complete and plans are
being made to begin the condition assessment and subsequent
work. Staff is confident that the implementation of this system is a
step towards providing smooth, safe, and economical road surfaces
and achieving the best possible value for the available public
funds.
(Note: Interested citizens should consult the most recent "County
of Roanoke Six Year Secondary System Construction and Revenue
Transportation - Draft - 14
1>-1
Sharing" document for a current, prioritized list of road
improvement projects in the County.)
C. Goal: To guide the use of Roanoke County transportation infrastructure
system to control air pollution, traffic, and livability problems.
i. Objective: To reduce Roanoke County's dependence on single-
occupant vehicle use as a primary mode of travel.
a. Strategy: Bicycle Facilities & Greenways --
Bicycle facilities
There are numerous benefits associated with bicycling. Bicycling
offers health and fitness benefits through increased exercise;
environmental benefits through reduced vehicular emissions; and
transportation benefits by providing an alternative transportation
option to the automobile. Bicycles may also serve as an excellent,
all-around short-distance transportation alternative to the single-
occupant vehicle for trips to work, schools, shopping, recreational
facilities, and other intra-neighborhood destinations. The many
benefits of bicycle facilities and reasons to invest in such
infrastructure have been adequately explained in detail in both the
1997 Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley and the Regional
Bicycle Suitability Study - Phase I -- 2003 (both documents can be
accessed via the Roanoke Valley Allegheny Regional Commission
(RV ARC) website: http://www.rvarc.org/bike/home.htm, or by
contacting either the RV ARC, at telephone number (540) 343-
4417, or the County Traffic Engineer, at telephone number (540)
772-2080, to obtain a hard copy of the documents). For that
reason, this element of the Community Plan will not attempt to
duplicate the valuable information contained in those documents;
rather, explain how the County attempts to implement its bikeway
plan.
The following disclaimer is presented in the 2003 Regional Bicycle
Suitability Study:
Note: For bicycle accommodations to be considered as part
of roadway improvements using Federal and State funding,
the roadway must be included in an approved bikeway
plan. The 1997 Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area
(RV AMPO, 1997) is the approved bikeway document for
the MPO, thereby fulfilling this requirement. As such, the
1997 Bikeway Plan should be referenced when specific
roadways are cited for bicycle accommodations. Phase I of
the Regional Bicycle Suitability Study is not intended to
Transportation - Draft - 15
'y- ¡
supercede or replace the 1997 Plan in this capacity. Instead
it should complement the efforts and goals of the 1997 Plan
and facilitate the provision of bicycle accommodation in
the MPO.
Due to the Virginia Department of Transportation's requirements
and importance of having an adequate and complete list, the
County is striving to provide input; not only on amendments to the
1997 Plan, but in the creation of a region-wide, connected network
of bicycle facilities that will hopefully be an end product of the
Regional Bicycle Suitability Study.
The Regional Bicycle Suitability Study will consist of Phase I and
Phase II. Whereas Phase I of the Study introduces the applicable
computer models, provides detailed analysis and summary of
survey responses, gives an overview of local, regional, state, and
national bicycle facility planning efforts, and lays the groundwork
for the project, Phase II of the Study will consist primarily of the
application of work products developed in Phase [ A prioritized
list of routes, corridors, destinations, and activity centers to be
connected via a significant regional bicycling network; maps of
existing and proposed bicycle facilities, and other spatial data
relevant to the study; and potentially a new, approved, and updated
bike plan are end products of Phase Ii.
The primary goal of the Study is to provide planners, transportation
engineers, citizens, and bicycle coordinators and enthusiasts the
tools and data for use in developing facilities and other
accommodations to enhance safe bicycle travel within the MPO.
Data and tools developed as part of the Study are useful in
identifying current and future problems facing the bicycling public,
facilitating the planning and design of a bicycle-friendly
transportation system, and determining possible options regarding
operational and design requirements for new facilities. End
products will assist stakeholders in establishing consistency and
connectivity along travel corridors, developing crucial linkages
with the greenway system and public transit, and developing other
components of a regional bicycling network.
Development of a regional bicycling network will require
coordination and cooperation among all stakeholders in the study
area. As a geographic region composed of several jurisdictions,
Roanoke Valley governments should coordinate bicycle facility
improvements to ensure that travel corridors are consistent in and
between jurisdictions in the study area.
Transportation - Draft - 16
'1-1
As part of the Regional Bicycle Suitability Study, a planning
committee, composed of interested stakeholders, was established
to assist in various aspects of the study. Representation from a
varied cross-section of stakeholders was sought in selecting
members. The planning committee was composed of Regional
Commission staff, local planning and traffic engineering staff
(including Roanoke County staff), Greenway representatives,
VDOT representatives, bicycling advocates, and citizens. The
committee is assisting in the development of a regionally
significant bicycling network by guiding the application of work
products in Phase II of the Regional Bicycle Suitability Study,
facilitating continued regional cooperation in bicycle facility
planning, and data collection.
The new Study will make it easier for the MPO and the localities to
develop a new bikeway plan to replace the 1997 Bikeway Plan, but
will not, in itself, be a replacement for the 1997 plan. Until a new
plan is developed and adopted by the MPO, it is important to keep
the 1997 plan up-to-date. Tools from the Regional Bicycle
Suitability Study could be used to develop a new bicycle plan for
the region in the next few years.
Rather than waiting for the completion of a replacement or update
to the 1997 Plan, the County will strive to utilize the computer
models introduced and implemented in the Regional Bicycle
Suitability Study to get a jump on the planning efforts. Before the
design phase of scheduled road projects begins, County staff will
attempt to measure the existing bicycle compatibility level and
generate proposed options regarding an applicable bicycle facility;
all the while consulting the 1997 Bikeway Plan.
For more infonnation on the 1997 Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke
Valley Area and the Regional Bicycle Suitability Study, please refer
to those particular documents via the aforementioned contact
infonnation.
Study findings and work products will be available to localities in
the region, and can be easily incorporated in the development of
regional and local plans. Once the Regional Bicycle Suitability
Study is complete and the localities have agreed upon a bicycle-
friendly transportation infrastructure that has been developed on a
regional basis (not only to meet existing demands, but also to
encourage and facilitate bicycling as a viable means of
transportation in the Roanoke Valley), County staff recommends
that the County Board of Supervisors adopt the new plan and that it
is utilized as the County's approved plan.
Transportation - Draft - 17
?-I
In addition, the Virginia Department of Transportation released a
memorandum in early 2003 stating their bicycle and pedestrian
policies and procedures. In the memo, the Secretary of
Transportation stated, among other things: that non-motorized
transportation should receive the same consideration as motorized
transportation in the planning, design, construction, and operation
of Virginia's transportation network; and bicycle and pedestrian
accommodations should be included in the design of all new
highway facilities and all major highway reconstruction efforts,
unless special circumstances exist that prevent their inclusion or a
local governing body has formally requested that bicycle or
pedestrian accommodations not be included. The Secretary
declared that the new policies should be in place by end of the
2003 calendar year. There still seems to be much confusion at the
district level as to the effects these new policies have on road
projects and subsequent funding. The County will keep abreast of
the developments pertinent to VDOT's bicycle and pedestrian
policies and procedures.
