HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/22/1997 - Adopted Board Recordse
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
RESOLUTION 042297-1 ENDORSING IN CONCEPT THE BLUE RIBBON
REPORT, THE 1997 COMPREHENSIVE FACILITIES STUDY OF THE
ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL SYSTEM
WHEREAS, following the defeat of the April 1996 bond referendum for construction
of a new south county high school and other school improvements, the Roanoke County
School Board and Board of Supervisors appointed a committee of 22 citizens from all
areas of the County to conduct a Comprehensive Facilities Study to determine the needs
of the school system, and
WHEREAS, this committee became known as the Blue Ribbon Committee and met
over 87 times and toured 28 school facilities in preparation of their report, and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 1997, the Blue Ribbon Committee presented the results
of the 1997 Comprehensive Facilities Study of the Roanoke County School System to the
School Board and Board of Supervisors in a public meeting, recommending approximately
$100 million in improvements, additions and new facilities to be constructed in three
phases over the next ten years, and
WHEREAS, On March 27, 1997, the School Board accepted and endorsed in
concept the report of the Blue Ribbon Committee.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia hereby endorses in concept the recommendations presented by the Blue
Ribbon Commission in their report, The 1997 Comprehensive Facilities Study of the
Roanoke County School System.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance as revised by Supervisor
1
Eddy, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent
School Board Members
Ron Martin, Martin & Associates
Al Thomason, Chair, BRC
2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT
THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
RESOLUTION 042297-2 TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF THE
FRANCHISE FROM BOOTH COMMUNICATIONS OF VIRGINIA, INC. TO
BLACKSBURG/SALEM CABLEVISION, INC.
WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke, Virginia ("County") granted a Cable Television Franchise
to Booth Communications of Virginia, Inc. ('Booth") or its predecessor in interest by adoption of
Ordinance No. 102594-12 (the 'Roanoke Franchise"); and
WHEREAS, on November 11, 1996, Booth entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger
("Agreement") with several entities including Adelphia Communications Corporation ("Adelphia");
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement and subsequent information provided by Adelphia,
Booth will transfer ownership of the Roanoke Franchise and cable system to a wholly owned
subsidiary of Adelphia, Blacksburg/Salem Cablevision, Inc. ("BSCI"); and
WHEREAS, following the closing of the transfer contemplated by the Agreement, the name
of the "Grantee" under the Roanoke Franchise will change to BSCI; and
WHEREAS, under the Roanoke Franchise, Virginia Statutes and Federal Law, the transfer
of ownership of the Roanoke Franchise to BSCI constitutes a transfer requiring approval of the
County; and
WHEREAS, the County, with the assistance of Moss & Barnett, A Professional Association,
has reviewed the proposed transfer of ownership of the Roanoke Franchise and the legal,
technical, and financial qualifications of BSCI and its parent company Adelphia; and
WHEREAS, based on information and reports received by the County, the County has found
no reason to disapprove of the transfer of ownership to Adelphia.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia resolves as follows:
1. The Roanoke Franchise is in full force and effect and Booth is the lawful "Grantee"
under the Roanoke Franchise.
2. The County hereby consents and approves of the transfer of ownership of the
Roanoke Franchise from Booth to BSCI subject to:
a. Closing of the transaction contemplated within the Agreement pursuant to
the terms and conditions described in information provided by Booth, BSCI and
Adelphia to the County.
b. BSCI or its parent Adelphia promptly notifying the County in writing of the
completion of the transfer of ownership and executing the attached Acceptance
Agreement or other similar form acceptable to the County and returning same to
the County within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Resolution.
C. Booth, BSCI or Adelphia reimbursing County within thirty (30) days
following the date of adoption of this Resolution, for all reasonable costs,
expenses, and professional fees incurred by County as a result of County's review
and action on the transfer of ownership.
d. Adelphia executing the attached Corporate Guaranty or other similar form
acceptable to the County and returning same to the County within thirty (30) days
of the effective date of this Resolution.
e. At the time the franchise is accepted, BSCI or Adelphia shall furnish and
N
file with the County a performance and payment bond, or a performance and
payment bond together with such other security as is approved by the County.
The bond shall run to the County in the penal sum of One Hundred Thousand and
00/100 Dollars ($100,000).
1. The performance bond shall be conditioned upon the faithful
performance of BSCI of all terms and conditions of the franchise. The
rights reserved to the County with respect to the bond or other security
are in addition to all other rights the County may have under the Roanoke
Franchise or any other law. The company providing the bond must be
licensed to do business in the State of Virginia.
ii. The requirement to maintain said bond shall remain in force for
the remaining term of the Roanoke Franchise unless extinguished by
authority of the County.
Ili. The bond shall be subject to the approval of the County and shall
contain the following endorsement:
"1t is hereby understood and agreed that this bond may not be
canceled without the consent of the County until sixty (60) days
after receipt by the County by registered mail, return receipt
requested of a written notice of intent to cancel or not to renew."
3. The County hereby waives any right of first refusal which the County may have
pursuant to the Roanoke Franchise, to purchase the Roanoke Franchise, or the cable television
3
system serving the County, but only as such right of first refusal applies to the request for
approval of the transfer of ownership now before the County.
4. In the event the transfer of ownership contemplated by the foregoing recitals is
not completed, for any reasons, the County's consent to the transfer of ownership shall not be
effective.
5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Joseph B. Obenshain, Senior Assistant County Attorney
4
A-042297-3
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER
Z.3
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
AGENDA ITEM: Approval of amendments to the Investment Policy
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
The County has had an investment policy since 1987. At the
time the original policy was adopted, it was announced that it was
a living document and would need to be revised from time to time.
It was revised in 1992, 1994, and again in 1995.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
On Page 6, we are adding language of Section 2.1-328.9 of the
Code of Virginia to give the County more flexibility in its
overnight investments.
FISCAL IMPACT
These amendments protect County funds while it improves return on
overnight investments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed
amendments to the Investment Policy.
Respectfully Submitted by -
Al" red C. Anderson
T easurer
Approved (x)
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred ( )
To ( )
Approved by:
Y-r�
44e�r_
Elmer C. Hodge
rn,lnty Administrator
ACTION
Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to
adopt investment policy
cc: File
Alfred C. Anderson, Treasurer
Paul M. M, -.honey, County Attorney
Policy Manual
VOTE
No Yes Abs.
Eddy
_
Harrison
Johnson
x
Minnix
x
Nickens
x
8--3
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
I. Investment and Portfolio Policy
A. Identification:
1. Purpose and Scone
This policy shall establish guidelines for the efficient management of County funds
and shall apply to activities with regard to the investment of the financial assets of the
County. The goal of the policy is to allow the County to obtain the highest possible yield
on available County financial assets, consistent with constraints imposed by its safety
objectives, cash flow considerations and Virginia state laws that restrict the placement of
public funds.
2. General Guidelines
The Treasurer of the County of Roanoke is an Elected Constitutional Officer whose
responsibility in part is receiving, collecting, safeguarding and disbursing county funds from
all sources. It shall be the responsibility of the Treasurer, however he may designate a
deputy to manage the day—to—day operations of the investment portfolio and place the
actual purchase/sell orders with brokers, The Treasurer shall advise the County Finance
Board, which is the Board of Supervisors, when the investment policy is altered and at the
end of each month report to them the amount of money on deposit with each depository.
Specifically excluded from these guidelines are funds that by statue or ordinance require
specific investments.
2
3. Authorized Investments
L-
3
As a unit of local government in the State of Virginia, the County of Roanoke is
restricted by Virginia Security for Public Deposits Act, Sec. 2.1-359 through 2.1-370 and
the Code of Virginia, Title 2 Investment of Public Funds to the following types of securities
as described in Sec. 2. 1-327 through 2.1-329:
a. Bonds, notes and other evidence of indebtedness of the State of Virginia.
b. Bonds, notes and other direct obligations of the United States and securities
unconditionally guaranteed as to the payment of principal and interest by the United States
or any agency thereof.
c. Bonds, notes and other evidence of indebtedness of any county, city, town, district,
authority or other public body of the State of Virginia.
d. Bonds and other obligations issued, guaranteed or assumed by the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Asian Development Bank.
e. Certificates of deposit in commercial banks up to their net worth provided they are
approved by the State Treasury Board in the State's Collateral protection pool in
accordance with the Virginia Public Deposits Act.
f. Certificates of deposit in commercial banks, savings and loan associations and
mutual savings bank doing business in this State up to FDIC and FSLIC insurance coverage.
g. Bankers' Acceptances
h. Repurchase Agreements -provided the securities for the agreement are written
against specific government securities as authorized under Sec. 2.1-328. As a matter of
3
policy, the county must take delivery of the securities purchased through a repurchase
agreement if the term of the agreement is greater than four (4) days. If the term is less
than four (4) days, the securities may be held in safekeeping by the bank for the account
of the county. Pledged securities under repurchase agreements must be based on market
value, not face value. When entering a repurchase agreement where delivery is not
required, the county shall obtain a safekeeping receipt for specific securities. Refer to Part
II Repurchase Agreements for complete details.
i. Money Market Funds
Deposit—type securities shall be collateralized through the State Collateral Pool as
required by Virginia Public Deposits Acts for any amount exceeding FDIC or FSLIC coverage.
