The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3/10/2009 - Regular Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda March 10, 2009 1838 NOTE: An Evening Session has been scheduled for 7:00 p.m. Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for March 10, 2009. 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 Thursday at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. Our meetings are now closed-captioned, so it is important that anyone addressing the Board speak directly into the microphones at the podium. 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: Reverend Tim Gearheart Calvary and Halls United Methodist Churches 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. BRIEFINGS D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of congratulations to Dr. Lorraine S. Lange for receiving an eSchool News Tech-Savvy Superintendent Award for 2009 1 E. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding proposed amendments to the fiscal year 2008-2009 budget in accordance with Section 15.2-2507, Code of Virginia. (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) 2. Public hearing and request to adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $50,000,000 General Obligation School Bonds to be sold through the Virginia Public School Authority (VPSA) for certain school renovations. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) F. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to appropriate $51,200,000 for the renovation of Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, Cave Spring Elementary and William Byrd High School from VPSA bond proceeds and school capital reserves. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES I. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 2. Library Board (appointed by District) 3. Roanoke County Community Leaders Environmental Action Roundtable (RC- CLEAR) for the ICLEI Program (appointed by District) 4. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 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. Resolution of congratulations to the Town of Vinton on its 125th Anniversary 2 K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy as of February 28, 2009 O. CLOSED MEETING P. WORK SESSIONS (Training room - 4th Floor) 1. Work session for the Budget for Fiscal Year 2009-2010. (John Chambliss, County Administrator; Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) 2. Work session for presentation of the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the Citizens CIP Review Committee to review results of the evaluation process. (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public hearings for citizen comment on the following items: (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) (a) General comment on the upcoming annual budget for fiscal year 2009- 2010 (b) "Effective" real estate tax rate increase (c) Real estate, personal property and machinery and tools tax rates 3 2. Request to adopt the following tax rates for calendar year 2009: (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) (a) Real estate tax rate of $1.09 per $100 assessed valuation (b) Personal property tax rate of $3.50 per $100 assessed valuation (c) Machinery and tools tax rate of $3.00 per $100 assessed valuation S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES 1. Second Reading of an ordinance amending and reenacting Sections of Article II, County Vehicle License, of Chapter 12, Motor Vehicle And Traffic, of the Roanoke County Code to delete provisions for vehicle decals and to enact a vehicle license fee as permitted by State law. (Kevin Hutchins, Treasurer; Joseph Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney) T. FUNDING REQUESTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010 BUDGET 1. Funding requests from health and human service agencies for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 U. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. Charlotte A. Moore 2. Joseph B. "Butch" Church 3. Richard C. Flora 4. Joseph P. McNamara 5. Michael W. Altizer W. ADJOURNMENT TO TUESDAY, MARCH 17,2009, AT 6:00 P.M. FOR A WORK SESSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, 5204 BERNARD DRIVE, SW, 4TH FLOOR TRAINING ROOM, ROANOKE, VIRGINIA; AND AT 7:00 P.M. FOR A MEETING IN THE BOARD ROOM 4 ACTION NO. rrEM NOw 1)--1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRATION CENTER MEE-rING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Congratulations to Drw Lorraine S. Lange for receiving an eSchool News Tech-Savvy Superintendent Award for 2009 SUBMITTED BY: Becky R. Meador Deputy Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr,. <i f./ County Administrator / r.k. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: l)r LC-hd<2~ Ctn (;1 -rAL- S:"Ac:cl .5-1~ Ie#! s-A~~:lcl 6e r..:.~';).,..."l-~ /....~~/ l~.- f fi :J r ...... '-~ n; f; c ., l,t 1)./ r It r:', .... t.. /. · ~ f;;, ,n ~'_ I;; h.. I ~ CVl J /' d,",~" 1'<- It? .: It n <;J 1<,; d 7 il/ ?,UI" $<: j,..:;./ S y/I., h1. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The eSchool News Tech-Savvy Superintendent Awards Program was established in 2001 and honors K-12 educators who have displayed exemplary vision in the use of technology to further the goals of educating today's students. Dr. Lorraine S. Lange, Roanoke County School Superintendent, was nominated by a teacher of her district and chosen as one of ten nationwide recipients of the award from hundreds of nominations. Dr. Lange exceptionally demonstrates the criteria for the award, as found in eSchool News' Hallmarks of Excellence, which include the use of technology day-to-day, distributing resources among students and staff district wide, offering training resources, integrating technology into the curriculum, and using technology to improve business operations. Dr. Lange attended an awards ceremony in February 2009, where she had the opportunity to accept her award, network and share ideas with past and present winners of the award. Dr. Lange will be present at the meeting. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OFROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRA-rION CENTER ON -rL~ESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 RESOLU-rION OF CONGRATULA-rIONS TO DR. LORRAINE S. LANGE FOR RECEIVING AN eSCHOOL NEWS TECH-SAVVY SUPERIN-rENDENT AWARD FOR 2009 WHEREAS, the eSchool News Tech-Sawy Superintendent Awards Program, which was established in 2001, honors K-12 educators who have displayed exemplary vision in the use of technology to further the goals of educating today's students and equip them with 21 st century skills; and WHEREAS, Dr. Lorraine S. Lange, Roanoke County School Superintendent, was nominated for this elite award by a teacher of her district, and from hundreds of countrywide nominations was chosen one of ten national recipients by a panel of judges that includes past laureates of the award; and WHEREAS, the criteria used to screen the winners are found in the Hallmarks of Excellence and include the effective use of technology day-to-day, distributing resources among students and staff district wide, offering training resources, integrating technology into the curriculum, and using technology to improve business operations; and WHEREAS, Dr. Lange exceptionally demonstrates all of the Hallmarks of Excellence criteria set forth by the eSchool News Network; and serves as an exemplary model for other school superintendents nationwide; and WHEREAS, Dr. Lange was presented with this award in February 2009, and the Board of Supervisors wishes to congratulate Dr. Lange for being recognized as one of the nation's top ten educators for her technology vision and leadership. 1 NOW, -rHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, does hereby extend its sincere congratulations to DR. LORRAINE S. LANGE for receiving an eSchool News Tech-Savvy Superintendent Award for 2009; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors expresses its deepest appreciation to Dr. Lange for her enduring dedication and significant contributions to the education of the children of Roanoke County Schools. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E-1-, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding proposed amendment to the fiscal year 2008-2009 budget in accordance with Section 15.2-2507, Code of Virginia SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director, Management and Budget APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. dL County Administrator f'~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This is a public hearing to secure citizen's comments concerning amending the fiscal year 2008-2009 budget by adjusting the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the fiscal year. Section 15.2-2507 of the Code of Virginia, as an1ended, provides that whenever such anlendment exceeds 1 percent of the total expenditures shown in the adopted budget or $500,000, whichever is lesser, the County must publish notice of a meeting and public hearing. The notice must state the County's intent to amend the budget and include a brief synopsis of the proposed budget amendment(s). This notice was published on March 3, 2009. 1. Request to appropriate an amount not to exceed $51 ,200,000 for the renovation of Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, Cave Spring Elementary and William Byrd High School from bond proceeds and capital reserves 1 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of the public hearing. Requests for the appropriations will occur later on this agenda. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board hold the required public hearing. Board action appropriating funds, as provided in this notice, will occur later during this meeting. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SL~PERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COL~NTY ADMINIS-rRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Public hearing and request to adopt an resolution authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $50,000,000 General Obligation Bonds to be sold through the Virginia Public School Authority (VPSA) for certain school renovations SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss ,dL County Administrator /f" --/" COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: T/JI~ 5k"...:lJ 6.z, l-<- YU'./ f,lI1e. h. sell 6t~I/le-1; et'f ~~ r:l.v.......iJ~- I ~ i-ti',. Ii' J' f r "...1 c. t--'" '" ./ -h;, G' 6 fo..;' ~ J ..' .- "I c~, r, J l;.. w <. 'f"" ' -I J> ,.; c. '-'::l ..' BACKGROUND: The next projects on the School Board Capital Improvement Plan are the renovations of William Byrd High School, Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, and Cave Spring Elementary including some or all of the following: asbestos abatement and renovation of existing corridors, upgrade of HV AC and electrical systems, renovation of existing classrooms, upgrade of kitchen and serving area, renovations to the auditorium, replacement of existing windows and roof system, general interior finish upgrades, and parking lot improvements. In addition, the School Board has agreed to replace Mason's Cove Elementary due to the age and condition of the building. -rhe design work for the new school will better match with a Fall 2009 borrowing so the project costs for that school are not included in this bond application for the Spring 2009 bond issue. Design work is slated to be complete by May 31st with construction bids to be awarded in summer 2009. The VPSA application is for an amount not to exceed $50,000,000. -rhis amount exceeds the actual amount needed by $2,300,000 because the VPSA cannot predict the interest rate coupon structure of the winning bid. -rherefore, VPSA is requesting that each locality authorize a "not to exceed" principal amount of bonds that is sufficiently in excess of the amount of proceeds requested. In so doing, we will be able to obtain funding for the full $47,700,000 needed to finance the William Byrd Hlgh, Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, and Cave Spring Elementary projects included in the application. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: School staff has prepared the required application to participate in the Spring 2009 bond sale. The School Board adopted a resolution approving this application at their meeting of February 24,2009. Before the bonds can be sold, the County Board of Supervisors must hold a public hearing and adopt the attached resolution, which outlines the parameter of the bond sale and the form of the bonds. The total project budget will be funded with existing school capital reserves and this VPSA bond sale. The School Board has previously appropriated $1,132,950 for William Byrd High and $3,170,004 for the three elementary schools from major capital reserve funds for the initial architecture/engineering and survey/testing costs. The School Board approved a reimbursement resolution for these projects to allow the costs to be reimbursed from the future VPSA bond issue. The School Board has committed a total of $3,500,000 from existing major capital reserves towards this project. The ability to subsidize capital projects with cash payments is made possible by the joint capital financing plan adopted by the School Board and Board of Supervisors in December 2004 and annually funded with the school and county budgets. FISCAL IMPACT: The first debt payment will not occur until the 2009-10 fiscal year and has been factored into the debt capacity for school capital improvements. Future county budgets will include the annual debt service. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: At the conclusion of the public hearing, staff recommends adopting the attached resolution that authorizes the issuance of VPSA bonds in the Spring 2009 bond sale for an amount not to exceed $50,000,000. -rhe VPSA application must be filed with the state no later than March 11, 2009. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF NOT TO EXCEED $50,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS OF THE COLINTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA TO BE SOLD TO -rHE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AU-rHORITY AND PROVIDING FOR THE FORM AND DETAILS THEREOF WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "County") has determined that it is necessary and expedient to borrow an amount not to exceed $50,000,000 and to issue its general obligation school bonds to finance certain capital projects for school purposes. WHEREAS, the Board held a public hearing on March 1 0, 2009, on the issuance of the Bonds (as defined below) in accordance with the requirements of Section 15.2- 2606, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "Virginia Code"). WHEREAS, the School Board of the County has requested by resolution the Board to authorize the issuance of the Bonds and has consented to the issuance of the Bonds. WHEREAS, the Bond Sale Agreement (as defined below) shall indicate that $47,700,000 is the amount of proceeds requested (the IIProceeds Requested") from the Virginia Public School Authority ("VPSA") in connection with the sale of the Bonds. WHEREAS, VPSA's objective is to pay the County a purchase price for the Bonds which, in VPSA's judgment, reflects the Bonds' market value (the "VPSA Purchase Price Objectivell), taking into consideration such factors as the amortization schedule the County has requested for the Bonds, the amortization schedules requested by other localities, the purchase price to be received by VPSA for its bonds and other market conditions relating to the sale of VPSA's bonds. WHEREAS, such factors may result in the Bonds having a purchase price other than par and consequently (i) the County may have to issue a principal amount of Bonds that is greater than or less than the Proceeds Requested in order to receive an amount of proceeds that is substantially equal to the Proceeds Requested, or (ii) if the maximum authorized principal amount of the Bonds set forth in section 1 below does not exceed the Proceeds Requested by at least the amount of any discount, the purchase price to be paid to the County, given the VPSA Purchase Price Objective and market conditions, will be less than the Proceeds Requested. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA: 1. Authorization of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. -rhe Board hereby determines that it is advisable to contract a debt and to issue and sell general obligation school bonds of the County in the maxin1um principal amount not to exceed $50,000,000 (the "Bonds") for the purpose of financing certain capital projects for school purposes. The Board hereby authorizes the issuance and sale of the Bonds in the form and upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution. 2. Sale of the Bonds. It is deterrrlined to be in the best interest of the County to accept the offer of VPSA to purchase from the County, and to sell to VPSA, the Bonds at a price determined by VPSA and accepted by the Chairman of the Board or the County Administrator and upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution. The County Administrator and the Chairman of the Board, or either of them, and such officer or officers of the County as either of them may designate, are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the Bond Sale Agreement with the VPSA providing for the sale of the Bonds to VPSA in substantially the form on file with the County Administrator, which form is hereby approved (the IIBond Sale Agreement"). 3. Details of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be issuable in fully registered form in denominations of $5,000 and whole multiples thereof; shall be dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds; shall be designated IIGeneral Obligation School Bonds, Series 2009 (or such other designation as the County Administrator may approve) shall bear interest from the date of delivery thereof payable semi-annually on each January 15 and July 15 (each an "Interest Payment Datell), beginning January 15, 2010, at the rates established in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Resolution; and shall mature on July 15 in the years (each a "Principal Payment Date") and in the amounts established in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Resolution. The Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Payment Dates are subject to change at the request of VPSA. 4. Principal Installments and Interest Rates. The County Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to accept the interest rates on the Bonds established by VPSA, provided that each interest rate shall be no more than ten one-hundredths of one percent (0.100/0) over the interest rate to be paid by VPSA for the corresponding principal payment date of the bonds to be issued by the VPSA (the "VPSA Bonds"), a portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Bonds, and provided further, that the true interest cost of the Bonds does not exceed six percent (60/0) per annum. -rhe County Administrator is further authorized and directed to accept the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds and the amounts of principal of the Bonds coming due on each Principal Payment Date (the "Principal Installn1ents") established by VPSA, including any changes in the Interest Payment Dates, the Principal Payment Dates and the Principal Installments which may be requested by VPSA provided that such aggregate principal amount shall not exceed the maximum amount set forth in paragraph one and the final maturity of the Bonds shall not be later than 21 years from their date. The execution and delivery of the Bonds as described in paragraph 8 hereof shall conclusively evidence such Interest Payment Dates, Principal Payment Dates, interest rates, principal amount and Principal Installments as having been so accepted as authorized by this Resolution. -2- 5. Form of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be initially in the form of a single, temporary typewritten bond substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. Payment: Paying Aaent and Bond Reaistrar. The following provisions shall apply to the Bonds: (a) For as long as VPSA is the registered owner of the Bonds, all payments of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds shall be made in immediately available funds to VPSA at or before 11 :00 a.m. on the applicable Interest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redernption, or if such date is not a business day for Virginia banks or for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then at or before 11 :00 a.m. on the business day next succeeding such Interest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption; (b) All overdue payments of principal and, to the extent permitted by law, interest shall bear interest at the applicable interest rate or rates on the Bonds; and (c) U.S. Bank National Association, Richmond, Virginia, is designated as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bonds. 7. Prepayment or Redemption. The Principal Installments of the Bonds held by the VPSA coming due on or before July 15, 2019, and the definitive Bonds for which the Bonds held by the VPSA may be exchanged that mature on or before July 15, 2019, are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities. -rhe Principal Installments of the Bonds held by the VPSA coming due after July 15, 2019, and the definitive Bonds for which the Bonds held by the VPSA may be exchanged that mature after July 15, 2019, are subject to prepayment or redemption at the option of the County prior to their stated maturities in whole or in part, on any date on or after July 15, 2019, upon payment of the prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as percentages of Principal Installnlents to be prepaid or the principal amount of the Bonds to be redeemed) set forth below plus accrued interest to the date set for prepayment or redemption: Dates Prices July 15, 2019 to July 14, 2020, inclusive............ow.................. July 15, 2020 to July 14, 2021, inclusive................................ July 15, 2021 and thereafter .................................................. 1010/0 1 00.5 100; Provided, however, that the Bonds shall not be subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities as described above without first obtaining the written consent of the registered owner of the Bonds. Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the registered owner by registered mail not more than ninety (90) and not less than sixty (60) days before the date fixed for prepayment or redemption. The County Administrator is authorized to approve such other redemption provisions, including changes to the redemption dates set forth above, as may be requested by VPSA. -3- 8. Execution of the Bonds. -rhe Chairman or Vice Chairman and the Clerk or any Deputy Clerk of the Board are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Bonds and to affix the seal of the County thereto. The manner of such execution may be by facsimile, provided that if both signatures are by facsimile, the Bonds shall not be valid until authenticated by the manual signature of the Paying Agent. 9. Pledae of Full Faith and Credit. For the prompt payment of the principal of, and the pren'"lium, if any, and the interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due, the full faith and credit of the County are hereby irrevocably pledged, and in each year while any of the Bonds shall be outstanding there shall be levied and collected in accordance with law an annual ad valorem tax upon all taxable property in the County subject to local taxation sufficient in amount to provide for the payment of the principal of, and the premium, if any, and the interest on the Bonds as slJch principal, premium, if any, and interest shall become due, which tax shall be without limitation as to rate or amount and in addition to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available and appropriated for such purpose. 10. Use of Proceeds Certificate: Non-Arbitraae Certificate. The Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator, or either of them and such officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute a Non-Arbitrage Certificate, if required by bond counsel, and a Use of Proceeds Certificate setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Bonds and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and applicable regulations relating to the exclusion from gross income of interest on the Bonds and on the VPSA Bonds. The Board covenants on behalf of the County that (i) the proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bonds will be invested and expended as set forth in such Use of Proceeds Certificate and the County shall comply with the covenants and representations contained therein and (ii) the County shall comply with the provisions of the Code so that interest on the Bonds and on the VPSA Bonds will remain excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. 11. State Non-Arbitraae Proaram: Proceeds Agreement. The Board hereby determines that it is in the best interests of the County to authorize and direct the County Treasurer to participate in the State Non-Arbitrage Program in connection with the Bonds. The County AdrTlinistrator and the Chairman of the Board, or either of them and such officer or officers of the County as either of them may designate, are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver a Proceeds Agreement with respect to the deposit and investment of proceeds of the Bonds by and among the County, the other participants in the sale of the VPSA Bonds, VPSA, the investment manager, and the depository substantially in the form on file with the County Administrator, which form is hereby approved. 12. Continuina Disclosure Aareement. The Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator, or either of them, and such officer or officers of the County as -4- either of them may designate are hereby authorized and directed (i) to execute a Continuing Disclosure Agreement, as set forth in Appendix F to the Bond Sale Agreement, setting forth the reports and notices to be filed by the County and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 and (ii) to make all filings required by Section 3 of the Bond Sale Agreement should the County be determined by the VPSA to be a MOP (as defined in the Continuing Disclosure Agreement). 13. Filina of Resolution. The appropriate officers or agents of the County are hereby authorized and directed to cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed with the Circuit Court of the County. 14. Further Actions. The County Adrninistrator, the Chairman of the Board, and such other officers, elllployees and agents of the County as either of them may designate are hereby authorized to take such action as the County Administrator or the Chairman of the Board may consider necessary or desirable in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and any such action previously taken is hereby ratified and confirmed. 15. Effective Date. -rhis Resolution shall take effect immediately. The undersigned Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, hereby certifies that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct extract from the minutes of a meeting of the Board of Supervisors held on March 10, 2009, and of the whole thereof so far as applicable to the matters referred to in such extract. I hereby further certify that such meeting was a regularly scheduled meeting and that, during the consideration of the foregoing resolution, a quorum was present. The front page of this Resolution accurately records (i) the members of the Board of Supervisors present at the meeting, (ii) the members who were absent from the meeting, and (iii) the vote of each member, including any abstentions. wrrNESS MY HAND and the seal of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, this 10th day of Marchi 2009. Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia (SEAL) -5- EXHIBIT A (FORM OF TEMPORARY BOND) NO. -rR-1 $ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COMMONWEAL-rH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ROANOKE General ObliQation School Bond Series 2009 The COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (the "County"), for value received, hereby acknowledges itself indebted and promises to pay to the VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY the principal amount of Dollars ($ ), in annual installments in the amounts set forth on Schedule I attached hereto payable on July 15, 2009 and annually on July 15 thereafter to and including July 151 20_ (each a "Principal Payment Date"), together with interest from the date of this Bond on the unpaid installments, payable semi-annually on January 15 and July 15 of each year commencing on January 15, 2010 (each an "Interest Payment Date;" together with any Principal Payment Date, a "Payment Daten), at the rates per annum set forth on Schedule I attached hereto, subject to prepayment or redemption as hereinafter provided. Both principal of and interest on this Bond are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. For as long as the Virginia Public School Authority is the registered owner of this Bond, U.S. Bank National Association, Richmond, Virginia, as bond registrar (the "Bond Registrar") shall make all payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest on this -6- Bond, without presentation or surrender hereof, to the Virginia Public School Authority, in immediately available funds at or before 11 :00 a.m. on the applicable Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption. If a Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption is not a business day for banks in the Commonwealth of Virginia or for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then the payment of principal, premium, if any, or interest on this Bond shall be made in immediately available funds at or before 11 :00 a.m. on the business day next succeeding the scheduled Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption. Upon receipt by the registered owner of this Bond of said payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest, written acknowledgment of the receipt thereof shall be given pronlptly to the Bond Registrar, and the County shall be fully discharged of its obligation on this Bond to the extent of the payment so made. Upon final payment, this Bond shall be surrendered to the Bond Registrar for cancellation. The full faith and credit of the County are irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and the premium, if any, and interest on this Bond. The resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors authorizing the issuance of the Bonds provides, and Section 15.2-2624 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, requires, that there shall be levied and collected an annual tax upon all taxable property in the County subject to local taxation sufficient to provide for the payment of the principal, premium, if any, and interest on this Bond as the same shall become due which tax shall be without limitation as to rate or amount and shall be in addition to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available and appropriated for such purpose. -7- This Bond is duly authorized and issued in compliance with and pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, including the Public Finance Act of 1991, Chapter 26, Title 15.2, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, and resolutions duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County and the School Board of the County to provide funds for capital projects for school purposes. This Bond may be exchanged without cost, on twenty (20) days written notice from the Virginia Public School Authority at the office of the Bond Registrar on one or more occasions for one or more temporary bonds or definitive bonds in marketable form and, in any case, in fully registered form, in denominations of $5,000 and whole multiples thereof, having an equal aggregate principal amount, having principal installments or maturities and bearing interest at rates corresponding to the maturities of and the interest rates on the installments of principal of this Bond then unpaid. This Bond is registered in the name of the Virginia Public School Authority on the books of the County kept by the Bond Registrar, and the transfer of this Bond may be effected by the registered owner of this Bond only upon due execution of an assignment by such registered owner. Upon receipt of such assignment and the surrender of this Bond, the Bond Registrar shall exchange this Bond for definitive Bonds as hereinabove provided, such definitive Bonds to be registered on such registration books in the name of the assignee or assignees named in such assignment. The principal installments of this Bond coming due on or before July 15, 2019 and the definitive Bonds for which this Bond may be exchanged that mature on or before July 15, 2019 are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities. -rhe principal installments of this Bond coming due after July 15, 2019, and -8- the definitive Bonds for which this Bond may be exchanged that mature after July 15, 2019 are subject to prepayment or redemption at the option of the County prior to their stated maturities in whole or in part, on any date on or after July 15, 2019, upon payment of the prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as percentages of principal installments to be prepaid or the principal amount of the Bonds to be redeemed) set forth below plus accrued interest to the date set for prepayment or reden1ption: Dates Prices July 15, 2019 to July 14,2020, inclusive................................ July 15,2020 to July 14, 2021, inclusive................................ July 15,2021 and thereafter .................................................. 1010/0 100.5 100; Provided, however, that the Bonds shall not be subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities as described above without the prior written consent of the registered owner of the Bonds. Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the registered owner by registered mail not more than ninety (90) and not less than sixty (60) days before the date fixed for prepayment or redemption. All acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia to happen, exist or be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond have happened, exist and have been performed in due time, form and manner as so required, and this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the County, is within every debt and other limit prescribed by the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. -rHE REMAINDER OF -rHIS PAGE IS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK -10- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, has caused this Bond to be issued in the name of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to be signed by its Chairman or Vice-Chairman, its seal to be affixed hereto and attested by the signature of its Clerk or any of its Deputy Clerks, and this Bond to be dated May _,2009. COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (SEAL) ATTEST: By: Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia Chairman, Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia -11- ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned sells, assigns and transfers unto (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE) PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR O-rHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: the within Bond and irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to exchange said Bond for definitive bonds in lieu of which this Bond is issued and to register the transfer of such definitive bonds on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed: (NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an "eligible guarantor institution" meeting the requirements of the Bond Registrar which requirements will include membership or participation in STAMP or such other "signature guarantee program" as may be determined by the Bond Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. ) Registered Owner (NOTICE: The signature above must correspond with the name of the Registered Owner as it appears on the front of this Bond in every particular, without alteration or change.) -12- ACTION NO. ITEM NO. F-1- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10r 2009 Request to appropriate $51,200,000 for the renovation of Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, Cave Spring Elementary and William Byrd High School from VPSA bond proceeds and school capital reserves AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss , County Administrator /~/ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: /11 tf,; (.' hI 41 tf'/i'7 :: / ~I-{)' - cJ.., / BACKGROUND: The next projects on the School Board Capital Improvement Plan are the renovations of Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, Cave Spring Elementary and William Byrd High School. -rhese projects may include some or all of the following: asbestos abatement, renovation of existing corridors, upgrade of HVAC and electrical systems, renovation of existing classrooms, upgrade of kitchen and serving area, renovations to the auditorium, replacement of existing windows and roof system, general interior finish upgrades, and parking lot improvements. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The total project budget will be funded with existing capital reserves and pending VPSA bond issues (Attachment A). The School Board has previously appropriated $1,132,950 from major capital reserves for William Byrd High and $2,275,866 as an advance for the three elementary schools for the initial architecture/engineering and survey/testing costs. At that time, the School Board approved a reimbursement resolution for these projects to allow the costs to be reimbursed from the future VPSA bond issue. The School Board has agreed to a total of $3,500,000 from existing major capital reserves towards these projects. The ability to subsidize capital projects with cash payments is made possible by the joint capital financing plan adopted by the School Board and Board of Supervisors in December 2004. Staff has prepared the required application and resolutions to participate in the Spring 2009 bond sales. As part of this application process, a public hearing will be held by the County Board of Supervisors on March 10, 2009. FISCAL IMPACT: The total project budget of $51,200,000 will be funded with cash reserves of $3,500,000 and pending bond sales of $47,700,000 (including issuance costs of $110,000) which are included in the capital financing plan for the school system as approved by the Board of Supervisors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a total appropriation of $51 ,200,000 for the renovation of Willian1 Byrd High, Mount Pleasant Elementary, Green Valley Elementary, and Cave Spring Elementary which includes $3,500,000 from major capital reserves ($1,132,950 approved on August 28,2008) and $47,700,000 from the Spring 2009 VPSA bond issue ($2,275,866 advanced by the School Board on August 28, 2008). <{ +-' c: QJ E ..c: u ro +-' +-' <( Vl +-' OJ b.O "'C :J co "'C C ro Vl +-' U OJ .0 .... a.. en o o N b.O C .... a. V') <( V') CL > +-' ro QJ +-' bO 0"'0 t- ~ > bO ..... c: C c: <( UJ ro V') +-' E ~ ~ QJ "'0 0::: ::J OJ "'0 ~ ~ ~ bOC:ob -g ~ N OJ "'0 00 <( N ~<(O\""'" ::JV')0q- +-'a..O..o ::J > N ::J u.. V') "'0 QJ ro QJ +-' +-' "'0 ro o c: 0 t- ::J 0 u.. +-' QJ +-' ro ..... C bO ,2, _ ~ c: rc ro "'O"'O~~ QJ c: E ro "'O~ oU c: ..... ::J '+- u.. E ..... 00 e 0 0 '+- 'm ~ ~~~ a 00 - t) ~ ~ ,~ ~ o 0 "'0 t- ..... ::J a.. co 0000 0000 0000 o N'" 0 00 NMOM ....... ~ ....... 0 0'" ~... 0 ..n ~ ~ ~ ~ aNN 0 O\NNO 000 0 ..n a\ N'" <<3" {"Q.......MM O\MO\O a\ 0 en LJ")'" ~ ~ 00000 ~ ....... ....... 0\0\0\1 ~ N............. LJ")LJ"){"Q ....... ....... ....... 0000 0000 0000 a N'" 0 00'" NMOM ....... ~....... 0 o ~... 0 LJ")'" ~ ~ ~ ~ o o 1 I 10 o o LJ") M'" 0000 000 0 0000 o N'" 0 00" N Mom .......~.......LJ") 0'" ~... 0 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ E QJ E ~ ~ ~ QJ W C I W > ~ bO QJ ro "E C QJ > .~ > a.. ~ V') C C ,ro_ QJ QJ ::s > QJ 0 a~~~ o o 10 o ~ ~ o LJ") o .......... t.O m N'" o LJ") 0\ N m 'f"""'I ~.. o o o o ~ ~ o o o 0'" ~ ~ V') +-' V) o u QJ u C ro ::J V') V') "'0 C o OJ o o o o o ....... .......... q- q- M ~ ~ N q- ..n q- {"Q {"Q 00 u1 ....... N N'" o o o 0'" o ....... r-: q- +-' QJ bO "'0 ::J co +-' U QJ g I ~ 0" ro o +-' LJ") 0 m t- o LJ") o .......... t.O m N'" o LJ") 0\ N'" m ~ ~... o o o o 0\ o 'f"""'I'" LJ") o o o o o N 'f"""'I'" LJ") V). O{"Q LJ") t.O 0\00 N'" ..n m ....... 'f"""'I N ~... N'" Oq- LJ") m o 'f"""'I .....: q- ... t.O N m q- N" ..n q- 0\ o ............. q- N ............. N 00 "'0 o QJ ............. > 00 <( 0 ~ V') .....a. ooa.. a. "'0 > ro "'0 ~ ~ QJ c: o:.c ..0 0 a.c 0..0 a.QJ ~<( ro a. ro V') +-' a.. 5 ro E "'0 '0.. > .- .~ 0 QJ ro bD o..g.J=~ U c o uOO QJ 0"'0 "'0 ..... 0 C '_ C <( 0 '00" V) ro QJ +-' '(0 NeE a. ~ E 'OO".Q E 15 "'0 +-' 0 QJ ::J E "'0 ~ J:: u ~ ~ ~ a...c: c o'+- c 0 V) ro a. ~ ~ ..... ro ro rc ro "'0 ~ U OJ ~U<{<{ 0::: en o o N """'- (V) """'- (V) <( o o o 0'" o N 'f"""'I'" LJ") ..... c Cl> E ..r:::. <J ro :t:: <( a. o ..... a. a. ro <( en a. > en o I o ~ I (V) -- Cl> U) .~ e- O) a. ~ a. E Cl> t:: ~ l en ....J <( () o ....J -- ..... o ~ ro (l) E ..... ..0 -- ~ I W ~ :J () o o -- () +-' QJ bD "'0 ::s OJ +-' U QJ '0 ..... a.. ro ...... o t- ACTION NO. ITEM NO. I .1-'-1 AT A REGULAR MEE1-ING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT -rHE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CEN-rER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Comrrlissions, and Boards SUBMITTED BY: Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board John M. Chambliss. Jr. ~ County Administrator /~ APPROVED BY: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. League of Older Americans - Advisory Council The one-year term of Beverly Eyerly will expire on March 31, 2009. 2. Library Board (appointed by district) Lisa Boggess, Vinton Magisterial District, is no longer a County resident. Herfour-year term expired on December 31, 2008. Herman Lowe, Catawba Magisterial District, resigned effective January 5, 2009. His four-year term will expire on December 31, 2011. 3. Roanoke County Citizen Leaders Environmental Action Roundtable (RC-CLEAR) (appointed by district) At the February 24, 2009 meeting, the Board confirmed the appointment of five members to this committee. Each supervisor was asked to appoint two citizens who live, work or do business in the County to serve on this committee. -rhe term for each of these appointments is three years and the initial terms will be staggered and expiration dates determined after all of the appointments have been made and confirnled. The Board needs to appoint five additional members as follows: (1) Supervisor Church, one member; (2) Supervisor Altizer, two members; and (3) Supervisor Flora, two members. 4. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission The three-year term of Charles Blankenship will expire on April 8, 2009. 2 0-1- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRA-rION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR -rHIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for March 10, 2009 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 Item 1 inclusive, as follows: 1. Resolution of congratulations to the Town of Vinton on its 125th Anniversary 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. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. :T-J.- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF -rHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRA-rION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of congratulations to the Town of Vinton on its 125 Anniversary SllBMITTED BY: Brenda J. Holton, CMC Deputy Clerk to the Board John M, Chambliss, Jr, d'rL County Administrator / ~ ~ APPROVED BY: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: A ec. t:'47mt!~~./ ~~;~e>.;'&;..// SUMMARY OF INFORMAl-ION: The Town of Vinton will be celebrating their 125th anniversary on March 17, 2009, at the Vinton War Memorial between the hours of 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. and at the Vinton Municipal Building between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. Chairman Altizer has requested that the Board adopt a resolution of congratulations to the Town of Vinton which is attached. However, due to the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 17, he will be unable to present the resolution to Mayor Grose at their council meeting. Chairman Altizer will present the resolution to the Vinton Town Council at their next meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Board is requested to adopt the attached resolution, and Chairman Altizer will present it to the Town of Vinton at their next Council meeting. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRA-rION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VINTON ON ITS 125TH ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, on March 17, 1884, the General Assembly of Virginia granted a charter establishing the Town of Vinton as a separate political subdivision located within Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, during its 125 year existence, the Town of Vinton, both as a separate political subdivision and as part of Roanoke County, has made many significant contributions to both the citizens of the Town and the citizens of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, the Vinton Town Council has scheduled a celebration on March 17, 2009, at the Vinton War Memorial, to honor the Town and its many outstanding citizens, both past and present, who have made many valuable contributions to the quality of life in the Town of Vinton and Roanoke County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that it does hereby express its most sincere congratulations to the Town of Vinton, its Council, and its citizens on the 125thanniversary of the Town of Vinton's most distinguished existence; and BE IT FUR-rHER RESOLVED that the Board does express its appreciation to the Town and its many citizens, both past and present, who have made many substantial contributions to the quality of life in both the Town of Vinton and in Roanoke County; and 1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Roanoke County, in commending and congratulating the Town of Vinton for its most successful past 125 years, looks forward to continued meaningful cooperation in providing essential and necessary governmental services for all our citizens for the next 125 years. 2 N-J GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 0/0 of General Amount Fund Revenue Audited balance at June 30, 2008 $ 16,743,199 9.51 % * Addition for 2007-08 Operations 906,609 Appropriation for staff at the Clearbrook Station (156,000) Balance at March 10, 2009 $ 17,493,808 9.300/0 ** Note: On December 21, 2004, the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy to increase the General Fund Unappropriated Balance incrementally over several years. * 2007-08 a range of 8.50/0-9.50/0 of General Fund Revenues 2007-2008 General Fund Revenues $176,033,678 8.50/0 of General Fund Revenues $14,962,863 9.50/0 of General Fund Revenues $16,723,199 ** 2008-09 a range of 9.00/0-10.00/0 of General Fund Revenues 2008-2009 General Fund Revenues $188,178,858 9.00/0 of General Fund Revenues $16,936,097 10.00/0 of General Fund Revenues $18,817,886 The Unappropriated Fund Balance of the County is currently maintained at 9.30010 which is within the ran for 2008-09. The balance will be increased over time to the following ranges: 2009-2010 2010-2011 9.50/0-10.50/0 10.00/0-11.00/0 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By John M. Chambliss, Jr. .1.L County Administrator I N-;J- COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CAPITAL RESERVES Minor County Capital Reserve (Projects not in the CIP, architectural/engineering services, and other one-time expenditures.) Audited balance at June 30, 2008 Amount $1,540,757.20 Addition for 2007-2008 Operations 298,490.00 Unappropriate funds for architect/engineering fees for the renovation of the former Southview Elementary School 175,000.00 Appropriate additional funding for Bent Mountain Station Parking Lot (81 ,376.00) Balance at March 10, 2009 $1,932,871.20 Maior County Capital Reserve (Projects in the CIP, debt payments to expedite projects identified in CIP, and land purchase opportunities.) Audited balance at June 30, 2008 $2,339,030.00 Balance at March 10, 2009 $2,339,030.00 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By John M. Chambliss, Jr. dr!:..- County Administrator I"" June 24, 2008 July 8, 2008 August 28, 2008 RESERVE FOR BOARD CON-rINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA From 2008-2009 Original Budget Allocation to Art Museum of Western Virginia and Roanoke County Public Schools for Education Appropriation for Legislative Liaison Appropriation for Development of a Regional Water Supply Plan Balance at March 10, 2009 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By John M. Chambliss, Jr. i,L County Administrator f- N~3 Amount $ 300,000.00 (200,000.00) ($24,000.00) ($11,100.00) $ 64,900.00 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER 1'/ - L-I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER. MEETING DATE: March 10,2009 AGENDA ITEMS: Statement of the Treasurer1s Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy, as of February 28, 2009. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: GOVERNMENT: SUNTRUST/ALEXANDER KEY SUNTRUST/ALEXANDER KEY CONTRA SUNTRUST SECURITIES SUNTRUST SECURITIES CONTRA 41,966,925.55 628,756.66 2,000,101.87 28,482.85 44,624,266.93 LOCAL GOV1T INVESTMENT POOL: GENERAL OPERATION (G.O.) 6,991,322.97 6,991,322.97 MONEY MARKET: BRANCH BANKING & TRUST STELLAR ONE SUNTRUST/ALEXANDER KEY SUNTRUST SECURITIES SUNTRUST SWEEP WACHOVIA 73,069.86 32,731.04 39,176,419.74 6,135,506.65 4,300,618.68 48,310.51 49,766,656.48 TOTAL 101,382,246.38 03/03/09 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. P-Y- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF -rHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRATION CENTER MEE-rING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA rrEM: Work Session for the Budget for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 SUBMITTED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. /~ County Administrator I'~ ' . COUNTY ADMINIS-rRATOR'S COMMENTS: SL~MMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside to present any updated information received regarding the state's budget and discuss the County's budget for the next fiscal year. ACTION NO. p-~ rrEM NOw AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRA-rION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Work session for presentation of the FY2009-2010 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the Citizens CIP Review Committee to review results of the evaluation process SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: John M, Chambliss, Jr, d. P County Administrator t9'"Wi-- COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: . , .. --I d . J L /, L I' f-::. f' " 4 , , . Ii'". I... L-~..- l..1';, ~'I'f11' f! ,.. t -/..", r/)e i.L-1~..I(.. 7f -r"f~ e&'~AI' fTt!e. , r ';t:f,,/ nc-v<? ft, 'P -. ,~, _ a"./ "j~.I: d..:f.., m&\" 7 c.f IJ" ce'-jJ' k,/ /1 <1',-,..4 eo {-" ~{h' '-~lffl,7'1 un,. 7, -r,/'w'1' ro?',':,-'jf~" z. ~.AJ r /Ie.. I .....pe..;:. r t:' F t? {,.,' Y' L'...I-"" fiI,,1 f- C..L:, .,;,] '~ ';,'',", , '- ,', ... J: ,/, In;>,.' oS # a... ~ ",.1 s, ',;,1 ,'" ,1..C'~ h",- I'...-g ,o<?P'> ,J.... I .. 1 ., ~J1 1/' I '.1:.1"" ,I' s; h 4,.... !C"'" I.-t? In -Fp r h ~ Vc:. r I &' (~J. /J ~ c- "...I'.J~ t!-;;~p / ., ~. m (..~." I ~ r';;.,(-I" ....7 ,. c- .. ,; It" It? I' ,.... .,:,;.t' .. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a work session to present the FY2009-2010 Capital Improvements Program and to hear the results and recommendations of the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Citizens Review Committee for capital planning for FY2010- 2014. -rhe committee began their process in November by agreeing on procedures, objectives, guiding principles, and evaluation criteria. Work continued through the fall and winter with the committee hearing presentations on submitted capital needs and to view requests for capital upgrades and replacements. A report outlining the committee's prioritization of capital needs and recommendations has been finalized. This time has been set aside to review the final report of the committee and to discuss the findings and recommendations with committee members. County of Roanoke DRAFT CIP Project Detail FY2010-2014 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Table of Contents I. Com mitt e e A p p 0 in tm en ts ......................................................................................... II. Capital Project Recommendations Capital Proj ect Prioritization........................................................................ 2 Project Score Summary - By Category ..................................................... 4 Recommendations............................................................................................ 6 IV. Appendix Committee Goal & 0 bj ecti ve s ..................................................................... 9 Proj ect Eval uati on Criteria............................................................................ 10 Evaluation Scoring Factors........................................................................... 11 Project Specific Comments ........................................................................... 12 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Committee Appointments In developing the FY201 0-2014 Roanoke County CIP, the Board of Supervisors approved a CIP Review Committee comprised of Board-appointed representatives for each magisterial district and members of County-appointed commissions and boards. This unique approach allows a diverse perspective in reviewing and prioritizing capital needs that exist throughout the county. The FY2009-2010 CIP Review Committee is comprised of the following appointed members: Appointment: Representin2: Mr. Brian Hooker Catawba Magisterial District Mr. Michael Jeffrey Cave Spring Magisterial District Mr. Steven A. Campbell Hollins Magisterial District Mr. Charles Wertalik Vinton Magisterial District Mr. Wes Thompson Windsor Hills Magisterial District Vacant Economic Development Authority Mr. James Nelson Library Board Mr. David Holladay Planning Commission Ms. Debbie Clark Public Safety Mr. Roger Falls Parks and Recreation Commission Facilitated bv Roanoke County Staff: Mr. W. Brent Robertson Director, Management and Budget Mr. Jimmy Lyon Budget Analyst Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Capital Proj ect Prioritization Due to the current economic climate, it was the consensus of the Committee to present to the Board of Supervisors last year's prioritization of capital projects. Last year, the Committee prioritized the submitted capital project requests by applying a set of evaluation criteria to each individual project. After scoring was completed by committee members, each project's average score was calculated and listed in numerical order with the highest score representing the greatest priority. The Levell projects represent capital needs that have the highest perceived community value, but have no identified funding associated with them. Succeeding levels were determined by grouping projects together that had successively lower scores; therefore, a lower perceived priority. This prioritization accurately reflects the Committee's recommendations on capital priorities for the current fiscal year CIP (FY2009-20l0). The Committee's recommendations on capital priorities are as follows: Average Total Department - Project Score Total Capital Cost Levell Projects: Parks & Recreation: Greenways & Trails Library: Glenvar Library Expansion Library: Mt. Pleasant Library Renovation Community Development: Regional Storm Water Management & Flood Control Police: Criminal Justice Training Facility Fire & Rescue: New Oak Grove Station Fire & Rescue: MDT Computer System Parks & Recreation: Land for Passive Recreation Information Technology: Enterprise Storage and Backup Information Technology: Upgrade & Redesign of County Internet & Intranet Parks & Recreation: Green Hill Park Fire & Rescue: New Hanging Rock Station 69.1 67.5 66.5 65.2 64.8 64.5 64.1 62.4 62.3 62 61.1 60.4 $15,878,707 $5,993,700 $3,325,750 $7,500,000 $3,600,000 $4,150,000 $212,750 $9,000,000 $826,106 $246,575 $4,098,300 $4,375,000 Level 2 Projects: Parks & Recreation: Sports Lighting Replacement Police: South County Police Precinct General Services: New Public Service Center Library: Vinton Library Renovation Parks & Recreation: Brambleton Center Parks & Recreation: Walrond Park Parks & Recreation: Arnold Burton Softball Complex Parks & Recreation: Vinyard Park Phase III Information Technology: Enterprise Security Project 59.8 59.5 59.1 57.8 56.3 55.9 55.9 55.9 55.1 $1,460,000 $360,000 $12,000,000 $4,988,735 $500,000 $715,000 $300,000 $545,000 $300,000 Level 3 Projects: Parks & Recreation: Whispering Pines Park Fire & Rescue: Station Renovations 53.8 53.4 $435,000 $524,535 2 Fire & Rescue: Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition Information Technology: Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Expansion Police: Bomb Disposal Unit Parks & Recreation: Taylor Tract Park and Trail System Information Technology: Microsoft Exchange Project Parks & Recreation: Camp Roanoke Information Technology: Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery Library: Bent Mountain Library Expansion Parks & Recreation: Hollins Park Information Technology: Voice Over IP System General Services: Parking Garage Fire & Rescue: Station Fuel Control System Parks & Recreation: Spring Hollow Reservoir 53.4 53.1 52.5 52.5 52.4 52 51.8 49.4 48.5 47.3 46.6 44.3 37.3 $325,000 $854,000 $165,000 $629,500 $500,000 $267,500 $104,800 $265,680 $335,000 $1,301,491 $5,200,000 $145,000 $3,234,000 3 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Project Score Summary - By Category Department: Project Public Safety Police: Criminal Justice Training Facility Fire & Rescue: New Oak Grove Station Fire & Rescue: New Hanging Rock Station Police: South County Police Precinct Fire & Rescue: Station Renovations Fire & Rescue: Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition Police: Bomb Disposal Unit Technolo2V Fire & Rescue: MDT Computer System Information Technology: Enterprise Storage and Backup Information Technology: Upgrade and Redesign of County Internet and Information Technology: Enterprise Security Project Information Technology: Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Expansion Information Technology: Microsoft Exchange Project Information Technology: Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery Information Technology: Voice Over IP System Fire & Rescue: Station Fuel Control System Qualitv of Life Parks & Recreation: Greenways & Trails Library: Glenvar Library Expansion Library: Mt. Pleasant Library Renovation Parks & Recreation: Green Hill Park Parks & Recreation: Sports Lighting Replacement Library: Vinton Library Renovation Parks & Recreation: Brambleton Center Parks & Recreation: Vinyard Park Phase III Parks & Recreation: Arnold Burton Softball Complex Parks & Recreation: Walrond Park Parks & Recreation: Whispering Pines Park Parks & Recreation: Taylor Tract Park and Trail System Parks & Recreation: Camp Roanoke Library: Bent Mountain Library Expansion 4 Average Total Score 64.8 64.5 60.4 59.5 53.4 53.4 52.5 64.1 62.3 62.0 55.1 53.1 52.4 51.8 47.3 44.3 69.1 67.5 66.5 61.1 59.8 57.8 56.3 55.9 55.9 55.9 53.8 52.5 52.0 49.4 Total Capital Cost $3,600,000 $4,150,000 $4,375,000 $360,000 $524,535 $325,000 $165,000 $212,750 $826,106 $246,575 $300,000 $854,000 $500,000 $104,800 $1,301,491 $145,000 $15,878,707 $5,993,700 $3,325,750 $4,098,300 $1,460,000 $4,988,735 $500,000 $545,000 $300,000 $715,000 $435,000 $629,500 $267,500 $265,680 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Project Score Summary - By Category Department: Project Parks & Recreation: Hollins Park Parks & Recreation: Spring Hollow Reservoir Service Infrastructure Community Development: Regional Storm Water Management & Flood Parks & Recreation: Land for Passive Recreation General Services: New Public Service Center General Services: Parking Garage 5 Average Total Total Capital Score Cost 48.5 $335,000 37.3 $3,234,000 65.2 $7,500,000 62.4 $9,000,000 59.1 $12,000,000 46.6 $5,200,000 Roanoke County Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Review Committee Recommendations Long-term capital planning and the need to fund capital assets essential to the well-being of the community is one of the most important functions undertaken by local government. Advantages of formal capital programming include focusing attention on community goals and financial capability, improving public awareness, avoiding the waste of resources, and helping to ensure financial stability. Service quality can be maintained only if governments are committed to keeping their capital assets current and in good condition. In order to implement an effective capital plan, the CIP Review Committee discussed and reached a consensus regarding several capital planning options that should be considered by the Board of Supervisors and staff. The Committee also understands the reality of the current economic conditions and the corresponding impact these conditions have on the capital planning process. While funds may not be available for the initiation of new capital projects, this does not mean that the need for new projects has diminished. If anything, the demand for services in the current economic climate reinforces the need for many of the top priority projects. With all of this in mind, the Committee presents to the Board of Supervisors the following suggestions regarding capital planning. Capital Maintenance It is the consensus of the Committee that the maintenance and upkeep of capital assets must be a priority for the County in order to protect prior investments of tax dollars and to ensure adequate delivery of services is maintained. With the current state of the economy, the increasing demand for services, inflation, and reduced operating budgets, it is easy to defer maintenance on capital assets. However, neglecting key maintenance needs in the short-term will inevitably result in more costly and disruptive maintenance in the long-term. While increasing funding for capital maintenance needs throughout the county may not be a realistic proposition given the current economic climate, it is the Committee's opinion that Roanoke County should at the very minimum keep funding amounts level for capital maintenance in the upcoming fiscal year. Over time, this increased attention will lessen the burden of funding required for Capital Improvement Program projects and provide better and more consistent services to the citizens. Capital Planning Process It is the consensus of the Committee that capital planning remain an integral part of the county's budget formation process despite the current lack of funding. As stated previously, just because there is a lack of funding for capital projects does not mean that there is a diminished need for such projects. Departmental presentations on capital project submissions were very clear in displaying the demand for their respective projects from both the citizen and county standpoint. Even though funding is unlikely in the upcoming fiscal year, the need for capital projects must be given the proper attention in order to ensure they will be ready to implement when funding does become available. 6 Given the above concerns, it is the consensus of the Committee that preplanning and engineering for capital projects remain in consideration for funding by the Board of Supervisors. Ensuring proper preplanning will allow departments to take advantage of any future opportunities that may surface from the federal, state or economic development fronts. Capital Project Operating and Replacement Costs The County has recently completed, or is in the process of completing, several significant capital projects. While these projects have very visible direct costs, such as real estate acquisition, construction, and operations, it is important not to lose sight of other less obvious costs. As mentioned above, adequately funding the cost of maintaining a capital investment cannot be overstated. Painting, minor repairs, roofing, fixture replacement, updating equipment, etc. are very important to maximizing the asset's life and utility. In addition, major systems (RV AC, electrical, water/sewer, etc.) and other major structural components of many capital assets will eventually need replacement or upgrade. From a planning perspective, it would be prudent to make allowances for these futures costs over the life of the assets by setting aside funds for future use. 7 Appendix 8 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Goal & Objectives Committee Goal The CIP Review Committee is a collaborative group established to evaluate and prioritize identified capital projects from a community perspective based upon countywide priorities articulated by the Board of Supervisors. Committee Objectives 1. To be acquainted with the history of the County of Roanoke's Capital Improvement Program and the proposed process for the development of the CIP. 2. To become familiar with countywide capital needs identified by department heads through the review of proposals, participation in site visits, and interviews as needed. 3. To evaluate submitted capital projects based on criteria that support the County's mission and guiding principals. 4. To make recommendations on capital planning for the Board of Supervisor's consideration by March 2009. 9 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Project Evaluation Criteria Providing effective and efficient services and improving the quality of life of its citizens is the County of Roanoke's mission and the foundation of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The Capital Improvement Review Committee has identified the following Guiding Principles for evaluating and prioritizing capital project requests in making recommendations to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. These principles are based on the stated priorities and approved plans of the Board of Supervisors. These principles are presented in no particular order of importance, as individual perspective will influence the relative value of each principle when compared to one another. The Guiding Principles are as follows: . Provide effective and efficient governmental services to the citizens. . Enhance public health, safety, and/or welfare issue(s). . Promote the safety and security of our citizens while at home, at work, and at play. . Consider solutions that extend beyond the County's boundaries in meeting future challenges. . Use public investment as a catalyst for economic growth in a manner consistent with the Community Plan. . Safeguard the environment and natural beauty for present and future generations. . Maintain and sustain effective land use planning. . Maintain or enhance cultural, recreational, educational, and social opportunities for all citizens. . Protect existing investment in facilities and infrastructure that are vital in delivering fundamental services to our citizens. . Anticipate future facility and infrastructure needs to best leverage capital resources of the community. . Comply with applicable state and federal mandates. 10 County of Roanoke FY09-13 CIP Evaluation Scoring Sheet Department: Project: Points (1-10): Improve Public Safety or Public Health: Does the project address public safety, life protection, health, and welfare issues that benefit our citizens? Does the project mitigate an existing or potential liability issue. Improve Public Quality of Life: Does the project directly address a major demand or meet a community obligation for cultural, social, educational or leisure services? Legal Requirements: Is the project required by law, regulation or mandate from local, state, or federal government? Economic Development Impact: Does the project directly or indirectly increase net community wealth/resources? Increases Tax or Fee Revenue: Does the project directly increase County's recurring revenues? Enhances Existing Services: Does the project maintain or enhance existing service levels that are at risk without the project? Benefit/Cost Factor: Does project implementation produce a community benefit that exceeds investment of resources or will the project generate resources/investments from outside sources (grants, donations, etc.)? Address Obsolescence: Does the project address requirements for asset replacement, due to age and wear, that supports essential services or addresses the need for a new or changing service demand? Investment to Reduce Future Costs: Will investment in the project reduce/contain increased expenditures at a future date? Extent of Service Area: Does the project benefit a large population (i.e. a project that benefits a larger population/area will have greater value than a project that benefits a smaller population/area)? Project Supports Existing County Plans or Policies: Is the project directly referenced in existing county plans or policies as a priority? Urgency of Need: Does the project meet an urgent need? Other Comments: 11 Roanoke County CIP Review Committee Committee Member Comments by Department/Project Parks & Recreation: Greenways & Trails Average Total Score: 69.1, Levell · Greenways & Trails was the number one requested in the Master Plan survey and in outline. The trails can be developed over a period of time with land acquisition, grants and land donations. Greenways and Trails are strong points for economic development. · We need to push for maintenance of the land and properties we already have in the Parks and Rec system before expanding the system. · This project is at the top of the list insofar as quality of life in Roanoke County is concerned. The County is a very handsome area and needs to be kept that way; this project will accomplish that. · I believe the Greenway Project is one of the most important projects to improving the quality of life in Roanoke County and the Valley. I believe this is more of a need than numerous other proj ects that are being proposed and suggested. I would like to see more progress in this area. We seem to be talking about it a lot as the years slip away. Library: Glenvar Library Expansion Average Total Score: 67.5, Levell · Having visited the Glenvar Library I fully understand the need for expanded facilities in a growing area. For the Glenvar area not only for students but for the senior and retired citizens at Richfield Retirement Center. I believe this is an urgent need. · Old style libraries and layouts are being outgrown. · This should have been taken care of a long time ago. · The County is literally throwing away money-rental income-by not having a facility large enough to accommodate meetings. This was a tier one item last year and certainly hasn't diminished in value since then. Library: Mt. Pleasant Library Renovation Average Total Score: 66.5, Levell · This project shocks me in a district formally represented by Harry Nickens, a former educator in the Vinton district. I don't understand the negligence of the Board of Supervisors nor the Librarian of Roanoke County. There is far more need for the facilities at Glenvar, Mt. Pleasant, Bent Mountain and Vinton than for the super palace in South County. This need is urgent again for the youth and senior citizens in the Mt. Pleasant area. · Worst Library site in the county · A lot of "ifs" surrounding joint venture with Franklin County - need to be addressed before proceeding with too many plans. · This is another tier one item from last year. An excellent location was found for the new library but was, VERY unfortunately, killed by the thoughtless negativism of just two individuals. Franklin County is evidently still interested in a joint venture; this project should move forward before the Library Board of that county loses interest. Community Development: Regional Storm Water Management & Flood Control Average Total Score: 65.2, Levell · This should be done whenever matching state or federal funds are available · State mandates keep rising with out funding. · This project was a tier 1 item last time around and has by no means diminished in importance. It affects virtually the entire County and needs to be kept at the top of the list. 12 Police: Criminal Justice Training Facility Average Total Score: 64.8, Levell · While I support this project whole heartedly, I do not support the project on the proposed Kessler Road property and will speak to that if requested. I have too much respect and concern for all the safety and welfare for our law enforcement and fire and rescue personnel to support the mentioned location. There are other sites in the Catawba, Vinton or North County areas that are more suitable. · You need to show this saves $ over existing private company · Possible sites should be explored for alternative sites. Joint venture with other surrounding localities or long term leased facility may be feasible. · This training facility would enhance the already strong bond between our Public Safety Departments and allow for shared services, and reduction of operating costs for individual departments. It may also provide for some income to the County in the form of user fees from other municipalities. · This project has definitely come of age. Use of land already owned by the County is a big plus, and tuition and other probable income are also helpful to offset operating costs. Fire & Rescue: New Oak Grove Station Average Total Score: 64.5, Levell · While comments were made by Chief Simon about the cooperation between Salem and Roanoke County about a joint venture about this project I don't agree this year knowing something about policies in Salem with a new manager, a new mayor and possibly new elected officials. · Future needs should justify study to locate available land for future building. · As Keagy Village develops there is additional incentive to move forward with the Oak Grove Station. · Where this station will be locate needs to be addressed now so that it can be up and running the next two years. Response times out of closest station (Cave Spring)to this new station's coverage area are already slower than they would like. Biggest impact on response times will be seen at night and on weekends when 24 hour staffmg will provide quicker response than current volunteer coverage from Station 3, "Second due" response time will also be shortened by using Station 3, as opposed to Back Creek, Clearbrook or Salem at present. 