Ultimately, the County's objectives pertaining to bicycle facilities
can be summed up in the following points:
0 To complete a network of bikeways that serves bicyclists'
needs, especially for travel to employment centers,
commercial districts, transit stations, institutions, and
recreational destinations;
0 To provide bikeway facilities that are appropriate to the
street classifications, traffic volumes, and speed of traffic;
0 To develop and implement education and encouragement
plans aimed at youth, adult cyclists, and motorists; and to
increase public awareness of the benefits of bicycling and
of available resources and facilities;
0 To encourage bicycle parking and related facilities as part
of all new construction or major renovation, including
office, retail, industrial, and housing developments;
0 To encourage the construction of showers and changing
facilities in all new or renovated commercial development;
0 To encourage bicycle parking facilities at all park and ride
lots, commercial developments, and selected parking lots
(such as bicycle parking facilities at public spaces such as
County buildings, museums, libraries and civic centers).
A regionally significant bikeway network in the MPO will include
the Roanoke Valley Greenway system. The greenway system is an
Transportation - Draft - 18
"'(-I
integral component of the recreational infrastructure in the area,
providing open and recreational space for Roanoke Valley
residents. Some bicyclists, such as novice users, will not be
comfortable with on-road facilities. The Greenway Plan presents
an added opportunity to meet this need by providing facilities with
little conflict from automobiles and by providing linkages and
connectivity. The Roanoke Valley's greenway system is explained
in the following section of this element of the Community Plan.
Greenways
A greenway is a corridor of protected open space managed for
conservation, recreation and nonmotorized transportation.
Greenways often follow natural geographic features such as ridge
lines, stream valleys, and rivers, but may also be built along canals,
utility corridors, or abandoned rail lines. Most greenways include
a trail or bike path, but others may be designed strictly for
environmental or scenic protection.
Greenways, as vegetated linear parks, provide tree cover, wildlife
habitat, and riparian buffers to protect streams. The environmental
benefits include reduced storm water runoff, flood reduction, water
quality protection, and preservation of biological diversity. The
trails within the greenways provide access between neighborhoods
and destination points, opportunity to travel without an automobile,
outdoor education classrooms, and close-to-home paths for
walking, jogging, bicycling, and roller blading. Tree cover and use
of bicycles instead of cars provide for better air quality, fewer
hard-surfaced parking lots, and reduced energy costs. Although
greenways are a collateral component of a county-wide park
system, they do not replace the need for additional park land.
In the spring of 1995, the four local governments appointed
representatives to a Greenways Steering Committee, supported by
the Fifth Planning District Commission. A consulting firm was
hired to develop a Conceptual Greenway Plan for the Roanoke
Valley with input from elected officials, civic leaders, and the
general public. This Plan was adopted by each of the four
jurisdictions in 1997.
The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, appointed by the
four Valley governments, replaced the Steering Committee in
1997. It is an advisory body with the responsibility to facilitate
cooperation and coordination among jurisdictions in greenway
planning and development; recommend funding sources for
greenway construction; develop uniform standards for design and
Transportation - Draft - 19
?-I
construction; and, pursue public/private partnerships for greenway
development.
In August 1997, the first one-half mile of greenway in Roanoke
was completed through Garst Mill Park along Mud Lick Creek.
This was the first section of greenway in Roanoke County and is
being very heavily used. Extensions of this greenway are planned
to connect to the Hidden Valley High School and to Murray Run
Greenway in the City of Roanoke.
The Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail which travels through portions
of Salem and Roanoke County opened in 1999. This Trail is
included on the brochure Shenandoah Valley Civil War Trails and
attracts tourists as well as local residents. The extension of this
greenway will follow Masons Creek to the Roanoke River.
In 2001 the Wolf Creek Greenway opened in Roanoke County,
extending a section built in the Town of Vinton in 1999. This trail
connects the new bicycle lanes built on Hardy Road to Goode and
Stonebridge Parks in Roanoke County. The extension of this
greenway will connect with the Blue Ridge Parkway to the
northeast and with the Roanoke River to the south. A master plan
for Tinker Creek Greenway was completed in 2000 in cooperation
with Roanoke City, and plans for Glade Creek Greenway are being
developed with the Town of Vinton.
The backbone of the Roanoke Valley greenway system will be the
Roanoke River Greenway which will run for over 20 miles through
Roanoke County, Salem, Roanoke City, and Vinton. Master plans
for the Roanoke River Greenway have been completed, and two
sections of the greenway have been built - one in Salem and one in
Roanoke City. The first section to be built in Roanoke County will
be in Green Hill Park.
In 1998, Roanoke County completed a prioritization of greenways
within its jurisdiction. The priorities for off-road routes were:
Wolf Creek, Roanoke River, Tinker/Carvins Creek, Glade Creek,
and Mud Lick Creek Greenways. The priorities developed by staff
in 2001 for on-road facilities needing major improvements were:
Mountain View Road, Plantation Road, Hardy Road, Loch Haven
Drive, and Colonial Avenue. While a significant amount of
progress has been made on greenways over the last 7-8 years, there
are substantial steps still to be taken.
Transportation - Draft - 20
?~i
b. Strategy: Traffic Management Strategies -- For the most
part, the effectiveness of existing roads should be maximized
rather than using new road construction as a crutch. It has been
proven in the past that we cannot build our way out of congestion;
we must begin to be creative about the utilization of the existing
infrastructure. Some potential strategies Roanoke County staff can
implement include:
.
Encouraging motorists to carpool or rideshare;
Promote employer-supported vanpool programs;
Persuade the use of park-and-ride facilities;
Endorse shuttle transit service from fringe parking areas to
urban centers or major destinations;
Encourage enhanced motorists infonnation services and
systems (such as presenting the congestion crises on
television, radio, or the intemet; motorists would be
advised to car pool or alter their driving pattems);
Advocate public transit, working with Valley Metro
(Greater Roanoke Transit Company) and RADAR
(Roanoke Area Dial-A-Ride);
Support non-motorized travel, such as bicycle/pedestrian
facilities (addressed in other sections of this Plan);
Teaming up with Roanoke Valley-Allegheny Regional
Commission (R V ARC) and their regional ridesharing
program called "Ride Solutions". This program is a grant-
funded program that provides free carpool and vanpool
matching services for citizens of the Roanoke Valley and
surrounding areas within southwestern V A. The program
also provides directions to area park-and-ride lots, and
infonnation about alternative modes of transportation, such
as public transit service, walking, and bicycling.
Infonnation on Ride Solutions can be obtained from the
website www.ridesolutioins.org or by calling them at (540)
342-9393.
c. Strategy: Education on Transportation Systems &
Livability Issues -- Americans perceive their car as a provider
of the freedom that we have come to cherish so greatly. An aspect
of that freedom is enjoying the privacy, convenience, and safety of
automobiles. Our love of cars has grown out of necessity. That is
to say, as residential developments are built without proximity to
employment centers or shopping facilities, residents have no
choice but to use personal automobiles. Transportation
infrastructure has been designed and built for the personal
transport vehicle, rather than designed on a human scale.
Transportation - Draft - 21
?-I
The public must be informed of the alternatives to the single-
occupant vehicle. One method to consider is informing the
younger residents of Roanoke County. Educating the young is
highly important if you want to make a new transportation system
work or even make an old one work better. Today's children are
the potential mass transit users, bikers, and pedestrians of
tomorrow, but the potential must be tapped through education. By
educating children, not only is the next generation reached, but so
are the parents. The children will hopefully influence the parents
to consider alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.