Other investments shall be collateralized by the actual security held in safekeeping by the
primary agent.
All investments will be in the name of the County of Roanoke and will name the
specific fund from which the instrument was purchased. Safekeeping account receipts will
be held by the Treasurer's Office.
The Treasurer will continually monitor the contents of the portfolio, the available
markets and the relative values of competing instruments, and will adjust the portfolio
accordingly.
CMOs, inverse floating rate securities, floating rate securities tied to a non—money
-market instrument, IO's, PO's, Z—tranche securities, residuals, and other securities having
unusual features are expressly prohibited. Transactions in options, futures, options on
L
4
futures, margin buying and commodities are prohibited. Any other security not specifically
authorized in this document is expressly prohibited.
4. Maturities
Maturity scheduling shall be timed according to anticipated need. Investment
maturities for operating funds shall be scheduled to coincide with projected cash flow
needs, taking into account large routine expenditures as well as considering sizable blocks
of anticipated revenue.
Investment of capital project funds shall be timed to meet contractors payments.
Short Term versus Long Term Portfolio — Limitation on instruments, diversification
and maturity scheduling shall depend upon whether the funds being invested are considered
short term or long term funds. All funds shall be considered short term except those
reserved for capital projects and prepayments funds being held for debt retirement,
5. Risk Liquidity Bidding
The primary goal of the investment policy is to maximize return on investment while
minimizing risk to the investment.
The Treasurer will diversify use of investment instruments to avoid incurring
unreasonable risks inherent in overinvesting in specific instruments, individual financial
institutions or maturities. The Treasurer's office shall maintain a listing of financial
institutions which are approved by the State Treasury Board for investment purposes and
which shall provide their most recent Consolidated Report of Condition. Periodically, these
financial institutions must be examined and evaluated to determine their strength and
5
creditworthiness. During the bid process the Treasurer may reject an investment with a
higher yield when he feels it carries an element of risk. Speculative investments will not be
allowed. Before the Treasurer invests any surplus funds, a competitive "bid" process with
three or more financial institutions shall be conducted. If a specific maturity date is
required, either for cash flow purposes or for conformance to maturity guidelines, bids will
be requested for instruments which meet the maturity requirement. If no specific maturity
is required, a market trend (yield curve) analysis will be conducted to determine which
maturities would be most advantageous.
6. Reporting and Controls
The Treasurer shall report at the end of each month to the Board of Supervisors the
amount of money on deposit with each depository.
The Treasurer shall establish a system of internal controls which shall be
documented and reviewed with internal and independent auditors and meets the
requirements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The controls are
designed to prevent losses of public funds due to fraud, error, misrepresentation,
unanticipated market change or imprudent actions.
B. Source of Investment Policy:
1. Current Management Practices
The Treasurer shall develop and maintain written administrative procedures for the
operation of the investment program. Each investment transaction shall seek to first
ensure that capital losses are avoided, whether they be from securities defaults or erosion
E - 3
X
of market value. The County seeks to attain market rates of return on its investments,
consistent with constraints imposed by its safety objectives, cash flow consideration and
Virginia state laws that restrict the placement of public funds.
The Treasurer shall also carry out an aggressive cash management program that
maintains true zero balances in the County's checking accounts with temporary idle funds
being invested overnight in either repurchase agreements that are secured or collateralized
by governmental securities as required by the Code of Virginia or in one or more opened
investment funds, provided that the funds are registered under Securities Act (03.1-50t et
seq.) of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the Federal Investment Co. Act of 1940, and that
the investment of such funds by the County is restricted to investments otherwise
permitted by law and this Investment Policy. Whenever
possible funds held for future capital projects (i.e., bond proceeds) shall be invested to
produce enough income to offset increases in construction costs due to inflation.
Diversification is required through the use of portfolio percentages. Safekeeping will be
required using third—party safekeeping in an account in an institution designated as a
primary agent.
The Board of Supervisors will be given copies of the County's Investment Policies and
Practices. All changes will be documented and copies sent to the Board. The Board should
contact the Treasurer if they have any questions, recommendations, additions or deletions
to the policies. The Treasurer will consider the recommendations and implement such
recommendations which he deems in the best interest of the County.
7
2. Prudence Standards
The standard of prudence to be applied by the Treasurer shall be the "prudent
investor" rule, which states, "Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under
circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence
exercised in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment,
considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be
derived." The prudent investor rule shall be applied in the context of managing the overall
portfolio.
The Treasurer, acting in accordance with written procedures of the Code of Virginia,
Sec. 2.1-329.1 and Sec. 58.1-3123 et. seq. and exercising due diligence, shall not be held
personally responsible for a specific security's credit risk or market price changes provided
that these deviations are reported immediately by the Treasurer and that reasonable and
prudent action is taken to control adverse developments. Furthermore, in accordance with
Sec. 58.1-3163 of the Code of Virginia, the Treasurer shall not be liable for loss of public
money due to the default, failure or insolvency of a depository.
3. State Law
The County shall limit investments to those allowed under the Virginia Security for
Public Deposits Act, Sec. 2.1-359 through 2.1-370 and Investment of Public Funds as in Sec.
2.1-327 through 2.1-329, Code of Virginia.
The Virginia Security for Public Deposits Act provides for a mutuality of
responsibility involving a cross guarantee among all commercial banks holding public
I
deposits. In the event of insolvency by a bank holding public deposits, any losses resulting
from uncollateralized and uninsured public deposits will be paid by assessments against all
other commercial banks holding public funds. The amount assessed against each bank will
be based on the ratio that its average public deposits bears to the statewide average.
• In respect to the savings and loan associations and savings banks, however, there is
no sharing of liability for total public funds on deposit. Instead, the savings and loan
associations are required to pledge collateral equal to 100% of their public deposits,
compared to 50% that is required of the banks.
4. Audit Requirements
The Treasurer shall establish a system of internal controls which shall be
documented in writing. Accurate and adequate records will be maintained by the
Treasurer's Office. Such records will be subject to audit by the Internal Audit Department,
as well as the independent auditors and the State Auditor of Public Accounts. Reporting and
disclosure requirements will comply with all applicable regulations including the
requirements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.
5. Concentration bank
The Treasurer will move funds from other depository banks to a central point to
maximize the availability of funds. The central point or primary bank will be the
concentration bank which shall be determined by competitive bids.
6. Charles for Banking Services
The cost of maintaining the account may be paid either by a compensating balance
rm
til
or by direct charges. If a compensating balance is used the Treasurer shall review with a
bank official monthly an anlyzation of the County's account profitability to the bank.
Considering interest rates at that time and the bank's average earnings allowance,
the bank will determine the balances in the accounts (compensating balances) which will be
required for the following month in order to cover the cost of processing the County's
banking transactions. Copies of the result of these analyses will be maintained by the
Treasurer.
7. Zero Balance Account (ZBA�
The Treasurer will take full advantage of clearing time on County checks disbursed
by maintaining true zero balances in the County's checking account.
As checks are presented for payment, they are accumulated and a single offsetting
credit is prepared to bring the account to a zero balance at the end of the banking day.
This account is linked to the Master Concentration or deposit account against which the
ZBA draws funds to pay the checks presented for payment.
Temporarily idle funds will be invested overnight in repurchase agreements that are
secured or collateralized by governmental securities as required by the Code of Virginia.
The Treasurer will determine excess idle funds and invest them in longer term investments.
8. Diversification
Diversification by Instrument: Percent of Portfolio
U.S. Treasury Obligations 70%
(bills, notes and bonds)
E-'"3
10 .
U.S. Government Agency Securities 70%
and Instrumentalities of Government
Sponsored Corporations
Bankers's Acceptance (BA's) 40%
Repurchase Agreement (Repo's) Two or more nights 25%
Repurchase Agreement (Repo's) overnight 70%
Commercial Banks
Certificate of Deposit (CD's) 100%
Savings & Loan Associations
Certificate of Deposits (CD's) 10%
Commercial Paper
35%
Local Government Investment Pool 75%
Diversification by Financial Institution:
Bankers' Acceptance (BA's)
No more than 25% of the total portfolio with any one institution
Repurchase Agreements (Repo's)
No more than 20% of the total portfolio with any one institution
Certificates of Deposits (CD's) Commercial Banks
No more than 45% of the total portfolio with any one institution
Certificates of Deposits (CD's) Savings and Loan Association. No more than $100,000 with
any one institution.
Local Government Investment Pool — State Pool
No more than $15 million
Commercial Paper
No more than 25% of the total portfolio may be purchased through any one financial
institution.
Diversification of Funds to be invested in any one issue:
NO limit— FDIC, FSLIC, Collateralized Certificates of Deposit
No limit— U.S. Treasuries and Agencies
Maximum— 10% of total portfolio for any Bankers Acceptance and Commercial Paper issue
II. Repurchase Agreements
Definition
A. Investing in Repurchase Agreements
1. The Instrument
The repurchase agreements (Repo's) are an integral part of an investment program
of state and local government. Their flexibility is unmatched by other short term money
market instruments. They provide the investor an excellent cash management tool.