2 acre buffer between Keagy Village and residential area should be explored to see if that is a suitable location, Other possibilities on the 419 corridor are extremely limited with the rapid growth in that area. If something other than Keagy Village must be considered, it needs to be dealt with now while there is still land available. Ideal location is on 419, or within a block of 419, to reduce residential impact. · I don't feel there has been any increase in this project's urgency since our last evaluation. Fire & Rescue: MDT Computer System Average Total Score: 64.1, Levell · Having had first hand experience with Fire and Rescue with the high efficiency within the last four years I recommend this project to continue to develop and maintain the high quality of services currently provided. · The use of state of the art computer aid devices to enhance communications and service support is critical to fast response. · The improved communication this system will provide should be considered a priority in an effort to provide the best possible planning and service we can. Information to responders ahead of arrival is critical not only to the safety and efficiency of those responders, but also to the recipients of their · This project is very "cool" and definitely has considerable value in that it saves time and provides needed info for on-scene responders. Nevertheless, I think there are other projects that are more urgently needed right now; this one needs to wait its turn a couple of years. · I believe this is needed now. 13 Parks & Recreation: Land for Passive Recreation Average Total Score: 62.4, Levell · The PR&T master plan reveals the need for land for passive recreation. · I am not in favor of purchasing additional lands until we figure out how to maintain the ones we have. · This was a tier one item last year and shouldn't be downgraded. Land will never be lower-priced than it is now. Information Technology: Enterprise Storage and Backup Average Total Score: 62.3, Levell · My comments on the Network Infrastructure Upgrade project apply to this project also (can't avoid computers' importance in practically every phase of our lives). Additionally, this item has now been spread out over five years instead of being lumped into a single sum. Better affordability is the result. Information Technology: Upgrade and Redesign of County Internet and Intranet Average Total Score: 62.0, Levell · I don't think we have a choice on this one. Parks & Recreation: Green Hill Park Average Total Score: 61.1, Levell · This site is the PR&T major event site. The amenities will make this a major sports complex with a proposed amphitheater for larger events. Fire & Rescue: New Hanging Rock Station Average Total Score: 60.4, Levell · I support this proj ect but once again working in cooperation with the current Salem Council is questionable. I suggest placing this cooperative on hold until we have an opportunity to work more closely with a new Salem Mayor, City Manager and a new City Council. I suggest reconsideration in 2009-2010. · Need for additional employees seems excessive · Proposed station could be a j oint staffing site like Read Mt. The surrounding area and 81 deems this area as needed by several surrounding governments. · Acquisition of land for this project is essential now while the land is still available and before it escalates in price. Having the land available will expedite the project once it receives complete funding. · The Hanging Rock community is vast area- anything we can do to help improve citizen services should be implemented. Parks & Recreation: Sports Lighting Replacement Average Total Score: 59.8, Level 2 · Older light systems are inefficient, waste energy and with component failure, can be dangerous. · Why isn't this project funded under routine maintenance? This is something that should be done on an ongoing basis so as not to end up being a capital cost. · I've personally experienced, and I'm sure most of the other Committee members have also experienced, the inadequacy of the lighting on many of the County's sports fields. Additional light emplacements and replacement of old fixtures with new, more efficient ones will make a big, noticeable difference. Police: South County Police Precinct Average Total Score: 59.5, Level 2 · This site would shorting travel time from Cove Rd and have another site to secure paper work allowing more time for service. This site could be staged in the South County in any possible surplus building or shared with another agency. · This facility could be located in the existing Main Library building once it is vacated, thus reducing 14 the cost of the project through land acquisition. · This project was a tier 2 item in last year's evaluations and should remain at that level. Significant comments last year centered around making use of a surplus building; this should still be considered. General Services: New Public Service Center Average Total Score: 59.1, Level 2 · The General Services personnel need and deserve a better facility . We the citizens need safer location of essential services. · Facility should be build in a central location that is accessible to 81,%8' or close access to the Transfer Station. · There is no doubt this project needs to be undertaken, but how and where is so very contingent on a domino effect. This property would lend itselfwell to the Police Academy if the decision is made to build the Public Service Center elsewhere, increasing the cost of this project perhaps, but lowering the cost of the other. Library: Vinton Library Renovation Average Total Score: 57.8, Level 2 · From the report from the Library staff, there is a need to renovate the Vinton library for better parking, a better reading room and a need for a better supervised library staff. East county is growing. There is a need in East County to emphasize the ecology and history and literature about the Blue Ridge Parkway. While I do not feel as strongly about Vinton as I do neglected Mt. Pleasant, I do believe renovation is needed. · Site is land locked. Very busy site. Parks & Recreation: Brambleton Center Average Total Score: 56.3, Level 2 · This is a old building that has been remolded a little at the time. Requires a lot of maintenance. · The Brambleton Center is pretty heavily used and is a valuable asset for the area it serves. The updates in this proj ect will bear good fruit. Parks & Recreation: Walrond Park Average Total Score: 55.9, Level 2 · Needed. · Paving should be covered under maintenance, not improvement. Parks & Recreation: Arnold Burton Softball Complex Average Total Score: 55.9, Level 2 · This venue is heavily used for tournament that bring in a lot of out of town visitors that subscribe to local lodging and restaurants. · Five million dollars of income for the greater Roanoke area says it all. The cost of this project is a drop in the bucket, by comparison. Parks & Recreation: Vinyard Park Phase III Average Total Score: 55.9, Level 2 · I highly support this proj ect. · This park is heavily used by rec teams, School teams, travel teams for tournaments as well as leisure activities. It is also used as a Handicap fishing site. A maintenance shop would lessen the continual moving equipment from other sites daily. · It's a large park and a big asset for the northern part of the County. It deserves to have all the amenities needed for such a facility. 15 Information Technology: Enterprise Security Project Average Total Score: 55.1, Level 2 Parks & Recreation: Whispering Pines Park Average Total Score: 53.8, Level 2 · Developing additional regulation soccer fields for this growing sport is essential. · The septic field and service facilities need to be completed first. I suggest funding those items this year and funding the rest next year. Fire & Rescue: Station Renovations Average Total Score: 53.4, Level 2 · Without much comment. There are greater needs at this time. I suggest resubmitting in 09-10. · We need to take care of our existing infrastructure. · Most of the request are from poor maintenance. Some issues could be bidding strategy of lowest price and not longer life product that can be upgraded. · Ongoing maintenance needs to be completed in a timely fashion to prevent increased costs for delayed proj ects. Delayed maintenance in these incidences has built up to the point that they are now being treated as capital costs, and this should not be. There should be an ongoing maintenance budget to address these needs · This project really hasn't changed since last year's evaluations; it's still a bunch ofrepairs...but the need for them has increased due to another year's worth of wear and tear on the facilities. These probably won't ever be done under the operational budget, and we should keep these facilities in good shape rather than let them get worse. Fire & Rescue: Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition Average Total Score: 53.4, Level 2 · While I support this project I do not see it as a priority this budget period. · There should be a way to address inadequacy of living quarters short of authorizing a $325,000 project. · We have expected our first responders to function on minimal conditions for too long. Adequate accommodations for 24 hours staffing is essential to the provision of continued quality response and care. · We really need to fix up this bunkroom. It looks more cramped than a WWII submarine's interior. · The bunk room needs to be replaced. It is tough to ask our fIrefighters to work in such conditions. Information Technology: Wi-Fi 'Hot Spots' Expansion Average Total Score: 53.1, Level 2 · Should enhance county services with ability to access information in more areas. · Absolutely essential as we move into the future · This is a "nice to have" item and should be added to IT capabilities in the not - too-distant future, but there are other projects of greater priority now, and dollars can go only so far. Police: Bomb Disposal Unit Average Total Score: 52.5, Level 2 · While I support this project I strongly believe also training the community resource people as fIrst responders along with designated school personnel to determine a need to call in a squad. · This needs to be a regional project with surrounding areas governments to share training and cost. · In today's hostile environment, I think it's imperative we have our own unit and avoid the potential for delayed response from an outside agency. That could really put life and property in jeopardy. · This is still a "nice to have" item and should be done on a regional basis. 16 Parks & Recreation: Taylor Tract Park and Trail System Average Total Score: 52.5, Level 2 · The nature trail will enhance the new library and provide accessible wildlife and wetlands studies for surrounding elementary school students as well as passive recreation. Grants are available for part of this proj ect. · Plans for the remaining 18 acres of the Taylor Tract should be approved to keep pace with SoCo library construction. · I'm in favor of developing this project in conjunction with the building of the new library, bridging the "gap" between that facility and the area schools and recreational areas. This areas could actually become a "destination". Information Technology: Microsoft Exchange Project Average Total Score: 52.4, Level 2 · Absolutely needed by all departments. · Product upgrade, got to do it. · This is probably long overdue Parks & Recreation: Camp Roanoke Average Total Score: 52.0, Level 2 · This would complete Camp Roanoke back to its original spender. The Camp was resurrected by Parks and Rec and is running at full potential with a good reputation. · Developing this camp as a "destination" to increase tourism should be a priority Information Technology: Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery Average Total Score: 51.8, Level 2 · Without comment. · This new item reflects the increased intrusion of government into our lives; yet it's unavoidable in the litigious world we live in. Fortunately, it's one of the smallest overall dollar amounts we're dealing with and is further mitigated by being spread out over several years, so we should just do it and have it out of the way. Library: Bent Mountain Library Expansion Average Total Score: 49.4, Level 3 · The Bent Mountain area is growing. People are moving up on the mountain. Yes people from Floyd County will be using the expanded library more if adequate parking and an adequate room is provided. The county once again addressed the South County Library before prioritizing the needs of Vinton, Mt. Pleasant and Bent Mountain. I don't understand! ! Parks & Recreation: Hollins Park Average Total Score: 48.5, Level 3 Information Technology: Voice Over IP System Average Total Score: 47.3, Level 3 · I can't support the justification for this proj ect at this time considering other more important needs in General Services and Library facilities. · This seems more like a want than a need, especially at $1,300,000 · Could join with school system to utilize their fiber optics lines General Services: Parking Garage Average Total Score: 46.6, Level 3 · Available sites are to far away from buildings serviced. Closest set At Thompson Memorial is not for 17 sale and is steel in Salem. Possible relocation of services. · I'm not happy with the fact that it's several blocks away from where it is needed, but perhaps that is the only realistic location for it. · County employees shouldn't have to pay for parking as part of going to work. Although the proposed garage isn't quite as close to work locations as we'd like, it will be a big plus in keeping employees happy with their job environment. Fire & Rescue: Station Fuel Control System Average Total Score: 44.3, Level 3 · I am not as enthusiastic about this project as I am about Libraries or the MDT program but I do support it. · A county wide fuel control system should be studied to see if the equipment and control measures could be economized by county wide bidding. · Preventive maintenance is critical for all apparatus and this program would allow better control of that. · The tremendous increase in vehicle fuel costs since last year's evaluations make this proj ect much more significant than it was then. These fuel costs won't go down, so it seems VERY sensible to take care of this need NOW and protect the County's fuel. Parks & Recreation: Spring Hollow Reservoir Average Total Score: 37.3, Level 3 · Not needed. There are far more important needs for our revenues. · I would prefer to see more information on just how much development will be allowed by the Health and Water Authority prior to backing this project. We could be putting money into something that does not have a lot of feasibility. · I think this project needs to be saved for later. There's just no pressing need for this project to be done now. 18 60 DRAFT CIP Project Detail FY2010-2014 Table of Contents Eco nomic Develop me n t............................................................................................................................. ........... 1 Center for Research & Technology................................................................................................................. 3 North Co un ty Bus in e ssP ark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Vinton Business Center........................................................................................................................ ........... 8 She riff .............................................................................................................................. ................................... 11 Renovations to Local Jail......................................................................................................................... ..... 13 Fire & Rescue........................................................................................................................ ..............................1 7 North County Station....................................................................................................................... ............. 19 Regional Bum Building...................................................................................................................... ..........21 New Oak Grove Station .............................................................................................................................. . 23 New Hanging Rock Station....................................................................................................................... ....25 MDT Computer System........................................................................................................................ ........27 Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition ............................................................................................................. 29 Station Renovations................................................................................................................... ...................31 Station Fuel Control System........................................................................................................................ .33 Po Ii ce .............................................................................................................................. ..................................... 35 Criminal J usti ce Training F ac ili ty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 South County Police Precinct...................................................................................................................... ..39 B 0 m b D i s po s al Unit........................................................................................................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 Lib ra ry .............................................................................................................................. .................................. 43 South County Library........................................................................................................................ ............45 G lenvar Library Expansion..................................................................................................................... ......47 Mt. Pleasant Library Relocation................................................................................................................... 49 Vinton Library Renovation.................................................................................................................... .......51 Bent Mountain Library Expansion................................................................................................................ 53 Real Estate V alua tio n............................................................................................................................. ............ 55 Digital Image Capture....................................................................................................................... ............ 57 Parks & Recrea tio n .............................................................................................................................. .............. 59 Greenways & Trails: Back Creek Greenway Segment................................................................................. 63 Greenways & Trails: Green Hill Park Loop TraiL........................................................................................ 66 Greenways & Trails: Glade Creek Greenway Segment................................................................................ 69 Greenways & Trails: Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail...........................................................................72 Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway East, Phase I .....................................................................75 Sports Lighting Rep lacement: Walrond Park............................................................................................... 78 Sports Lighting Replacement: Arnold Burton Softball Complex................................................................ 80 Sports Lighting Replacement: Darrell Shell Park Ballfields........................................................................ 82 Green Hill Park: Phase I............................................................................................................................. . . . 84 C amp Roan 0 k e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6 Whispering Pines Park.......................................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . 88 Land for Passive Recreations.................................................................................................................... ....90 Walrond Park.......................................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Arnold Burton Softball Complex.................................................................................................................. 95 Starkey Park.......................................................................................................................... ........................97 Bramb leton Center........................................................................................................................ ................99 Hollins P ark .............................................................................................................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 0 1 Vinyard Park.......................................................................................................................... ..................... 103 Spring H 011 ow Reservoir ............................................................................................................................ 1 05 DRAFT CIP Project Detail FY2010-2014 Table of Contents Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River West, Phase I ...................................................................................107 Greenways & Trails: Tinker Creek, Phase I ............................................................................................... 110 Iofo rma tio 0 T echo 0 logy .............................................................................................................................. .... 113 HP Migration Proj ect .............................................................................................................................. .... 115 Enterprise Storage and Backup................................................................................................................... 11 7 Internet & Intranet Redesign Proj ect......................................................................................... .................. 119 Voice Over IP System Proj ect..................................................................................................................... 122 Microsoft Exchange Proj ect........................................................................................................................ 124 Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery ................................................................................................. 126 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development Center for Research & Technology North County Business Park Vinton Business Center 114 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development Center for Research and Technology Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The Economic Development Department recently completed a $3.5 million construction project in the Center for Research and Technology, which included the construction of a new roadway with all necessary utilities and amenities to the Phase II area of the park. It also included the grading of three additional sites which will be serviced by the new road and ready for marketing to prospective companies in the spring of 2009. Future construction and improvement plans include: * Continuation of grading the individual sites within Phase I and Phase II of the project. * Ongoing maintenance of roadway and grounds including snow removal, mowing and care of vegetation * Additional landscaping enhancements along entrances and roadways, to Oinclude the reforestation of the hillside and drainage area adjacent to the new road. * Utility extensions and additional street light installations as Glenmary Drive and Corporate Circle are extended * Rights of way acquisition for the Dow Hollow Road extension * Preliminary design for the Dow Hollow Road extension * Construction of the Dow Hollow Road extension Marketing plans include: * Concentrated staff participation in regional organizations and programs such as the New Century Technology Council, the Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional commission and the New Century Venture Center * Building more strategic relationships with developmental partners such as the RVEDP and VEDP. * Staff participation in marketing missions/trade shows for specific targeted industries * Emphasis on the existing business and retention program for expansion into CRT * Srengthening the relationship with Virginia Tech and the Virginia Tech Corporate Research Center * Ongoing improvements to the Economic Development web site and the production of new marketing materials for use with prospective businesses * Marketing and utilization of the CRT Technology Zone, offering attractive incentives to qualifying companies Justification This project has been identified by the Board of Supervisors as a priority economic and community development project for Roanoke County. Continued improvements to the CRT are critical to the County's preparedness and development success of the park in a highly competitive marketplace. The funding needed for park development is prospect dependent. The construction schedule is a graduated plan of action for development of the park with public and private infrastructure, roadways, and stormwater drainage. If a qualified and confirmed prospect announced its intention to locate in the park, the development and funding schedule would require readjustment according to the parameters of the project. In addition, identification of land for acquisition next to the park requires flexible funding as potential tracks become available. The location of Novozymes Biologicals and Tecton Products to CRT is validation that this project is realizing the goals set forth by the Board of Supervisors when the project was initially approved. These projects represent a $22 million investment, the retention of 65 jobs, and the 3 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development Center for Research and Technology creation of over 100 new high paying technical jobs for Roanoke County citizens. Further, both companies are committed to significant expansions within the next few years. Operating Budget Impact Operational costs require annual budgeting for maintenance of Glenmary Drive and interior roadways due to VDOT's inability to perform road maintenance in a timely and suitable manner. Budgeting for the maintenance of landscaped public areas will continue to be included in future budgets. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will provide new tax revenue that will benefit Roanoke County in the future, in addition to providing well-paying jobs for our residents. Conformance with County Obligations The revised Master Plan and Planned Technology Development District (PTD) was approved by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors in 2007. This revised Master Plan will be included in future revisions to the Comprehensive Plan. It is included in the current Economic Development Business Plan. It also furthers the goals set forth in the Regional Economic Development Strategy, which was endorsed, by the governing bodies of all Roanoke Valley jurisdictions including Roanoke County. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources for this project would be General Fund operating revenue, state funds including VDOT industrial access funds, Governor's Opportunity Funds, or funds allotted at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors. 4 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development Center for Research and Technology FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $2,750,000 Annual commitment of $550,000 per year ($500,000 for construction, $50,000 for marketing). None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ^ ........,,""1 "...."..""...i....,... "'"........... -1=".. ..""",...J ""....,...J I""....,...J...."'''''...." l"Y'\""i......."....""...."'" r\1II IUClI VfJCI ClLIII~ '-'V~L~ IVI I VClU ClIIU IClIIU~'-'ClfJC IIIClIIILCIIClII'-'C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $550,000 FY11 $550,000 FY12 $550,000 FY13 $550,000 FY14 $550,000 TOTAL FY10-14 $2,750,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $15,000 FY11 $15,000 FY12 $15,000 FY13 $15,000 FY14 $15,000 5 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development North County Business Park Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Extension of Public Roadway and Utilities to a proposed new 200 acre commercial development at the intersection of Woodhaven Road and Valleypointe Boulevard. The project is being developed as a public private partnership between Roanoke County and the owner/developer, English Construction. A Performance Agreement between FirstChoice Partners, LLC, Roanoke County and the Roanoke County Economic Development Authority outlined the terms and conditions of the partnership. This infrastructure will also provide access to the new Multi Generational Recreation Facility currently under construction. It will also open up a thirty acre site for marketing for future commercial development. Justification Roanoke County, as an integral part of it's Economic Development program, partners with private businesses to create new revenue for the County and new jobs for it's citizens. The creation of this new business park as an extension of the Valleypointe Business Park was proposed over a decade ago and the owner/developer has begun the planning phase for the project and funding must the identified to move the project forward. Operating Budget Impact New tax revenue realized from the development will more than offset minimal operating costs that will result from the new public infrastructure in place. As new businesses are located in the park they will add new tax revenue to the Counties general fund. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will provide new tax revenue and new jobs to the region, thus providing long term benefits to Roanoke County and the surrounding area. Conformance with County Obligations Complies with the Comprehensive Plan, and the new Master Plan being developed by the owner will require approval by the Board of Supervisors. Funding Sources General Operating Revenue 6 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development North County Business Park FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $2,000,000 None. $1,000,000 Associated Operating Costs I\ni....il"Y'\""I "...."..""...i....,... ,.."........... IVIIIIIIIIClI VfJCI ClLIII~ '-'V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $500,000 FY11 $500,000 FY12 $500,000 FY13 $500,000 FY14 $500,000 TOTAL FY10-14 $2,000,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $1,000,000 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 7 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development Vinton Business Center Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Grading, utility extensions and access road construction of a 16 acre site in the Vinton Business Center. This will prepare an approximate 10+/- acre pad site for marketing for future industrial development. Justification Roanoke County established a Gain Sharing Agreement with the Town of Vinton in 1999 to market the Vinton Business Center for new business development. The Town and the County established the Center to generate new revenue and create new jobs for its citizens, and now shares equally (on a 50/50 basis) in the infrastructure costs and new revenue generated by businesses locating in the Center. Preparing "shovel ready" sites for development will assist both communities' in attracting quality companies to our area by being more prepared, and ultimately more competitive to new businesses. Operating Budget Impact New tax revenue realized from the development will offset the minimal operating costs that will result from the new public infrastructure in place. As new businesses are located in the park they will add new tax revenue to the Counties general fund. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will ultimately provide new tax revenue and new jobs to the region, thus providing long term benefits to Roanoke County, the Town of Vinton and the surrounding area. Conformance with County Obligations This project complies with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Master Plans for both Roanoke County and the Town of Vinton. The original Gain Sharing Agreement and subsequent amendments have all been adopted and approved by the Board of Supervisors. It also furthers the goals set forth in the Regional Economic Development Strategy, which was endorsed by the governing bodies of all Roanoke Valley jurisdictions including Roanoke County and the Town of Vinton. Funding Sources General Operating Revenue, VDOT Industrial Access Road Grant possibility. 8 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Economic Development Vinton Business Center FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $775,000 None. $0 Associated Operating Costs I\ni....il"Y'\""I "...."..""...i....,... ,.."