Roanoke County staff will consider working in conjunction with
the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission in their
educating/advertising endeavors. Staff should also examine
informing and promoting the use of mass transit with the aid of
Valley Metro (Greater Roanoke Transit Company) and RADAR
(Roanoke Area Dial-A-Ride). The County should also enlist the
help of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission and local
bicycling clubs to publicize and market the facilities available to
pedestrians and bicyclists. Roanoke County staff could also utilize
the County website and the public access cable channel (Roanoke
Valley Television, RVTV Channel 3) in its educating efforts.
ii. Objective: To reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter
driver behavior, and improve conditions for non-motorized street
users.
a. Strategy: Traffic Calming -- Traffic calming measures are
mainly used to address speeding and high cut-through traffic
volumes on neighborhood streets. These issues can create an
atmosphere in which non-motorists are intimidated, or even
endangered, by motorized traffic. Along with the additional
amount of traffic generated within the neighborhood, cut-through
motorists are often perceived as driving faster than local motorists.
By addressing high speeds and cut-through volumes, traffic
calming can increase both the real and perceived safety of
pedestrians and bicyclists. Although the social results of traffic
calming are slightly more difficult to measure, studies show that
traffic calming measures can increase property values decrease
crime and noise levels, promote a sense of community, and
improve the quality of life within the neighborhood.
In an effort to induce motorists to slow down and drive
responsibly, traffic calming purposely introduces additional self-
Transportation - Draft - 22
?- t
enforcing physical features in the design of the roadway,
effectively changing the design speed. Traffic calming measures
are generally implemented in a retrofit situation and traditional
design standards require interpretation and modification. Some of
the commonly implemented traffic calming measures includes:
Horizontal Deflection
. curb extension / bulb out;
. chicane;
choker;
on-street parking;
raised median island / pedestrian refuge;
and traffic circle, etc.
Vertical Deflection
. textured crosswalk;
speed hump;
raised intersection;
and raised crosswalk, etc.
Physical Obstruction
semi-diverter;
diagonal diverter;
. raised median through intersection;
and street closure, etc.
Signs and Pavement Markings
roadway narrowing with edge lines;
speed limit signing;
turn prohibitions;
one-way streets;
and commercial vehicle prohibitions, etc.
Any of the above mentioned measures could be individually
installed but may be most effective if used in concert with other
measures. Tools ill!! recommended for traffic calming include:
STOP signs, "Children at Play" signs, speed dips, speed bumps.
Functional classification and land use should be primary criteria in
determining whether traffic calming measures are appropriate for a
particular roadway. When conditions warrant, traffic calming
measures may be appropriate on the following roadway types:
Local residential streets;
Collector streets with predominantly residential land uses;
Arterial roads located within downtown districts or
commercial areas (with posted speed limits of 40 mph or
less). Traffic calming is not appropriate for use on arterial
streets which are intended to accommodate higher speeds
and larger traffic volumes. It is important to determine the
intended function of the roadway and remember that
Transportation - Draft - 23
'1- ,
efficiently moving large numbers of vehicles is necessary
on some roads.
When implementing traffic calming measures, it is best to do so
under the direction of an overall traffic calming plan for the area in
question. Installing traffic calming devices in the absence of an
area-wide plan could simply divert one neighborhood's speed and
traffic volume problems to other streets.
One more critical facet of traffic calming is gaining community
support. A comprehensive community outreach program is
important to ensure that the communities' needs will be met by a
proposed project. A task force should be fonned at the early stages
of planning and concept development. This task force should have
representation from the following groups: residents, business and
property owners, emergency services, school representatives,
transit authorities, local officials, utility departments, RV ARC,
VDOT, and other interested parties. The idea behind this is to try
and front lead the public involvement in order to ensure that final
solution has broad support in the community. It is the citizen's of
Roanoke County that must live with the solution and the traffic
calming measures will be largely unsuccessful without community
support. By making the residents co-authors of the solution it will
foster sense of ownership and pride in the community. The role of
Roanoke County staff is one of facilitator rather than director of
the solution.
County staff will also work to investigate citizen's traffic calming
requests as they are submitted and will examine possibilities to
include traffic calming to be included in repair/reconstruction
projects on all applicable roads. Staff will detennine (based on
functional classification, land use, and other factors) whether
traffic calming implementation should be pursued and if so, work
with VDOT on the project.
iii. Objective: To provide access to land development, while
preserving the safety and capacity of the transportation system.
a. Strategy: Access Management -- Access management is a
fairly new response to the congestion, the loss of arterial capacity,
and the serious access related accidents that are plaguing our
roadways. It is the careful control of the location, design, and
operation ofal! driveways and public street connections to a
roadway. Access management is intended for use on collectors
and arterial roads that have many commercial and residential
driveways/intersections to increase the mobility of the traffic.
Transportation - Draft - 24
?-\
There are different methods for attaining the goals and methods are
typically designed around the needs and problems of each
particular area.
The basic principles of access management include:
Limiting the Number of Conflict Points
A conflict point exists at any place that vehicle paths will cross,
merge into, or diverge from one another along roadways,
specifically at intersections or driveways. The potential for
vehicular crashes increases as the number of conflict points
along a roadway go higher. One method for limiting the
number of conflict points is to decrease the number of
driveways a business or neighborhood can have onto an arterial
or collector roadway. Limitation of conflict points can also be
accomplished with the use of reverse frontage and access
roads. Decreasing the number of conflict points significantly
reduce the potential for crashes.
Separating Basic Conflict Areas
Intersections of public streets as well as intersections of
driveways and public streets represent basic conflict areas.
High levels of activity can occur at these locations and,
consequently, the through traffic needs time to react to the
decelerations, accelerations, and travel paths of other vehicles
at or near the intersections. Adequate spacing between
intersections allows drivers to react to one intersection at a time
and provides greater opportunities to avoid potential conflicts
at each successive downstream intersection. Similarly, setting
driveways and connections back form intersections reduces the
number of conflicts and provides more time and space for
vehicles to turn or merge safely across lanes. One way of
accomplishing this goal is to close off or relocate existing
entrances or establish a larger minimum lot size for comer lots.
Reducing Interference with Through Traffic
Traffic often needs to slow down for vehicles exiting, entering,
or turning across the roadway. Providing turning lanes and
restricting turning movements allows turning traffic to get out
of the way of the following through traffic. Other measures
include increasing the turning radius of a driveway, using a
driveway flare, or increased driveway width and length.
Providing Adequate On-Site Circulation and Storage
The design of good internal vehicle circulation in parking areas
and on local streets reduces the number of driveways that
businesses need for access to the major roadway. Internal
connections between neighboring properties allow vehicles to
Transportation - Draft - 25
?-I
circulate between businesses without having to re-enter the
major roadway. Subdivisions should be designed so that lots
fronting the major roadway have intemal access ftom a
residential street (reverse ftontage).
Implementation of an access management measure is much easier
when constructing a new corridor with wide right-of-ways and no
existing development. Developers can follow certain guidelines or
regulations that have been established. However, as is the case in
most of Roanoke County, most of the corridors have already been
developed and the right-of-ways are set. The designers and
developers must try to "retrofit" access management measures into
an already tight right-of-way. More often than not, access
management projects will coincide with major road improvements.
Some of the benefits of implementing Access Management are:
. Saves lives and reduces the ftequency of fatal, injury, and
property damage accidents;
Maintains the transportation system travel efficiency
necessary for economic prosperity;
Prolongs the functional life of existing highways by
maintaining or increasing capacity, thereby reducing the
need for new capital construction to meet increasing system
demands;
Is an element of Air Quality Conformance;
Reduces congestion and delay and provides property
owners with safe access to highways;
Promotes desirable land use patterns, establishes uniform
standards, and promotes fair and equal application to the
development of the community.