The sale by a bank of a government security with a simultaneous agreement to
repurchase the security at a later date can insure safety of public funds while securing
money market rates of interest.
The Repo is a contractual transaction between an investor and an issuing financial
institution. The investor exchanges cash for temporary ownership or control of collateral
12
securities, with an agreement between the parties that on a future date, the financial
institution will repurchase the securities.
The Treasurer will use a Master Repurchase Agreement (See Appendices) as a written
contract to establish the County's rights in all transactions. A written contract will also be
used with the independent third—party custodian. (See Appendices.)
Customarily, the investor receives interest during the term of the repurchase
agreement, as agreed upon at the time of the investment transaction. The eligibility of
repos depends on the manner in which the repo is structured. The Attorney General in an
opinion written in July 1982 states "that a repurchase agreement which is secured or
*collateralized by governmental securities which qualify under Sec.2.1-328 is a legally
authorized investment." The General Assembly during the 1985 session amended Sec. 2.1-
328.5 and added Sec. 2.1-328.8. This legislation authorizes the investment of public funds
in overnight, term and open repurchase agreements which are collateralized with securities
that are approved for direct investment.
2. Tykes of Repurchase Agreements
An overnight repo is one which is written for one day, as its name implies. These
are popular with cash managers seeking to invest funds overnight to meet specific cash
needs on the next day or to combine assets with other investments and incoming cash in
larger denominations for a longer maturity in another instrument. Interest rates tend to
be quoted in relationship to the Fed funds rate, which is the interbank lending rate for
bank reserves.
13
Term repos are written for a specific time period of more than one day. The County
uses term repos usually for maturities for less than 14 days, particularly when bank
regulations require jumbo CDs to be written for at least 14 days with some having 30—day
requirements. Collateral is adjusted daily to protect the investor.
Open repos are written without a specific maturity. Either party may end the
transaction on a future date and the amount invested can be changed on a daily basis.
Open repos are based upon a rate that keys off Fed funds or T—bill yields.
3. Know With Whom You Are Investing
The Treasurer must exercise special caution selecting parties to conduct repurchase
transactions with and be able to identify the parties acting as principals to the
transactions. A written master repurchase agreement is executed between the County, the
bank and the third party collateral agent.
It is the policy of the County to concentrate its investment efforts to banks located
in the State of Virginia which are under the Virginia statutes for public funds and all banks
must be approved depositories by the State Treasury Board.
4. Collateral
Collateral is the repo's underlying security. Repos are written against specific
government securities as authorized by law. The best collateral from the investor's
standpoint is short—term U.S. Treasury bills which are liquid and not subject to serve price
changes.
5. Delivery of Collateral
r�
14
As a matter of policy, the County must take delivery of the securities purchased
through the agreement if the term of the agreement is more than four (4) days. These
investment securities may be held by the County or placed in a third party custodial
account for safekeeping. If the term is less than four (4) days, such as the overnight repo
when third party safekeeping is not required, the securities may be held in safekeeping by
the bank, but must be held for the account of the County. The repo must be written
against specific government securities as authorized under Sec. 2.1-328. When entering a
repurchase agreement where delivery is not required, the County shall obtain a safekeeping
receipt for the specific securities purchased. Pledged securities under the repurchase
agreement must be based on market value, not face value.
6. Risk
Risk is significantly reduced by delivery of underlying securities through physical
delivery to a third party custodian.
Repos shall not exceed 25% of the total investment in the County's investment
portfolio on any one day and no more than 15% with any one institution.
Losses can be limited in doing repos, if not avoided entirely, by following these four
basic rules: (1) operate under the terms of a clearly specified and executed master
repurchase agreement with Commercial Virginia Banks, (2) property assess counterparties
including their corporate structure and capital strength, (3) use appropriate procedures for
obtaining control of securities, and (4) evaluate securities appropriately and monitor them
regularly, making margin calls when necessary.
15
III,. Prime Bankers' Acceptances
Definition:
E -3
This instrument as defined by the Government Finance Officers Association,
Committee on Cash Management in its lune 1984 publication Model Investment Legislation is
as follows:
"Bankers' acceptances typically are created from a letter of credit in a foreign
trade transaction. For example, a U.S. corporation planning to import goods from abroad
requests that its bank issue a letter of credit on its behalf in favor of the foreign
supplier.This letter allows the foreign vendor to draw a draft on the importer's U.S. bank
for payment of the merchandise. Upon receipt of this letter and draft, the supplier ships
the goods and presents the draft at its bank for discounting, allowing the supplier to
receive immediate payment for the shipment. The foreign bank then forwards the draft to
its U.S. correspondent. At this point, the draft is stamped "accepted", with the U.S. bank
incurring an obligation to pay the draft (now a bankers' acceptance) at maturity.
The accepting domestic bank may buy the acceptance, earning the discount between
the purchase price and face amount to be reimbursed by the U.S. importer. On the other
hand, the acceptance may be sold to a third party, freeing the bank of all but the
contingent liability, for which it collects a small fee. In this case the acceptance ---
secured by the bank, the goods themselves and the importer ---becomes a money market
instrument.
In 69 years of use in the United States, the bankers' acceptance has experienced no
4E 1-3
16
known principal loss to investors. There have been instances of counterfeit and fraudulent
acceptances. Government investors are advised to seek bankers' acceptance from money
center banks to insure a secondary marketability unless a lesser known local institution
offers a yield premium. Maturities range from 30 to 180 days."
As a matter of policy, one of the banks should be a Virginia bank and the County
should only purchase bankers' acceptances of banks that have a rating of no lower than
B/C as assigned by Keefe Bruyette or the top local banks.
The maximum percentage of funds to be invested in any one issue shall not exceed
five (5) percent of the total portfolio. These securities will be held by the County's third
party custodial agent in the County's name.
IV. Prime Quality Commercial Paper
Definition
Commercial paper has a history that extends back to colonial times, prior to the
existence of a banking system in America. The precursor of commercial paper was the
domestic bill of exchange, which was used to finance trade as early as the beginning of the
eighteenth century. Bills of exchange allowed the safe and convenient transfer of funds and
provided a short—term loan between the time of purchase and payment for goods. As
financial intermediation evolved, banks and paper brokers began discounting paper. The
supply of negotiable paper was held by commercial banks or by entrepreneurs investing
surplus funds.
Commercial paper is a short term unsecured promissory note that is generally sold
LA ✓
17
by large corporations. In recent years commercial paper has attracted much attention
because of its rapid growth and its use as an alternative to short—term bank loans. The
principal issuers of commercial paper include finance companies, nonfinancial companies
and bank holding companies. These issuers participate in the market for different reasons
and in different ways.
Finance companies raise funds on a more—or—less continuous basis in the
commercial paper sales in part to support their consumer and business lending. These
commercial paper sales in part provide interim financing between issues of long—term
debentures. Non—financial companies issue commercial paper at less frequent intervals
than do finance companies.
These firms issue paper to meet their funding requirements for short—term or
seasonal expenditures such as inventories, payrolls and tax liabilities. Bank holding
companies use the commercial paper market to finance primarily banking related activities
such as leasing, mortgage banking, and consumer finance. The firms issuing paper obtain
rating from at least one of three services, and most obtain two ratings. In most cases,
insurers bank their paper one hundred percent with lines of credit from commercial banks.
Present day investors in commercial paper include money center banks, non—financial
firms, investment firms, state and local governments, private pension funds, foundations
and individuals.
The County's policy is to invest only in "prime quality" commercial paper, with a
maturity of two hundred seventy days or less, or issuing corporations organized under the
Z-3
laws of the United States, or any state thereof including paper issued by banks and bank
holding companies.
"Prime quality" shall be as rated by the Moody's Investors Service, Inc. within its
ratings of prime 1 or prime 2 or by Standard and Poor's, Inc. within its ratings of A-1 or
A-2 or by Fitch Investors Service within its ratings of F-1 and F-2. The maximum
percentage of funds to be invested in any one issue shall not exceed five (5) percent of the
total portfolio, These securities will be held by the County's third party custodial agent in
the County's name. It shall be the county's policy to purchase only Al — Pl paper.
Local Government Investment Pool Act Operated Directly By
State Treasurer
A. The Act and its Purpose
1. Introduction
The "Investment of Public Funds and Local Government Investment Pool Act" became
effective January 1, 1981 and provides for a local government investment pool which will
produce additional revenues for localities on short—term investments.
The pooling of funds enables governmental entities to avail themselves of the
economics of large—scale investing as well as active, professional management of funds by
the State Treasurer's investment staff.
As a member of the pool, governmental entities are able to take advantage of the
investment facilities of the Commonwealth. Pooled funds are invested in accordance with
Treasury Board investment guidelines for the Commonwealth's general fund monies. This
E-3
19
encompasses third—party delivery of repo collateral and other professional safekeeping
arrangements.
2. Investment Strategies
Investments will be made in conformity with Sec. 2.1-234-4 of the Act. There is a
minimum participation of $5,000.00. The minimum period for investment is one day. Rates
of return
vary. Once the account
is established, no
minimum
balance
is
required.
Additional
investments can be made
in minimum $1,000
increments.