........... IVIIIIIIIIClI VfJCI ClLIII~ '-'V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $775,000 FY10 $0 FY11 $775,000 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 9 12 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Sheriff Renovations to Local Jail 11 10 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Sheriff Renovations to Local Jail Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The jail is in its third year of a five year CIP maintenance project. As explained in the HSM&M report, there are a number of areas inside of the facility that are in need of repair/replacement or will need to be done shortly. So far, the CIP has enabled us to make needed repairs to the Cooling Tower and 12 of the 22 heat pumps have been replaced. Adjustments have also been made to the electrical system in order to bring it closer in to compliance with all of the electrical systems that are now in use in the jail facility. Also, as stated in the HSM&M report, several of the building's mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems are in poor condition and in need of replacement or repair. Justification Again, a continued replacement of the Jail's heat pump systems needs to be completed. The security systems (alarms, intercoms, door locks, cameras and recorders, etc.) are in need of repair or replacement. In order to keep up with existing requirements, not only must we be able to monitor the actions of inmates, deputies, employees and the public inside of the jail and courts, we have to monitor the exterior of all buildings and grounds. Being able to repair most of the equipment is more of a problem than installing new equipment. We have found that most of the mechanical equipment that we need to replace, is outdated and parts are no longer available. Currently we have contracted to have 21 lavatory valves replaced at a cost of $16,968. We have 119 more valves to be replaced at a cost of $96,237.68. The roofs on the jail have had numerous minor leaks that have been repaired by sealing the flashing on the walls, drains, pumps and mechanical rooms. The entire roof on the main part of the jail needs to be replaced, as well as the small roof over the gym and mechanical areas. The cost on repairing both roofs is approximately $77,000, according to estimates by the John T. Morgan roofing company. The replacement of roofs, water valves, cameras and monitors, locks and other mechanical/electrical equipment are all part of an on-going need for upkeep and service. We have been able to replace floor tiles in some areas of the jail, however, there are too many floors that are in need of repair. We have recently spent a little over $34,000 on our gymnasium, our visitation area and docket and medical areas. We have four other floors where the tiles need to be replaced. The cost of repairing those floors would be in the vicinity of $90,000. Due to this jail being such a secure facility, visual inspections can't be made as in some other buildings. That can also be said of the ability to work on the "systems," and by that I mean that the jail is set up for security and not for ease of maintenance. Even though we try to be proactive in the maintenance on the building, there are many areas that are brought to our attention by a system failure, a leak or when checking on one thing and finding another. We do repair many areas of the jail each year that are not covered by the CIP. Operating Budget Impact The investment in the new water cooling tower, as well as the 12 heat pumps has already been noticed in the constant temperature that the jail is able to maintain. Once the other 10 heat pumps are installed, along with the loss of 200 inmates to the Regional Jail, the pumps should be at maximum efficiency. The 21 lavatory valves that have been purchased and will soon be installed, will supply parts for other valves that have problems. However, these recycled parts are limited. New valves should be bought and installed as soon as possible for the other 119 lavatories. Continuous patching of the roof is an ongoing project. I don't believe that any structural integrity has been compromised due to the roof leaks, as of yet. Cost and Efficiency Impact The HVAC work that has been done on the jail building so far, has increased the air movement and seems to be working extremely well. When the remainder of the system is complete, it 13 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Sheriff Renovations to Local Jail should serve the jail effectively and efficiently for years. As you can imagine, the technology of surveillance equipment for our types of uses has increased dramatically. Not only do we have more requirements from the American Correctional Association (ACA) and the Department of Corrections (DOC), regarding treatment of inmates, but our ability to monitor them and keep them safely confined is paramount. As I said before, that since the equipment in the jail is so old and out-of-date, it is likely that most things have to be replaced (rather than repaired). Replacement should allow us to be able to find compatible parts for the equipment, and hopefully at a better price. Conformance with County Obligations One of the things that will help the Roanoke County/Salem Jail facility will be turning over to the Western VA Regional Jail, approximately 200 inmates. The RC/S jail was originally designed to hold 108 inmates. For long periods of time, this jail held over 300 inmates. That number would even increase on weekends. This was probably another reason why the facility has been "well used." The ability to move the extra inmates to the Regional facility will allow us to pass some non-mandatory standards that we had previously failed during ACA audits. The jail, while it is believed to be structurally sound, will not continue to pass standards that are mandated by State Codes or National Accreditation, without continual updates to machinery and supplementary equipment. Funding Sources Seventy-five percent of the project is the responsibility of Roanoke County. The other twenty- five percent is the responsibility of the City of Salem. 14 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Sheriff Renovations to Local Jail FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $1,275,000 Salem is reponsible for 25% of costs. Some of the smaller repairs will be paid for with "Dollar-a-Day" collected from housing of inmates. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $1,550,000 Associated Operating Costs 1\.."...." I ""VIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $1,275,000 FY10 $500,000 FY11 $500,000 FY12 $275,000 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $1,550,000 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 15 18 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Fire & Rescue North County Station Regional Burn Building New Oak Grove Station New Hanging Rock Station MDT Computer System Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition Station Renovations Station Fuel Control System 17 16 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue New North County Fire Station Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Provide a new fire and rescue public safety building, including land purchase, in the area of Plantation and Hollins Road. This would be a three-bay station to house a pumper and two ambulances. Also included would be adequate living areas such as offices, male/female sleeping/restroom/shower areas, storage areas, and meeting rooms. The Board of Supervisors has voted to approve and appropriate an increase in fee for ambulance transport schedules to repay the loan for the construction of this station and subsequent personnel costs. Justification Roanoke County continues to see an increase in call volume in the Williamson, Hershberger, and Plantation Road corridors. The existing station is dispatched to approximately 3,000 calls per year resulting in multiple calls that the current Hollins station is unable to handle. Thus, response goals in this first run area cannot be met because of travel time to the Hollins Road/Hershberger Road corridor and due to travel time from other stations that assist. By building this station, Roanoke County will improve response times and increase service to the citizens of Roanoke County. In addition, this station will also be able to offer backup to the growing Read Mountain area. Operating Budget Impact The operating budget would still have to be addressed; staffing projections include the addition of 3 Captain positions, 3 Lieutenant positions, 6 Paramedic/Firefighter positions and 6 Firefighter/EMT positions. Completion of this project would result in increased operational expenses. Cost and Efficiency Impact Completion of this project would result in the reduction of reaction/response times to the citizens. Conformance with County Obligations The addition of this station is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "expedient emergency response to the community" and meeting our performance measure of providing ALS response to 80% of the citizens in the County within six minutes when service is needed. Funding Sources Fee for Ambulance Transport Revenue 19 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue New North County Fire Station FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Includes land purchase and construction of the new building. None. $4,200,000 Associated Operating Costs C...""ffi....,... "...ili...i"'.... l"Y'\""i......."'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ...."........Ii"'.... ,.."'........... VLClIIIII~, ULIIILIC~, IIIClIIILCIIClII'-'C ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~ '-'V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $4,200,000 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $1,079,504 $1 , 113,036 $1,147,687 $1,183,504 $1,243,769 20 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Regional Burn Building Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Build a new regional burn building prop at the Roanoke Valley Regional Fire/EMS Training Center. This will be a Class B burn building in accordance with Virginia Department of Fire Programs guidelines Justification The current burn building is over 20 years old and has had several renovations through the years. It has reached the end of its useful life and it is now imperative that this critical training prop be replaced with a new, state-of-the-art structure. The four localities have once again jointly pursued funding through the Virginia Department of Fire Programs with much success. A grant in the amount of $430,000 was awarded to the localities to fund the new construction of a burn building on the Kessler Mill Road site. The remaining $350,000 needed to construct the building will be split among the four participating valley jurisdictions per the original regional agreement Operating Budget Impact There will be little impact on the operating budget as this building replaces one currently on site. Utilities will continue to be paid from the Regional Training Center operating accounts. Cost and Efficiency Impact Training for the valley and surrounding jurisdictions would be greatly improved. Conformance with County Obligations The addition of this project is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "professional, quality services to the community". Funding Sources $430,000 from Virginia Department of Fire Programs grant, $350,000 split between regional training center partners (County obligation of $134,000 will be incorporated into the Regional Training Center loan that currently exists). 21 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Regional Burn Building FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 None. $780,000 Associated Operating Costs 1\.."...." I ""VIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $0 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $780,000 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 22 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue New Oak Grove Station Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Provide a new fire and rescue public safety building, including land purchase, in the Oak Grove section of the Cave Spring area. This would be a three-bay station initially to house a pumper and an ambulance. Also included would be adequate living areas such as offices, male/female sleeping/restroom/shower areas, storage areas, and meeting rooms. Justification This area is undergoing rapid development and the response times to calls in this area are increasing due to the demographics of the population. This facility would serve the general areas of Oak Grove, Hidden Valley, Fairway Forest and Grandin Road Extension. These areas would then be under the six-minute response time goal instead of the current 6-10 minutes. As this area is further developed, this response time is and will continue to increase. All of the above mentioned areas are within the Cave Spring first-due district, which is our second busiest station. This new station could also provide second-due back up coverage to the Cave Spring, Fort Lewis, and Mason's Cove stations thus reducing the time for arrival on the scene of an emergency. This could also include a mutual aid response agreement with the City of Salem and Roanoke City or a possible joint-staffing agreement similar to that at Clearbrook. Operating Budget Impact The operating budget would still have to be addressed; proposed staffing would include the addition of 3 Captain positions, 3 Lieutenant positions, 6 Paramedic/Firefighter positions and 6 Firefighter/EMT positions. The approximate utility costs are shown. Costs could possibly be shared with another locality should a joint-staffing agreement be established. Cost and Efficiency Impact Completion of this project would result in the reduction of reaction/response times to the citizens. Conformance with County Obligations The addition of this station is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "expedient emergency response to the community" and meeting our performance measure of providing ALS response to 80% of the citizens in the County within six minutes when service is needed. Funding Sources Not known. 23 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue New Oak Grove Station FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $5,950,000 Includes land purchase and construction of new 3-bay station. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs C...""ffi....,... "...ili...i"'.... l"Y'\""i......."'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ...."........Ii"'.... ,.."'........... VLClIIIII~, ULIIILIC~, IIIClIIILCIIClII'-'C ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~ '-'V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $5,950,000 FY10 $600,000 FY11 $350,000 FY12 $5,000,000 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $1,147,687 FY13 $1,183,504 FY14 $1,243,769 24 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue New Hanging Rock Station Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Provide a new fire and rescue public safety building, including land purchase, in the area of 1-81 and Route 419. This would be a three-bay station initially to house a pumper and an ambulance. Also included would be adequate living areas such as offices, male/female sleeping/restrooms/shower areas, storage areas, and meeting rooms. Justification This area is undergoing more development and the response times to calls in this area are increasing due to traffic. This facility would serve the general areas of Red Lane, Laurel Woods, Loch Haven, Montclair, Glen Cove, the backside of North Lakes and the 1-81/419 area to include Cove Road. These areas would then be under the six-minute response time goal instead of the current 7-12 minutes. This station could also provide second-due back up coverage to the Fort Lewis, Mason's Cove, and Hollins stations thus reducing the time for arrival on the scene of an emergency. This could also include a mutual aid response agreement with the City of Salem and Roanoke City or a possible joint-staffing agreement similar to that at Clearbrook. Operating Budget Impact The operating budget would still have to be addressed; proposed staffing would include the addition of 3 Captain positions, 3 Lieutenant positions, 6 Paramedic/Firefighter positions and 6 Firefighter/EMT positions. The approximate utility costs are shown. Costs could possibly be shared with another locality should a joint-staffing agreement be established. Cost and Efficiency Impact Completion of this project would result in the reduction of reaction/response times to the citizens. Conformance with County Obligations The addition of this station is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "expedient emergency response to the community" and meeting our performance measure of providing ALS response to 80% of the citizens in the County within six minutes when service is needed. Funding Sources Not known. 25 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue New Hanging Rock Station FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $6,485,000 Includes land, engineering and design costs. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs C...""ffi....,... "...ili...i"'.... l"Y'\""i......."'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ...."........Ii"'.... ,.."'........... VLClIIIII~, ULIIILIC~, IIIClIIILCIIClII'-'C ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~ '-'V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $6,485,000 FY10 $600,000 FY11 $0 FY12 $385,000 FY13 $5,500,000 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $1,183,504 FY14 $1,243,769 26 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue MDT Computer System Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The MDT Program is designed to place a ruggedized computer in fire/rescue vehicles to improve response capabilities for the Fire and Rescue Department. The mobile data terminals or commonly called MDT's will allow information exchange in real-time from the Communications Officer to the Fire/Rescue Personnel in the field. This allows for more accurate information to be provided to responding fire/rescue units from the 911 Center. The MDT's will also allow for utilization of stored files for building plans and Pre-Incident Surveys for rapid access by responding fire/rescue units. Currently, the majority of all information is passed by voice over the radio which limits the amount of information that is available to responding fire/rescue units. Justification A trial program in the Battalion Chief vehicle has proven successful. The availability of information from CAD provides the responder with critical information regarding the number and identity of units responding, location of hydrants, hazards on the scene or changes in the status of the incident. Having this information updated live is invaluable. This program would allow the department to purchase 37 MDT's and the mounting hardware for our station apparatus. Responding units would have access to pre-plan information detailing the floor plans for any businesses, construction types, and any hazards. The live connection will ensure that the current status of the incident is known to the responders prior to their arrival. Information may become available while enroute to the incident that currently can only be communicated via the radio. Operating Budget Impact Since these MDT's operate via a cellular wireless card, the Department will have to contract for cellular service at a cost of $600.00 annually per unit. A total of $22,200.00 annually will need to be budgeted in our operating account. Cost and Efficiency Impact By using the MDT's to retrieve information prior to arrival on-scene, the responding company will be better prepared to respond and it ensures that incidents are handled safely and efficiently. Conformance with County Obligations The addition of this station is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "expedient emergency response to the community". Funding Sources Not known. 27 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue MDT Computer System FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $212,750 Equipment costs. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs 1"'",11, .I"".. ...."'....,i"'''' "''''.........'''''''... ",-1= ~a"" ""........,,""11., ...."'.. "....i... VCIIUIClI ~CI VI'-'C '-'VilLI CI'-'L VI ,,",VVV ClIII IUClIIY fJCI UIIIL. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $212,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $212,750 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $22,200 $22,200 $22,200 $22,200 $22,200 28 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will provide sleeping quarters for career and volunteer personnel at the Masons Cove station. The current area being used is not large enough or adequate to house the 24- hour career personnel and the volunteer personnel who work evenings and weekends. An addition similar to that added at the Mount Pleasant station would provide for the facilities necessary for personnel to stay overnight including sleeping, bathroom and shower areas for both male and female personnel. Completion of this project will also allow for the upgrade of the current electrical system, backup generator, and water purification system for the entire station. Justification Calls in the Catawba/Masons Cove area have increased in recent years to the point that 24- Hour/? days-a-week ALS coverage is provided from the Masons Cove station. At the time the personnel were approved, areas within the station were rearranged to provide an area for 24- hour personnel to sleep. These accommodations are crowded and are not adequate for continued use. The area was originally part of the meeting room and not designed to be a living area. An interior wall was added to partition off the area currently used for a bunkroom. HVAC flows are not at an optimal level since this partition disrupts the air flow. Bathroom facilities are not located near the sleeping quarters. There is a need for a building addition to the rear of the existing building to allow sleeping quarters for the 24-hour career personnel and volunteer personnel. The completion of this addition would supply more efficient and quality facilities for evening personnel. Operating Budget Impact There would be a slight increase in utilities to heat and cool the additional space. Water consumption should not see an increase since personnel are already assigned on a 24-hour basis at this time. Cost and Efficiency Impact Completion of this project would provide a more energy efficient and adequate environment for 24-hour personnel and volunteer personnel on duty. Conformance with County Obligations The addition at this station is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "expedient emergency response to the community" and meeting our performance measure of providing ALS response to 80% of the citizens in the County within six minutes when service is needed. Funding Sources Not known. 29 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Masons Cove Bunk Room Addition FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $425,000 Includes construction of the additional sleeping quarters, upgrading the electrical system an dpurchase of a backup generator and water purification system. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs I\ni....il"Y'\""1 i....,...."'''''....''' i.... "...ili...i"'.... ,.."'....... IVIIIIIIIIClI IIlvl t;;CI~t;; III U LIIILIt;;~ vV~L. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $425,000 FY10 $50,000 FY11 $375,000 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 30 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Station Renovations Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will encompass major renovations and upgrades of Fire and Rescue Public Safety Buildings throughout the County. The work will include HVAC upgrades, window replacements, roof repairs and parking area improvements. The buildings included are Bent Mountain, Catawba, Cave Spring, Fort Lewis, Masons Cove and Hollins. Due to difficulties in continued operations, this project is requested to be on-going over several years with bids for similar work (HVAC, concrete, bay doors, and windows) to include all sites to realize a cost savings. It is the goal of the department to continue the work over a multi-year period where vehicles and/or staff could be temporarily relocated to accommodate the work and still continue to provide services to the public. Fire and Rescue is working with General Services to coordinate the renovations and to facilitate multi-location bids for the most efficient use of funds. Justification The Bent Mountain and Catawba Stations were both built and opened in 1980. While routine maintenance has taken place, neither building has undergone any major repair or renovation since the initial construction except for the replacement of the bay heat and concrete pad at Bent Mountain. The replacement of the windows is necessary to ensure that the station operates at its most energy efficient capacity. Major concrete and asphalt repairs are still needed on the exterior. In addition, areas of the initial pre-fab construction that have begun to rust need repairs to prolong the life of the facility. These would be the first two buildings receiving work. Masons Cove has not received any upgrades since 1987 when bays and living quarters were added to the original station. The bay doors need repairs and the parking lot is in need of re- paving. Hollins, Fort Lewis and Cave Spring stations have all had some work completed since the original construction but are still in need of repair/replacement of essential systems due to the high traffic and call volume. Restrooms, HVAC systems and some roofing areas necessitate work to remain both functional and efficient. The sewer line at Fort Lewis is experiencing frequent backups, resulting in extensive cleaning and monitoring to ensure that sanitary conditions within the station are maintained. All of the above would receive some cosmetic repair (painting) in any areas where other work to upgrade systems was performed. Additionally, each site would have significant work performed on the bay doors to include seals and switching units. This should assist in reducing utility costs at all locations. Operating Budget Impact The overall operating needs should slightly decline due to more efficient systems being utilized and repairs/replacements to the buildings resulting in a more energy efficient structure. Cost and Efficiency Impact The overall efficiency will improve at each site due to the more efficient systems in use coupled with the energy saving repairs/replacements completed on the buildings will result in lower utility costs at each site renovated. Conformance with County Obligations These station improvements are directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "expedient emergency response to the community" and meeting our performance 31 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Station Renovations measure of providing ALS response to 80% of the citizens in the County within six minutes when service is needed. Funding Sources Not known. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $524,535 HVAC upgrades, window replacements, roof repairs and parking area improvements. Cost of renovations would be spread out over several years. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs None. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $524,535 FY10 $176,000 FY11 $176,000 FY12 $172,535 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 32 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Station Fuel Control System Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project would provide for the installation of an automated fuel technology at all fire and rescue stations. Justification Currently, the fire and rescue stations do not have fuel security/control/accountability technology on the station fuel pumps. Fuel is tracked and monitored by an honor system solely dependent on the individual's manual entry of information. The use of pen and paper to track the usage of fuel has become an antiquated method that is prone to the human error factor. This facilitates the loss of accountability due to incomplete documentation on the fuel tracking sheets. With fuel costs at an all time high, it is more important now than ever to ensure the proper dispensing and tracking of fuel as it has a major impact on departmental budgets. By implementing this project, the fuel will be tracked via a computer technology system and accountability will be maintained by individual apparatus. In addition, there will be the added benefit of tracking odometer readings for each apparatus to schedule preventive maintenance. This would also perpetuate the possibility of generating reports from the system for projections and future planning. The main goal is to help control and monitor fuel usage. The added benefit we will see is a method to ensure that our apparatus meet their equipment maintenance schedules. Operating Budget Impact Since the existing stations have all been networked into our system, there would be little cost to implement the system other than the purchase of equipment, installation, and future maintenance. These annual projections are shown. Cost and Efficiency Impact The implementation of this system would improve overall efficiency by offering more monitoring capabilities for fuel consumption and increased performance of the apparatus due to the completion of preventative maintenance on schedule. Conformance with County Obligations This project is directly related to our departmental business plan goal of providing "accurate records and reporting to meet departmental needs" and ensure compliance with local mandates. Funding Sources Not known. 33 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Fire and Rescue Station Fuel Control System FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $159,500 Cost includes purchase and installation of the automatedfuel control technology. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ^ ........,,""1 l"Y'\""i......."'....""....,..'" r\1II IUClI IIIClIIILCIIClII'-'C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $159,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $159,500 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $6,050 $6,050 $6,050 $6,050 $6,050 34 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Pol ice Criminal Justice Training Facility South County Precinct Bomb Disposal Unit 35 62 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Police Criminal Justice Training Academy Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The scope of this proposal entails the construction of a training facility for use by the Roanoke County Police and Sheriffs Department as well as other potential partnering public safety agencies in and around the Roanoke Valley. A training academy aligns with many guiding principles aimed at delivering effective services to the citizenry, enhancing public safety and promoting the safety and security of our citizens while at home, at work, and at play. The training academy would involve the reconditioning and excavation of land located on Kessler Mill Road that is already owned by the County of Roanoke. In 2007, the Police Department contracted the services of the Community Design Assistance Center of the Virginia Tech College of Architecture and Urban Studies to prepare concept plans for the creation of such a facility. In 2008, the County of Roanoke expanded their evaluation of the project by issuing a formal Request for Proposal for Professional Architectural and Engineering Services to conduct an engineering study aimed at determining the feasibility and suitability of construction on the Kessler Mill site. The academy plans would provide for tiered classrooms, physical training room, auditorium, computer laboratory, administrative offices, file and storage areas, and research library. The facilities have been designed as "Green Buildings" using the principles and the guidelines of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. This 15,000 square foot facility will serve as a location for both new employee and in-service training. The Police and Sheriff Departments would be the primary users of the training facility however members of other law enforcement agencies are fully expected to participate in some training programs. Justification The nature of the public safety profession dictates a high level of training for all personnel. Not only is this training mandated by the State of Virginia, the ability to provide the residents of the County with premier law enforcement services requires personnel skilled in delivery of those services. In today's environment, with its rapidly developing technology and increasing sophistication of threats to public safety, proper training has evolved as a key element to the effectiveness of all public safety agencies. This joint training facility will provide economies of scale by having the Police and Sheriff sharing joint facilities, preventing needless duplication of physical facilities and will allow for economies of scope through the interaction and transfer of knowledge and expertise between the departments. Operating Budget Impact Staffing of the facility is expected to require 3 full time positions, an Academy Director, an Assistant Academy Director and an Office Support Specialist. Two part time positions would serve in a support role to assist in the training and management of the academy classes. The first full year salary and benefits package would be approximately $183,000 for these 3 positions with a 3% annual adjustment added for subsequent years. The annual operational costs for the academy are projected to cost $142,282 with approximately 3.5% adjustment for subsequent years. Cost and Efficiency Impact All of the Roanoke County Public Safety Agencies are efficient and professional organizations as evidenced by the high quality of service provided to the citizens and the formal recognition of state and national public safety accrediting organizations. Quality training will enable Roanoke County's public safety agencies to maintain this high level of service. This facility will provide the public safety agencies with a facility to provide quality training to their personnel, thereby 37 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Police Criminal Justice Training Academy improving the level of service provided to the citizens of the County of Roanoke. Conformance with County Obligations The County's Community Plan recognizes the need for intergovernmental cooperation in the provision of public safety services, Chapter 4, page 16. The Community Plan also recognizes the theme of regionalism in its Vision Statements as noted in Chapter 2, page 1. Funding Sources Partnering public safety agencies from around the Roanoke Valley will pay a tuition fee for training services rendered by the County of Roanoke. The Police Department currently has 3 million dollars dedicated to the construction of a training academy. These funds were acquired by the Department as a result of their assistance in criminal justice endeavors and at no cost to the County of Roanoke. These funds should provide a majority of the capital necessary for the construction of this facility. However, additional funding would be necessary to ensure the facility would provide the optimal resources for effective and efficient training. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $3,600,000 Includes construction of the facility and equipment/furnishings. None. $9,424 Associated Operating Costs Th...i""'\i""'\ "",..J,..Ji"'i"I"'\",,1 f..I1 ...il"V'\i""'\ ""I"'\,..J "'\A/" "",..J,..Ji...i"I"'\""1 ....""...... ...il"V'\i""'\ ...."~i...i,,l"'\~ \A/ill hi""'\ 1"'\i""'\i""'\,..Ji""'\,..J ""... "" ,..,,~... "f ct1 Q':2 nnn ....i""'\... Hi""'\""'" f""'\"'hi""'\'" I III ~~ ClUUILlVIIClI I UII-L1III~ ClIIU LVVV ClUUILlVIIClI fJClI L-L1III~ fJV~ILlVII~ VVIII IJ~ II~~U~U ClL CI ,",V~L VI \oj) I VV,VVV fJ~1 Y~ClI. ,""L1I~1 operational costs are projected to be $142,282 per year. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $3,600,000 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $3,600,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $9,424 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $325,282 FY13 $335,751 FY14 $346,560 38 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Police South County Precinct Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will provide for a building of a new Police Precinct building in South Roanoke County. This new building will meet the increasing demands upon the Police Department to provide close, available police services to the citizens of Roanoke County. The new building will provide space for patrol officers, investigative personnel, and supervisors. The new building has a projected size of 2000 square feet. The building could be built on land already owned by Roanoke County or land could be acquired for the facility. Justification The strong growth in Roanoke County has resulted in an increase in the demand for police services. The patrol districts extending southward from Lewis Gale Hospital towards Tanglewood Mall represents 40% of the police service calls in Roanoke County. The new building would enable both patrol and investigative personnel to originate their tour of duty in south Roanoke County region. By initiating their work from the southern area of the County, travel to the main police station on Cove Road would be reduced, saving the County both time and resources (fuel). This enhances the overall delivery of police services by retaining personnel in the south Roanoke County area for the duration of their tours of duty. The location would also provide heightened opportunities for police interaction with members of the south Roanoke County communities Operating Budget Impact The operating costs for maintenance and utilities the first year are estimated at $5,000. It is further estimated that these operating costs will rise by approximately 3.5% per year. These costs estimates include electric, gas, water, maintenance, and custodial. No additional staff would be added to staff this facility. Cost and Efficiency Impact The department anticipates that the need for the south precinct building will continue to exist into the foreseeable future. Long term leasing of a building would result in significant recurring payments. Due to the high demand for commercial property, it is unlikely that a suitable building could be leased at a rate significantly below prevailing market rates. After the initial construction costs, these future lease payments could be avoided. The presence of the south Roanoke County Precinct would increase the efficiency of the department by permanently stationing resources in south Roanoke County. The cost estimates are based on square footage (2,000) and projected construction costs ($175.00 per square foot). Conformance with County Obligations The Community Plan, Chapter 4 page 16, recognizes that the level of service provided by the police department is a significant factor in the quality of life enjoyed by County citizens and the creation of a South County Precinct would validate the importance of minimizing response time and increasing opportunities for citizen interaction. Funding Sources Currently the Police Department does not have funding to initiate this project and would need funds from the Count to complete this project. 39 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Police South County Precinct FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $410,000 Includes construction of the new precinct and equipment/furnishings. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs r'"tr'O"tr'O .."I""",,,..J .." l"Y'\""i......"....""....,.." ""....,..J ""ili"i,,tr'O VV~L~ ICIClLCU LV IllCllIlLCllClllvC ClIIU ULIIILIC~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $410,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $410,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $5,000 $5,175 $5,355 $5,542 $5,737 40 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Police Bomb Disposal Unit Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The creation of a bomb disposal unit will both enhance and expand the Department's ability to provide services and increased safety to the citizens of Roanoke County. The bomb disposal unit will enable the Department to respond, investigate, and resolve incidents involving suspected explosive devices. The bomb disposal unit will also serve to both complement and leverage the existing Department explosive detection K-9 unit. Justification The changing nature of threats and the increased sophistication of criminals dictate that local law enforcement agencies possess the capability to handle incidents that occur within their jurisdictions. Since November 1998, the Department has responded to 98 calls for service involving bomb threats, of those 12 involved governmental buildings, 39 involved schools, and 34 involved business establishments. The Virginia State Police has a single bomb disposal unit serving 13 counties in southwestern Virginia. The large geographic area of the 13 counties could result in a significant delay in a response to an incident in Roanoke County. In the event of an actual explosive device, a time delay can lead to a higher potential for injury. In the case of a hoax explosive device or a false bomb threat, a delay in response can lead to higher levels of concern and apprehension for those directly involved in the incident and for the public at large. The creation of a bomb disposal unit will eliminate the possibility of a delayed response and will enable the Department to quickly address incidents involving explosive devices. Operating Budget Impact Adoption of this project would result in yearly costs incurred of approximately $2,500 for equipment maintenance and $2,500 for personnel in-service training. The initial capital costs are estimated at approximately $150,000 with an expected $20,000 in following years for equipment upgrades and maintenance. The capital costs cover the bomb disposal trailer, protective equipment, disruption devices and related equipment. All bomb disposal equipment is required to be owned by the jurisdiction before personnel may receive authorization to attend the required training. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will provide for the enhanced safety of Roanoke County Schools as well as all County residents. The creation of the bomb disposal unit will enable the Department to handle explosive threats in a timely manner. The timely handling of calls involving explosive devices will provide for efficient services to the citizens of Roanoke County and minimize extended disruption of commerce and education in Roanoke County as the result of incidents involving threats of explosive devices. Conformance with County Obligations The County's Community Plan recognizes the need for the efficient delivery of public safety services with minimal response time, Chp. 4 page 16. Funding Sources General operating revenues supplemented by grant funding if available. 41 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Police Bomb Disposal Unit FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $170,000 Equipment related costs. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ^ ........,,""1 ",,,tr'O"tr'O ,,-1= ~') &:.nn -1=".. "...."i....I"Y'\"...... l"Y'\""i......"....""....,.." ""....,..J ~') &:.nn -1=".. i.... tr'O"....,i,.." ...."..tr'O"........,,1 ....""i....i........ r\1II IUClI vV~L~ VI \OjJL.,VVV IVI C'-tUlfJIIICIIL IllCllIlLCllClllvC ClIIU \OjJL.,VVV IVI 1I1-~CIVlvC fJCI~VIIIICI LIClIIIIII~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $0 $150,000 $0 $0 $20,000 $170,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 42 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Library South County Library Glenvar Library Expansion Mt. Pleasant Library Relocation Vinton Library Renovation Bent Mountain Library Expansion 43 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library South County Library Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will replace the existing Headquarters/419 Library with a 56,000 sq. ft. building constructed to meet both current and anticipated needs for size, lighting, design, handicapped accessibility, and telecommunication infrastructure. The Library will include expanded stacks, children's programming areas, young adult collections, a browsing area, additional Internet stations, a computer training lab, display space, a 200-seat divisible meeting room, an auditorium, individual tutoring spaces, a conference room, and a coffee shop. The design incorporates logical traffic patterns, redesign support work spaces, and added security measures to protect valuable materials and allow the introduction of self-checkout modules. Externally, the building will have safe parking lot entrances and exits, improved traffic flow connecting to Merriman Road, and parking spaces to accommodate 220 vehicles. Justification With a public area of approximately 18,500 sq. ft., the present Headquarters/419 Library is less than 40% of the size specified by state standards for its current population base. It is the only library that serves two magisterial districts, Cave Spring and Windsor Hills. Designed for a service level of 600 visitors per day, it now averages more than 1,150 citizen visits daily [376,250 in FY06-07, with an annual circulation of 546,877 items, a 4.5% increase over the previous year]. The building was recarpeted and painted in 2003 and the circulation desks were refurbished but no square footage was added. The majority of the furnishings and fixtures date from the original construction of thirty-four years ago and are heavily-worn. It is overcrowded, with a disjointed layout that forces inefficiencies and compounds congestion during peak periods. Shelves are at 120% of capacity. There is no archival or storage space for the collection so the acquisition of any new materials requires that less-used books be discarded. This facility was designed for library services as they existed in the 1970's. New formats, including Internet access, instructional labs, and media products require more space, a robust technological infrastructure, and greater flexibility than the building can accommodate. Remodeling the existing structure would not achieve the goal of creating a modern library. The building is landlocked on a 2.5 acre lot, with the maximum allowable number of parking spaces. Funding and a timeline for this project were established. Roanoke County contracted for architectural and engineering services for a new library and design and permitting were completed. However, when the project went out to bid, all bids were significantly over budget. The project was delayed to allow time for redesign and rebidding. The current timeline projects that construction will begin in the summer of 2009. Operating Budget Impact Additional staff (5.5 positions) will be needed to provide service in the larger public work area and for support functions in technical services. Although this represents a much larger building size, it is designed within the principles of sustainable architecture. Cost and Efficiency Impact When completed, the department's operational costs will rise but overall efficiency will be improved by maximizing staffing resources and eliminating poor traffic patterns. The installation of a security system would reduce collection theft rates. Rental fees from the meeting rooms, auditorium, coffee shop and FOL gift shop will become revenue streams to help support operational expenses. 45 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library South County Library Conformance with County Obligations This project has been funded. It was identified as the highest priority by the Library Citizens' Review Team and the Library Board. It is in conformance with the Library Facilities Study and the Community Plan. The current building does not meet standards for a public library or requirements for handicapped accessibility. Funding Sources As part of a revenue sharing agreement with the schools, $1.4 million in funding for land acquisition and initial engineering for this project was included in the FY2005-06 budget, with an additional $600,000 added in FY2006-07. The balance of the cost will come from bonds. Because this project is a headquarters library, it could qualify for a grant of up to $100,000 if Federal funding for library construction is restored. After construction, operating revenues will increase by $25,000 from shop sales and rental fees. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $8,959,500 Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: Includes land acquisition, site improvements, construction, equipment and furnishings. None. $9,040,500 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ~""".J:.J: It::. t::. ...."~i..i,,....~\ ..,ill h...... ................,..J......,..J I\n""i................"",........ ""....,..J "..ili..i......~ ~h",.I,..J ....".. i....,..........""~...... ""........ t::.nol.. ""........"""11,, ,.."I"Y'\....""........,..J .." r\UUILlVIIClI ~LClII \v.v fJV~ILlVII~J VVIII IJC IICCUCU. IVICllIlLCllClvC ClIIU ULIIILlC~ ~IIVUIU IIVL IIlvICCI~C VVCI VV /u ClIIIIUClIIY vVlllfJClICU LV the current HQ/419 library. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10-14 $8,959,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,959,500 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $9,040,500 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $232,250 $391,500 $391,500 $391 ,500 $391,500 46 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Glenvar Library Expansion Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project would replace the existing Glenvar Branch Library with a 15,000 s.f. facility on the same site. The old building would be not be removed until the new library is completed, thus ensuring continuous service to patrons of the Catawba District. The new library would provide increased public space and readers' seating, twice the number of book stacks, an improved children's area with appropriately-scaled shelving, a more functional meeting room, a conference room, and high speed access to electronic resources, including Internet work stations and a computer instructional lab. Space would be allotted to system support functions, including archival storage. There would be room for future growth. The parking lot would be expanded and redesigned to better accommodate both patron and through-traffic from the nursing home located behind the building. Justification The Glenvar Library was constructed in 1978 and has had no renovations since, despite nearly three decades of patron use. It is in deplorable condition. Worn furniture, packed shelves, and cramped conditions make the Glenvar Branch unappealing to the public and inefficient in which to work. Severely limited shelf space requires the removal and disposal of approximately 1,000 items annually. In its current configuration, the building inhibits services to both traditional library users and business clientele. Replacing it would restore basic library functionality for patrons, especially children, who presently have no study, browsing, or quiet reading spaces. Unlike the other large branches, there is no computer instructional lab, which means the system is unable to offer the same full range of classes for the public that it does elsewhere. Designed to be a cozy neighborhood library, it is now located in a mixed environment of housing subdivisions and industrial development. It is surrounded by small-to-medium sized businesses, so it typically has more requests for commercial meeting and training space than other branches, many of which can't be accommodated because the existing space is restricted and does not have the necessary technological amenities. Upgrading the facility would enable businesses, developers, and civic groups to use the facility as a mini-conference center, while the rental fees could create a revenue stream for the library. The current building does not meet state standards, is not A.D.A. compliant, and is riddled with structural problems which would make an expansion problematic. An engineering assessment determined that replacing the current building would be more cost-efficient in the long run than attempting to add onto it. Operating Budget Impact Departmental costs for staffing, maintenance, and utility expenses would increase proportionate to the size of the expanded building and the change in service level more patron traffic would require. It would require approximately $20,000 per year on an ongoing basis to begin to restore the collection after years of discarding books due to lack of space. Cost and Efficiency Impact The library itself will operate more efficiently if it has better design, logical traffic patterns, improved lighting, and stable access to technology. Books won't have to be discarded simply because there is no space for them. Based on current request rates that cannot be accommodated, commercial meeting room/computer lab usage could immediately generate $6,000 per year. With promotional efforts, that number would be higher. Although the Virginia Department of Transportation has claimed significant footage for its right 47 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Glenvar Library Expansion of way to widen Rte. 460, enough property remains to allow for the new building and parking to be relocated without purchasing additional land or a new site. The right-of-way sale generated funds of $74,000, which could be applied to planning. Conformance with County Obligations The project is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Library Facilities Study. Expansion of the Glenvar Library has been consistently ranked as one of the highest Level One capital projects by the CIP Citizen Review Committees and is in conformance with the Community Plan and the Library Facilities Study. It is supported by standards published by the Library of Virginia and is the primary unfunded capital priority of the Library Board of Trustees. Funding Sources The funding source for this project will be General Fund operating revenue and unidentified new revenues. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $6,392,950 Includes engineering, design, construction, furnishings and equipment. None. $624,509 Associated Operating Costs C..""ffi........ l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ""ili",, ",,,tr'O"tr'O VLClIIIII~, IllCllIlLCllClllvC ClIIU ULIIILY vV~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10-14 $100,000 $3,066,875 $3,226,075 $0 $0 $6,392,950 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $624,509 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $0 $108,700 $119,895 $130,445 48 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Mt. Pleasant Library Replacement Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project would relocate the one-room, 529 sq ft Mt. Pleasant Branch Library to a separate structure outside the elementary school. The new 6,000 sq ft library would include stack space to accommodate general reading, adult nonfiction, and juvenile collections. It would have approximately 25 work/study seats, appropriate furnishings for children, new shelving, an area for pc/lnternet stations, and a programming/meeting area for small groups. It would include handicapped accessible parking and entries. Justification The current library is housed in a small classroom in the Mt. Pleasant Elementary School. It is too restricted, both in size and by school operations, to support a standard collection and appropriate library services. This branch was characterized as "completely inadequate" in the consultant's preliminary assessment for the Library Facilities Study. Its future has become even more problematic due to the recent decision by the Roanoke County School Board to renovate or replace the elementary school within the next two years. Their project could begin within this fiscal year but there has been no firm indication of what, if any, role the public library space would fill in the future. A new building would improve services to a section of the County which does not have ready access to other libraries. A separate facility would also avoid some of the security and control issues that arise when public library operations are located on school grounds. With a surrounding area that has experienced substantial residential growth, library services should be upgraded to meet the needs of a population that has continued to expand. Any library would require a minimum of 6,000 s.f. to be functional for the foreseeable future. The location of a new and enlarged facility, which is yet to be determined, will be an issue which will impact building plans. A site on the highway would be ideal because it would improve access, convenience, and visibility and promote increased use of the library by all citizens. Operating Budget Impact Annual operational, maintenance, and utilities costs would increase by approximately $117,000, proportionate to the larger space, longer operating hours, and the need for more staff. Cost and Efficiency Impact A new building would provide services and create meeting space for an area which is notably lacking in public facilities. The classroom currently occupied by the library would be vacated which would free the room to be used for school purposes. Conformance with County Obligations The current room fails to meet state standards for a public library and was rated as completely inadequate by the Library Facilities Study. Expansion and replacement of the Mt. Pleasant Library is in conformance with the newly-revised and adopted Mt. Pleasant Community Plan, in which citizens rated improving library services as important to their quality of life. It is also a high priority of the Library Board of Trustees. Funding Sources A full-service library would offer meeting room space, which would generate usage fees averaging $1000 per year. Construction and ongoing costs would come from general operating revenues or source to be determined. 49 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Mt. Pleasant Library Replacement FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $3,326,020 Includes land, site improvements, engineering and construction costs. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ^ ........,,""1 l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" "...."'..""..i"....""1 ""....,..J ,,"ili4o., ",,,tr'O"tr'O r\1II IUClI IIIClIIILCIIClllvC, VfJCI ClLIVIIClI ClIIU ULIIILY vV~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 $0 $1,797,500 $1,528,520 $0 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 $0 $1,797,500 $1 ,528,520 $0 TOTAL FY14 FY10-14 $0 $3,326,020 FY14 $0 50 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Vinton Library Expansion Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project would expand the footprint of the Vinton Library by 4,000 sq.ft. and would bring it closer to the size of the current Hollins Library (17,600 sq. ft.) and the planned Glenvar Library (15,000 sq. ft.). It would also refurbish the shabby interior. New chairs and tables would replace worn furnishings and provide comfortable seating for casual reading or studying. A realigned floor plan would make shelving areas fully-accessible, improve traffic patterns in the adult section, and allow space for the computer lab. Lighting would be upgraded to meet current standards, as would telecommunication lines and electrical outlets. The layout of the public workstations would be reconfigured. The project would also include a reoriented circulation desk and central corridor work area for more efficient workflow, improved line-of-sight, appropriate media shelving, and added storage. Public restrooms would be redesigned to allow handicapped accessibility. When finished, this would be the first complete renovation since the building's construction since 1969. Justification The Vinton library is nearly 40 years old and is essentially unchanged, although it was expanded slightly in 1985, after an HV AC unit fell through the roof and destroyed part of the collection. The building serves as one of the hubs of all the Town of Vinton's community festivals (i.e., Dogwood Days, Enchanted Eve, etc.) and is the County's public face to the residents. In recent years, the Friends of the Library have donated a substantial part of their treasury to provide some new furniture but most fittings and furnishings are original to the building and show almost four decades of wear. Lighting is dim and ill-placed. Space for the existing computer lab was cut out of the magazine display area so the resulting configuration has partially blocked ambient light in the reference area. The lab needs to be re-sited for better staff oversight and resized to allow more room for computer workstations. The wiring and telecommunications infrastructure for a large computer network has been grafted onto old lines. Handicapped accessibility is compromised in some of the aisles, as well as the public restrooms, which are narrow and inaccessible for wheelchairs. In fact, the only restroom that is available to handicapped citizens is in the meeting room. Wheelchair-bound patrons who need to use it must intrude on groups in the meeting room, which is embarrassing and inconvenient. In FY2006-07, the Town of Vinton built a 21-space parking lot below the War Memorial and has allowed the Library to share it. Even when added to the existing 14 spaces adjacent to the building the total is still inadequate to meet the need for parking when programs are in progress at either site. Operating Budget Impact There would be an impact on the department's operating budget for utilities. Renovations draw more patrons into the library, which would increase circulation and reference requests and therefore, the need for part-time staff. Cost and Efficiency Impact Although ongoing operating costs would increase, accessibility, functionality, building supervision and workflow would be improved. Conformance with County Obligations The project is in conformance with the Community Plan, the Library Facilities Study, construction standards established by the Library of Virginia, and has been approved by the Library Board of Trustees. 51 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Vinton Library Expansion Funding Sources According to the terms of the Vinton Library's small Alford Trust, $25,000 could be used for furnishings for this project. In addition, a computer lab that is properly oriented, lighted, and vented, together with increased meeting room revenues, could generate $6,000 per year in rental fees. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $5,943,700 Includes engineering, construction, equipment and technology costs. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs r',,~"~ ........I""........,..J .." i....,..........""~...... i.... "..ili..i......~ ""....,..J ..h...... ................,..J f".. "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\...... ~..""ff VV~L~ I CIClLCU LV 111'"'1 CCI~C III ULIIILlC~ ClIIU L1IC IICCU IVI ClUUILlVIIClI fJClI L-L1IIIC ~LClII. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10-14 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $5,843,700 $5,943,700 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 $5,843,700 52 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Bent Mountain Library Expansion Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project would add 550 sq. ft. to the Bent Mountain Library to provide additional readers' seating, more open space for programs, and appropriate wall surface for shelving for various formats in the adult collection. Justification The Bent Mountain Library is an 850 sq. ft. facility, which was built in 1985. It is situated on school property and shares a common wall with the Bent Mountain Elementary School. A 150 s.f. addition was completed in the spring of 2005 and is now being used to house the children's collection and a child-scaled table and chairs. This area is too small to be used for computers or for programs and events, which instead must be held in the aisles, near the front door, or outside. Even with the additional footage and an adjusted floor plan, the open areas in the adult section are constricted and accessibility is questionable. A bigger library would create a more suitable environment for story times and other children's activities, as well as improving study space and reader's seating for all patrons. There is enough land behind the building which could be used for a second expansion. It is important to consider that this library serves as a focal point for its community and area residents have a strong attachment to it, as demonstrated by the successful fund raising campaign which culminated in the building of the children's addition. Also, there are very few options for public meeting spaces in the Bent Mountain neighborhood. Operating Budget Impact Increased collection development, additional deliveries and maintenance related to use, and utility costs should average approximately $28,000 per year. Cost and Efficiency Impact The project would upgrade the level of service offered at this branch, particularly in children's programs and accessibility for citizens. It also would provide the community with meeting space. Conformance with County Obligations The project is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, the Library Facilities Study, and has been approved by the Library Board of Trustees. Funding Sources Approximately $750 per year could be generated by meeting space usage fees. Construction and ongoing costs from general operating revenues or source to be determined. 53 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Library Bent Mountain Library Expansion FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $285,700 Includes construction, equipment/furnishings, and technology costs. None. Associated Operating Costs ^ ..........,,"'il"Y'\"".."'h, ~')o nnn ...."'.. ,,"'''''.. f".. i....,...."'''''tr'O''',..J ,.."II"',....i".... ,..J"'""'I,,....I"Y'\"'...... "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ,..J",li"",..i",tr'O ""....,..J l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ""ili",, r\fJfJl VAil I IClLCIY \ojJL.V,VVV fJCI YCClI IVI 111'"'1 CCI~CU ,",VIIC,",LIVII UCVCIVfJIIICIIL, ClUUILIVIIClI UCIIVCIIC~ ClIIU IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C ClIIU ULIIILY costs. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $70,000 FY14 $173,950 TOTAL FY10-14 $285,700 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 FY14 $9,300 54 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Real Estate Valuation Digital Image Capture 55 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Real Estate Valuation Digital Image Capture Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The Real Estate Valuation department is requesting Roanoke County secure a vendor to capture approximately 40,000 digital images of single family, multi-family, commercial, industrial, and tax exempt properties. Each image would be linked to the parcel record in Assess Pro, which would allow users to view the images associated to a parcel. Justification The new software, Assess Pro, has an attribute which allows an image of building to be linked to the parcel record card. Once the images are linked to the parcel record and stored, they would be available to publish on the County's website. This availability of images on the website would aide citizens, real estate professionals, and business owners in their need to have up to date images of buildings located on parcels within Roanoke County boundaries. Many requests are received each year as to when we will have images added to our website. Images to the property record would also help other departments at Roanoke County, who have access to Assess Pro, including Community Development, Commissioner of Revenue, and Treasurer Office, IT, Town of Vinton, and Circuit Court. Operating Budget Impact There would be minimal impact to the operating budget due to this process being part of the yearly reassessment. Cost and Efficiency Impact After initial cost of having images taken and installed in Assess Pro, the staff would be responsible for capturing images of future changes to the property, including structural alterations, or new construction. One of the efficiencies for having images would be assisting the appraisal staff in their informal appeals process. Many times the citizen will request a field review of their home. This request would be eliminated due to the appraiser ability to bring images to the computer screen, as the appraiser is meeting with the citizen. This process allows the citizen to actually see which property the appraiser is comparing their property to, when appealing their appraisal. The Board of Equalization needs to have an image of the property before them, as property owner makes an appeal of their appraisal. This necessitates staff to drive to property and take image for all who appear before the BOE. This would negate this process for the BOE. Again, all other departments within the county and the Town of Vinton who have access to Assess Pro would benefit by having image in front of them as they talk to property owner. Conformance with County Obligations Having image attached to property record card would only leave getting map of property to property record card, to have all attributes of property in one centralized location for users of Assess Pro. Funding Sources At this time there are no funding sources for this CIP project. 57 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Real Estate Valuation Digital Image Capture FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $170,000 Initial costs related to images being taken and installed in Assess Pro. Staff would be responsible for future pictures. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ,,,.. " .... '" I ""VIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $170,000 FY10 $170,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 58 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Parks & Recreation Greenways & Trails: Back Creek Greenway Segment in Starkey Park Greenways & Trails: Green Hill Park Loop Trail Connector to RR Greenway Greenways & Trails: Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park Greenways & Trails: Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway East, Phase I Engineering/ROW Procurement Sports Lighting Replacement: Walrond Park Ballfields Sports Lighting Replacement: Arnold Burton Softball Complex Sports Lighting Replacement: Darrell Shell Park Ballfields Green Hill Park: Sports Complex, Amphitheater and Picnic Shelter/Restroom Facility, Phase I Camp Roanoke: Renovation to Residential Camp and Retreat Center Standards 59 Whispering Pines Park: New Soccer Field, Parking Lot & Picnic Shelter Land for Passive Recreation: Phase I Land Banking Investment Walrond Park: Tennis Courts/Parking Lot Paving and New Picnic Shelter Arnold Burton Softball Complex: New Tournament Director's Facility, Security Lighting and Parking/Access Road/Fencing Improvements Starkey Park: Soccer Field Lighting and Parking Lot Paving Brambleton Center: Renovation to Community Recreation Center Standards Hollins Park: Soccer Field Lighting, New Picnic Shelter and Parking/Access Road Improvements Vinyard Park: Greenway Bridge and Playground/Passive Recreation Improvements Spring Hollow Reservoir Park: Develop as a Major Regional Park & Tourist Attraction, Phase I Engineering Design/Facility Development Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway West, Phase I Engineering/ROW Procurement Greenways & Trails: Tinker Creek Greenway, Phase I Engineering/ROW Procurement 61 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Back Creek Greenway Segment in Starkey Park Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of seven projects representing approximately 7.5 miles of park greenways and trails for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year. For FY10 CIP consideration, the Back Creek Greenway Segment in Starkey Park Project is being put forth as a priority Greenways and Trails project. This project request would fund the construction of an approximately 0.75-mile section of the Back Creek Greenway in Starkey Park and the Merriman Soccer Complex. The completion of this portion of the Back Creek Greenway will link Darrell Shell Park, Penn Forest Elementary School, the new South County Library and the proposed DCR/LWCF-funded trail system at the Taylor Tract with Starkey Park and the Merriman Soccer Complex, and will ultimately provide a connection to the Blue Ridge Parkway at the southern end of the Merriman Soccer Complex. The project would serve as valuable park facility providing walking, hiking and biking opportunities for park users of all ages and would also function as the initial phase of construction of an important greenway route in the Roanoke Valley Greenway Network. By connecting these varied county resources that serve a wide range of county residents of all ages, the project would provide an expanded safe and healthy environment for walkers, joggers, hikers, strollers and bike riders of all ages and contribute to enhanced cultural, recreational, educational and social opportunities for all park users. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key 63 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Back Creek Greenway Segment in Starkey Park Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. Operating Budget Impact The project requires a small amount of additional staff hours to undertake maintenance, maintenance materials and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. 64 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Back Creek Greenway Segment in Starkey Park FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $297,000 Includes construction of an approximately 0.75-mile section of the Back Creek Greenway in Starkey Park and the Merriman Soccer Complex None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs CI"Y'\""II ""I"Y'\""...... ",f "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 tr'O""",f,f h""..tr'O ,f".. l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" vlllClII ClIIIVUIIL VI ClUUILIVIIClI ~LClII IIVUI ~ IVI IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $297,000 FY10 $297,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $7,500 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 65 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Green Hill Park Loop Trail Connector to RR Greenway Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of seven projects representing approximately 7.5 miles of park greenways and trails for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year. For FY10 CIP consideration, the Green Hill Park Loop Trail Connector to the Roanoke River Greenway Project is being put forth as a priority Greenways and Trails project. This project request would fund the construction of an approximately one-mile loop trail around a portion of Green Hill Park that would connect to the Green Hill Park Section of the Roanoke River Greenway that was completed in April 2008, providing an approximately two-mile trail around the periphery of Green Hill Park. The Green Hill Park Section of the Roanoke River Greenway has proven to be immensely popular with park users of all ages and is one of the most heavily used facilities in the park. By connecting this section of the Roanoke River Greenway with a one-mil loop trail, the project would provide an expanded safe and healthy environment for walkers, joggers, hikers, strollers and bike riders of all ages and contribute to enhanced cultural, recreational, educational and social opportunities for all park users. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 66 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Green Hill Park Loop Trail Connector to RR Greenway 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. Operating Budget Impact The project requires a small amount of additional staff hours to undertake maintenance, maintenance materials and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. 67 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Green Hill Park Loop Trail Connector to RR Greenway FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $264,000 Includes construction of an approximately one-mile loop trail around a portion of Green Hill Park that would connect to the Green Hill Park Section of the Roanoke River Greenway that was completed in April 2008. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs CI"Y'\""II ""I"Y'\""...... ",f "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 tr'O""",f,f h""..tr'O ,f".. l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" vlllClII ClIIIVUIIL VI ClUUILIVIIClI ~LClII IIVUI ~ IVI IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $264,000 FY10 $264,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $7,500 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 68 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park Project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of seven projects representing approximately 7.5 miles of park greenways and trails for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year. For FY10 CIP consideration, the Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park Project is being put forth as a priority Greenways and Trails project. This project request would fund the construction of an approximately one-mile section of the Glade Creek Greenway in Vinyard Park. The completion of this portion of the Glade Creek Greenway would serve as valuable park facility providing walking, hiking and biking opportunities for park users of all ages and would also function as the initial phase of construction of an important greenway route in the Roanoke Valley Greenway Network. Through the construction this much-needed trail facility in Vinyard Park where none currently exists, the project would provide an expanded safe and healthy environment for walkers, joggers, hikers, strollers and bike riders of all ages and contribute to enhanced cultural, recreational, educational and social opportunities for all park users. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County 69 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. Operating Budget Impact The project requires a small amount of additional staff hours to undertake maintenance, maintenance materials and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. 70 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $396,000 Includes construction of an approximately one-mile section of the Glade Creek Greenway in Vinyard Park. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs CI"Y'\""II ""I"Y'\""...... ",f "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 tr'O""",f,f h""..tr'O ,f".. l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" vlllClII ClIIIVUIIL VI ClUUILIVIIClI ~LClII IIVUI ~ IVI IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $396,000 FY10 $396,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $7,500 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 71 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of seven projects representing approximately 7.5 miles of park greenways and trails for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year. For FY10 CIP consideration, the Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail Project is being put forth as a priority Greenways and Trails project. This project request would fund the construction of an approximately one-mile loop trail around a portion of Walrond Park that would connect to the proposed DCR/Recreational Trails Grant-funded trail system around the wetland area and pond in the lower portion of the park. The project would serve as valuable park facility providing walking, hiking and biking opportunities for park users of all ages. By connecting the grant-funded trail system around the wetland area with a one-mil loop trail, the project would provide an expanded safe and healthy environment for walkers, joggers, hikers, strollers and bike riders of all ages and contribute to enhanced cultural, recreational, educational and social opportunities for all park users. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County 72 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail residents. Operating Budget Impact The project requires a small amount of additional staff hours to undertake maintenance, maintenance materials and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $264,000 Includes construction of an approximately one-mile loop trail around a portion of Walrond Park that would connect to the proposed DCR/Recreational Trails Grant-funded trail system around the wetland area and pond in the lower portion of the park. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs 73 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail Small amount of additional staff hours for maintenance. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $264,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $0 $0 $0 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $7,500 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 74 TOTAL FY10-14 $264,000 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway East, Phase I Engineering/ROW Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of three major greenway projects for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year and includes an approximately six-mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway in Roanoke County that would extend eastward from the Roanoke City line to Explore Park. For FY10 CIP consideration, the Roanoke River Greenway East Project has been broken up into phases to ease funding. Phase I of the project will include preliminary engineering and the initial phase of right-of-way acquisition, and is being put forth as a priority Greenways and Trails project. Phase I project costs are $450,000; total project costs are estimated to be $6,336,000. In October 2007, the Department requested $372,480 in VDOT Transportation Enhancement grant funding for FY08-09, which amounts to 80% of the estimated total cost of Phase I of the project, $465,600. The Department received notification in June 2008 that VDOT had approved Transportation Enhancement grant funding in the amount of $104,000. As the enhancement grant is 80:20 matching grant, the Department will need to match the $104,000 VDOT grant with $26,000 in matching funds. However, the VDOT enhancement grant will only fund a portion of Phase I cost of the project. This project would provide the $26,000 in matching funds for $104,000 grant and would contribute to the shortfall between the VDOT funding that was requested and the actual amount that was granted for Phase I of the project. The Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan adopted by the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission in May 2007 designated the Roanoke River Greenway as the Priority #1 greenway for development and construction in the Roanoke Valley, as it was identified as the most important greenway in the regional greenway network. An important initial step in the development and construction of greenways and trails is the procurement of funding that will support the engineering and design of greenways and trails, and necessary land acquisition where greenway and trails corridors are located outside of lands owned by Roanoke County. 75 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway East, Phase I Engineering/ROW Such funding is essential to getting these projects underway in a timely manner and to meeting the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1 ,000 County residents by 2016. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. Operating Budget Impact Phase I of this project will require a small amount of staff hours for project management and contract administration. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. 76 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway East, Phase I Engineering/ROW FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $450,000 Includes construction of an approximately six-mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway in Roanoke County that would extend eastward from the Roanoke City line to Explore Park. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs CI"Y'\""II ""I"Y'\""...... ",f Ir'""",f,f h""..1r' ,f".. ......"i"',.... I"Y'\""...."""''''I''Y'\'''...... vlllClII ClIIIVUIIL VI ~LClII IIVUI~ IVI fJIVJC,",L IIIClIICI~CIIICIIL. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $450,000 FY10 $158,400 FY11 $291,600 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $5,000 FY11 $5,000 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 77 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Sports Lighting Replacement: Walrond Park Ballfields Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary As the Parks infrastructure ages, upgrades to the sports lighting systems are necessary to ensure safety, provide adequate light levels to confirm to current standards, maintain efficiencies with regard to power consumption, and minimize expensive repairs. The main priority for this project would be to replace the lighting systems at the Walrond Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts. Other high priority lighting replacement projects include Arnold Burton Softball Complex and the Darrell Shell Park Ballfields. All sports lighting replacement projects would greatly benefit recreation league and tournament play, and would greatly enhance the County's regional sports marketing and economic development efforts. Other sports lighting replacement projects that will need attention in the very near future but have not been earmarked as priority projects for FY 2010 include replace the lighting systems at Mount Pleasant Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts, Garst Mill Park Tennis Courts, Northside Tennis Courts and Stonebridge Park Tennis Courts for recreation play. Projected increases in league participation will dictate lighting additional fields at Hollins Park, Green Hill Park, and Merriman Soccer Fields. Justification The aging systems identified above have reached or exceeded their useful life. These systems no longer provide adequate light levels, are expensive to maintain, and may not be safe in instances of component failure. Operating Budget Impact This project would result in a reduction in maintenance materials/supplies and annual utility costs. Cost and Efficiency Impact Current sport lighting repairs average $2,500 - $4,000 annually. Replacement of old, out-of- date systems would reduce maintenance and repair costs. Also, a cost reduction in monthly utility bills due to the current inefficient systems would be achieved. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 78 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Sports Lighting Replacement: Walrond Park Ballfields FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $250,000 Includes the replacement of the lighting systems at the Walrond Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ,^,,,,.I,..J ""'Ir',.I" i.... "" .."',..J",....i".... ",f ,.."...."'...... l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ,,"ili4o., "'''Ir'''1r' v VVUIU I C~UIL III CI I CUU,",L1VII VI ,",UII CIIL IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C ClIIU ULIIILY ,",V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $125,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) 79 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Sports Lighting Replacement: Arnold Burton Softball Complex Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary As the Parks infrastructure ages, upgrades to the sports lighting systems are necessary to ensure safety, provide adequate light levels to confirm to current standards, maintain efficiencies with regard to power consumption, and minimize expensive repairs. The main priority for this project would be to replace the lighting systems at the Arnold Burton Softball Complex. Other high priority lighting replacement projects include Walrond Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts and the Darrell Shell Park Ballfields. All sports lighting replacement projects would greatly benefit recreation league and tournament play, and would greatly enhance the County's regional sports marketing and economic development efforts. Other sports lighting replacement projects that will need attention in the very near future but have not been earmarked as priority projects for FY 2010 include replace the lighting systems at Mount Pleasant Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts, Garst Mill Park Tennis Courts, Northside Tennis Courts and Stonebridge Park Tennis Courts for recreation play. Projected increases in league participation will dictate lighting additional fields at Hollins Park, Green Hill Park, and Merriman Soccer Fields. Justification The aging systems identified above have reached or exceeded their useful life. These systems no longer provide adequate light levels, are expensive to maintain, and may not be safe in instances of component failure. Operating Budget Impact This project would result in a reduction in maintenance materials/supplies and annual utility costs. Cost and Efficiency Impact Current sport lighting repairs average $2,500 - $4,000 annually. Replacement of old, out-of- date systems would reduce maintenance and repair costs. Also, a cost reduction in monthly utility bills due to the current inefficient systems would be achieved. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 80 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Sports Lighting Replacement: Arnold Burton Softball Complex FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $250,000 Includes the replacement of the lighting systems at the Arnold Burton Softball Complex. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ,^,,,,.I,..J ""'Ir',.I" i.... "" .."',..J",....i".... ",f ,.."...."'...... l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ,,"ili4o., "'''Ir'''1r' v VVUIU I C~UIL III CI I CUU,",L1VII VI ,",UII CIIL IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C ClIIU ULIIILY ,",V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $125,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) 81 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Sports Lighting Replacement: Darrell Shell Park Ballfields Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary As the Parks infrastructure ages, upgrades to the sports lighting systems are necessary to ensure safety, provide adequate light levels to confirm to current standards, maintain efficiencies with regard to power consumption, and minimize expensive repairs. The main priority for this project would be to replace the lighting systems at the Darrell Shell Park Ballfields. Other high priority lighting replacement projects include Walrond Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts, and the Arnold Burton Softball Complex. All sports lighting replacement projects would greatly benefit recreation league and tournament play, and would greatly enhance the County's regional sports marketing and economic development efforts. Other sports lighting replacement projects that will need attention in the very near future but have not been earmarked as priority projects for FY 2010 include replace the lighting systems at Mount Pleasant Park Ballfields and Tennis Courts, Garst Mill Park Tennis Courts, Northside Tennis Courts and Stonebridge Park Tennis Courts for recreation play. Projected increases in league participation will dictate lighting additional fields at Hollins Park, Green Hill Park, and Merriman Soccer Fields. Justification The aging systems identified above have reached or exceeded their useful life. These systems no longer provide adequate light levels, are expensive to maintain, and may not be safe in instances of component failure. Operating Budget Impact This project would result in a reduction in maintenance materials/supplies and annual utility costs. Cost and Efficiency Impact Current sport lighting repairs average $2,500 - $4,000 annually. Replacement of old, out-of- date systems would reduce maintenance and repair costs. Also, a cost reduction in monthly utility bills due to the current inefficient systems would be achieved. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 82 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Sports Lighting Replacement: Darrell Shell Park Ballfields FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $250,000 Includes the replacement of the lighting systems at the Darrell Shell Park Ballfields. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ,^,,,,.I,..J ""'Ir',.I" i.... "" .."',..J",....i".... ",f ,.."...."'...... l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ""....,..J ,,"ili4o., "'''Ir'''1r' v VVUIU I C~UIL III CI I CUU,",L1VII VI ,",UII CIIL IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C ClIIU ULIIILY ,",V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $125,000 $125,000 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) ($2,000) 83 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Green Hill Park: Sports Complex, Amphitheater and Picnic Shelter/Restroom Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will continue the development of Green Hill Park by providing an amphitheater and restroom building, a large picnic shelter, installation of electric and water to the existing two shelters, improve security lighting, expand existing parking and pave all areas, expand the barrier system, install an accessible playground, add fencing, and improve the landscaping. Additional items include improving the existing softball fields into a five field tournament quality "Sports Complex", add three blueways, replace the fishing pier, and construct a maintenance yard and outbuildings. Phase I of the project will include planning/engineering design associated with the Sports Complex and amphitheater and the initial phase of facility development. Phase I project costs are $500,000; total project costs are estimated to be $3,950,000. Projected increases in league participation will dictate lighting two soccer fields at Green Hill Park in the very near future but the lighting of those fields has not been earmarked as priority project for FY 2010. Justification These enhancements will continue to develop this park as the Roanoke County's Parks, Recreation and Tourism's major event site. This project will develop a "Sports Complex" as identified in the 2007 Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. This project will also provide facilities for the home of the Glenvar Youth Boosters. It will provide for a medium to stimulate and encourage growth in tourism and provide a venue for sports marketing initiatives. Operating Budget Impact This will require additional part time staff, utilities, maintenance materials, and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding source would be general obligation bonds. 84 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Green Hill Park: Sports Complex, Amphitheater and Picnic Shelter/Restroom FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $500,000 Includes a number of improvements and additions to Green Hill Park. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\'" 1r'''''''U ""ili"i,,,1r' l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" 1"Y'\""..",..i",,11r' ""....,..J 1r'"........li"'lr' r\UUILIVIIClI fJClI L LIIIIC ~LClII, ULIIILlC~, IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C IIIClLCIIClI~, ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~ Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $500,000 FY10 $158,000 FY11 $342,000 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $5,000 FY11 $5,000 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 85 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Camp Roanoke: Renovation to Residential Camp and Retreat Center Standards Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will complete the renovation of Camp Roanoke as a residential camp and retreat center. Renovations have included the upgrading of the dining hall, restrooms, and grounds. Community donations, in-kind services, and in house staff provided for the renovation of the 8 residential cabins, the lodge, ropes course, log cabin shell, three bathroom/shower facilities, a water system, trail upgrades, and a parking lot. The remaining items to complete the renovation will be the construction of a new camp pool and a canoe dock to access the Spring Hollow Reservoir for canoe and kayak programs, paving the parking lot, and enhance the landscaping. Justification This site could become a premier park facility within the system as a major regional park with the potential to generate tourism as well as local interest. Camp Roanoke provides an exceptional site for youth programs and a revenue producing opportunity that covers partial operating costs of the program. The camp has cabins, a large picnic shelter, dining hall, a lodge, challenge course, and trails. A camp pool is an amenity that is usually offered with this type of facility. This provides a unique opportunity to develop a one of a kind facility in the region. Operating Budget Impact The camp is operating with general funds for FT staff and revenue from fees for direct expenses. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Private donations or General Obligation Bond. 86 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Camp Roanoke: Renovation to Residential Camp and Retreat Center Standards FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $267,500 Will complete the renovation of Camp Roanoke as a residential camp and retreat center. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs 0"',,"'....,,'" ,f""1"Y'\ ,f"''''1r' ,a,ill ,..",,"'.. ...."'...."'..""1 "...."'..""..i........ "''''....'''....Ir''''1r' I ,"CVCIIUC II VIII ICC~ VVIII ,",VVCI ~CIICI ClI VfJCI ClLIII~ CAfJCII~C~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $150,000 $117,500 $0 $0 $0 $267,500 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $31,800 $31,800 $31,800 $31,800 87 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Whispering Pines Park: New Soccer Field, Parking Lot & Picnic Shelter Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will design, engineer, and construct a regulation soccer field with a paved parking lot, pave the existing lot, add an additional picnic shelter, and improve park landscaping. Capital Maintenance Funds have been used to replace the playground, provide an enhanced water purification system for the park, install a engineered septic field system for the park, and complete construction of the park bathrooms that were originally funded through the Department's matching grant program. The development of a perimeter loop trail is envisioned in the near future following construction of the soccer field complex. Justification The current level of use by the recreation league, field rentals, picnic shelter rentals, and general park visitation warrants the new soccer field and the other amenities typically available for a park of this size. The Masons Cove Recreation league does not have a regulation size soccer field in their district and players for this age group travel to fields outside their area. Operating Budget Impact This will require additional part-time staff, utilities, and maintenance materials and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 88 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Whispering Pines Park: New Soccer Field, Parking Lot & Picnic Shelter FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $435,000 Includes the design, engineering, and construction of a regulation soccer field with a paved parking lot, paving the existing lot, adding an additional picnic shelter, and improving park landscaping. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $39,045 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\'" 1r'''''''U ""ili"i,,,1r' ""....,..J l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" 1"Y'\""..",..i",,11r' ""....,..J 1r'"........li"'lr' r\UUILIVIIClI fJClI L-L1IIIC ~LClII, U LIIILIC~, ClIIU IIIClIII LCIIClII,",C IIIClLCIIClI~ ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $160,000 $275,000 $0 $0 $0 $435,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $39,045 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $7,950 $8,950 $8,950 $8,950 89 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Land for Passive Recreation: Phase I Land Banking Investment Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for passive use park land as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the acquisition of park lands for passive recreation activities was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that the priority is to focus on ten (10) to forty (40) acre parcels with the goal to acquire 300 acres of potential passive use park land over the next ten years. Generally, 10-40 acre parcels function as Community Parks and offer balanced opportunities for active and passive recreation. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that approximately 172 acres of Community Park land are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 3.0 acres of Community Park land 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for Community Parks is 1.3 acres of Community Park land per 1,000 County residents. Additional acreage is also needed for District Parks (82 acres) and Regional Parks (67 acres) in order to meet Roanoke County standards presented in the Master Plan but it is the category of Community Parks where park acreage is most needed and most likely to be available within Roanoke County. Emphasis will be placed on acquiring park land in the Southwest County area, as current outdoor recreation needs are at or near capacity in the Southwest area and future development trends in the Southwest area show a growing need for future park facilities in that area. As this project ultimately requires an extensive outlay of funds, the project has been broken into phases to help facilitate funding. Phase I of the project will focus on the acquisition of 172 acres of Community Park land, specifically in the Southwest County area in the Windsor Hills and Cave Spring magisterial districts. Land values at two existing Community Parks in these magisterial districts vary widely generally due to the presence of one of the parks in a floodplain area. In 2008, the 27 acres of park land in Garst Mill Park in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District were valued $383,000 or $14,215 per acre. In 2008, the 12 acres of park land in Darrell Shell Park in the Cave Spring Magisterial District were valued $672,000 or $56,000 per acre. As almost the entire acreage at Garst Mill Park is in the FEMA flood zone, property values in this heavily used park are relatively low due to the constraints on development posed by the floodplain. The average value of the park land in these two parks is approximately $35,000 per acre. Since it is advantageous to have park land outside of the floodplain rather than in the floodplain, an average cost of $30,000 per acre is used to calculate the cost of acquiring Community Park land. As 172 acres of Community Park land are needed, using an average cost of $30,000 per acre, the total cost of acquiring this acreage is approximately $5 million. Phase I of this project requests $500,000 in funding or 10% of the total costs to begin the acquisition of the 172 acres of needed Community Park land. Incremental increases in funding over four successive years would be necessary to achieve the $5 million target for the acquisition of 172 acres of needed Community Park land. Total project costs to address Community Park, District Park and Regional Park needs are estimated to be $9,000,000. 90 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Land for Passive Recreation: Phase I Land Banking Investment Justification This project responds to the documented need for more passive use park land expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty (50) percent of respondent households indicated that they were very supportive of purchasing land to develop for passive use and thirty eight (38) percent of respondent households indicated that purchasing land to develop for passive use was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the acquisition of park lands for passive recreation activities was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, additional acreage is needed for Community Parks (172 acres), District Parks (82 acres) and Regional Parks (67) by 2016 in order to meet Roanoke County standards presented in the Master Plan. Operating Budget Impact None. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 91 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Land for Passive Recreation: Phase I Land Banking Investment FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $500,000 Includes acquisition of passive use park land. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ,,,.. " .... '" I ""VIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $500,000 FY10 $500,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 92 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Walrond Park: Tennis Courts/Parking Lot Paving and New Picnic Shelter Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will develop Walrond Park by resurfacing the 10 tennis courts, expand the parking, pave the upper parking lot on Enon Drive, improve the pond and wetland areas, add a picnic shelter, improve security lighting, and improve the landscaping. In addition, the Walrond Cabin is serving as a senior citizen center and a deck needs to be added as well as overall repairs to the log cabin. All sports lighting replacements are included in the Sports Lighting Replacement: Walrond Park Ballfields CIP project funding request. The development of the perimeter loop trail is included in the Greenway and Trails: Walrond Park Perimeter Loop Trail CIP project funding request. Capital Maintenance Funds have provided recent improvements to the existing park restrooms and paved the main parking lot. Justification This will complete the development of Walrond Park as the North County Regional Park, providing additional recreational amenities, and improving the park infrastructure. Also, improving the pond area and the park landscaping will enhance the passive recreation experience for the citizens of North Roanoke. Frequent grading and adding stone to the gravel lot on Enon Drive has become necessary to maintain a reasonable surface for this heavily used facility. Operating Budget Impact This will require additional part-time staff, utilities, maintenance materials, and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 93 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Walrond Park: Tennis Courts/Parking Lot Paving and New Picnic Shelter FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $250,000 Includes numerous additions and improvements to Walrond Park. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\'" 1r'''''''U ""ili"i,,,1r' ""....,..J l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" 1"Y'\""..",..i",,11r' ""....,..J 1r'"........li"'lr' r\UUILIVIIClI fJClI L-L1IIIC ~LClII, U LIIILIC~, ClIIU IIIClIII LCIIClII,",C IIIClLCIIClI~ ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $250,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $1,450 $6,100 $6,100 $6,100 94 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Arnold Burton Softball Complex: New Tournament Director's Facility, Security Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This facility is located adjacent to the Arnold R. Burton Technology Center and serves as a primary county site for adult softball league and tournament play. It contains three regulation softball fields that supplement the state, regional, and national tournaments held at the Moyer Athletic Complex, and often is the only site for USSSA and NSA Softball Tournaments. Recent funding provided sideline fence replacement on one softball field. This facility needs a new tournament director's facility, general security lighting, parking lot paving, access road realignment and vendor parking, and major fence replacement on the remaining two fields. Proposed landscaping improvements and a playground would complete this project. All sports lighting replacements are included in the Sports Lighting Replacement: Walrond Park Ballfields CIP project funding request. Justification This project will provide much needed basic level amenities for the citizens who use the park on a daily basis. It will also provide facilities for tournament participants and directors, which contributes to the economic development of the community through tourism. The recent 2006 N.S.A. Softball World Series brought 175 teams, 29 teams local, who visited the Roanoke Valley to participate in the tournament jointly sponsored by the City of Salem, Roanoke County, and the City of Roanoke. Based on the formula used by the Convention and visitors Bureau, there was a total of $5,605,350 million in direct spending by these guests while staying in the Valley. Operating Budget Impact Requires additional part-time staff, utilities, maintenance materials, and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact No. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 95 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Arnold Burton Softball Complex: New Tournament Director's Facility, Security FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $300,000 Includes a new tournament director's facility, general security lighting, parking lot paving, access road realignment and vendor parking, and major fence replacement on the remaining two fields. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\'" 1r'''''''U ""ili"i,,,1r' ""....,..J l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" 1"Y'\""..",..i",,11r' ""....,..J 1r'"........li"'lr' r\UUILIVIIClI fJClI L-L1IIIC ~LClII, U LIIILIC~, ClIIU IIIClIII LCIIClII,",C IIIClLCIIClI~ ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $300,000 FY10 $110,000 FY11 $150,000 FY12 $40,000 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $9,220 FY12 $9,220 FY13 $9,220 FY14 $9,220 96 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Starkey Park: Soccer Field Lighting and Parking Lot Paving Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The 2007 Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities classified Starkey Park as a District Park to include the Merriman Soccer Complex. Two of the existing soccer fields at the Merriman Soccer Complex are currently lighted. This project will light the third soccer field and pave the existing parking lots and entrance road at the Starkey Park facility. Justification The 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities identifies the need for park facilities and soccer fields throughout the County. In order to meet increasing recreational demands, the third soccer field needs to be lit. Frequent grading and adding stone to the gravel lots at the Starkey Park facility is constantly necessary in order to maintain a reasonable surface for this heavily used facility. Paving the existing parking lots and entrance road would reduce maintenance costs and improve the user experience. Operating Budget Impact None. Cost and Efficiency Impact Cost reduction in monthly utility bills due to the current inefficient systems. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 97 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Starkey Park: Soccer Field Lighting and Parking Lot Paving FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $150,000 Includes additions of lights to the third soccer field and paving of the parking lot. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ,,,.. " .... '" I ""VIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $150,000 FY10 $150,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 98 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Brambleton Center: Renovation to Community Recreation Center Standards Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project continues the renovation of the former RCAC facility on Brambleton Avenue into a Community Recreation Center with a focus on programming for senior adults, citizens with disabilities, teens, and youth. This facility also houses the Virginia Cooperative Extension Service for the Roanoke Valley. This project request would complete the remaining roof replacement over the community room, repair the building foundation and underground drainage, replace the failing floor foundation in the main wooden hallway and flooring, replace the remaining carpet in the building, replace the floor tile in the ceramic rooms, upgrade the restroom plumbing and fixtures, encapsulate the asbestos in the boiler room, and construct a dumpster enclosure. Recent improvements include interior and exterior painting, partial roof replacement, HVAC upgrades, replacing the four boilers, seal coating the parking lot, and 50% carpet replacement. Justification This building is currently the main Community Recreation Center for Roanoke County with over 84,000 participant visits annually. The center serves as the regional home for Therapeutic Recreation programs, Senior Citizens, and the Teen Center. Many of the past repairs have been funded through emergency purchases to keep the building open such as the leaking roof and failed boilers. This project will complete the building's main structural problems as well as maintain a presentable appearance for its high use. Operating Budget Impact None. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding source would be General Operating Fund and/or General Obligation Bond. 99 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Brambleton Center: Renovation to Community Recreation Center Standards FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $500,000 Includes a number of repairs and replacements to the Brambleton Center. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ,,,.. " .... '" I ""VIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $500,000 FY10 $500,000 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 100 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Hollins Park: Soccer Field Lighting, New Picnic Shelter and Parking/Access Road Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The North Roanoke Recreation League engaged in fundraisers and lit one of the two existing soccer fields. This project will light the second soccer field, and provide design and engineering plans for passive recreation on the recently acquired tract of land. Also, this project will pave the existing parking lots and entrance road, construct a picnic shelter and restroom facility, add playground improvements, and enhance the landscaping. Justification The 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities identifies the need for park facilities and soccer fields in North County. In order to meet current recreational demands, the second ballfield needs to be lit. A park shelter, restrooms, large playground, and landscaping are standard amenities provided in a community park. Also, providing passive recreational opportunities is identified in the 2007 Master Plan. Operating Budget Impact This will require additional part-time staff, utilities, maintenance materials, and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources A recommended funding source would be general obligation bonds. 101 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Hollins Park: Soccer Field Lighting, New Picnic Shelter and Parking/Access Road FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $375,000 Costs include providing lighting to the second soccer field as well as numerous improvements. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\'" 1r'''''''U ""ili"i,,,1r' ""....,..J l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" 1"Y'\""..",..i",,11r' ""....,..J 1r'"........li"'lr' r\UUILIVIIClI fJClI L-L1IIIC ~LClII, U LIIILIC~, ClIIU IIIClIII LCIIClII,",C IIIClLCIIClI~ ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $170,000 $205,000 $0 $0 $0 $375,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $9,470 $9,470 $9,470 $9,470 102 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Vinyard Park: Greenway Bridge and Playground/Passive Recreation Improvements Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Funding from the new Roanoke Catholic partnership provided sports field lighting for a large baseball/football combination field, a new park restroom and concession building and recent parking lot expansion. This project requests funding to add traffic barriers, expand the playground, and install a greenway bridge to connect the parking area of Vinyard Park II tract to the passive use area across Glade Creek. A handicap trout fishing area, a maintenance shop, parking lot paving, and other park amenities are also proposed for the development of recreation facilities at Vinyard Park II. A new walking, hiking and biking trail at Vinyard Park I & II is included in the Greenways & Trails: Glade Creek Greenway Segment in Vinyard Park CIP project funding request. Justification This will complete the master plan, and provide a comprehensive regional park in the east county area. New facilities will improve access and recreational opportunities to a broader segment of the population. Operating Budget Impact This will require additional part-time staff, utilities and maintenance materials and supplies. Cost and Efficiency Impact None. Conformance with County Obligations This project type is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, and the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds and/or General Obligation Bond. 103 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Vinyard Park: Greenway Bridge and Playground/Passive Recreation Improvements FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $545,000 Includes adding traffic barriers, expanding the playground, and installing a greenway bridge to connect the parking area of Vinyard Park II tract to the passive use area across Glade Creek. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs ^,..J,..Ji..i"....""1 ...."".... ..il"Y'\'" 1r'''''''U ""ili"i,,,1r' ""....,..J l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" 1"Y'\""..",..i",,11r' ""....,..J 1r'"........li"'lr' r\UUILIVIIClI fJClI L-L1IIIC ~LClII, U LIIILIC~, ClIIU IIIClIII LCIIClII,",C IIIClLCIIClI~ ClIIU ~UfJfJIIC~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY10-14 $200,000 $190,000 $155,000 $0 $0 $545,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $13,800 $13,800 $13,800 $13,800 104 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Spring Hollow Reservoir Park: Develop as a Major Regional Park & Tourist Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The Spring Hollow Reservoir site is adjacent to Camp Roanoke and both facilities are on Dry Hollow Road that leads to the reservoir. This project consists of developing the 700-acre site around the reservoir as a public park for fishing, hiking, picnicking, and other appropriate outdoor recreation interests. Development of the reservoir depends upon Health and Water Authority requirements. The Master Plan has been developed and includes the cost projections. Phase I of the project will include planning/engineering design and the initial phase facility development. Phase I project costs are $962,500; total project costs are estimated to be $3,234,000. Justification This site could potentially become a premier facility within the system as a major regional park with the potential to generate tourist as well as local interest. Operating Budget Impact Not available at this time. Cost and Efficiency Impact None Conformance with County Obligations This project is included in the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding source would be bond issue. 105 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Spring Hollow Reservoir Park: Develop as a Major Regional Park & Tourist FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $962,500 Includes planning/engineering design and the initial phase facility development. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs ,,,..,,.. """""il""hl", "".. "hilr' ..il"Y'\'" I ""VL CI VClIIClIJIC ClL L111~ LIIIIC. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $962,500 FY10 $55,000 FY11 $135,000 FY12 $290,000 FY13 $482,500 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 106 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway West, Phase I Engineering/ROW Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of three major greenway projects for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year and includes an approximately seven-mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway in Roanoke County that would extend westward from Green Hill Park to Spring Hollow Reservoir. For FY1 0 CIP consideration, the Roanoke River Greenway West Project has been broken up into phases to ease funding. Phase I of the project will include preliminary engineering and the initial phase of right-of-way acquisition, and is being put forth as the next-in-line Roanoke River Greenway segment after the Roanoke River Greenway East Project. Phase I project costs are $450,000; total project costs are estimated to be $7,392,000. The Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan adopted by the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission in May 2007 designated the Roanoke River Greenway as the Priority #1 greenway for development and construction in the Roanoke Valley, as it was identified as the most important greenway in the regional greenway network. An important initial step in the development and construction of greenways and trails is the procurement of funding that will support the engineering and design of greenways and trails, and necessary land acquisition where greenway and trails corridors are located outside of lands owned by Roanoke County. Such funding is essential to getting these projects underway in a timely manner and to meeting the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1 ,000 County residents by 2016. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent 107 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway West, Phase I Engineering/ROW of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. Operating Budget Impact Phase I of this project will require a small amount of staff hours for project management and contract administration. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. 108 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Roanoke River Greenway West, Phase I Engineering/ROW FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $450,000 Includes construction of an approximately seven-mile section of the Roanoke River Greenway in Roanoke County that would extend westward from Green Hill Park to Spring Hollow Reservoir. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs CI"Y'\""II ""I"Y'\""...... ",f "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 Ir'""",f,f h""..1r' ,f".. l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" vlllClII ClIIIVUIIL VI ClUUILIVIIClI ~LClII IIVUI ~ IVI IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $450,000 FY10 $0 FY11 $184,800 FY12 $265,200 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $5,000 FY12 $5,000 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 109 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Tinker Creek Greenway, Phase I Engineering/ROW Procurement Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project addresses the growing need for additional greenways and trails as expressed through citizen input gained during the recent preparation of the Department's Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. The Master Plan was officially adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in July 2007 and will serve as the Department's guide for enhancing and developing recreation facilities and services to meet community needs and desires in the years to come. Greenways and trails offer opportunities for walking, hiking and bicycling and these opportunities were deemed as very important though citizen input gained during the preparation of the Master Plan. In response to the importance of greenways and trails voiced by Roanoke County citizens during preparation of the Master Plan, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. As such, the Master Plan indicates that Roanoke County should continue to develop additional greenways and trails in the County through a two-pronged development approach as follows: (1) develop park greenways and hiking and walking trails within County parks that offer opportunities for close-to-home opportunities for walking, jogging, hiking and bicycling and (2) develop greenways outside existing County parks that will link or connect parks with resources such as schools, neighborhoods, playgrounds and other parks, forests, rivers and other natural areas, historic sites and businesses. Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan indicate that 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. This project is one of three major greenway projects for which FY09 CIP funds were requested last year and includes an approximately five-mile section of the Tinker Creek Greenway in Roanoke County that would extend northward from the Roanoke City line to the Hollins University area. For FY10 CIP consideration, the Tinker Creek Greenway Project has been broken up into phases to ease funding. Phase I of the project will include preliminary engineering and the initial phase of right-of-way acquisition, and is being put forth as a priority Greenways and Trails project. Phase I project costs are $450,000; total project costs are estimated to be $5,280,000. The Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan adopted by the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission in May 2007 designated the Tinker Creek Greenway as a Priority #2 greenway for development and construction in the Roanoke Valley, as it was identified as an important greenway in the regional greenway network. An important initial step in the development and construction of greenways and trails is the procurement of funding that will support the engineering and design of greenways and trails, and necessary land acquisition where greenway and trails corridors are located outside of lands owned by Roanoke County. Such funding is essential to getting these projects underway in a timely manner and to meeting the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1 ,000 County residents by 2016. Justification This project responds to the documented need for more greenways and trails expressed through citizen input gained during the preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities. Through a statistically valid survey conducted, the citizens were asked the most important actions to improve or expand parks and recreation facilities. Fifty seven (57) percent 110 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Tinker Creek Greenway, Phase I Engineering/ROW Procurement of respondent households indicated that renovation/development of greenways for walking and biking was one of the four most important actions to improve/expand parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, the continued development of greenways and trails was listed as a Key Capital Project in the Master Plan. Also, as previously noted, in order to meet the Recommended Roanoke County Park Facility Standards presented in the Master Plan, 19 miles of additional greenways and trails are needed by 2016 to meet the Roanoke County standard of 0.30 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. The current Roanoke County service level for greenways and trails is 0.11 miles of greenways and trails per 1,000 County residents. Operating Budget Impact Phase I of this project will require a small amount of staff hours for project management and contract administration. Cost and Efficiency Impact The development of greenways and trails promotes healthy lifestyles and physical fitness, helps preserve important natural areas, contributes to the protection of water quality and overall serves to enhance the quality of life of Roanoke County residents. Conformance with County Obligations This project is consistent with the general goals, objectives, and policies of the 1998 Roanoke County Community Plan, the 2007 Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks and Facilities, and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Funding Sources Recommended funding sources would be General Operating Funds, private foundation grants, federal, state and local grants, private grants, individual and corporate donations, stormwater and impact fees, and/or General Obligation Bond. 111 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Parks and Recreation Greenways & Trails: Tinker Creek Greenway, Phase I Engineering/ROW Procurement FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $450,000 Includes construction of an approximately five-mile section of the Tinker Creek Greenway in Roanoke County that would extend northward from the Roanoke City line to the Hollins University area. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs CI"Y'\""II ""I"Y'\""...... ",f "",..J,..Ji..i"....""1 Ir'""",f,f h""..1r' ,f".. l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" vlllClII ClIIIVUIIL VI ClUUILIVIIClI ~LClII IIVUI ~ IVI IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $450,000 FY10 FY11 $0 $0 FY12 $132,000 FY13 $318,000 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $5,000 FY13 $5,000 FY14 $0 112 County of Roanoke FY201 0-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology HP Migration Project Enterprise Storage & Backup Project Internet & Intranet Redesign Project Voice Over IP Project Microsoft Exchange Project Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery Project 113 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology HP Migration Project Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will move the County's eighteen critical business applications off of the, soon to be obsolete, HP/3000 computer system. These critical business systems support the daily operations and functions of vital citizen services such as Real Estate Valuation, Personal Property, Billing and Collections, etc. Without these business systems, Roanoke County could not support daily business functions or provide citizens and businesses with the information and services they require. Justification In November 2001, Hewlett Packard announced the discontinuance of the HP/3000 computer hardware and operating system as of December 31, 2006. In 2006 Hewlett Packard announced they were extending their support until December 31, 2008. Hewlett Packard has now extended that coverage to 2010. The HP/3000 is our primary hardware and operating system platform and hosts critical business applications and interfaces. The replacement of these critical business applications by 2008 is an ambitious undertaking. The success of this project will require intense project management, departmental cooperation, full support of senior management and the Board, as well as project funding. This project will affect most County departments such as Treasurer, Commissioner of the Revenue, Real Estate Valuation, Finance, as well as the School System. If we fail to replace these systems, these departments will be running critical business systems on an unsupported platform. This means if the hardware or operating systems fail, we run the high risk of not having a repair source. Any such failure would severely impact our ability to provide services to our citizens and prove extremely detrimental to the County's bottom line. To date, the Board has appropriated $3.65 million towards the project. We originally thought these dollars would be sufficient until our primary vendor filed bankruptcy. Software and maintenance costs overall have also increased as we have moved through implementation of the project. Additional funding would provide for departmental solutions offering current functionality, solutions for data sharing and integration and position us for enhancing E- Government in the future. Upon completion of the application migration, IT will be able to deploy simplified management and security methods for all of the applications that have been moved from the HP3000 to various servers and SQL databases. Effective consolidation will occur with storage allocation management, backup and security tools that have matured significantly during the life of this project. Consolidation will increase overall system efficiency of the hardware and applications in order to facilitate other important County projects such as disaster recovery planning and implementation. Projects of this magnitude take substantial resources, whether it is money, staff or time to maintain the high quality of service to the County's citizens and businesses. Operating Budget Impact There will be significant operating budget impacts over the next few years. These increases are due to maintenance contracts and hardware acquisition costs, which historically have not been incurred with in-house systems. The increase in operating costs become required yearly operating expenses upon implementation. 115 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology HP Migration Project Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will improve overall efficiency and may provide opportunity for cost avoidance in effected County departments. Conformance with County Obligations This project conforms with the Board of Supervisors stated mission to provide high quality delivery of services to the citizens of Roanoke County. This project also conforms with the County's 1998 Community Plan. Chapter Two contains a Technology and Communication vision statement to provide its citizens the capability to access local and global community services through the latest communications technologies (p.11). Lastly this project has had the full support of the Board of Supervisors as evidenced by previous funding totaling $3.5 million. Funding Sources General Fund. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: $100,000 This project is necessary due to Hewlett Packard discontinuing HP3000 hardware support. None. Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $3,800,000 Associated Operating Costs I\n""i................""....,........ ,.."........"",....~ u,ill h"""...... "".... il"Y'\...."",.... ".... "............""..i........ ,..,,~..~ IVIClIIILCIIClII,",C ,",VIILlCI,",L~ VVIII IIClVC ClII II I IfJCI,",L VII VfJCIClLIII~ ,",V~L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs TOTAL FY10-14 $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $3,800,000 Associated Operating Costs FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 116 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Enterprise Storage & Backup Project Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will establish a standard platform for storage and backup of critical data, such as that related to Police, Fire, Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), GIS Mapping, e-government, financial reporting, etc. We will utilize the latest storage technologies, known as a Storage Area Network (SAN), to provide a single large repository that can host data for multiple applications in a stable and easily supportable format. Justification Currently Roanoke County has 30 separate storage and backup systems in several different locations, which jeopardizes our ability to backup critical data and safely secure all stored data in the event of an emergency or natural disaster. Consolidation will increase overall system efficiency of the hardware and applications such as Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and in Public Safety areas that must operate 24 hours a day/7 days a week. Secure storage and backup is vital to protecting the security of our data. Having an effective storage system enables us to store data securely and establish a back-up plan that ensures our crucial data will be recoverable in the event of an unplanned outage. By establishing a SAN environment, we will be able to standardize the infrastructure into a consistent format, which will make it much easier for us to support within our existing staffing levels. Providing consistent technology and parts allows us to focus training, procurement and strategy on a single set of hardware and software, rather than developing individual management plans for each disparate back-up system that we manage today. Additionally, consolidating our back-ups into an organization wide SAN, we will also be able to take advantage of other time and labor saving techniques such as remote monitoring and troubleshooting, and offsite replication. Establishing a SAN environment will allow us to take advantage of the our offsite disaster recovery center by moving data across our network to our off site recovery location, thereby dramatically improving our ability to recover data and systems in the unlikely event of a catastrophic failure. Operating Budget Impact There will be a slight budget impact, related to software maintenance costs, which becomes a required yearly operating expense upon implementation. These expenses will be offset by the savings from unnecessary replacement parts from antiquated tape loading devices and server hard drives. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will decrease County costs by standardizing our storage media. It will also improve overall efficiency as all storage and backup will be standardized and managed from one location. Conformance with County Obligations This project conforms with the stated mission of the Board of Supervisors to provide high quality services at reasonable costs to the citizens of Roanoke County. This project also conforms to the County's listed objective to ensure that all citizens have full and appropriate access to information concerning their government, as found in Chapter Two of the 2005 Community Plan. Funding Sources General Fund. 117 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Enterprise Storage & Backup Project FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $672,928 Equipment cost. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs C",f",a,,,,,..,,, l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" "'''Ir'''1r' vV I LVVClI C III ClIII LCIIClII,",C ,",v~ L~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $192,354 FY11 $360,574 FY12 $40,000 FY13 $40,000 FY14 $40,000 TOTAL FY10-14 $672,928 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $50,000 FY14 $150,000 118 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Internet & Intranet Redesign Project Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary The Upgrade and Redesign project entails the migration of our Web presence into a new content management system while at the same time upgrading the user interface (look and feel) of the County's Web site in order to provide a more effective and functional site for our citizens to use to conduct business with the County. A new site interface and a new content management system will allow us to improve functionality and usability, improve the quality and timeliness of our content and integrate many of the new tools available on the Web today (improved search, social media, etc). Justification All signs in any government publication point to the idea of getting citizens "online" rather than "inline". As broadband use continues to grow in the County and more and more of our population becomes accustomed to conducting business online, we need to be able to offer that same level of service to our citizens. By improving our web presence through the delivery of more online services and the creation of more content that is timely, relevant and useful, we can better serve the public on their terms and their timeframes. We can reduce the more costly methods of operation by cutting down on lines and telephone calls by web-enabling our organization. Such an undertaking requires a powerful system and an intuitive user interface that is friendly and simple. Our current web site is maintained using Microsoft's Content Management System. Microsoft has announced that they will be dropping general support for both this main product and the software (MS Frontpage) used by each department web master in April 2009. The upgrades are necessary and critical in order to retain future support for the software. Since the internal organization has largely standardized on the Microsoft product line (MS Office, SQL, liS, etc.), we would like to upgrade our existing software to Microsoft Office Sharepoint Server (MOSS) to be used as our single system for enterprise web content. By implementing MOSS, we can provide all of the subject matter experts across the organization with flexible tools that will allow them to publish their web content to a single repository and then re-use that content in multiple areas (multiple web sites) simultaneously - designing the way the content appears based on the intended audience. Additionally, our subject matter experts will be able to create, edit, delete or otherwise manipulate content on their own time, using their preferred approval methods, without an IT bottleneck to delay the process. The need for increased use of web applications, online forms, project collaboration, content/document management and workflow capabilities, as well as the ability to quickly and efficiently share information between employees and citizens continues to grow. The County website is a critical component to meeting the increased demand for services that support Public Safety, the future Multi-gen Center and South County Library, as well as many other departments and service areas within the county. Upgrading the software will position the county with the ability to offer these much needed services as well as bring the existing software to a supported platform. This will also enable us to integrate improved online payment services, citizen self-service, document sharing, new media integration and other newer tools into our web presence to ensure that it continues to grow as the demands grow. In addition to our external Web presence, this upgrade will also enable us to improve our internal use of the technology by linking each department into a true intranet. We can use MOSS to implement internally-facing department Web sites to serve each other as internal customers. Much like the external Web site, an effective intranet will reduce phone calls, improve our work flows and in general improve our ability to collaborate on work products. 119 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Internet & Intranet Redesign Project Content and services can be shared across the intranet and the Web presence yet still be managed centrally by the appropriate subject matter experts - a true improvement in efficiency and access to valuable information. Operating Budget Impact Operating budget impacted by increases in software maintenance and licensing fees for the products used to develop and maintain the Web presence. We currently purchase our software off of a state contract with Microsoft that expires in 2010. At that time we will be renegotiating our contract with Microsoft at TBD rates. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will insure the County Internet is upgraded to a supported platform. The redesign aspect of the project will allow the County to meet the ever-growing demand for use of e- government services on both the Internet and Intranet. Conformance with County Obligations This project conforms with the stated mission of the Board of Supervisors to provide high quality services at reasonable costs to the citizens of Roanoke County. It helps support the Technology and Communications Vision in the Community Plan and it conforms with the County IT Department's Strategic plan, revised in 2006, to expand and enhance e-government services for citizens and County government. Funding Sources General Fund. 120 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Internet & Intranet Redesign Project FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $276,575 Costs will be related to software acquisition and licensing as well as training. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs C",f"U'''''''''' l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ""....,..J li,.."'....lr'i........ ,f"''''1r' .." h", ,..J"'.."'..l"Y'\i...."',..J vVILVVClIC IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C ClIIU II,",CII~III~ ICC~ LV IJC UCLCIIIIIIICU. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 $0 $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $276,575 FY10 $108,000 FY11 $168,575 FY12 FY13 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 121 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Voice Over IP Project Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary This project will bring voice over IP (Internet) technology to all County buildings. Voice over IP allows telephone conversations over our internal computer network, eventually eliminating the need to maintain separate networks. Our plan is to switch over the various phone systems one at a time. This will require replacing all phones, outgoing local and long distance lines, and increasing network bandwidth throughout our network to provide this service, however this expansion of our computer network will ultimately allow us to reduce our telephony network and decrease our dependency on external telephony vendors. Currently, the Public Safety Center is using VolP and all new facilities currently under construction will include VolP as the standard telephony system. Justification This project addresses both future infrastructure needs and equipment obsolescence. It will consolidate phone management and cut down on the number of leased phone lines. We presently have 42 phone systems, which must be individually maintained and managed, and cannot connect to each other through an intercom system. By implementing VolP county-wide, we will be able to take advantage of our computer network infrastructure, reducing our reliance on outside vendor equipment and services (thereby reducing our ongoing costs). By having a single system across the organization, we will also be able to more quickly spread emergency notifications to ensure employee safety. As with our similar request of enterprise storage, we will also be able to reduce the long-term operating costs and improve response times. We will be able to remotely troubleshoot and repair many service issues. Additionally, we will be able to focus ongoing training efforts and skill sets on an individual set of technology rather than being forced to keep up with the upgrades, patches and hardware offered by the multiple vendor systems we support today. In short, the implementation will bring our technologies up to date and allow us to be more efficient in our uses and support of the technology, and it will enable us to provide faster, better and cheaper service in a way that is flexible enough to meet growing and changing needs of the organization. Operating Budget Impact This project will not have a significant impact on operating budgets. Any additional expenses will be offset by savings on equipment costs. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will improve overall efficiency by allowing the use of the same equipment to support the computer network and the telephone system infrastructure. In essence we will be leveraging monies that we have already spent on improving our computer network infrastructure in other areas. It will also cut down on field support while simultaneously opening the door for new communications capabilities (i.e. soft phones). Conformance with County Obligations This project conforms with the stated mission of the Board of Supervisors to provide high quality services at reasonable costs to the citizens of Roanoke County. This project also conforms to the County's listed objective to promote the use of the most effective & efficient methods to communicate issues and policies to the citizens and to receive their input and suggestions, as found in Chapter Two of the 2005 Community Plan. 122 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Voice Over IP Project Funding Sources General Fund. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $276,585 Equipment cost. Future equipment costs. $0 Associated Operating Costs None. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $231,447 FY12 $550,458 FY13 $207,507 FY14 $165,645 TOTAL FY10-14 $276,585 Future Costs Beyond 2014: Future equipment costs. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $18,174 FY12 $19,450 FY13 $20,383 FY14 $20,975 123 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Microsoft Exchange Project Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Our present email system is over ten years old. The viability of its vendor, Novell, support, and maintenance are becoming a challenge. It has limited capabilities, no integration with our other office productivity applications, and is no longer considered a best of breed in its product category. In all other areas of our technology operations, we are beginning to standardize on the Microsoft platform. Our messaging system is one of our most vital communications tools and its longevity and stability is of course a primary concern for the Information Technology department. As the needs of the organization have grown, we are beginning to out pace the product offering of our existing vendor. Moving to Microsoft's messaging system (Exchange), we will be able to standardize on the proven, stable leader in the field and engage with a company that has no sign of weakening. Justification Novell has indicated support for the GroupWise email system will be provided through 2015. By implementing MS Exchange according to the schedule indicated in the attached, we would position the county to be fully converted before support for our existing system wanes or is completely removed. Transitioning to a Microsoft Exchange Server messaging platform would provide longevity to the county's email capabilities, increase efficiency & productivity through integration with our other MS applications (MS Office, MS Sharepoint, MS SQL, etc.), provide increased capabilities (new services and features not available with Novell Groupwise), and protect the county from obsolescence. This would be a major undertaking requiring an additional Network Engineer for administration, additional yearly operating expense for software licensing, and additional security measures to protect the system. Operating Budget Impact This project will have an impact on operating budgets as software licensing and necessary security measures will have to be purchased annually. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will improve overall efficiency and may provide opportunity for cost avoidance in affected County departments. Conformance with County Obligations This project conforms with the Board of Supervisors stated mission to provide high quality delivery of services to the citizens of Roanoke County. This project also conforms to the County's 2005 Community Plan. Chapter Two contains a Technology and Communication vision statement to provide its citizens the capability to access local and global community services through the latest communications technologies. Funding Sources General Fund. 124 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Microsoft Exchange Project FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $520,000 Includes land acquisition, equipment and software. Future equipment costs. $0 Associated Operating Costs ^ ........,,""1 "'''Ir''' ..",I"""",,..J Ir'"fl.u,,,,,..,,, li,.."'....lr'i........ r\1 II I U ClI '"'v~ L I C IClLCU ~v I L VV ClI C II,",C I I~ II I~. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $0 TOTAL FY10-14 $520,000 FY10 FY11 $0 $0 FY12 $50,000 FY13 $470,000 FY14 Future Costs Beyond 2014: Future equipment costs. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $65,000 FY14 $65,000 125 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery Project Description FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary E-mail archiving tools are becoming more prevalent among organizations of all sizes. Increasing compliance pressure from regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley and HIPAA has combined with new litigation guidelines to create a perfect storm of market demand. But e-mail archiving is more than just a technology; it's also an integrated set of policies and controls. An archiving system will enable us to more effectively manage the volume of email that flows in and out of the county and has proven to be crucial to our ongoing operations. Justification E-mail archiving products do two things: they improve the efficiency of existing e-mail infrastructures by relieving load, and they improve an enterprise's ability to store and manage e- mail. In today's environment, we rely very heavily on our messaging system to coordinate meetings, communicate with each other and the public and to generally organize our productivity. The county relies on email correspondence internally and with citizens and business on a daily basis. We conduct regular communications directly with citizens via email (i.e web site inquiries, planning, zoning and permits information, real estate valuations, etc.) and we also have begun to tie our messaging systems into our other applications (i.e. service requests to General Services, automated notifications to IT when server issues occur) to enable us to provide better services and provide more efficient support. Outages of our messaging system could cause work delays, lost revenue, poor citizen service and a general lack of coordination of our work efforts. Therefore, we must do all that is reasonably possible to protect the integrity and stability of our messaging system. By installing a separate archiving system, we reduce the load on our messaging system thereby ensuring better stability and faster recovery time, should the system go offline. Additionally, an archiving system will enable the County Attorney's office to more quickly provide an effective response to FOIA or eDiscovery requests that include an electronic component. Operating Budget Impact There will be an impact on our operating budget to implement additional hardware maintenance contracts. It should be noted that each increase in operating cost listed in the CIP-3 document becomes a required yearly operating expense upon its implementation. Cost and Efficiency Impact This project will improve overall efficiency by reducing the load on the County's e-mail system and allowing the County to recover requested records quickly. Maintaining this system is crucial to supporting our citizens and staff. This request enables us to provide direct and indirect improvements to both citizens and employees and enables us to more effectively respond to requests for electronic records. Conformance with County Obligations This project conforms with the stated mission of the Board of Supervisors to provide high quality services at reasonable costs to the citizens of Roanoke County. This project also conforms to the County's listed objective to ensure that all citizens have full and appropriate access to information concerning their government, as found in Chapter Two of the 2005 Community Plan. 126 DRAFT FY2010-2014 CIP Projects Information Technology Email Archiving, Retention and Recovery Project Funding Sources General Fund. FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs Total FY1 0-14 Project Cost: Project Cost Notes: Future Capital Costs Beyond 2014: Appropriations to Date: $160,800 New hardware/software will relieve load and improve efficiency. None. $0 Associated Operating Costs U""..,..JU'''''''''' l"Y'\""i......"'....""....,..'" ,.."........"",.... "'''Ir''' .." h", ,..J"'.."'..l"Y'\i...."',..J I IClI UVVClI C IIIClIIILCIIClII,",C '"'VilLI CI,",L ,",V~L LV IJC UCLCIIIIIIICU. Department Request for Allocation FY2010 - 2014 Expenditure Summary Capital Costs $95,000 $10,200 $10,200 $35,200 $10,200 TOTAL FY10-14 $160,800 Future Costs Beyond 2014: None. Appropriations to Date: $0 Associated Operating Costs FY10 $0 FY11 $0 FY12 $0 FY13 $0 FY14 $0 127 c~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE GOUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRA-rION CENTER ON l-LIESDA Y, MARCH 1 0, 2009 RESOLU1-JON CER1-IFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, -rHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER K j., 0...- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10,2009 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearings for citizen comment on the following items: (a) General Comment on the upcoming annual budget for FY2009-201 0 (b) "Effective" real estate tax rate increase (c) Real estate, personal property and machinery and tools tax rates SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Tho~ f1,.61,'L h ~,:,-",; 'Ci}.$ &ue rC'ju,,' b/ 6y Sfc.h~. <!.PJe_ tC~i't?J/ c,.., ri~_ J~ 12,1:- / fir.) -f..4....f..e... ("\ J-J' t'.J.f Fn e/'J.I- (""t-" d rlJ<i!.- ~'-)L. I'l:..'_'~ ,i ~~;~ .2CjC f., '/ 7JC'~J t:..- 'h-.~c.~ , ~ . L ;- e. 1-2" r ' .;-It tt! - C (..L'" y ".;( f- . f- "J~.:.,i y' <:'.....-;-0 L F Y "8.. (!';9) t::., ~/ t:.l r~. r e. c p J;Y#1 e' .N~' .." SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: AI 'f'Ait j).l.J,...g r,.:/e. /t(.,~l.s. jlL As requested by the Board of Supervisors, staff advertised the proposed Real Estate, Personal Property, and Machinery and Tools Tax Rates for calendar year 2009 as follows: Real Estate Tax at a rate of not more than $1.09 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. Personal Property Tax at a rate of not more than $3.50 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. Machinery and Tools Tax at a rate of not more than $3.00 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. In addition, state code mandates that when reassessment of real property in a locality results in a real estate revenue increase of 1 % over the previous year, the locality must either reduce the tax rate, so that the revenues are no more than 101 % of the previous year's or hold a public hearing indicating an "effective" real property tax increase. Also, consistent with past practices, the Board has expressed a desire to hold a public hearing to elicit "general" comment on the upcoming annual budget development process. -rhis hearing gives citizens the opportunity to express their priorities and concerns for the Board to consider during formulation of the upcoming budget. 1 The public hearings scheduled for today are for receiving written and oral comment on these three topics. The public hearing on proposed tax rates was advertised on February 24 and March 3, 2009, the "Effective" real estate tax rate Increase was advertised on March 3,2009, and the general comment for the FY2009-2010 Budget was advertised on March 3,2009, thereby satisfying state code requirements for public notice. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. I< - ~ . 0.... AT A REGULAR MEETING OF -rHE BOARD OF SLIPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COL~NTYr VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COLJNTY ADMINIS-rRATION CENTER MEE-rING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA rrEM: Adoption of the real estate tax rate for the calendar year 2009 SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. /L. County Administrator /~- COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~:' L L'Po nJC'<Jo;;/ 4/i" &".1.--1 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the direction of the Board of Supervisors, the real estate tax rate for the twelve-month period beginning January 1, 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, was advertised on February 24 and March 3,2009 at $1.09 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. This advertised rate represents no change from the current rate of $1.09. The public hearing for citizen comment on the above advertised tax rate will be held on March 10, 2009. STAFF RECOMMENDA1-ION: The proposed budget for fiscal year 2009-10 is predicated on the advertised real estate tax rate; therefore, staff recommends that the real estate tax rate again be established at the rate of $1.09 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation for the 2009 calendar year. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF -rHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 ORDER SET1-ING THE TAX RATE ON REAL ESTATE SITUATE IN ROANOKE COUNTY FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2009 BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the levy for the twelve-month period beginning January 1, 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, be, and hereby is, set for a tax rate of $1.09 per one hundred dollars of assessed valuation on all taxable real estate and mobile homes classified by Sections 58.1-3200 I 58.1-3201 J 58.1-3506.A.8, and 58.1-3506.B of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, situate in Roanoke County. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. P.-:J, b AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of the personal property tax rate for the calendar year 2009 SllBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. L~ County Administrator r/;I COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: R t: ,~, I:'''''''~./ l7,pflr:J ~'L-~ I SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The personal property tax rate for the twelve-month period beginning January 1 , 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, was advertised on February 24 and March 3, 2009 at $3.50 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. The public hearing for citizen comment on the above advertised tax rates will be held on March 10, 2009. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposed budget for fiscal year 2009-1 0 is predicated on the current personal property tax rate; therefore, staff recommends that the personal property tax rate again be established at the rate of $3.50 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation for the 2009 calendar year. AT A REGULAR MEE-rING OF -rHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 ORDER SETTING THE TAX LEVY ON PERSONAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN ROANOKE COUNTY FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2009 BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. -rhat the levy for the twelve-month period beginning January 1, 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, be, and hereby is, set for a tax rate of $3.50 per one hundred dollars of assessed valuation on all taxable, tangible personal property, excluding that class of personal property generally designated as machinery and tools as set forth in Section 58.1-3507 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and excluding all those classes of household goods and personal effects as are defined in Sections 58.1-3504 and 58.1-3505 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, but including the property separately classified by Sections 58.1-3500, 58.1-3501, 58.1-3502, 58.1-3506 in the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, of public service corporations based upon the assessed value thereof fixed by the State Corporation Commission and duly certified. 2. That there be, and hereby is, established as a separate class of personal property in Roanoke County those items of personal property set forth in Section 58.1- 3506 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and adopted by Ordinance No. 121592- 11, and generally designated as Motor Vehicles for Disabled Veterans. 3. That the levy for the twelve-month period beginning January 1, 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, be, and hereby is, set at fifty (50o!'c.) percent of the tax rate 1 established in paragraph 1 for the taxable, tangible personal property as herein established as a separate classification for tax purposes and as more fully defined by Section 58.1- 3506 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and generally designated as Motor Vehicles for Disabled Veterans. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. f< -;). c~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRA-rION CENTER MEE-rING DATE: March 1 0, 2009 AGENDA rrEM: Adoption of the machinery and tools tax rate for the calendar year 2009 SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. ,~ County Adrrlinistrator '/" COUNTY ADMINIS-rRA TOR'S COMMENTS: If e r... f.;' An,n tine'; ~1f' ... ~ ' ~ I SUMMARY OF INFORMAl-ION: The machinery and tools tax rate for the twelve-month period beginning January 1 , 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, was advertised on February 24 and March 3, 2009 at $3.00 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. The public hearing for citizen comment on the above advertised tax rate will be held on March 10, 2009. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposed budget for fiscal year 2009-10 is predicated on the current machinery and tools tax rate; therefore, staff recommends that the machinery and tools tax rate be established at $3.00 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation for the 2009 calendar year. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10,2009 ORDER SETTING THE TAX LEVY ON A CLASSIFCATION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY - MACHINERY AND TOOLS - SITUATE IN ROANOKE COUNTY FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 2009 BE IT ORDERED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That there be, and hereby is, established as a separate class of personal property in Roanoke County those items of personal property set forth in Section 58.1- 3507 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and generally designated as machinery and tools. 2. That the levy for the twelve-month period beginning January 1, 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, be, and hereby is, set for a tax rate of $3.00 per one hundred dollars of assessed valuation on all taxable, tangible personal property as herein established as a separate classification for tax purposes and as more fully defined by Section 58.1-3507 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and generally designated as machinery and tools. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. $-1- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF -rHE BOARD OF SL~PERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS-rRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 10, 2009 AGENDA rrEM: Second Reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending and reenacting Sections of Article II, County Vehicle License, of Chapter 12, Motor Vehicle And Traffic SUBMITTED BY: F. Kevin Hutchins Treasurer APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~ County Administrator ,j-' COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: A t! ~.:' nl Jft c'",J 41'd~ C ~ i.:v / SllMMARY OF INFORMA-rION: In 2008 Roanoke County initiated a significant move in eliminating the historically controversial Vehicle Decal collection tool and initiating a Vehicle License Fee (VLF) structure. The change came at an opportune moment in time given the Hp 3000 conversion project as well as the amended underlying State Code of Virginia 46.2-752 which authorizes such a change. The transfer has been smooth and the original negative fiscal impact of $30,000 - $50,000 has not been realized. The Hp conversion has been slow but we have now arrived at the final deployment date. With this upon us, we are now requesting some final changes to the ordinance in order to firm up definitions and consistency in its practical application. The changes will lower the VLF cost to the owners of farm use vehicles, small trailers, and National Guard members to a pricing model similar to the one utilized in previous years with decals. Given the annual growth in DecalNLF revenue in combination with the negative impact, revenue should remain flat for the current year. 1 FISCAL IMPACT: This change will create a negative impact of $23,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Treasurer's Office and staff recommends adoption after the conclusion of the public hearing. 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 2009 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS OF ARTICLE II, COUNTY VEHICLE LICENSE, OF CHAPTER 12, MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC, OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO DELETE PROVISIONS FOR VEHICLE DECALS AND TO ENACT A VEHICLE LICENSE FEE AS PERMITTED BY STATE LAW WHEREAS, Section 46.2-752 authorizes counties, as well as cities and towns, to charge a license fee on motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers having a situs within the jurisdiction which is in addition to any personal property tax on such vehicles or trailers; and WHEREAS, this Virginia Code section further authorizes a county to provide by ordinance that it shall be unlawful for any owner or operator of a motor vehicle, trailer or semi-trailer to fail to obtain the license represented by such license fee; and WHEREAS, this Virginia Code section further provides that a county, city or town may dispense with the requirement that a decal or other tangible evidence of a local license tax be displayed upon any licensed vehicle; and WHEREAS, the Treasurer of Roanoke County has requested the elimination of the county's vehicle decals to reduce the inconvenience to county citizens, to reduce costs of obtaining and processing decals and without a negative impact upon the collection of such license fees; and WHEREAS, adoption of amendments to the existing Roanoke County Code provisions concerning motor vehicles are necessary at this time to permit effective implementation of this license fee ordinance beginning with the tax year 2009; and WHEREAS, the first reading for this ordinance was held on February 24, 2009; and the second reading and public hearing was held on March 10, 2009. 1 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Sec. 12-27. License year.; Sec. 12-28. Levy and amount of fee; special provisions for antique vehicles; exceptions., Sec 12-29. Application for license and payment of tax., Sec. 12-30. Authority of Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue, Correction of or relief from License fee, of Article II, COUNTY VEHICLE LICENSE, of Chapter 12, MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC of the Roanoke County Code, be amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 12-27. License year. The license year under this article shall commence on January J.tH::le 1 and expire on December May 310f each year and each license issued upon the payment of the license fee ~ prescribed by this article shall expire at the end of the license year in which such license is issued. (Code 1971, SS 10-42, 10-43; Ord. No. 2735, S 1, 12-9-80) Sec. 12-28. Levy and amount of fee ~; special provisions for antique vehicles; exceptions. (b) On every motor vehicle, trailer and semitrailer not taxed under other subsections of this section, there shall be a fee ~ of twenty dollars ($20.00) per annum, except that the fee ~ on motorcycles shall be fifteen dollars ($15.00) per annum, the fee on vehicles with a gross weight in pounds of four thousand and one (4,001), or more, shall be twenty-five dollars ($25.00). The annual license fee for a trailer or semi-trailer not designed and used for the transportation of passengers with a gross vehicle weight in pounds of 1,500 or less shall not exceed eight dollars ($8.00); for such trailers or semi-trailers with a gross vehicle weight in pounds of 1,501 to 4,000 pounds shall not exceed eighteen dollars and fifty cents ($18.50) and for such trailers of semi-trailers with a gross vehicle weight in pounds of 4,001 shall not exceed twenty dollars ($20.00). The annual license fee for a motor vehicle which is registered for farm use with the Division of Motor Vehicles pursuant to 9 46.2-698 of the Code of Virginia shall not exceed fifteen dollars ($ 15.00). 2 (c) On each truck or trailer there shall be a tax per annum according to the follo'Ning schedule: Gross \'ehicle +FYsk Trailer \^/eight in Pounds 1 ,500 or less $20.00 $ 6.50 1 ,501 to 1,000 20.00 15.00 1,001 to 6,500 25.00 20.00 6,501 to 10,000 30.00 20.00 10,001 to 20,000 1 0 . 00 20.00 20,001 to 30,000 60.00 20.00 30,001 to 10,000 70.00 20.00 10,000 and o'/er 80.00 20.00 The fee ~ for a trailer designed exclusively to transport boats shall not exceed six dollars and fifty cents ($6.50). (c) fGj The owner of an "antique motor vehicle," as defined and licensed in title 46.2 of the Code of Virginia, may be recognized secure 3 loc31 license or dec31 3t no ch3rge upon filing an application for same with the Treasurer and payment of a five dollar ($5.00) fee and the payment of the appropriate personal property taxes. This application shall remain valid so long as the vehicle is titled to the applicant. (d) fej Any member of the Virginia National Guard shall be entitled to be licensed for any motor vehicle bearing special license plates issued under the provisions of 9 46.2-744 of the Code of Virginia 3 loc31 license or dec31 upon the payment of a an annual license fee in the amount of one-half ( 1/2) of the license fee ~ prescribed in this section. (e) The following owners of motor vehicles are hereby exempt from the annual license fee ~: An honorably-discharged prisoner of war, any person awarded the Medal of Honor, and any disabled veteran. These exemptions shall be limited to anyone passenger vehicle, pickup or panel truck owned by an eligible person. The Commissioner of the Revenue shall determine eligibility based upon the criteria utilized by the commissioner of the department of motor vehicles of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the issuance of special license plates. The Treasurer is hereby authorized to recognize issue 3 loc31 license or dec31 te owners eligible under this subsection. (Code 1971, S 10-41; Ord. No. 1929, 12-13-78; Ord. No. 83-99, S 1,6-14-83; Ord. No. 84-195, 11-13-84; Ord. No. 6987-5, S 1,6-9-87) Cross References: Taxation generally, Ch. 21. 3 Sec. 12-29. Application for license and payment of fee~. Application for a license required by this article shall be made at the office of the Commissioner of the Revenue on forms supplied by the Treasurer or Commissioner of the Revenue. At the time of such application, the license fee ~ prescribed by this article shall be paid. A license fee of one dollar ($ 1.00) shall be paid for a license for a vehicle which replaces a vehicle currently licensed in Roanoke County which has been sold or disposed of not more than If.'ithin sixty (60) days prior to the application for such new license upon the presentation of adequate written proof of sale or disposal of the currently licensed vehicle. (Code 1971, S 10-45) Sec. 12-30. Authority of Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue; Correction of or relief from license fee. The Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue, respectively, shall have the authority to correct erroneous billings or assessments of vehicles for a license fee in any tax year upon submission of proper documentation as to such vehicles use, weight or other appropriate classification. 2. That this ordinance shall be effective on and after January 1, 2009. 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. T:L AT A REGULAR MEETING OF -rHE BOARD OF SLIPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRA-rION CENTER MEE1.,NG DATE: March 10, 2009 Funding requests from health and human service agencies for fiscal year 2009-2010 AGENDA rrEM: SUBMITTED BY: Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. 4L- County Administrator jr. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMA1.,ON: This time has been set aside for presentations to allow health and human service agencies the opportunity to orally submit funding requests to the Board of Supervisors for inclusion in the FY2009-2010 budget. Consistent with prior years' process, the requesting organizations have been categorized into two groups and presentations will be heard at separate Board n1eetings. At the March 17, 2008 Board of Supervisors meeting, presentations from cultural, tourism, and other organizations requesting contributions from the County for inclusion in the FY2009-20 10 budget will be heard. Organizations that submitted funding requests for FY2009-201 0 were instructed to submit an Appearance Request Form to the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's if they wanted to make an oral presentation. The Health and Human Service agencies on the attached report have requested time to speak to the Board on March 1 0, 2009 regarding their funding requests. The written requests and accompanying literature submitted by each organization are available in the Budget office for your review prior to the presentations. Attached is a summary that lists each agency's budget history and requested funding amount, along with a listing of speakers who have signed up to present the agency's request. Based on input received from the Board, the County Administrator will make recommendations for funding and present them as part of the FY2009-2010 proposed budget that is planned for April. FY 2009-201 0 Agency Funding Requests Board Recommendation Worksheet Health and Human Services Agencies March 10, 2009 FY2009-2010 Agency Funding Requests Health and Human Service Agencies BOS Work Session March 10, 2009 The agencies listed below have requested time to speak to the Board regarding FY2009-2010 funding requests. Speakers will be called in alphabetical order (Z to A) by the name of the organization they are representing. Agency Name Presenter YWCA Melissa Woodson, Executive Director Roanoke Valley Speech & Hearing Center McCormick, Executive Director TAP - Total Action Against Poverty Salem/Roanoke County Food Pantry Roanoke Valley I nterfaith Hospitality Network Roanoke Area Ministries Presbyterian Community Center Planned Parenthood Health Systems Mental Health America of Roanoke Valley lIy, Executive Director Manna Ministries L. Willard II LOA Area Agency on Aging Literacy Volunteers of Roanoke Valley Habitat for Humanity in the Roanoke Valley elopment Director Council of Community Services estner-Chappelear, President Conflict Resolution Center Commonwealth Catholic Charities Children's Trust Child Health Investment Partnership (CHIP) Bradley Free Clinic Blue Ridge Legal Services American Red Cross Advancement Foundation Adult Care Center of Roanoke Valley, Inc Sue S. Nutter, Executive Director FY2009-2010 Agency Funding Requests Health and Human Service Agencies 80S Work Session March 1 0, 2009 FY08 FY09 FY2010 Agency Name Adopted Adopted Request Proposed Adult Care Center of the Roanoke Valley $10,500 $10,500 $12,000 Advancement Foundation $400 $1,500 American Red Cross $3,700 $5,000 Bethany Hall $1,300 $2,100 Big Brothers and Big Sisters of Roanoke Valley $4,500 $4,500 Blue Ridge Independent Living Center $1,000 $1,000 Blue Ridge Legal Services, Inc. $600 $3,732 Boys & Girls Clubs of Southwest Virginia $200 $20,000 Bradley Free Clinic $5,600 $6,500 Brain Injury Services of SVWA $2,200 $0 Camp Virginia Jaycee, Inc. $200 $4,800 Child Health Investment Partnership (CHIP) $ , $25,000 Children's Trust (formerly Children's Advocacy Center and CASA) $0 $10,000 Children's Advocacy Center of the Roanoke Valley, Inc $3,900 See Children's Trust Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) $3,600 See Children's Trust Commonwealth Catholic Charities $400 $1,500 Commonwealth Search and Rescue (Daleville) $400 $1,000 Conflict Resolution Center, Inc. $1,600 $24,000 Council of Community Svcs - Info and Referral Center $3,200 $3,200 Council of Community Svcs - Nonprofit Resource Center $500 $500 Council of Community Svcs - Homless Management Information $0 $5,000 System (NEW) Dare to Care Charities (NEW) $0 $3,000 Family Service of the Roanoke Valley $4,500 $7,000 Good Samaritan Hospice $0 $5,500 Goodwill Industries of the Valleys $1,100 $1 , 1 00 Habitat for Humanity - Cash Donation $2,100 $5,000 Habitat for Humanity - Property Donation None Property Literacy Volunteers of Roanoke Valley $1,200 $2,000 LOA Area Agency on Aging ,700 $32,003 Manna Ministries $800 $5,000 Mental Health America of Roanoke Valley $1,100 $1,500 National Multiple Sclerosis Society $600 $0 Planned Parenthood (NEW) $0 $10,000 Presbyterian Community Center $600 $1,000 Roanoke Area Ministries $1,600 $5,000 Roanoke County Prevention Council $1,000 $1,000 FY2009-2010 Agency Funding Requests Health and Human Service Agencies 80S Work Session March 1 0, 2009 Agency Name Roanoke Valley Interfaith Hospitality Network Roanoke Valley SPCA Roanoke Valley Speech & Hearing Center Roanoke Wildlife Rescue Saint Francis of Assisi Service Dog Foundation Salem/Roanoke County Community Food Pantry Salvation Army Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project, Inc. Southwestern Virginia Second Harvest Food Bank TAP TAP - Transitional Living Center The Achievement Center Trust House YMCA - Kirk Family YMCA - Partners of Youth YWCA of the Roanoke Valley Sub- Total $168,400 Contractual Relationship for Services: Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare $157,000 Grand Total Health & Human Services $325,400 FY09 Adopted $1,100 $700 $2,000 $700 $3,500 $5,400 $2,800 $0 $5,200 7,700 $17,700 $0 $4,200 $200 $1,800 $900 $168,700 $175,000 $343,700 FY2010 Request Proposed $3,000 $1,500 $3,000 $0 $20,000 $10,000 $4,500 $5,000 $15,000 $31,000 $21,000 $20,000 $5,500 $0 $0 $2,500 $352,435 $248,779 $601,214