Virginia Department of Transportation has Access Management
guidelines that are available for adoption by the County. Roanoke
County staff will consider adoption of said standards, coordinating
with RV ARC and VDOT throughout the process. Until the time
that the Board has approved and adopted the standards, staff will
consider each major corridor project that is performed in the
County as a candidate Access Management project.
iv. Objective: To reduce noise levels where transportation activities
are the predominant noise generating sources.
a. Strategy: Noise Abatement Measures -- To the normal
Roanoke County motorist, highway traffic noise is not a
considerable concern. However, to the many County residents and
Transportation -- Draft - 26
~_I
business owners that are adjacent to a busy travel way, it is an
unnecessary nuisance.
The level of highway traffic noise depends on three factors: (I) the
volume of traffic, (2) the speed of traffic, and (3) the number of
trucks in the flow oftraffic. With the number of registered
vehicles and vehicle miles traveled increasing every year to nearly
uncontrollable values, planners/designers must look to strategies
other than traffic and/or speed mitigation.
The highway noise dilemma can be solved with a three-part
solution: motor vehicle control, land use control, and highway
planning and design. Motor vehicle control: The Environmental
Protection Agency has issued noise limit regulations for new
trucks and many local and State governments have passed
ordinances requiring existing vehicles to be properly maintained
and operated. Land use control: Highway traffic noise complaints
often come from occupants of new homes built adjacent to an
existing highway. The majority of these highways were originally
constructed through undeveloped lands. Prudent land use control
can help to prevent many future traffic noise problems in these
areas. It is important to point out that such controls need not
prohibit development, but rather require reasonable distances
between buildings and roads as well as "soundproofing" or other
noise abatement measures. Another strategy is to promote the
development of less noise-sensitive commercial buildings next to a
major highway, with residencies farther away. Highway planning
and design: Early in the planning stages of most highway
improvement projects, the highway agency will do a noise study.
The existing noise levels of a highway are measured or computed
by models. Then, the agency predicts future what the noise levels
will be once the project is constructed. If the predicted noise levels
exceed Federal noise criteria, the agency must consider measures
that can be taken to lessen the adverse noise impacts.
Some noise reduction measures that can be implemented on
existing roads include creating buffer zones, construction barriers
(e.g., earth berms, noise walls, etc.), planting vegetation, installing
noise insulation in buildings, and managing traffic.
On a more local level, VDOT established its Noise Abatement
Policy in 1989 to lessen the impact of highway traffic noise on
people in neighborhoods and in other noise-sensitive areas. That
policy maintains that VDOT will conduct a highway traffic noise
study on proposed federally funded highway improvement
projects. These projects must meet one of the following
conditions: a highway is being built on a new location; an existing
Transportation - Draft - 27
'7- t
highway is being redesigned with a significant change in its
alignment; or the number of through traffic lanes on an existing
highway is being increased. The cost of the noise reduction
measures are included with the other costs of the highway
improvement and are eligible for Federal funding in the same
proportion as other aspects of the project. State highway agencies
may also use Federal highway grants for noise reduction project on
existing roads on the Federal-aid system. The monies spent on the
noise reduction measures are deducted from funds which would
otherwise be available for highway construction. On non-federally
funded highway improvement projects, the locality can obtain
partial funding from VDOT to implement noise abatement
measures if the locality meets eligibility requirements outlined in
the aforementioned state noise policy. The County will strive to
adhere to VDOT's Noise Abatement Policy when making decisions
pertinent to Roanoke County roads.
If alternative measures will not reduce the noise or are not
desirable in a certain location, VDOT engineers will then consider
installing noise walls. The noise walls must meet the following
conditions: they will not present a safety or engineering problem;
they will reduce noise levels by at least five decibels at all
impacted locations; and they cost $30,000 or less per noise-
impacted property. If the structure costs more than $30,000 per
affected property, they can still be built in a third party - someone
other than VDOT or FHW A, such as a locality or developer-
funds the difference. The neighborhood or any other interested
party can also participate as the third party and third party
payments must be received prior to the start of highway
construction.
Noise problems are harder to mitigate after an area is developed.
Consequently, local governments are encouraged to evaluate
potential noise problems as part of planning and zoning decisions.
Development standards can regulate the placement of noise
generating activities adjacent to sensitive areas such as residential
neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, parks, natural areas, and open
spaces. Some of the action measures that the County can consider
implementing include:
. Coordinate with area RV ARC, MPO, and adjacent state
and local agencies to minimize noise impacts of existing
and future transportation facilities and other noise-
producing land uses;
Ensure development complies with state noise regulations;
Adopt development standards which require review of the
potential noise impacts of new development, including
Transportation - Draft - 28
?-I
roads, and the need for appropriate mitigating measures
such as:
0 Building setbacks;
0 Berms, noise walls, and extensive landscaping;
0 Site design measures such as using parking, storage
areas and buildings which generate little or no noise
to separate noise sources from surrounding land
uses;
0 Sound insulation and state of the art mechanical and
processing equipment which generate little or no
noise;
0 Measures recommended by DEQ or a qualified
noise consultant and financial agreements to ensure
required noise reduction measures are installed;
0 Increased rights-of-way for major arterials and
berming, noise walls, sunken roadways, and
planting of large shrubs and trees; and
0 Traffic management measures to discourage
through traffic from using local residential streets.
v. Objective: To help reduce and control air pollutants in the
Roanoke Valley and surrounding area.
a. Strategy: Air Quality/Attainment Status -- The primary
objective of the Federal Clean Air Act, amended by the U.S.
Congress in 1990, is to establish standards for various pollutants
from both stationary and mobile sources and to provide for the
regulation of polluting emissions via state implementation plans.
The Clean Air Act authorizes the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to establish minimum national standards for air
quality, and assigns primary responsibility to the states to assure
compliance. Areas not meeting the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), referred to as "non-attainment" areas, are
required to implement specified air pollution control measures.
Roanoke County, by its inclusion in the Roanoke Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA), may possibly be designated as a non-
attainment area. The Roanoke MSA has one ozone monitor
located in the town of Vinton. Roanoke County and all other
communities within the MSA are judged solely on that one
monitoring station. To meet the I-hour ozone standard, the
Roanoke MSA must have a monitored hourly peak ozone
concentration below 125 parts per billion (ppb). Since 1990, the
Roanoke MSA has exceeded the I-hour standard on two occasions
Transportation - Draft - 29
'?-\
in 1998. However, due to the guidelines, the MSA remains in
compliance for the I-hour standard.
Similarly, the 8-hour ozone standard, found by averaging three
years of the fourth highest 8-hour ozone levels in the area, must be
lower than 85 ppb to meet the standard. Currently (as of 2003), the
Roanoke MSA design value is 87 ppb. Therefore, it is probable,
based on recent monitoring data, that the Roanoke MSA will be
designated a non-attainment area when formal designations occur,
by the year 2004.
The region is volunteering to put itself into the Ozone Early Action
Program (OEAP) process to expedite air cleanup and to avoid
being labeled a non-attainment area. The two principal
components of the OEAP are the Early Action Compact (EAC)
and the Early Action Plan (EAP). The EAC is a memorandum of
agreement to prepare and implement the EAP. Specifically, the
EAC sets measurable milestones for developing and implementing
the EAP. The EAC is between the local governments representing
the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the Counties of Roanoke and
Botetourt, the Town of Vinton, the EPA, and VDEQ (Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality). It is for the express
purpose of developing and implementing a plan that will reduce
ground-level ozone concentrations in the Roanoke MSA to comply
with the 8-hour ozone standard by December 31, 2007 and
maintain that standard until at least 2012. Failure to meet that
obligation results in immediate reversion to the traditional non-
attainment process and the subsequent negative impacts. A major
advantage of the region's participation in the GEAr is the
flexibility afforded to the signatories of the Compact in selecting
emission reduction measures and programs that are best suited to
local needs and circumstances.