The
pool
provides
liquidity to the investor with one—day notice of deposit or withdrawal of funds. Instructions
are to be called to the Department of Treasury at (804) 225-3166 before 4:00 p.m. on the
business day prior to the actual transfer of funds.
3. Income Earnines
Accumulated income will be credited to each participant's account monthly. Each
locality will receive a monthly report which will contain the following information:
Average investment balance
Average yield
Gross investment credit
Administrative expenses
Net Investment Credit
Changes in participation made during the preceding month
4. Reserve for losses
It is not anticipated that a reserve for losses will be necessary due to restriction on
20
the quality of investments.
Amendments:
January 28, 1992
December 1, 1992
June 27, 1995
general.invest.pol
E-3
A-042297-4
41
Item No. '' I
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
AGENDA ITEM: Request to expend project funds to reimburse the Virginia
Department of Transportation for industrial access road
construction costs for Technology Drive at Valley TechPark
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: D
BACKGROUND:
Roanoke County requested $450,000 from the Virginia Department of Transportation,
Industrial Access Road Fund in early 1993 to construct a road in Valley TechPark. The
VDOT Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) subsequently approved the County's
application on June 24, 1993. The County prepared the road plans and profiles in accordance
with VDOT and County standards and VDOT requested that they administer the construction
project. Roanoke County obtained a bond for the project and pledged to locate a qualifying
industry within three years of the date of the CTB's allocation in order to obtain credit against
VDOT's expenditures for the construction of the road.
Road construction of Technology Drive began in the spring of 1994 and was completed in
early 1995. Rusco Windows of Roanoke located in Valley TechPark in August 1995 and RR
Donnelley & Sons Co. announced their location in February 1996. These companies are
"qualifying industries" under the Industrial Access Road Fund Program and therefore, relieve
Roanoke County of having to reimburse VDOT for any eligible road construction costs.
The total cost of constructing Technology Drive was $750,917.33 as is shown on the attached
calculations provided by VDOT. There are $234,299.99 of ineligible construction costs
associated with this project. These include curb and gutter, additional pavement width as
required by County standards, pipes and storm water management. Rusco and RR Donnelley
combined to account for $408,308.67 of credit towards the bond obligation. The County
provided a $150,000 match at the beginning of the project, of which VDOT has applied
$41,691.33 as an excess match against the ineligible project costs leaving a sum of
$192,608.66 owed to VDOT.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Capital funds in the amount of $1,333,426 remain from the appropriation made for RR
Donnelley on February 21, 1996. Of this amount, $273,718 has been allocated for training,
traffic signal, signage and other items leaving $1,059,708 in the account. There is an
additional $ 31,925.50 remaining in the 1993 bond Issue for Valley TechPark. Staff
recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the expenditure of the remaining
$31,925.50 of Bond funds and $160,683.16 of capital funds appropriated to the RR
Donnelley project to reimburse VDOT for ineligible costs related to the construction of
Technology Drive in Valley TechPark.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Roanoke County appropriated $2.5 million for the RR Donnelley project at the February 21,
1996 meeting. Remaining funds of $31,925.50 from the 1993 Bond Issue are available
within the Department of Economic Development budget.
ALTERNATIVES:
action
1. Adopt the attached req@44iott approving the reimbursement of $192,608.66 to VDOT
for the construction of Technology Drive in Valley TechPark.
2. Fund the reimbursement to VDOT from the unappropriated fund balance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve Alternative No. 1 in order to close
out the road construction element of the Valley TechPark project.
Respectfully submitted,
—7 —
/ Mt �4, /q4J-1L4-
Timothy W. Guba a
Director, Economic Development
Approved (x)
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred ( )
To
cc: File
Timothy
Diane D.
Approved by,
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
ACTION
Motion by: Fenton F. Harrison
to expend funds
W. Gubala, Director, Econ Dev
Hyatt, Director Finance
VOTE
No Yes Abs.
Eddy_
Harrison _x
Johnson x
Minnix x
Nickens x
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
DAVID R. GEHR RICHMOND, 23219-1939
COMMISSIONER
April 2, 1997
Mr. Elmer C. Hodge, Administrator
Roanoke County
P.O. Box 29800
Roanoke, VA 24018-0798
Dear Mr. Hodge:
JAMES S. GIVENS
STATE SECONDARY ROADS ENGINEER
I am pleased to inform you I have made the determination that
the R. R. Donnelley facility was effectively constructed prior to
the expiration of the three-year bond period following the CTB
allocation on June 24, 1993. I am basing this determination on
the documentation you submitted dated June 19, 1996, as evidence
of capital investment in excess of $48 million. This will
formally notify you that VDOT releases you from any further
obligation under the Industrial Access Program for the .eligible
portion of this project. An outstanding balance of $192,608.66
for ineligible project costs remains payable for Roanoke County.
I believe this is in keeping with our discussions and I look
forward to continuing to work with Roanoke County in the further-
ance of economic development and the secondary road system
in the county.
CC: James W. Atwell
Fred Altizer, Jr.
Jeffrey A. Echols
Yours truly
J mes S. Givens
tate Secondary Roads Engineer
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
N1AR-Cb'97(THU) 14:31 VDOT SECONDARY ROADS TEL:8047862603 P. 001
E—
The
facts pertaining to the allocation, bond and expenditures
in this matter are as follows:
CTB allocation 6/24/93 $450,000.00
Bond Expiration 7/24/96
Total Project Cost $750,917.33
Ineligible Project Cost $234,299.99
Eligible Project Cost $516,617.34
Less Required County Match 10808.67
Required Bond $408,308.67
Less Credit for Rusco $151.110.00
Remaining Bond Obligation $257,196.67
Potentially satisfied by
R. R. Donnelly Investment
Match Paid by County 1/28/97 $150,000.00
Required County Match X08,308.67
Excess Match Paid by County $ 41,691.33
to be credited to
ineligible project cost
Ineligible Project Cost
Less Excess Match
Remainder Amount due
VDOT from County
NATURE SAVER"' FAX MEMO 01516 Date
To
C. -P
Co,
Pho"
Phone M
Fax f .7-V.a 3�j Fazi
Xot
Aages �
$234,299.99
,$ 41,691.23
$192,608.66
A-042297-5
ACTION #
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
SUBJECT: Request for Approval of FY 1997-98 Cable Television Budget
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Axvl-�
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Roanoke County, the City of Roanoke, and the Town of
Vinton jointly operate Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV). The initial equipment and facilities for
the television studio were funded through a capital grant from Cox Communications in the amount
of $480,00. The studio is located at the Jefferson Center, and currently employs three full time staff
members, in addition to a variety of part time personnel. The staff produces videos and shows for
the local governments and school systems which are cablecast along with government meetings on
Cox Communications Channel 3 and Booth Communications Channel 3 in the West County area.
RVTV is governed by the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee, which
includes representatives from the City, the County, and the Town. The operation budget for RVTV
is provided for by the three governments, based on the proportion of Cox customers located in each
jurisdiction. The governing bodies have informally agreed to provide up to 20% of the franchise fee
paid by Cox Communications to fund the operations of the facility.
During 1996, RVTV has produced the following for the County: nine departmental videos
or public service announcements, 11 Roanoke County Todays, 2 special projects, 23 live Board
meetings, and has also provided upkeep of the Message Board. Based on local costs for production,
the value of these productions is approximately $70,700. Already produced in 1997 is Roanoke
County 101, an orientation video for new workers to the County, which is the largest project ever
produced at RVTV in terms of length. The staff has also completed Public Service Announcements
for the County Schools' vocational program and a video highlighting the Building Permit process
called The Permit Zone. Already in the plans for the remainder of 1997 is a new monthly program
on County schools Accent Excellence. RVTV has been awarded numerous recognition for its
outstanding work, including the 1996 Virginia Municipal League Communications Achievement
Award for Roanoke County Today.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Valley Cable Television Committee has approved
the attached budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 for the operation of RVTV. The budget includes
the following highlights:
ma
Re-classification of the Station Manager position from Grade 24 on the County pay scale to
Grade 25. The change in salary compensates for a change in scope of responsibilities, and increase
in the number of people supervised, the quality of RVTV productions, and the stature of RVTV in
the local government hierarchy.
Re-classification of the Assistant Station Manager position from Grade 18 to Grade 20. This
increase compensates for the many additional responsibilities taken on by the manager and the
consistent production of high quality products.
Addition of another full time position and the elimination of regular part-time positions.
Because of the increase in workload over the last year the current staff cannot take on additional
programs or live government meetings, including projects that RVTV would like to initiate but do
not have the work hours available. This will allow for a low turnover rate among employees, greater
flexibility for the localities in terms of adding new programming, and would eliminate part-time funds
in the next two budget cycles.
Cable Television staff is carried on the County's payroll and benefit system and will receive
the same increase as County employees. The proposed budget includes 4% for raises for the staff,
but actual raises will be at the County rate.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total RVTV budget request is $190,995, of which Roanoke County's share
is 33.8%, or $64,556, an increase of $12,131 over last year's budget. The total franchise fee paid
by Cox to Roanoke County last year is $402,896, and 20% of that is $80,579.20, or $16,000 less than
this budget request.
RECOMMENDATION: The Cable Television Committee recommends that the Board approve this
budget request in the amount of $64,556.
Anne Marie Green, APR Elmer C. Hodge
Director, Community Relations County Administrator
Approved (x)
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred ( )
To ( )
ACTION
Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to
approve budget
cc: File
Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
VOTE
No
Yes Abs.
Eddy_
Harrison_
Johnson
x
Minnix
x
Nickens
x
cc: File
Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
Report PAH250-77777777.—"�--------------�__...._ ..
Analysis
06.FISCAL P
E.57
--SUBFUND 817 �C . Cable TV
DEPARTMENT ---_....__ ..._ .... '- -
- - ._..........
21. ; nt y dm n st rat or.....
:.. A i ...
•..•..._....-_..._......•.....•...._.•.•_...._.._._...Bud9et
... .•..
Proposed
--------------
1010 Regular
.
..<....:.. _.... _ ..... .... •... - . ...........
78,477.00
106,719
2100 FICA - Employer Contribution
51000.00
0
X200 Retirement - VSRS
60386.00
8,162
2300 Group H�afh' insurance '_ '-" --------
- 8'813.00
12,603
2310 Group Dental , I'nsuranc* `
4j114.00
7,864
.
3013 Prof*ssional'S*rvices-'Other
-- 3202
453.00
7,500.00
724
Repairs i ff'ic� Equipment) �' " `" '
7,500
3209 Repairs (Other •Equipment)500.00
500
3530 Printed Forms
10000.00
11000
3610 Advert sing �.:.-
500.00
y500,00
500
5210 Postage
0
5230.Te1*phone
75 00
250
-on*
__._...._......_......
2.000.00
22800
5305 Motor Vehicl* Insurance
300
-r _5308 _Generl Li_abil_it Insuranc*
aLease%R�nt
1,575.00
1,600
5410- of' -Equipment
1._100.00
11100
5420 Leas*/Rent of Buildings
10000.00
500
5501 Travel (Mileage)
26.0600.00
26,600
5504 Travel "iConvention 6 Conferences)
1.000.00
250
5520 Dinner Meetings 3 Luncheons
1,000.00
11000
__-5540 Trainin�d Education
500.00
500
5801 Dues d Assoc1at ioh Momber tii �i " "'--'-"""--
- - 600.00
3, 750
5819 Small Equipment 6, Supplies'•°'p°
500.00
700
_
__5883 Video Suppli*s.
0
6010 Offices Supplies -General
2.500.00
2,500
6080 Gas, Oil d Grease
800.00
1,000
6202 Subscriptions
- —.
500.00
500
2400 Life Insurarice'
400..00_..
2, 500
213200 Rs,e� fable T*levi
4,193 00
373
-- w19
0 ,995
A-042297-6
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
AGENDA ITEM: Request for additional funding for the June 10,
1997 Republican Primary Election
COUh*Tv ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
The costs for this election were not included in the 1996-97 budget
due to the fact that the Republican Party did not call for this
election until March, 1997.
Estimated costs for this election are as follows:
Election Officials $11,850
Ballots - Machine & Paper 900
Rent of Trucks 850
Set up of Machines & Election
day service 4,000
Supplies, Copying, Postage 200
Rent of Voting Places 240
Funds are requested from the General Fund unappropriated balance.
Staff recommends approval of additional funds in the amount of
$18,040 from the General Fund unappropriated balance.
Respectfully submitted,
D. Diane St.Joh
Registrar
Approved by,
Elmer C. Hodg
County Administrator
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (x) notion by: H Odell Minnix to No Yes Abs.
Denied ( ) appropriate funds Eddy _x
Received ( ) Harrison x
Referred ( ) Johnson x
To ( ) Minnix x
Nickens x
cc: File
D. Diane St. John, Registrar
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
ORDINANCE 042297-7 AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF A
DRAINAGE EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF DAVIS H. ELLIOT
CO., INC. (TAX MAP PARCEL NO. 50.01-1-2.2), THE RELEASE OF ANY
RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST IN AN EXISTING STORM DRAIN, AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY THEREFOR
WHEREAS, Davis H. Elliot Company, Inc. is the owner of a 9.331 acre parcel of real
estate identified as Tax Map No. 50.01-1-2.2, acquired by deed dated February 26, 1988,
from Jack F. Walrond, Jr., recorded in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in
Deed Book 1280 at page 1425; and
WHEREAS, by plat dated October 23, 1987, made by Frank B. Caldwell, III, Land
Surveyor, showing Perimeter East Commerce Center Phase I, recorded in the Roanoke
County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Plat Book 10 at page 113, a buried pipe is described
as "Approximate location existing storm drain," and further referred to in said plat as a
drainage easement; said drainage easement being located on the above -referenced
property; and
WHEREAS, Elliot has requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County
release and quitclaim any right, title, or interest the County may have to the above -
referenced storm drain which has been referred to as a drainage easement, and acquire
a new 20' drainage easement; and
WHEREAS, the acquisition of this drainage easement will assist in the resolution
of storm water drainage problems in the east Route 460 corridor, and will support and
encourage economic development initiatives in said corridor; and
1
WHEREAS, it has been determined that an emergency exists, and that the second
reading of this ordinance is hereby waived in accordance with the provisions of the
Roanoke County Charter.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authority only by ordinance.
A first reading of this ordinance was held on April 22, 1997; and the second reading was
waived upon a declaration of emergency in accordance with said section; and
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the subject real estate (storm drain or drainage easement) is hereby declared to
be surplus and the nature of the interest in real estate renders it unavailable for other
public uses; and
3. That in consideration of the payment of $1.00 and conditioned upon the
exchange as hereinafter provided, a drainage easement described as "Approximate
location existing storm drain" as shown on a plated dated October 23, 1987, made by
Frank B. Caldwell, III, showing Perimeter East Commerce Center Phase I, recorded in the
aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 10 at page 113 be, and hereby is, released; and
4. That, in exchange, acquisition and acceptance of a drainage easement
twenty (20') feet in width as shown on the attached "Easement plat for County of Roanoke
showing A New 20' Drainage Easement Across the Property of Davis H. Elliot Co., Inc."
dated January 30, 1997, made by T. P. Parker & Son, ESP, be, and hereby is, ,authorized
2
and approved; and
5. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses
associated herewith, including but not limited to, survey costs and recordation of
documents, shall be the responsibility of Davis H. Elliot Company, Inc., or their successors
or assigns; and
6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such
documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this release and
acquisition, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance and waive the second
reading, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
3
NOW OR FORMERLY
LOT 1 PROPERTY OF
t; PERIMETER EAST
� a COMMERCE CEN7ER VIRGINIA H. DA NS
o PHASE I + �, 7;®X NO. 50.01-01-03
P.B. 10, PG. 113 �\ aB. 639, PG. 125
.per �� Gym N 79 42y4�
�s 135.fi%
LOT 2
PERIMETER EAST T \
COMMERCE CENTER
PHASE l
P.B. ' 10, PO 113 /
L
LOT 3 sv �� PROPERTY OF
PERIMETER EAST ��• DAMS H. ELUOT CO., INC. �.
COMMERACE SE�� TAX NO. 50.01-01-02.2 .�
P.B. 10, PG. 113, �, s b.
� I
\
— EXIS7TNG 15' DRAINAGE CENJERUNE OF
—7s EASEMENT, SEE P.B. f0, PG. 113 NEW 20 DRAINAGE
sg� , EASEMENT
Ssyrs3. s¢ 242.
!y
PROPERTY O'
NANCY a CREASY, ET ALS
TAX NO. 50.01-01-01
W.B. 38, PG. 729
NOTES.•
1. THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED WITHOUT BENEFIT OF A 717LE
REPORT AND IS SUBJECT THERETO. 7HEREFORE, 7HERE MAY
EXIST ENCUMBRANCES WHICH AFFECT THE PROPERTY NOT
SHOWN HEREON. I
2. METES AND BOUNDS !DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN HEREON REPRESENT
A COMPO5l7E OF DEEDS, PLATS, CALCULATED INFORMA77ON
AND FIELD 77ES TO .PROPERTY BOUNDARIES TO LOCATE THE
POS1770N OF THE EAISEM£NT IN REIA77ON R7 THE BOUNDARIES.
THIS SURVEY DOES NOT REFLECT A COMPLETE AND ACCURATE
BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERRES,
EASEMENT PLAT FOR
COUNTY OF ROANOKE
SHOWING A NEW 20' DRAINAGE EASEMENT ACROSS
THE PROPERTY OF
DA VIS H. ELLIOT CO., INC.
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DIS7RICT
TPP&5 T. R PJaard SON
EN OINEERS 810 BOLj�rd
9URVEYOR9 Pod otnom HOZ 89
wLANNERS Sdon, 91r`Wa 24153
LO
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE CbUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
RESOLUTION 042297-8 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN
CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM L CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, as follows:
1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for
April 22, 1997 designated as Item L - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and
concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1
through 5, inclusive, as follows:
1. Approval of minutes for March 11, 1997 and March 17, 1997.
2. Confirmation of appointment to the Social Services Advisory Board.
3. Acceptance of a $21,300 grant to enhance drug law enforcement
and prosecution.