The Roanoke MSA's OEAP is designed to enable a local,
proactive approach to ensuring attainment of the 8-hour ozone
standard and, as a by-product of these actions, protect human
health. Using the OEAP approach, the region could begin
implementing by 2005 emission-reduction measures directed at
attaining the 8-hour standard. This allows for a significantly
earlier start than waiting for formal EP A non-attainment
designation and it gives more flexibility in choosing which
emission reduction strategies to implement.
The Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission (R V ARC),
in consultation with the aforementioned local governments, will
develop the EAP in coordination with VDEQ, EPA, stakeholders,
and the public. The EAP will serve as Roanoke MSA's official air
Transportation - Draft - 30
1_1
quality improvement plan, to be adopted and implemented by the
local govemments.
By signing the EAC, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors is
committed to holding responsibility for the development and
implementation of the EAP. Roanoke County Community
Development staff has aided the RV ARC in the early stages of the
EAC and EAP and helped in selecting the consultant that will work
on this project. The staff will continue its efforts with the
RV ARC, adjacent communities, and interested stakeholders
throughout this endeavor; ensuring that the emission reduction
measures that are selected are best suited to County needs and
circumstances.
D. Goal: To play an influential role in shaping and implementing regional
transportation decisions.
i. Objective: To continue comprehensive transportation planning and
to work in concert with neighboring jurisdictions and public entities.
a. Strategy: Active role In Regional Transportation Issues
and Funding -- In 1973, federal law began requiring the
formation of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for
urbanized areas with populations exceeding 50,000 to ensure that
federal expenditures on transportation projects include cooperation
at all government levels and provide for citizen input. The
regional MPO consists of representatives from area localities, the
Virginia Department of Transportation, the Greater Roanoke
Transit Company, Roanoke Regional Airport and the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission (RV ARC). The service
area of the Roanoke Valley Area MPO includes Roanoke and
Salem cities, Vinton, the urbanized portions of Botetourt and
Roanoke counties and the extreme westem portion of Bedford
County.
The MPO functions through regional forums where a series of
participants address transportation issues. The Policy Board
reviews and approves plans and programs and exercises
administrative and fiscal control over MPO duties. It is made up
of two representatives (at least one elected official) from each
member locality and one member each from other participating
agencies. The Transportation Technical Committee (TTC) works
closely with MPO staff in developing plans and programs and
advises the Policy Board on technical and administrative issues
related to regional transportation planning. It is comprised of
Transportation - Draft - 31
r-I
planning and engineering staff from participating members of the
MPO. An often underutilized component of the decision-making
process is citizen participation. The public is invited to help
develop, review and comment on proposed regional transportation
plans. All MPO meetings are open to the public and serve as a
regular forum for conununity transportation concerns.
The Metropolitan Planning Organization is charged with
developing plans and programs to be approved by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHW A) in order for federal-aid dollars
to reach their regions. Federal regulations (see discussion of TEA-
21 in this element of the Comprehensive Plan) mandate that each
MPO develop a Long Range Transportation Plan and a
Transportation Improvement Plan.
The Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is an urbanized
area's guide to creating a more efficient, responsive and
environmentally-sensitive transportation system over a twenty-year
horizon. This plan examines transportation issues and trends and
offers a list of specific projects for dealing with a region's mobility
needs. The LRTP is updated every five years and public input is
requested.
The Transportation lmprovement Program (TIP) is a three-year
schedule of all federally funded and regionally significant
transportation projects to be constructed in the urbanized area. To
receive federal funding, these projects must first be approved by
the MPO Policy Board for inclusion in the TIP. The TIP is
updated annually and may include proposals originating from the
LR TP. The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is
Virginia's version of the TIP, (earmarking state funds) established
after annual TIP approvals.
The Unified Transportation Work Program (UTWP) is a one-year
schedule of all urban transportation planning activities that will be
carried out with federal expenditures. Project suggestions can
originate from the public or from any MPO member. The Policy
Board and TTC determine the projects to be part of the UTWP
which is updated each year.
Roanoke County staff will continue in its efforts to work in concert
with the RV ARC, collaborating on particular facility, sub-area,
corridor, and system-level transportation studies, and representing
the County on the associated boards and conunittees mentioned
above.
b. Strategy: Active role with Virginia Dept. of
Transportation (VDOT) -- Roanoke County staff seeks to
Transportation - Draft - 32
"Y- \
work in a cooperative manner with Virginia Department of
Transportation on all projects that occur in the County. This
coordination of efforts is done to ensure the project progresses in a
timely manner, all the while, looking out for the best interests of
the County residents. Our efforts may involve forwarding citizens'
comments, questions, and/or recommendations, ensuring
compliance with County standards, and sharing data, information,
expertise, etc. to assure timely and efficient completion of projects.
Whereas County residents and staff have input on all roads in
Roanoke County, the opportunity for citizen input is greater
regarding the secondary roads, working within the framework of
the annually updated six-year improvement plan. The public may
advise county staff on needed safety or other improvements to the
secondary street system. Staff considers these requests,
investigates the matter, and takes the concerns to VDOT, hopefully
to gain a spot in the six-year improvement program. Staff also
gathers insight and input from the Board of Supervisors, VDOT,
and the MPO prior to the inclusion of a specific road into the six-
year improvement program (see Figure T-2 for an explanation of
VDOT's Project Development Process). In addition to the six-year
improvement program, the County also works in conjunction with
VDOT on Revenue Sharing (both Six-Year Improvement Program
and Revenue Sharing covered in this element of the
Comprehensive Plan) and the Rural Addition Program.
County staff will attempt to continue to grow and strengthen the
working relationship with VDOT, specifically the Salem District
ofVDOT.
VDOT Project Development Process
"""""'"'
""'-' 1
"""."...
~~""'~. """. -.'" Added"
pm:;';""""":~'.e':"". H""""'Y') -""
-",. ' " .PSbyMPO
CTS -L T~","
a",,', Appro"" '"::::':"
.: VOOTI o,,',~;;, ,y,
R":;:": .. C:.:i! .. ~:;. ".::::." ...:;::"
"""'M ......
FHWA&
,,=01$-
'""""
""",pm'"
...- ----..-..
w"'....__..-~-
"'~-'-~"-'
ø,...""""....
Figure T-2: VDOT Project Development Process
Transportation - Draft - 33
1>-\
c. Strategy: Support regional aviation efforts .. The Virginia Air
Transportation Systems Plan classifies the Roanoke Regional Airport as a
Commercial Service Airport. The Roanoke Regional Airport
accommodates the aviation needs of the scheduled airlines, air freight
carriers, general aviation, corporate, air taxi and charter operators, as well
as the military, for a region including, but not limited to, the Roanoke
Valley. The Roanoke Regional Airport's passenger service area covers an
area which includes the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the Counties of
Roanoke, Montgomery, Pulaski, Giles, Craig, Botetourt, Alleghany,
Rockbridge, Bedford, Franklin, Floyd, and portions of West Virginia.
Public ground transportation service to and from the airport is limited to
taxicab and limousine service. There are a few heliports located in and
around the area. Although these heliports are important from a service
and air traffic standpoint, their impact on overall transportation planning
in the Roanoke are is minor.
The need for improvements to the Roanoke Regional Airport spawned an
Airport Master Plan Update in 1997 to estimate and accommodate future
aviation demand, maintain flexibility for development opportunities and
market changes, and to recognize physical constraints. Major long-range
anticipated improvements (horizon year 2015) include pavement upgrades
to airfield runways, relocation and widening of taxiways, installation of
new runway navigational/landing aids, construction of a new air traffic
control tower and changes to the passenger terminal and parking lots.
The implementation strategies put forth in the County's 1998 Community
Plan hold true for this update/revision. The strategies include:
Supporting improvement to the airport and airport access as a
central factor in economic development;
. Locating and operating aviation and related facilities in such a way
as to minimize detrimental environmental and community impacts;
Evaluating land uses around existing aviation facilities during the
development review process, to ensure compatibility in terms of
height, noise, and the functional classification of the aviation
facility;
Supporting the provision of transit service to the Roanoke
Regional Airport, not only for passengers, but in support of the
airport's role as a major employment center;
. Encouraging the use and development of the Roanoke Regional
Airport and seek international status;
Encouraging the Airport Commission to procure aviation and
related facility easements where appropriate.
d. Strategy: Collaborate with Virginia Department of Rail and
Public Transportation (VDRPT) .. Rail transport, once a thriving
Transportation - Draft - 34
1>-1
business and transportation choice in the Roanoke Valley, is not presently
a popular mode of transportation for County citizens. There is currently
no direct inter-city rail service available from the Roanoke valley. There
is, however, rail service from Clifton Forge and Lynchburg, surrounding
communities within a short driving distance of Roanoke. Roanoke County
staff should cooperate with the VDRPT, RV ARC, and Roanoke City staff
in revitalizing passenger rail service for the Roanoke Valley.
ii. Objective: To stay abreast of recent legislation that pertains to
transportation and investigate its availability for County
infrastructure systems.
a. Strategy: TEA-3 (An Update / Reauthorization of TEA-
21) -- TEA-3, or Transportation Equity Act- 2003 (third
authorization) refers to the nation's surface transportation program
scheduled for renewal in 2003. The original vision, Intennodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 introduced
a series ofrefonns to national transportation policy, steering away
from the automobile and towards pedestrian, bicycling, passenger
rail and transit mobility. In 1998, the Transportation Equity Act
for the Twenty- First Century (TEA-21) continued those programs
through the expenditure of $300 billion during the decade.
Authorization of TEA-3 is expected during the second half of 2003
involving Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation, Finance,
Banking, Environment & Public Works, and Housing & Urban
Affairs committees and House of Representatives Transportation
& Infrastructure, Science, and Ways & Means committees with the
U.S. Department of Transportation as the lead agency. The
challenge is to build on ISTEA's provisions for improving
transportation through flexibility, local decision-making, long
range planning, fiscally constrained budgeting, and environmental
stewardship. Sound transportation investments can help
communities thrive by providing a safe, healthy, and secure
environment, enhancing neighborhood livability, and promoting
energy efficiency and conservation.
The most popular and visible use of federal funds has been
conducted under the Transportation Enhancements Program (TE).
TE was created under ISTEA and fosters local economic
development and helps reconnect communities divided or
negatively impacted by highway construction. Using only two
cents of every federal transportation dollar, TE projects ~ bicycle
and pedestrian facilities, main street revitalization programs,
renovation of train stations and other historic sites, scenic
Transportation ~ Draft - 35
"f- ,
easements, and billboard removal along highway corridors - are
achieved. For example, the regional greenways program has been
awarded nearly $2.3 million in Transportation Enhancements since
1996.
County staff will continue to monitor the progress of the TEA-3
authorization and investigate ways that County residents can
benefit.
iii. Objective: To remain informed and up-to-date on major
road/transportation projects within the County.
a. Strategy: Interstate 81 -- Interstate 81 extends for 325 miles
throughout Virginia, with a substantial portion of it located in
Roanoke County. The route provides access through the
County for movement of goods and motor vehicles with
connections to the Atlantic Coast. 1-81 begins in Tennessee
and extends through New York to the U.S. - Canada border. A
large portion of the traffic is through traffic, meaning that
Roanoke County is neither a destination nor origin of the trip.
The 30 year old route is experiencing capacity and safety
issues. The daily traffic volume more than doubled in some
areas from 25,000 vehicles in 1980 to more than 50,000
vehicles in 2000. Though mostly a rural corridor, 1-81 is one
of the top eight truck routes in the U.S. The highway was
designed for 15% truck traffic, but trucks now account for 20-
40% of the traffic on 1-81.
VDOT is accepting proposals under the Public-Private
Transportation Act of 1995 (PPT A) to design, build, improve,
maintain, and/or operate all or parts ofI-8l through the
Commonwealth. These proposals involve separating passenger
vehicles and heavy trucks using physical barriers, adding
additional lanes, adding truck climbing lanes, longer on- and
off- ramps, tolls on all motor vehicles or tolls only on heavy
trucks, utilizing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and
other features.
Roanoke County will be working with neighboring
jurisdictions, planning organizations, and VDOT to detennine
which of the competing proposals will best address the safety
concerns and truck traffic capacity issues. Once the best
proposal is selected, the County will continue to work in
concert with all interested parties on this endeavor.
Transportation - Draft - 36
7-1
b. Strategy: Proposed Interstate 73 -- The U.S. Congress
designated Interstate 73 (1-73) a National Priority Corridor as
part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
(ISTEA) of 1991. Congress made 1-73 official in 1995 by
including it in the National Highway System (NHS). The
purpose of the NHS "priority corridor" is to link the nation's
regions and support economic growth. Needs were identified
to improve goods movements between the port of Charleston,
SC and Sault Ste. Marie, MI. This would require an effective
and efficient roadway that facilitates interstate travel between
Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, and North and South
Carolina.
1-73 is an identified state and regional priority in Virginia to
foster planned economic development between southwestem
Virginia and the Piedmont Triad regions in North Carolina.
Local manufacturers have business connections with the cities
of Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and High Point, NC.
Improved access through the Roanoke Valley to 1-581 and 1-81
will link businesses in the study area with locations in the
eastern U.S.
Another regional priority in southwest Virginia is to address
safety concems along U.S. Route 220 resulting ITom high
percentages of truck traffic, poor sight distances, steep grades,
and a large number of accidents. VDOT's consultant maintains
that this could be achieved by developing a safe and direct
transportation link for business trucking between NC's
Piedmont Triangle and the Roanoke Valley's 1-581 and 1-81
corridors.
The Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB)
approved a corridor location for 1-73 in May 200 I. A month
later, the CTB adjusted the 1-73 location south and east of
Martinsville, VA. Starting at the northern end of the corridor,
the approved location for 1-73 begins at the existing
interchange ofI-81 and 1-581 and continues along 1-581
through Roanoke City to the Elm A venue interchange. From
this interchange, the corridor travels to the southeast around the
east side of Mill Mountain. It then crosses the Roanoke River
south of the Roanoke Industrial Center and continues towards
the Blue Ridge Parkway to the east of Route 116. The corridor
continues to the southeast, turns to the south, and leaves
Roanoke County to enter Franklin County in the vicinity of
Coopers Cove. The approved location for 1-73 also includes
the construction of a connector road that would link 1-73 with
Transportation - Draft - 37
1'-1
existing U.S. Route 220. The connector road would intersect
existing U.S. Route 220 near the intersection of Route 668 east
of Buck Mountain in Roanoke County.