4. Acceptance of a $64,928 grant to fund two School Resource
Officers.
5. Request from County Schools to appropriate additional revenues
from the dual enrollment program with Virginia Western Community
College.
2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where
required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any
such item pursuant to this resolution.
1
On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the Consent Resolution after
discussion of Item 4, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
James R. Lavinder, Captain, Criminal Investigations Division
J. H. McCorkle, Assistant Chief of Police
Garland R. Life, Senior Director of Instruction
Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
2
A-042297-g•a
ACTION NO.
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the
Social Services Advisory Board
Supervisor Johnson nominated Allen Simpson to fill the
unexpired four-year term of Mary Anderson representing the
Hollins Magisterial District. The term will expire August 1,
1997
It is recommended that the above appointment be confirmed by the
Board of Supervisors.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board
Approv d by,
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to No Yes Abs.
Denied ( ) approve Eddy x._
Received ( ) Harrison
Referred ( ) Johnson X_
To ( ) Minnix _
Nickens
cc: File
Social Service Advisory Board File
ACTION NUMBER
ITEM NUMBER
A -042297-8.b
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER.
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of a Grant to Enhance Drug Law
Enforcement and Prosecution
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
In 1996 the Vice Unit of The Roanoke County Police Department
received a grant for the purpose of enforcing and prosecuting drug
law violators. The grant was primarily focused on young people
ages 16 to 19, with emphasis on working with the County Schools to
deter future drug use through enforcement actions. The grant is
supported by school officials and the Commonwealth Attorney's
Office.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
This grant has been renewed in the amount of $28,400.
The Police Department requests approval to accept this grant.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The grant is for $21,300 in DCJS funds (750) and $7,100 in local
funds (25%) mandatory match.
The 25% mandatory match will be funded from the asset forfeiture
account. No monies from County's General Fund will necessary to
match this grant.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
L-3
The staff recommends acceptance of this grant.
Attachments:
SUBMITTED BY:
-ell
James R. Lav'nde
g'
Captain
Criminal Investigations Division
APPROVED:
17
�yyco,/
Elmer C. Hodge, Jr.
County Administrator
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to No Yes Abs.
Denied ( ) approve Eddy _x
Received ( ) Harrison
Referred ( ) Johnson x
To ( ) Minnix _x
Nickens x
cc: File
James R. Lavinder, Captain, Criminal Investigations Division
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
A -042297-8.c
ACTION NUMBER
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER.
MEETING TRATE: April 22, 1997
ANGFNDA ITEM: School Resource Officer Grant Renewal
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
IOXW&0*0181_
In June 1996, with the cooperation and written endorsement of the
Roanoke County School Superintendent, the Police Department
received a grant to hire and equip two sworn officers to serve as
School Resource Officers in the County high schools. This grant
has been renewed in the amount of $86,571.
The Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services grant funding
of two of the four authorized School Resource officer positions has
been renewed. The Police Department requests approval to accept
the grant and retain these two officers.
FOCAL IMPACT
The grant is for $64,928 in DCJS federal funds (75%) and $21,643 in
local funds (25%). The criteria of the grant requires a hard
dollar match of local funds.
The local match has been included in the 1997/98 fiscal year budget
within the personnel sub -object lines. No further -funding is
required.
�-y
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends acceptance of the grant from the Department of
Criminal Justice Services.
Attachments:
SUBMITTED BY:
H. McCorkle
Assistant Chief of Police
APPROVED:
Elmer C. Ho ge, Jr.
County Administrator
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION
VOTE
Approved (x)
Motion by: Harry C. Nickens
to
No Yes Abs.
Denied ( )
approve
Eddy
x
Received ( )
Harrison
x
Referred ( )
Johnson
x
To ( )
Minnix
x
Nickens
x
cc: File
J. H. McCorkle, Assistant Chief of
Police
Diane D.
Hyatt, Director, Finance
ACTION # A -042297-8.d
ITEM NUMBER
MEETING DATE: April 22, 1997
L-5
AGENDA ITEM: Request from County Schools to appropriate additional
revenues from dual enrollment program.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
PYA4�0KC011i
Roanoke County Schools and Virginia Western Community College
currently have an agreement whereby the college provides a college
level course in the Department of English. This course is taught
within the local high schools, by Roanoke County School teachers
who meet the college's criteria for an adjunct professor. Monies
that have been collected exceed the expenses; therefore, we request
for these additional funds to be appropriated for inservice and
materials to be used in the program.
0:ua •►
Roanoke County Schools collected $5,445 tuition from 121 students.
Virginia Western Community College will reimburse the Roanoke
County Schools $13,501.91 for services rendered (teachers,
administrative expenses, rooms, utilities, and maintenance).
Roanoke County Schools owes Virginia Western Community College
$17,534.95 for tuition and technology fees and college service
fees. The difference between that which was collected and that
which will be spent is $1,411.96.
FISCAL IMPACT•
An additional $1,411.96 was generated in the dual enrollment
program and could be used to purchase additional materials and
inservice for the program.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends appropriating the additional revenues of $1,411.96
to the dual enrollment program.
Submitted by: Approved by:
Garland R. Life
Senior Director of Instruction
lxtl,o"`i AZ5A
E'fmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
L-5
----------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to No Yes Abs.
Denied ( ) approve Eddy
Received ( ) Harrison _x
Referred ( ) Johnson _x
To ( ) Minnix x
Nickens x
cc: File
Garland R. Life, Senior Director of Instruction
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL --22,1997
RESOLUTION 042297-9 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened
an executive 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 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the
Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such executive meeting was
conducted in conformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge:
1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements
by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting which this certification resolution
applies, and
2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening
the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors
of Roanoke County, Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
cc: File Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
Executive Session
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
ORDINANCE 042297-10 ACKNOWLEDGING AND CONSENTING TO THE
VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
EASEMENT ACROSS LOTS 28, 29, 30 AND 31 OF PENN FOREST
PLACE, PLAT BOOK 17, PAGE 102, IN THE CAVE SPRING
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, by subdivision plat entitled 'Revised Plat of Subdivision for Boone,
Boone & Loeb, Inc. creating hereon "PENN FOREST PLACE"', revised February 4, 1995,
and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat
Book 17, page 102, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. dedicated certain public easements,
including a storm water management easement across Lots 28, 29, 30 and 31; and,
WHEREAS, the petitioner, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc., is the owner of Lots 28, 29,
30 and 31, Penn Forest Place; and,
WHEREAS, the petitioner has requested that a portion of the storm water
management easement be vacated pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia
(1950, as amended), which requires that such action be accomplished by the adoption of
an ordinance by the governing body; and,
WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by Section 15.1-431 of the 1950
Code of Virginia, as amended, and a first reading of this ordinance was held on April 8,
1997; and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on April 22,
1997.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, as follows:
4
1. That the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County acknowledges and
consents to the vacation of a portion of the storm water management easement across
Lots 28, 29, 30 and 31, Penn Forest Place, in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of the
County of Roanoke, Virginia, as shown on the 'Revised Plat of Subdivision for Boone,
Boone & Loeb, Inc. creating hereon "PENN FOREST PLACE"', revised February 4, 1995,
and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat
Book 17, page 102, and as further shown on the Exhibit ("Revised Storm water
Management Easement," prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated 15 November
1996) attached hereto, pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as
amended; and,
2. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses
associated herewith, including but not limited to publication costs, survey costs and
recordation of documents, shall be the responsibility of the petitioner, Boone, Boone &
Loeb, Inc., or their successors or assigns; and,
3. That the Department of Engineering and Inspections shall record a certified
copy of this ordinance with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, and
the recordation costs shall be payable by the petitioner.
4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be,
and the same hereby are, repealed.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
2
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
3
NOTESI O.E" /
!� BOUNDARY INFORMATION TAKEN FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS.
?. NO TITLE REPORT PROVIDED FOR THIS PLAT.
i. SEE REVISED PLAT FOR PENN FOREST PLACE, P.B. 17, PG. 102, F O�
FOR THE LOCATION OF EXISTING EASEMENTS. (
REVISED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EASEMENT
LOCATED ON LOTS 28, 29, 30 AND 31
REVISED
PENN FOREST PLACE
(PG 17, PG. 102)
CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
SCALE 1"= 60' DATE: 15 NOVEMBER' 1996
LUMSDEN ASSOCIATES, P.C.
ENGINEERS-Si7RVEYORS-PLANNERS
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
BLOCK 2
F�\�QP��GQG
MANWARING MANOR �P 1
' 3 (P.B./7, PG. 6) �Q� �•
2
ORIGINAL STORMWATER
1
MANAGEMENT EASEMENT
I
REVISED STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT EASEMENT
E
N ¢6'09'00" E 246.06'
A
I
519.81' 60.52' 54.80' 70.
3'
I D
3 C
M '� 3 •�1
to
27
d4• 28
^
v 29 � �
lz 0 30
I
h
1
11)
�trc 31
o
_ _ C 2
_ I _
EX. 15' P.U.E.
C-4 C-3
30.00•'�
EXIST. 15 DE
45,
FORESTpLgC S 25'os�0
PENN
F W
4
60' R/W 75.00.
O
co
Ld
$ 'I-:
I
�
4 3 ' 2
�
' 1
1
L
CURVE TABLE
A IN
L A
105N1
47
REVISED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
EASEMENT
-i INF HUN ANLt4
iR1'4 4 Ww 17 4
C-0 7
PLAT SHOWING
REVISED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT EASEMENT
LOCATED ON LOTS 28, 29, 30 AND 31
REVISED
PENN FOREST PLACE
(PG 17, PG. 102)
CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
SCALE 1"= 60' DATE: 15 NOVEMBER' 1996
LUMSDEN ASSOCIATES, P.C.
ENGINEERS-Si7RVEYORS-PLANNERS
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
ORDINANCE 042297-11 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
A 3.00 -ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF WEST MAIN STREET ACROSS FROM ALLEGHANY DRIVE
(TAX MAP NOS. 55.03-1-18,19, 20) IN THE CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 TO THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF 1-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE
APPLICATION OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF
ROANOKE COUNTY
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 25, 1997, and the
second reading and public hearing were held April 22, 1997; and,
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this matter on April 1, 1997; and
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 3.00
acres, as described herein, and located on the south side of West Main Street across from
Alleghany Drive, (Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1-18, 19, 20) in the Catawba Magisterial
District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Office District, to the
zoning classification of 1-2, Industrial District.
2. That this action is taken upon the application of Industrial Development
Authority of Roanoke County.
3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the
following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby
accepts:
(1) Landscaping and the berm along Route 11/460 (West Main Street) shall be
located in substantial conformance with the Kroger VMF site plan dated March 21,
1997, provided that the break for (old) Garman Road is deleted and the berm
extended to new Garman Road.
(2) Access to the property shall be solely from (new) Garman Road. There will
be NO entrance to the site from (old) Garman Road.
4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows:
All of those certain lots, parcels or tracts of land, together with any improvements
thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in
the Catawba District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, designated and described
as all of Lot No. Fifteen (15), all of Lot No. Sixteen (16), and the Western 70 feet
of Lot No. Fourteen (14), as shown on the recorded Map of Fort Lewis Estates, of
record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat
Book 3, at page 51, reference to which is hereby made for further description of
said property; said real estate being further shown and designated upon the
Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 55.03-1-18, 55.03-1-19, and 55.03-
1-20.
5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed
to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized
by this ordinance.
On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
6
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
.. '.. •p' \ •\' r � x•11&R�• ;:Zt -'2 �
,r 141x4 13 LSCA4
' .ro., • � ' /'� ���,�• G ter,. -.-, s �• � ,
n 27
Seek 3
Yrr•w t,.,. Ma At 15 ff 24 Z5
`\ � 26.yk n S94k lD!
6.2044 C-
LOOAC
/ t yl1E t.00 do 403 Gc a �� 23 lob i ���
DEPaRT,` 'I' OF PL—A-NNIENG
Al M ZONENG
Roanoke County IDA
Tax Map Numbers 55,03-1-18,19,20
14
4Z.70At
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER, ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
ORDINANCE 042297-12 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
A 2.35 -ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF WEST MAIN STREET ACROSS FROM ALLEGHANY DRIVE
(TAX MAP NOS. 55.03-1-14,15,16,17) IN THE CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 TO THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF 1-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE
APPLICATION OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF
ROANOKE COUNTY
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 25, 1997, and the
second reading and public hearing were held April 22, 1997; and,
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this matter on April 1, 1997; and
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 2.35
acres, as described herein, and located on the south side of West Main Street across from
Alleghany Drive (Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1-14, 15, 16, 17) in the Catawba Magisterial
District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Office District, to the
zoning classification of 1-2, Industrial District.
2. That this action is taken upon the application of Industrial Development
Authority of Roanoke County.
3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the
following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby
accepts:
(1) Landscaping and the berm along Route 11/460 (West Main Street) shall be
located in substantial conformance with the Kroger VMF site plan dated March 21,
1997, provided that the break for (old) Garman Road is deleted and the berm
extended to new Garman Road.
(2) Access to the property shall be solely from (new) Garman Road. There will
be NO entrance to the site from (old) Garman Road.
4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows:
All those certain lots or parcels of land together with any improvements thereon,
rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in the
County of Roanoke, Virginia, on the south side of U.S. Route 11/460 being
designated and described as 5 feet of lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of lot 14, lot 13,
and lot 12 on the map of Fort Lewis Estates recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, Page 51, reference to
which is hereby made for a further description of said property, said real estate
being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County land records as Tax
Map Numbers 55.03-1-17, 55.03-1-16, 55.03-1-15, and 55.03-1-14.
5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed
to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized
by this ordinance.
On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
2
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
V
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
rtttn, j.n to .I w..-.ar"/.w•/ l.!. �i �• '- __
' • • ' .' \ \ '\ f �• 118' R�``A-� S,z�� .
• \\ /�/' ..l' ii Yrs `13
lz
ZS
501
.14
� � J✓I .�S�t.t` \ t. i rr SJBAt
YNr.+' / }t f O Z425•r••+ J1taa 'I -.S
r/` /
3�k
00 zz
I.COx 405Ac s v 1 JT'l 23
So.
•* DEPAR=i i TT Or PLJNN-_L-L\,G
-AM ZONPiG
Roanoke County IDA .
Tax Map Numbers 55,03-1-14,15,16,17
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER, ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
DENIAL OF ORDINANCE 042297-13 TO CHANGE THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF A 17.5 -ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED
EAST OF AIRPORT ROAD NORTH OF THE TERMINUS OF WOODBURY
STREET (TAX MAP NO. 38.14-1-5) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 TO THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS AND TO GRANT
A SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH CONDITIONS TO CONSTRUCT A HOME
FOR ADULTS, UPON THE APPLICATION OF SHENANDOAH HOMES
RETIREMENT VILLAGE, INC.
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 25, 1997, and the
second reading and public hearing were held April 22, 1997; and,
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this matter on April 1, 1997; and
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
On motion of Supervisor Johnson to DENY approval of the ordinance and special
use permit, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: Supervisor Eddy
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
ORDINANCE 042297-14 AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE
APPENDIX A OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE
cc: File
Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Circuit Court
Roy B. Willett, Judge
Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge
Diane McQ. Strickland, Judge
Richard C. Pattisall, Judge
Robert P. Doherty, Jr., Judge
Steven A. McGraw, Clerk
Juvenile Domestic Relations District Court
Joseph M. Clarke, II, Judge
Philip Trompeter, Judge
John B. Ferguson, Judge
Joseph P. Bounds, Judge
Ruth P. Bates, Clerk
Intake Counsellor
General District Court
John L. Apostolou, Judge
George W. Harris, Judge
William Broadhurst, Judge
Vincent Lilley, Judge
Julian H. Raney, Judge
Theresa A. Childress, Clerk
Skip Burkart, Commonwealth Attorney
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
Magistrates Sherri Krantz/Betty Perry
Main Library
Police Chief
Richard Burch, Chief of Fire & Rescue
Roanoke Law Library, 315 Church Avenue, S.W., Rke 24016
Roanoke County Law Library, Singleton Osterhoudt
Roanoke County Code Book
Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff
John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator
Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator
Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance
O. Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections
Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning
Gary Robertson, Director, Utility
Michael Lazzuri, Court Services
William J. Rand, III, Director, General Services
Thomas S. Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation
Elaine Carver, Director, Procurement
John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Alfred C. Anderson, Treasurer
R. Wayne Compton, Commissioner of Revenue
5
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
ORDINANCE 042297-14 AMENDING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE
82592-121 THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR ROANOKE COUNTY, BY THE
AMENDING SECTIONS 30-54-2 (A) 6, AND (B) 4; 30-61-2 (A) 6, AND (B)
3; 30-62-2 (A) 6, AND (B) 3 TO ALLOW BROADCASTING TOWERS ONLY
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS,
I-1 AND 1-2 INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
WHEREAS, on August 25, 1992, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, adopted Ordinance 82592-12 which enacted a new zoning ordinance for Roanoke
County; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for Roanoke County will hold its public
hearing on this amendment on April 1, 1997, and will make a recommendation concerning
approval of the ordinance adopting these amendments to the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia; and,
WHEREAS, in the interest of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and
good zoning practice, the Board of Supervisors hereby amends certain provisions
concerning broadcasting towers in the various zoning districts of the County; and
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law,
and that the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 25, 1997; and the second
reading and public hearing will be held on April 22, 1997.
BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that
the Zoning Ordinance for Roanoke County, adopted on August 25, 1992, be, and hereby
is, amended and reenacted, as follows:
1. That Sections 30-54-2 (A) 6, AND (B) 4; 30-61-2 (A) 6, AND (B) 3; and 30-
1
62-2 (A) 6, AND (B) 3 be amended to read and provide as follows:
ARTICLE III. DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Section 30-54-2. Permitted Uses
(A) The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable
requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional,
modified, or more stringent standards are listed in Article IV. Use and Design
Standards, for those specific uses.
6. Miscellaneous
Section 30-54-2. Permitted Uses
(B) The following uses are allowed only by Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-
19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified, or more stringent standards are
listed in Article IV. Use and Design Standards, for those specific uses.
4. Miscellaneous
W
Section 30-61-2. Permitted Uses
(A) The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable
requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional,
modified, or more stringent standards are listed in Article IV. Use and Design
Standards, for those specific uses.
6. Miscellaneous
101 LuDiLm VIT� MR IN LW
2
Section 30-61-2. Permitted Uses
(B) The following uses are allowed only by Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-
19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified, or more stringent standards are
listed in Article IV. Use and Design Standards, for those specific uses.
3. Miscellaneous
Section 30-62-2. Permitted Uses
(A) The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable
requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional,
modified, or more stringent standards are listed in Article IV. Use and Design
Standards, for those specific uses.
6. Miscellaneous
Section 30-62-2. Permitted Uses
(B) The following uses are allowed only by Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-
19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified, or more stringent standards are
listed in Article IV. Use and Design Standards, for those specific uses.
3. Miscellaneous
13roadcstng Ttwe
2. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after April 22, 1997.
On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following
3
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
4
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 1997
ORDINANCE 042297-15 AMENDING THE 1985 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
BY INCORPORATING INTO SAID PLAN THE CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY
PLAN, ROANOKE VALLEY, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted the Roanoke
County Land Use Plan on June 25, 1985; and
WHEREAS, public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning
practice has from time to time required that this plan be modified; and
WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee has,
with the full support and participation of Roanoke County, completed the Conceptual
Greenway Plan, Roanoke Valley, Virginia dated December 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and discussed the analysis,
conclusion, and recommendations of the Conceptual Greenway Plan, Roanoke Valley,
Virginia, and following a duly advertised public hearing as required by Section 15.1-431
of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, on April 1, 1997, adopted a motion
recommending that the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan be amended to incorporate
the analysis, conclusions, and recommendations of said Plan with the attached addendum;
and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 8,1997; the second
reading and public hearing was held on April 22, 1997; and
WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
1
follows:
1. That the 1985 Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to
incorporate the analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the Conceptual Greenway
Plan, Roanoke Valley, Virginia, with the attached addendum. The Plan and the addendum
contain information, policy, goals, objectives, and recommendations to guide the County
in the greenway development process.
2. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be April 22, 1997.
On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the ordinance and addendum, and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, CMC
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Jonathan Hartley, Assistant Director of Planning & Zoning
Elizabeth Belcher, Greenways Coordinator
W. Robert Herbert, Roanoke City Manager
B Clayton Goodman, III, Vinton Town Manager
Randolph M. Smith, Salem City Manager
2
ADDENDUM TO THE
CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN, ROANOKE VALLEY VIRGINIA
The purpose of this addendum to the Conceptual Greenway Plan (Plan) is to:
Clarify, where necessary, public policy as it applies to Roanoke County; and,
Supplement and expand upon the methods for implementing the greenway system as proposed
in this Plan.
General Statements
The greenway system proposed in the Conceptual Greenway Plan is to be incorporated into the
County's existing Comprehensive Plan in its entirety with the understanding that full implementation
relies on actions by both public and private sectors throughout the Valley jurisdictions. Asa joint
regional undertaking, the Plan serves an essential coordinating role. However, beyond the County's
participation in the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, the County is primarily limited to
implementing only those corridors which are located in the unincorporated areas of Roanoke County.
While the Conceptual Greenway Plan designates 51 corridors for the development of a regional
greenway system, these should be viewed as the primary corridors of what will in all likelihood be a
larger network. As opportunities will allow, additional corridors should be added and trails and
greenways at the neighborhood and subdivision level should be encouraged, particularly if they are
connected to the larger Valley wide network.
Ten Strategies For Success
Critical to the success in developing a network of greenways throughout the Roanoke Valley are the
"Ten Strategies for Success" presented in Section 2 of the Conceptual Plan. These are restated below
to emphasize their importance to Roanoke County:
Establish a framework for on going inter -governmental cooperation to develop a regional
greenway system through a permanent committee of interjurisdictional local staff.
2. Promote and ensure private sector involvement from all localities by means of organized
partnerships.
3. Create a"non-governmental greenway advocacy organization that would include citizens -from all
communities.
April 14, 1997
4. Develop an on -road and off-road network of trails through the Valley linking diverse lands such
as communities, parks, commercial areas and natural resources.
5. Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian accommodations on newly built and improved urban roads.
Incorporate bicycle accommodations on other newly built and improved roads.
6. Develop a highly visible multi -jurisdictional pilot project.
7. Establish a regional program of on going land acquisition through donations, easements
combined with new sewer interceptors, and land purchase where necessary.
8. Establish an annual allocation of local government funds for trail construction and maintenance.
9. Implement a multi -jurisdictional greenway maintenance and management program to promote a
safe and clean trail system.
10. Develop a regional marketing program for the greenway system that includes promotional
literature, maps, and tourist information.
Implementation
In addition to the options suggested in Section 7 of the Conceptual Greenway Plan, Roanoke County
establishes the following additional guidelines to implement the system of greenways proposed in the
Plan. These are described according to the five basic components of implementation, including,
planning, finding land, funding, construction, and maintenance.
A. Planning
1. Planning for specific corridors shall be conducted by an internal team comprised of
representatives of the Departments of Planning, Parks and Recreation, Economic Development,
Utilities, and Engineering. Other Departments and appropriate officials from other jurisdictions
should also be involved, when appropriate.
2. Prepare a detailed feasibility study, as described in the Conceptual Plan, for all of the primary
off-road greenways proposed in developed or developing areas of the County. The level of detail
shall be adequate to guide decisions in acquiring access to lands through those mechanisms in
B.below.
3. Public Safety agencies shall be consulted on the design, location, and improvements proposed
to ensure a high level of safety that can be achieved for both users and adjoining properties
owners.
4. All planning shall be undertaken with the full involvement of the citizens in the surrounding
2 April 14, 1997
neighborhoods.
B. Finding Land
Assembling the land to build greenways should capitalize on every option available. The actions below
are intended to supplement those listed in Section 7.2 of the Conceptual Greenway Plan.
1. The on -road facilities indicated in the Conceptual Greenway Plan shall be incorporated into the
VDOT Primary and Secondary Road Plans early in the planning and funding phases for
applicable future road improvements.
2. In the negotiation and acquisition of easements for County projects, including sewer, water,
drainage and storm water easements, where a greenway is also proposed, the opportunities to
also negotiate an access easement for the greenway shall be evaluated, and if feasible,
acquired.
3. Before legal interest is abandoned in any property, the County shall evaluate the property's
potential for use in the development of greenways. This would include the vacation of
easements, formal abandonment of rights-of-way and easements and the sale of surplus
property.
4. Prior to offering properties at public auction, all properties which may be available as tax
delinquent property shall be evaluated for use in the development of greenways.
5. Where land proposed for rezoning is located along a corridor shown on the conceptual plan or
for which a master plan has been developed, dedication of the legal right to access the property
and build and maintain a greenway shall be solicited as a voluntary proffer as a condition of the
rezoning. Where appropriate and timely, actual construction of the greenway shall be
encouraged.
6. The County zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations shall be evaluated and amended to
incorporate the language necessary to obtain during the site plan and subdivision process, the
necessary legal rights of access to further the development of the proposed greenway system.
7. All property owned by the County or any division, department or agency of the County, shall be
evaluated for dedication and use in the greenway system. Public lands determined to be
appropriate for use in the greenway system shall be legally encumbered for such use by
establishment of an easement conveyed to a neutral party.
- 8. The County, in conjunction with VDOT, shall evaluate and implement a comprehensive program
to construct a system of sidewalks to meet existing demands of foot traffic, and enhance and
provide links with the proposed greenway system.
April 14, 1997
C. Funding
1. Funding to complete the feasibility study described above shall be a high priority in the
immediate future in order to establish a firm foundation for all future activities associated with
developing the Greenway system.
2. Funds shall be reflected annually in the County's Capital Improvement Program at a level
sufficient to indicate a commitment to complete the County's portion of the conceptual network
of greenways over a twenty yeaer 6*1: "�j period.
3. All avenues for utilizing public/private partnerships in developing the proposed greenway system
shall be strongly encouraged.
4. In coordination with other jurisdictions and the Greenway Commission staff, all opportunities to
obtain public or private grant monies shall be pursued by the County where time and resources
allow.
D. Construction
1. All greenways shall be constructed in accordance with the minimum standards developed and
adopted by the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission.
2. All construction activities shall be undertaken in full compliance with all local, state and federal
laws which may apply, and all necessary permits shall be obtained prior to construction.
3. Construction shall be undertaken with the utmost sensitivity and care to surrounding property
owners and the rights and wishes of the owners of property for which easements have been
obtained.
E. Maintenance
No greenway stra4f be funded for construction or accepted for public maintenance until
appropriate funds have been also allocated to the Department of Parks and Recreation or other
agency which is responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the corridor. Funds thaw"
be adequate to provide the minimum maintenance expected given the level of volunteer support
which can be anticipated.
4 April 14, 1997