Roanoke County's Board of Supervisors has supported this
project and passed several resolutions pertaining to the issue.
VDOT is finalizing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
with specific information about the selected corridor. The Final
EIS will then be forwarded to the Federal Highway
Administration (FHW A) for consideration and/or approval.
Completion of the Final EIS and approval by FHW A may take
up to a year. Once the FHW A issues its approval - called a
Record of Decision - final design, right of way acquisition and
construction can begin. Roanoke County staff will continue to
monitor the development of this project and work in concert
with all involved.
E. Goal: To provide progressive and forward looking solutions and technology
to users of Roanoke County's transportation network.
i. Objective: To improve the management ofthe County's resources
and data and to utilize computer technology as a decision making tool.
a. Strategy: Geographical Information Systems (GIS) --
Roanoke County has attempted to stay on the leading edge of
computer technology. This trend maintains as it relates to
transportation issues the County encounters. Specifically, GIS will
be used to develop and maintain an inventory of the transportation
infrastructure. The inventory will include road lengths and widths,
traffic counts, and functional classification to name a few archived
items. GIS will also be used in conjunction with a pavement
management system to track and display road
construction/maintenance. The inventory and pavement
management system will be maintained in the ESRI
(Environmental Systems Research Institute) environment utilizing
up to date versions of ArcGIS. We will incorporate a relational
database to enter, store, and analyze the necessary data.
The GIS software will be pivotal in preparing maps and presenting
infrastructure inventory and maintenance recommendations to
VDOT, the Board of Supervisors, and the public.
ii. Objective: To improve the livability of Roanoke County residents
by ensuring that transportation systems are properly designed and
applicable to the community it serves.
Transportation - Draft - 38
1-1
a. Strategy: Context Sensitive/Flexible Design -- An
important, yet often forgotten, concept in highway design is that
every project is unique. The setting and character of the area, the
values of the community, the needs of the highway users, and the
challenges and opportunities are unique factors that designers must
consider with each highway project. For each potential project,
designers are faced with the task of balancing the need for the
highway improvement with the need to safely integrate the design
into the surrounding natural and human environments.
Often, over- engineered road design standards limit transportation
choices, isolate neighborhoods, create hazardous settings, and
otherwise harm the quality oflife within a community.
Unnecessarily wide neighborhood streets discourage pedestrian
and bicycle use and increase car speeds. Flexible road standards
would give designers more opportunities to use varying widths,
medians, sidewalks, bike lanes, and landscaping to develop better
streetscapes with more opportunities for transportation and
recreation, while still providing roads that efficiently carry
vehicles. Use of the aforementioned flexible standards is
commonly referred to as Context Sensitive Design (CSD). CSD
incorporates the streetscape, aesthetics, livability, and the
application of devices aimed at changing motorists' behavior.
However, in order to succeed, CSD requires neighborhood
involvement before road design changes are initiated. CSD
attempts to balance the level of service of a road with surrounding
community values. CSD provides a higher level of safety for
pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists than conventional street design
which focuses on vehicular movement at high speeds. Typical
elements of CSD are somewhat similar to traffic calming
measures. Some examples ofCSD are:
.
Real or perceived lane width reductions or limitations
Intentional curvature
Textured pavement and/or markings
Extensive landscaping
Right of entry for all travel modes
.
.
.
Context Sensitive Design calls for public involvement when
defining the need for a road project. This requires public
participation throughout the project, the early and continuous use
of a multidisciplinary design team, the use of visualization
techniques to aid the public, and the application of flexible
design criteria. The reference most often used for project design
criteria is the Green Book. Its official title is A Policy on the
Transportation - Draft - 39
y-t
Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Although often
viewed as dictating a set of national standards, this document is
actually a series of guidelines on geometric design within which
the designer has a range of flexibility. As stated in the forward to
the Green Book:
The intent of this policy is to provide guidance to the
designer by referencing a recommended range of values for
critical dimensions. Sufficient flexibility is permitted to
encourage independent designs tailored to particular
situations.
Context Sensitive Design can provide significant improvements to
collector and arterial roads scheduled for widening or
reconstruction in Roanoke County. An example of a Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT) project that has
incorporated CSD is the Colonial Avenue project (a one-half mile
portion of Colonial between Penn Forest Boulevard and Route
419). Citizens along Colonial Avenue requested that the County
and VDOT implement CSD along that corridor. At the time of this
update to the Comprehensive Plan, that project is progressing with
the input of the citizens along the Colonial Avenue corridor and
will hopefully meet the needs of the residents and motorists.
Roanoke County staff will attempt to monitor all VDOT road
projects within the County and ensure that the proposed design is
applicable to the needs and environment of the community while
maintaining the desired function of the roadway.
ii. Objective: To help take an active role in implementing and
incorporating new technologies into the transportation system to
increase the safety and efficiency of the system.
a. Strategy: Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) --
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) incorporate new
technologies in information processing, communications, control,
and electronics into the transportation system. When integrated
into the transportation infrastructure, and in vehicles themselves,
these technologies help monitor and manage traffic flow, reduce
congestion, provide alternate routes to travelers, enhance
productivity, and save lives, time, and money.
Intelligent transportation systems provide the tools for
transportation professionals to collect, analyze, and archive data
about the performance of the system. Having this data enhances a
Transportation - Draft - 40
-p.1
traffic operator's ability to respond to incidents, adverse weather,
or other capacity constricting events.
Some systems, products, and services are already in place and at
work throughout the country (a local example ofITS technology
can be found between Blacksburg and 1-81 on the Smart Road).
Various examples ofIntelligent Transportation Systems include:
. On-board navigation systems;
. Crash notification systems;
. Electronic payment systems;
Roadbed sensors;
. Traffic video/control technologies;
. Weather information services;
. Variable message signs:
. Fleet tracking and weigh-in-motion technologies.
Roanoke County and other member governments of the Roanoke
Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (RV AMPO) are
seeking to take an active role in the Commonwealth's efforts to
develop and implement ITS technologies. County staff will work
with the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
(RV ARC) in this effort and cooperate with VDOT's Salem District
when possible.
F. Goal: To expand and emphasize citizen participation and comments during
the early stages of transportation planning.
i. Objective: To ensure that Roanoke County citizens have their
voices heard on projects/issues that will affect them.
a. Strategy: Comment form on County's website -- More
and more people are utilizing the internet to gather and transmit
information than ever before. The County should provide a
platform for those individuals that want to communicate their
inquiries, comments, and concems to County staff, via this format.
An addition will be made to the County's website that allows the
citizens to voice their opinions, desires, and questions. The citizen
will access the Transportation/Engineering portion of the County's
website at:
http://www.roanokeeountyva. govlOeparlme nlslEngineeringlTrans porI ationl.
Once here, the citizen will find contact information that will enable
them to speak their mind on transportation issues in the County.
Transportation - Draft - 41
"p- I
b. Strategy: Citizen Input on Long Range Transportation
Plan -- As noted earlier in this element of the Comprehensive
Plan, the County's input into the Long Range Transportation Plan
(LRTP) is vitally important. For that reason, staff is seeking the
comments of County residents on the matter. Ultimately, the
residents are the one that pay for and use the infrastructure:
consequently, their voice should be heard.
Comments received after the release of this updated
Comprehensive Plan will be taken into consideration for the next
update to the LRTP, as the list has already been submitted
(submitted in September '03) to VDOT for consideration.
However, as stated earlier, the plan may be revised by the Roanoke
Valley MPO through amendments. Therefore, County staff is
requesting that the residents review the list (Table T -2) and
subsequent map attached in this document. Any comments or
questions about the LRTP can be directed to the County staff via
the website (explained above), email, or telephone.
Transportation - Draft - 42
TranspønaUln Element -lmplementaUøn Schedule
STRATEGY TIME FRAME COMMENTS
Growth ManaQement Measures by 2008 Dependent on APFO legislation
Balance Land Use Objectives w/ by 2005 Functional Classifications designated by 2004; implementation of guidelines
Street Functional Capabilities bv planninQ staff will take a little more time.
Long Range Plan Issues ongoing Officially updated every 5 yrs.; County will receive comments at any time
Pavement Mgmt. Sys. for Secondary by 2004 6-yr Plan and Revenue Sharing updated annually: hope to implement PMS for
6-Year Plan & Rev. SharinQ Revenue Sharing for 2004 program.
Bicycle Facilities & Greenways ongoing Continue working with VDOT & the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission
Traffic Mana'1ement Strate'1ies by 2005 Work with RVARC
Education on Transportation by 2005 Work with RVARC, Valley Metro, County website, RVTV, etc.
Systems & livabilitY Issues
Traffic Calming by 2005 Dependent on scheduling of potential projects
Access ManaQement by 2005 Dependent on scheduling of potential projects
Noise Abatement Measures by 2005 Project specific: may be an issue that coincides with improvements to 1-81
Air Quality/Attainment Status by 2005 Must be in compliance by 12/31/07; being implementing measures by 2005
Active role in Regional ongoing Work with RVARC, MPO, and other localities
Transportation Issues & Fundin'1
Active role with VDOT on'1oin'1
Support Regional Aviation Efforts ongoing Work with Roanoke Regional Airport and Roanoke Co.'s Economic
Development department
Collaborate with VDRPT ongoing Work with VDRPT, RVARC, and Roanoke CitY
TEA-3 on'1oin'1
Interstate 81 ongoing Roanoke Co. will provide comments; work in conjunction with VDOT & MPO
Proposed Interstate 73 ongoing Staff monitoring project progress
Geographical Info. Sys (GIS) ongoing Used extensively for road inventory and PMS
Context Sensitive/Flexible Design ongoing Project specific, time frame dependent on project scheduling
Intelligent Trans. Systems (ITS) ongoing Coordinate efforts with RVARC & VDOT
Comment Form on County's Website by 2004 Citizen can currently access contact info and communicate to the County
Traffic En'1ineer; will attempt to '1et more structured comment form in 2004
Citizen Input on Long Range Plan ongoing Will receive comments at any time for potential amendments and/or the
scheduled updates
Transportation-Draft - 43
1-1
May 5, 2004 DRAFT
~?-I
Chapter 4: Community Facilities
5. PUBLIC UTILITIES
Introduction
The Public utilities available in Roanoke County include water supply and production, water
distribution, sanitary sewer collection, solid waste management, electrical service, telephone
service, natural gas distribution and cable television. Public water production and distribution,
sanitary sewer are services that are provided by the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVW A).
The Ttransfer of solid waste to the regional landfill and the management of that landfill is the
responsibility ofthe Roanoke Valley Resource Authority.
This section of the Community Plan discusses two Public utility services - water and sewer,
which individually and collectively, greatly influence growth in Roanoke County. The provision
of these services to a previously unserved area will encourage growth and development in that
community. As we leamed over the last 10 years, the lack of water and sewer services to an area
does not necessarily mean that community will not experience growth. Past history has shown
that growth may still occur, but it will likely be at lower densities. As development pressures
increase, the communities may experience the failure of wells and on-site septic tankldrainfield
systems.
As a community Roanoke County must recognize the influence that public water and sewer
services and internal policies concerning fees, fee rebates and cost sharing have on growth
management. The policies of the WVWA must be consistent with County policies concerning
issues of land use, economic development, schools and the provision of public services such as
police, fire and rescue.
The WVW A is charged with providing public water and sewer service to the citizens of Roanoke
County and Roanoke City. This Authority operates as an enterprise fund and receives no direct
general fund tax dollars. As a result, the TheAuthority department is funded solely from the
collection of water and sewer fees from the citizens of Roanoke County and Roanoke City.
The WVW A Utility Department is responsible for providing and maintaining a safe drinking
water supply. The predominant source of this water is for Roanoke County is the Spring Hollow
Reservoir, which when full, holds 3.2 billion gallons of water. The reservoir can meet Roanoke
County's water needs past the year 2040.
Distribution of water from the Spring Hollow Reservoir is provided via two transmission lines.
The 30-inch diameter South Transmission Line begins at the Spring Hollow water treatment
facility, terminates along U. S. Route 220 in the Clearbrook Community and serves major areas
of southwestern Roanoke County between these two points. In addition, portions of southwest
Roanoke City are served by the South Transmission Line. The north loop begins at Route
11/460 near Cherokee Hills and proceeds to Route 311, along Loch Haven Road to the
Plantation Road area and includes a parallel line from Dixie Caverns to the Fort Lewis area.
Major areas served by the North Transmission Line include the 1-81 corridor between Dixie
Cavems and Plantation Road. Also served are portions of northeast Roanoke City.
Utilities-Draft - 1
'P-I
May 5, 2004 DRAFT
Chapter 4: Community Facilities
The WVW A continues to have limited dependence on ground water wells. Currently,
approximately 22 wells located in Roanoke County supply drinking water. More than forty
wells have been taken off-line since the construction of the Spring Hollow Reservoir. In
addition, the County trades approximately 2.0 million gallons of water per day with the City of
Roanoke and the WVWA has the capability of purchasing approximately 0.2 million gallons per
day from the City of Salem.
The WVW A is responsible for maintaining the wastewater collection system, including sewage
pump stations for the County's wastewater conveyance system located in Roanoke County.
Roanoke County participates in the regional wastewater treatment plant that is owned and
operated by the WVW A.
Roanoke County, Botetourt County, the Town of Vinton and the Cities of Salem and Roanoke
are participating in an upgrade of the regional wastewater treatment plant. and the Roanoke
River and Tinker Creek interceptors.
The WVW A has completed a Capital Improvement Plan through the year 2006. This Plan
includes the most critical needs in the areas of water and sewer service that can reasonably be
funded and constructed within the 2001-2006 timeframe. The WVWA develops a new Capital
Improvement Plan every five years.
Utilities-Draft - 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. ~-à.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE:
June 8, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Work session to conduct training regarding planning and
zoning laws in the Commonwealth of Virginia
SUBMITTED BY:
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
This time has been set aside for training regarding the planning and zoning laws in the
Commonwealth of Virginia. It is anticipated that the work session will begin at 5:30 p.m.
and require approximately three hours to cover the material. The Planning Commission
members have been invited to attend.
The adoption of the revisions to the comprehensive plan, accompanying zoning ordinance
amendments to implement changes to the plan, turnover in the membership of the Board,
and the increasing litigious nature of society, all combine to suggest that a brief review of
the legal foundations of planning and zoning law in the Commonwealth of Virginia would be
valuable.
Mr. R. Michael Chandler, a professor in land use and community planning, the County
Attorney and the Director of Planning and Zoning will present portions of this work session.
R
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004
RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a
closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance
with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2,2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the
Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was
conducted in conformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge:
1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements
by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution
applies, and
2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the
closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia.