9/28/1982 - Regular
9-23-82
198
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Salem-Roanoke County Civic Center
Salem, Virginia
September 28, 1982
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day in
open session at the Salem-Roanoke County Civic Center in Salem, Virginia
this being the fourth Tuesday and the third regular meeting of the month
of September, 1932.
HElmERS PRESEJJT:
Chairman Athena E. 3urton and Supervisors May W. Johnson
Gary J. Minter, Robert E. Myers, and Harry C. Nickens
MENDERS ABSENT: None
Ii; RE:
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Burton called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Supervis
Johnson immediately moved to go into executive session, pursuant to Section
2.l-}l:L: (a) (C) of the Code of Virginia. Her motion was adopted by a
unanimous voice vote.
I,' R:::
cou;:n 30ARD AND SCHOOL BOARD - CLOSED HORK SESS I OiJ
I tJ RE:
RETURH TO OPEN SESS 10[;
At 4:38 p.m. the Supervisors returned to the meeting room and
on motion of Supervisor Johnson, voted unanimously to return to open session.
Chairman Burton then turned the meeting over to County Administrator Flander
and his staff to present for discussion a study on sewer and water rates.
John ii. Chambliss, Director of Finance and John K. Hubbard, Director of
Administration and Engineering presented facts and figures to the Board
for discussion and consideration.
I
I
I
I
I
9-28-82
19H
I
I
I
IN RE:
RECESS
At 5:25 p.m. Chairman Burton called for a recess for dinner.
IN RE:
RECONVENEMENT
At 6:06 p.m. and on motion of Supervisor Johnson, the Board
reconvened in open session to continue the work session on sewer and water
rates. After extensive discussion it was decided to have another work
session to final ize recommendations prior to a publ ic hearing. It was the
consensus of the group to have this work session beginning at 4:00 p.m.,
October 12th at the next regularly scheduled meeting.
IN RE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 6:27 p.m. Supervisor Johnson moved that the Board go into
Executive Session to discuss personnel, real estate, industrial and legal
matters, pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (1), (2), (4), and (6) of the
Code of Virginia. Her motion was adopted by a unanimous voice vote.
HJ RE:
CALL TO ORDER
On motion by Supervisor Myers and a unanimous voice vote the
Board returned to open session. Chairman Burton called the meeting to
order at 7:00 p.m.
Chairman Burton advised those present that the Board
had been meeting since 4:00 p.m. for the third regular meeting for the
month of September, this being the fourth Tuesday.
'I
IN RE:
INVOCATION
Invocation was offered by John M. Chambl iss, Jr., Director of
!j
fl
!l
Finance, Roanoke County Administration. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
was recited in unison.
H
U
,I
'I
I
I'
:1
;1
I
I
r-
9-28-82
200
IN RE:
ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR INFORMATION ONLY
On motion of Supervisor Johnson and a unanimous voice vote, the
following items were received and filed;
a. Letter from Town Manager of Vinton accepting Supervisorc'
I
invitation to Town Council to meet at the Vinton War Memorial on September
30.
b. Letter from Roanoke City Council Clerk (with Council
Resolution No. 26207) regarding creation of Roanoke Val ley War Memoria]
Special Account.
c. Letter from State Librarian advising that 5 percent of the
grant from the State Library Board to Roanoke County's library system has
been frozen.
d. Copy of letter from County Planner to the Times-Wor]d
I
Corporation asking for a retraction of a quotation mistakenly attributed to
I
the Planner.
e. Copy of letter from Delegate G. Steven Agee to Chairman
Burton with attached correspondence regarding a post office for Southwest
I
I
County.
f. Letter from Senator John W. Warner regarding a post office
for Southwest County.
g. Letter from Virginia Department of Highways and Transportatior
] isting five streets in Willow Creek subdivision which have been accepted
into the State secondary system.
IN RE:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 2] ZONING OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY CODE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF HOME OCCUPATIONS,
THE I R LOCAT ION IN lotJ I iJG D I STR I CT, AND COND I T IONS UNDER WH I CH
THEY MAY BE PERMITTED.
Chairman Burton stated the Board would hear from anyone who lived
I
in Roanoke County who hed a question or a point of information to be
addressed.
Claude G. Lee, Zoning Administrator presented a prepared
resolution stating the proposed amendments to the County code. He advised
that his report was prepared at the direction of the Supervisors on August
1--,
~ r
,.,
9-28-82
i.J 0 1
~ . ~.
f
24, whereby, the Board had requested a study and investigation of Home
Occupation ordinances in order to give the County better control.
Chairman Burton stated she had no objections to that which was
I
included in the ordinance, but felt it did not go far enough with the
specifications of the various conditions under which a Home Occupation permi
be granted.
Chairman Burton continued by reminding the group th2t in a
previous discussion with the County Attorney, his definition of a special
permit and the intent of the ordinance was to allow for special hardship
cases, and to assure that residential property was used primarily as a
residential property. She felt the ordinance being presented did not
address what portion of a residence could be devoted toward a home occupatior
and did not mention anything about a hardship, etc.
After extensive discussion by the Board relating to the definition
and provisions of the Home Occupation ordinance, Supervisor Minter stated
he would 1 ike to hear comments from any citizens who wished to speak.
I
Chairman Burton then recognized Ann Bailey, 7514 Deer Branch Road,
who stated she was opposed to home beauty shops, and if the Board authorized
any, it should be permitted only for certain hardship cases. She also
expressed her definition of a hardship case.
After further discussion regarding the definition of a hardship
case, Chairman Burton recognized Katina Batson, 4306 Will iamson Road, wno
expressed her opposition to home shops, except in hardship cases.
Chairman Burton then recognized Kathy Firebaugh, 4703 Phyll is
Road, who expressed her opinions concerning both home and commercial beauty
I
shops, and that there were more strict regulations on commercial businesses
than on home owned shops.
Following further discussion of the Home Occupation definition,
codes, rules and regulations in reference to home beauty shops, and on
motion by Supervisor Myers and a unanimous voice vote Mr. Buchholtz, County
Attorney, was directed to prepare an ordinance according to the specific
I
I
I~
~
202
9-23-82
changes recommended by the Board and submit this for approval at a future
meeting.
IN RE:
PETITION OF LYNN R. CREASY FOR A HOME OCCUPATION *
PERMIT TO CONDUCT A ONE-CHAIR BEAUTY SHOP IN HER *
HOME AT 5571 CAPITO STREET, N.E. IN HOLLINS *
DISTRICT. *
APPROVED
(FOR 1 YEAR
ONLY)
I
Alex N. Apostolou, Attorney, was present to support this request
and no one appeared in opposition. There was some discussion by the Board
as to whether or not this item should be heard at this point since the new
ordinance regarding home beauty shops was being discussed at this meeting
and had not been approved. It was mentioned, however, that Mrs. Creasy had
appl ied for the permit previously. County Attorney Buchholtz stated the
Board had legal right to continue the matter or the right to go ahead
and make a decision.
Mr. Apostolou stated his cl ient had appl ied some time ago for a
he had
permit and that this was the third time/to come before the Board. He also
stated that the Board was considering an ordinance that had not been drawn
I
nor passed. He asked the Board to accept his cl ient's request for a permit
adding that he compl ied with all regulations existing at this time.
I;
I'
that Mrs. Creasy had appl ied for the permit before the new ordinance was
There was some discussion regarding special restrictions, legal ity I
I
I
Supervisor Minter moved that the permit be granted on the basis
of the Soard to act on this request, and the home and area in which the
beauty shop would be operated.
discussed, that it be granted for one year subject to the conditions at the
time of renewal of theordinance, and subject to the restrictions of a one-
chair operation, off street parking, no additional side entrance. The
I
motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Minter, Johnson, and Burton.
NAYS:
Supervisors Myers and Nickens
Supervisor Myers stated he voted no because the Board was
considering an ordinance to govern such shops and he did not feel it was
---
~
I
I
I
~
9-28-82
203
appropriate to grant one when at another meeting there was to be an
ordinance to set restrictions. He felt everyone should be under the same
restrictions.
Supervisor Minter stated he voted 'yesl because, again, she had
applied for the permit well before the Board started considering changes,
and that the Board kept putting her off and she should be treated as those
in the past.
Supervisor Johnson stated she voted 'yes' because she had appl ied
for the permit before, and that this case brought the problem to the
attention of the Board.
Supervisor Nickens stated he was in favor of granting the request
but voted 'no' on this particular motion because he wished to offer a
substitute motion.
Chairman Burton stated she voted 'yes' because she felt this case
came before the Board before discussion regarding changes in the ordinance
and that after one year Mrs. Creasy would have to come under the conditions
as outl ined.
IN RE:
PETITION OF ROBERT W. AND LINDA KELLEY FOR A HOME *
OCCUPATION PERMIT TO CONDUCT A BEAUTY SHOP IN *
THEIR HOME AT 1038 STARMOUNT AVENUE, N.W. IN THE *
CATAWBA DISTRICT. *
CONTINUED
Alex N. Apostolou, attorney, was present to support this request
and no one appeared in opposition. Mr. Apostolou stated this case was
similar to the previous case, in that it was the third time the case had
appeared before the Board. He advised that all regulations had been met.
Supervisor Minter remarked that there was one difference in the
cases, in that this permit was appl ied for two weeks after Mrs. Creasy's
was appl ied for, he wasn1t
sure this was the case, but that it was after
the Board had decided to study the matter. He was informed that the
appl ication was received on July 28, 1982, and that the appl ication was
received at the meeting in which the ordinance was discussed.
Supervisor Myers moved that the Kelley case be continued until
such time as the rules and regulations and codes are set up for home
I
~
~
204
9-28-82
operated beauty shops and that this request come under those restrictions.
The motion was adopted by the following recorded roll call vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Myers, Minter and Johnson
NAYS:
Supervisors Nickens and Burton
I
Chairman Burton informed those present that the case was continued
until the revision of the ordinance had been completed. Mr. Apostolou
expressed disagreement with the decision in that his cl ient had appl ied in
July and would have to comply now with the proposed new ordinance.
IN RE:
PETITION OF BARBARA J. BOGAR, M.D., REQUESTING *
REZONING FROM R-l TO A-I OF A HALF-ACRE LOT *
LOCATED AT 4903 COLONIAL AVENUE, S.W. IN THE CAVE *
SPRING DISTRICT. REZONING IS REQUESTED SO DR. *
BOGAR MAY USE THE EXISTING DWELLING AS HER PRIMARY*
RESIDENCE AND OPERATE HER MEDICAL OFFICE THEREIN. *
APPROVED
Mr. Gilbert Butler, attorney, was spokesman on Dr. Bogar's behalf.
I
He stated that he was brought in to present this petition after a real
estate agent had previously attempted to negotiate the rezoning through all
the intricate channels. He also stated that at the last hearing the real
estate agent presented an order which did not contain the proper conditions,
and the agent was compelled to withdraw the rezoning request. Mr. Gilbert
stated that it was at this point that he came into the picture and reinitiat d
the petition process. He took the request to the County Attorney and
informed Mrs. Johnson of the special nature of the case, in that, at the
first presentation it was approved by the Planning Commission with the
proper conditions, and it was simply a mistake more of form rather than of
substance on the real estate agent's part. Mr. Gilbert stated at this
point, that he would have to go through the Planning Commission phase again,
Supervisor Johnson moved that the procedure of referring this back
I
but that the petition had been refiled and the petition fee paid.
to the Planning Commission be waived. The motion was adopted by a unanimous
voice vote.
Supervisor Johnson then moved that the property be rezoned to A-I
with the condition that it revert back to R-l if it does not continue in
the use appl ied for. Motion was adopted by the following roll call qote:
~
..,
9-28-02
,..~... 11'"......
?' 0 h'f)
f.I ll.c
AYES:
Supervisors Myers, Minter, Johnson, Nickens, and Burton.
I
I
I
NAYS:
None
Supervisor Nickens moved that the second fil ing fee for this
petition be refunded to the petitioner. Motion was carried.
FINAL ORDER
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED and ORDERED that at this meeting of
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held on the 28th
day of September, 1982, the said Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be, and the
same is hereby amended so as to reclassify the hereinafter described
property from Residential District, R-l, to Agricultural District, A-I,
which property is described as follows, to-wit:
BEGINNING at a point in the center of the Bent Mountain
road, also known as the Poorhouse Road and also known as
Virginia State Secondary Road, Route #613, said beginning
point being 439.5 feet easterly as measured along the
center I ine of said Road from the point of intersection
of same produced to intersection with the center 1 ine of
the old Frankl in Turnpike; thence leaving the above
described Beginning Point and leaving the center 1 ine of
said road, and with the easterl6 boundary 1 ine of the
property of L. C. Leffler, N. 2 151 E., passing through
an iron pipe on the 1 ine at 11.5 feet, in all a total
distance of 267.6 feet to an iron pipe corner; thence with
two new division 1 ines through and across the property of
Ralph Palmer and wife, S. 80 251 E., 103 feet to an iron
pipe corner; thence S. 70 331 W., passing through an iron
pipe on the 1 ine at 251.6 feet, in all a total distance
of 267.8 feet to a point in the center of the aforesaid
Bent Mountain Road; thence along the center 1 ine of said
road, N. 790 031 W., 78.4 feet to the place of BEGINNING,
and containing a gross area of 0.53 acre, from which is to
be deducted the northerly one-half of the existing 30
foot width Bent Mountain Road included in the herein
described conveyance, leaving a net area of 0.5 acre of land
being conveyed; this conveyance is made subject to an
extra 15 foot width strip of land provided for in the future
widening of the Bent Mountain Road as shown upon annexed plat
of survey made by C. B. Malcolm, S.C.E., dated July 7, 1944,
which plat is made part of the herein described conveyance
and to which reference is made for further detail; and
There is also excepted, .116 acres conveyed to the Common-
wealth of Virginia, in Deed Book 503, page 174.
BEING the same property conveyed to H. P. Walter and
Helen B. Walter, husband and wife, by Ralph Palmer and
Ida B. Palmer, husband and wife, by deed dated the 10th
day of July, 1944, and of record in the Clerk1s Office
of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia
in Deed Book 314, page 183.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED and ORDERED that the Clerk of this Board
shall forthwith certify a copy of this resolution and order to the
Secretary of the Planning Commission of Roanoke County, Virginia.
i
I-
I
I
I~
r
~2 0 6
9-23-82
I iJ RE:
PETITION OF CHARLES H. BURTON REQUESTING REZONING *
FROM R-l TO R-3 OF 9.2 ACRES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF *
DENT ROAD (BETWEEN AIRPORT AND WILLIAMSON ROADS) *
IN THE HOLLINS DISTRICT. REZONING IS REQUESTED TO*
PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF CONDOMINIUMS. *
CONTINUED
Chairman Burton recognized John L. Apostolou, attorney, who spoke
I
on behalf of his cl ient, Charles H. Burton. He informed the Board that
the matter before them was of great importance. He stated that the 9.2
acres which had been petitioned was surrounded by multi-family housing
units and it was compatible with the entire area, that the Lakeview
Apartments were located behind the property and the complex known as
Friendship Manor is a developing multi-family, multi-purpose complex home
for the aged. He continued by stating he felt the petition before the
Board did not offend any of the srrounding area. He stated that the
Planning Commission had denied the request, and at this time he wanted
to know the reason.
Chairman Burton then asked if there was anyone from the Planning
Commission who could elaborate on the reason the petition was denied.
I
Claude G. Lee, Zoning Administrator, read frorl the minutes of the Planning
Commission stating the petition was denied on the grounds of excessive
density of population and objections to the citizens I iving too close to
the airport runway. There was some discussion concerning the density factor
and a letter from Roanoke City Planning and Zoning which was received by
Ii the Planning Commission.
Supervisor Nickens moved that in I ight of there not being adequate
representation from the Planning Commission to provide answers to questions
as to why the petition was denied, that this matter be continued until the
next meeting and allow the staff to gather more information for the Board's
review.
Motion was adopted by a unanimous voice vote.
I
IN RE:
APPLICATION OF CARL RALPH FURROW FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION*
PERM I T TO PARK A MOB I LE HOt:E ON A I-ACRE TRACT LOCATED ;',
ON A PRIVATE ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF STATE ROUTE 774, *
ABOUT 800 FEET FRO~1 ITS INTERS~CTlO[J \';IT:I ROUTE 638 It~ ;',
THE CATAlt/BA DISTRICT. ;',
APPROVED
-
~
..,
9-28-82
C) () '''/
f...I.j .~;
Claude G. Lee, Zoning Administrator, informed the Board that the
mobile home would be occupied by the parents of Mr. Furrow. There being
no opposition, Supervisor nyers moved that the special exception permit be
I
granted. Motion was adopted by the following roll cal I vote:
AYES: Supervisors Myers, Minter, Johnson, Nickens, and Burton.
NAYS: None
IN RE:
PROCLAMATION
The following proclamation was presented by Chairman Burton:
PRO C LAM A T ION
WHEREAS, the National School Lunch Program has served our nation
admirably for 35 years through advanced practices and nutrition education;
and
WHEREAS, the National School Lunch Program is dedicated to the health
I
and well-being of our nation's children; and
WHEREAS, the National School Lunch Program has been joined through
the years by many other excellent childfeeding programs; and
WHEREAS, there is evidence of continued need for nutrition education
and awareness of the value of school feeding programs;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Athena E. Burton, Chai rman of the Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors, DO HERE3Y PROCLAIM the week of October 10-16, 1982,
as
SCHOOL LUNCH WEEK
and I encourage all residents to become aware and concerned about their
children's and their own nutrition habits, in hope of achieving a more
healthful citizenry for today and the future.
I
The Chairman directed that the Proclamation be properly noticed
to the County School Administration.
IN RE:
RECESS
At 9:20 p.m. Chairman Burton called for a recess.
l~
r
9-28-82
2 () 8
IN RE:
RECONVENEMENT
At 9:36 p.m. Chairman Burton asked that the meeting reconvene
and deviating from the prepared agenda called upon Alfred C. Anderson,
Treasurer of Roanoke County.
I
IN RE:
COUNTY TREASURER
Mr. Alfred C. Anderson called attention to a letter dated
September 21, 1982, addressed to Chairman Burton, in which he proposed that
interest on unpaid personal property taxes commence on July 1st, which is
the first day of the new fiscal year instead of January 1st.
Mr. Anderson continued in explanation of his request by stating
he would 1 ike to start collecting interest on del inquent taxes 30 days
after the due date rather than the now 7 months.
Supervisor Minter moved that the County Attorney prepare an
amendment to the ordinance whereby interest on personal property commence
I
on July 1st fol lowing the due date, and this amendment to be presented to
the Board on October 26th. Motion was carried by a unanimous voice vote.
III RE:
RETIREMENT OF MRS. HELEN STUMP
Supervisor Johnson moved for adoption of the following prepared
resolution in recognition of Mrs. Helen Stump.
f\
RESOLUT I ON NO. 3257.-EXPRESS I NG THE APPREC I AT I O~I OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERV I SORS OF ROANOKE COUllTY FOR THE LOYAL SERV I CE OF MRS.
HELEN STUMP AS A DEPUTY TREASURER OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, Mrs. Helen Stump was first employed as a Deputy Treasurer
of Roanoke County by the former Treasurer of Roanoke County on August 1,
WHEREAS, Mrs. Helen Stump has served either as a Deputy Treasurer
I
1962; and
of Roanoke County or in another responsible financial position in Roanoke
County, having served as a Deputy Treasurer under Alfred C. Anderson,
Treasurer of Roanoke County and as a financial department employee
under John M. Chambl iss, Jr., Director of Finance; and
"--
~
..,
9-20-82
209
WHEREAS, Mrs. Stump has at all times during her employment for
Roanoke County exhibited a selfless dedication and loyalty to Roanoke
County and a genuine concern for the citizens of Roanoke County in her
I
daily contact with the publ ic; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Helen Stump has determined to retire from her employment
with Roanoke County on September 30th, 1982;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County that the Board, on behalf of itself and the citizens of
Roanoke County, does express its most genuine and deepest appreciation
to Mrs. Helen Stump for her long and dedicated service to the County and
its citizens; and
The Board does further wish for Mrs. Helen Stump a long, happy and
most fruitful retirement.
Athena E. Burton, Chairman /s/
May W. Johnson, Supervisor /s/
Robert E. Myers, Supervisor /s/
I
Gary J. Minter, Supervisor /s/
Parry C. Nickens, Supervisor /s/
Adopted on motion of Supervisor Johnson and the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
Supervisors ~lyers, t1inter, Johnson, Nickens and Burton
NAYS:
None
Chairman Burton then presented Mrs. Stump with a $50 Bond in
recognition of her service and expressed her appreciation for outstanding
service to the citizens of the County and good wishes for a happy retirement
I
IN RE:
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Darrell Shell, Director of Parks and Recreation stated he had two
items for the Board's consideration; the first being acquisition and
second item beig acquisition of property in the Oldfield section of Holl ins
i
I
!
I-
I
I~
development of a Neighborhood Park in the Big Hill/Dixie Caverns Area, the
for development of a community park.
~
210
I .
9-28-82
I.
-,
~I:
Mr. Shell presented a written report which reviewed three parcels
of land for consideration, with his recommendation being the 4.501 acres
owned by the Gospel Baptist Church in the Big Hill/Dixie Caverns Area for
development or a park because it was more accessible and could be developed
at the least expense. He also recommended submitting an appl ication for a
grant from the Virginia Commission of OUtdoor Recreation for acquisition and
development of the projects, the grant being 50% of the total cost.
Supervisor Nickens expressed opposition to acquiring more land
at this time. He stated the County already had undeveloped parks and he
felt there was great disparity among the different magisterial districts;
in that each district should be given their fair share of park facil ities.
Chairman Burton stated she felt before the Board could go forward
in designating new park areas she would 1 ike to see a map that indicated
population distribution, and the park facil ities available to that
population area. She continued by stating that there are many communities
located throughout the county and the county should not begin to provide a
park facil ity for each area. She felt the Board needed a more complete
study and evaluation of exactly where the population is and what facil ities
were provided.
Mr. Shell repl ied to Mrs. Burton's comments by stating that an
appl ication for federal monies would require statistics concerning how
many people were in a given area and how far they 1 ived from the proposed
park.
After extensive discussion, Chairman Burton stated she felt the
issue at this time, was if the grant money could be appl ied to the
acquisition of new properties or the development of existing properties,
and in addition, where should the priorities be placed; should it be
placed in the acquisition of new properties or should it be placed in the
development of the currently existing properties.
I
I
I
9-28-82
;~ 1 1 .
Supervisor Johnson remarked that there had been very 1 ittle land
acquisition by the County for parks and the schools are cooperating in
providing recreational facilities.
I
Mr. Shell stated he would 1 ike to proceed with a prel iminary
application to ascertain if there was the possibil ity of federal money,
then return to the Board with a more detailed description of the total
picture of the park situation. He stated the County comprehensive plan did
have a master plan and did project parks and development in the five
magisterial districts. He said the plan had basically been followed and
park areas had been developed with a very small amount of money. He
reminded the Board that the original bond referendum for parks in 1967
was $500,000 for acquisition and building. He felt the County had done a
lot of development with this amount.
Supervisor Myers moved that the County Administrator make
I
appl ication for a grant from the Virginia Commission of Outdoor Recreation
for the acquisition and development of the Big Hill/Dixie Caverns area
and the Oldfield Community Park.
Supervisor Nickens made a substitute motion to have the Parks and
Recreation Director investigate existing park facil ities to determine what
would be an appropriate grant of an appl ication for the further development
of parks that are not up to the prescribed standards.
After some discussion, it was noted that in the absence of any
additional land, there are a large number of requests for park development.
It was also noted that the two site acquisitions in question had been
I
presenting their requests to the Board for a number of years.
Chairman Burton then recognized Ms. Al ice Garrison from the Holl ins
community who expressed her desire for a park in the Holl ins area.
There was some discussion regarding budgeting of funds for
existing parks and the cost of developing existing parks and the locational
disparity in development of County parks.
I
I
IL-
~
"..-
910
,:..;. ,4,.,
9-23-32
Chairman Burton then recognized Ms. Recardo from the Big Hill
area and advised those present that a publ ic hearing was not in session.
Ms. Recardo expressed opposition to the purchase of the Gospel Baptist Church
property, preferring purchase of the Taylor Hills property. She was
reminded by the Board that the Taylor Hills property would be costly to
I
develop.
Chairman Burton then called for a vote on the substitute motion
made by Supervisor Nickens. The motion was defeated by the following
voice vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Nickens and Burton
NAYS:
Supervisors Johnson, Minter and Myers
Supervisor Myers then called for a vote on his original motion
that the County Administrator be directed to apply for a grant for the
acquisition and development of the Big Hill/Dixie Caverns area and the
Oldfield Community Park in the Holl ins area. Motion was defeated by the
I
following roll call vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Myers, Minter
NAYS:
Supervisors Johnson, Nickens and Burton
Supervisor Minter stated he voted 'yesl because he understood that
the citizens preferred a different site, but that rather than not have a
park, he stated he understood they would accept the site recommended by
Mr. Shell.
Supervisor Johnson supported her vote of Inol by stating she
felt the citizens would complain to the Board about the site purchased if
they didn't have a voice in the selection.
I
Supervisor Johnson then moved that the grant be submitted for the
Oldfield Community Park in Holl ins because the citizens had made numerous
requests for such a site over the years.
~I
,.,
9-28-32
213
I
I
I
Supervisor Nickens moved for a substitute motion requesting that
the Parks and Recreation Director draft a grant that would result in the
further development of the Mt. Pleasant Park.
After extensive discussion Supervisor Nickens' motion was defeated
by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
Supervisor Nickens
NAYS:
Supervisors Myers, Minter, Johnson and Burton.
Chairman Burton supported her vote saying the item was deleted
from the current budget and would require SO% funding and the Board did
the Board
not have the money in the spring when / developed the budget and that the
money was not available now.
Supervisor Minter then asked Mrs. Johnson to amend her motion by
including the Big Hill/Dixie Caverns area. Supervisor Johnson repl ied
she felt the people who spoke during the meeting did not want the site
recommended.
Supervisor Johnson's motion to submit a grant for the acquisition
and development of the Oldfield Community Park in Holl ins was adopted
by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Supervisors Myers, Minter,and Johnson
NAYS:
Supervisors Nickens and B~rton
IN RE:
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
Chairman Burton deviated from the prepared agenda by introducing
the item of the offical statement for the sale of $10 Mill ion Public
Improvement Bonds.
John Chambliss, Director of Finance presented for consideration a
report and prepared resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 3258 PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $10,000,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF ROANOKE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA. -
~
r
214
9-28-82
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the
"Board") adopted a resolution on August 25, 1981 requesting the Circuit
Court of Roanoke County, Virginia to order an election on November 3,
1981 (the 'ICourthouse Bond Election"), to take the sense of the qual ified
voters of Roanoke County, Virginia (the IICounty") on the question of
contracting a debt and issuing the general obligation bonds of the
County in an amount of up to $7,000,000 for the purpose of financing
improvements to the County's courthouse facility (the "Courthouse Bonds");
and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 1981, the Circuit Court of Roanoke County,
Virginia ordered that the Courthouse Bond Election be held on November
3, 1981; and
WHEREAS, at the Courthouse Bond Election, a majority of the County's
voters approved the issuance of the Courthouse Bonds; and
WHEREAS, in an Order entered November 13, 1981, the Circuit Court
of the County authorized this Board to proceed to carry out the wishes
of the voters as expressed at the Courthouse Bond Election; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopted a resolution on September 10, 1974
I: November 5, 1974 (the "Sewer Bond Election'I), to take the sense of the
requesting the Circuit Court of the County to order an election on
i
!
!
,
I
;
:
-
:
,
,
..... ,
qual ified voters of the County on the question of contracting a debt and
issuing the general obI igation bonds of the County in an amount of up to
$8,700,000 for the purpose of financing various improvements to the
sewer system of the County (the "Sewer Bonds"); and
WHEREAS, on September 13, 1974, the Circuit Court of the County
ordered that the Sewer Bond Election be held on November 5, 1974; and
WHEREAS, at the Sewer Bond Election, a majority of the County's
voters approved the issuance of the Sewer Bonds; and
WHEREAS, in an Order entered December 30, 1974, the Circuit Court
of the County authorized this Board to proceed to carry out the wishes
of the voters as expressed at the Sewer Bond Election.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
I
I
I
..,
9-28-82
.;) 1 r.")'
1.1 t.
I
1. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to contract a
debt and to issue and se 11 its genera 1 ob 1 i gat i on bonds (the "Bonds") in
the aggregate amount of $10,000,000, of which $7,000,000 shall be issued
for the purposes for which the Courthouse Bonds have been authorized and
$3,000,000 shall be issued for the purposes for which the Sewer Bonds
have been authorized.
2. The officers and agents of the County are hereby authorized and
directed to assist in the preparation, execution and del ivery of appropriate
offering circulars or such other certificates or disclosure documents as
may be necessary to expedite the sale of the Bonds.
3. The Chairman of the Board is hereby authorized and directed to
execute and del iver the final Official Statement (the 'IOfficial Statementll)
in substantially the form submitted at this meeting with such changes as
the Chairman may consider necessary or desirable in connection therewith.
I
The distribution by Horner, Barksdale & Co. of the Official Statement is
hereby authorized. The publication and distribution of a Notice of Sale
on behalf of the County for the sale of the Bonds is hereby authorized.
4. The officers and agents of the County are hereby further authorized
and directed to do all acts required for the full, punctual and complete
performance of all things necessary for this borrowing.
5. Any other action taken by the officers and agents of the County
in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds is hereby approved,
ratified and confirmed.
I
6. The Clerk of the County is hereby authorized and directed to
cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed with the Circuit
Court of the County of Roanoke pursuant to Sections 15.1199 and 15.1212
of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended.
7. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
Adopted on motion of Supervisor Johnson and the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Supervisors Myers, Minter, Johnson, Nickens, and Burton
None
~
,....-
9-28-82
"<Ii ~1'~ 6,-'
:.:.".. .
Chairman Burton remineded all those present the Board would be
meeting on October 13, 1982, to receive bids for the Bond Sale.
Chairman Burton then suggested to the Board that they give serious
I
consideration to adjourning the meeting to the following day.
IN RE:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County Administrator Flanders requested consideration by the Board
to review several emergency items in connection with the opening of the
new Administrative Center.
Mr. Flanders reported the moved to the new center was moving along
as planned with the opening on October 18th. He requested Board approval
to move the operations on the 14th and 15th allowing final settlement on
the weekend of the 16th and 17th, and be ready for business on the morning
I'
On motion of Supervisor Johnson and a unanimous voice vote Mr. Flanders
I
of the 13th.
request was approved.
Mr. Flanders then presented a written report reviewing specific
items authorized or needed and items being developed for County Board and
Building Committee consideration and approval.
After some discussion regarding the copy equipment outlet at a
cost of $585 it was decided to look into other copy equipment.
Regarding emergency items in connection with the opening of the
new Administrative center and on motion by Supervisor Myers, Mr. James E.
Buchholtz, County Attorney, was directed to prepare the appropriate
resolutions for inclusion in the minutes.
I
-
!
,
.....11
..,
9-28-82
217
RESOLUTION NUMBER 3259
On motion made by Supervisor Myers, the General Appropriation Resolution
of Roanoke County, Virginia, adopted June 22, 1982 be, and is the same
I
hereby amended as follows to become effective September 28, 1982:
DESCRIPTION
Class:
Fund:
Project:
Class:
Source:
Class:
Fund:
Object:
AYES:
I
NAYS:
IN RE:
ACCOUNT NUMBER
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
Expenditures
Captial Projects
RCAC
16-6-60000-00000
$4,975
Revenue
Transfer from
General Fund
16-5-51030-00000
4,975
Expenditures
General Operating
Transfer to Capital
Projects
03-6-09316-90016
4,975
Unappropriated
Balance
03-6-99999-99999
(4,975)
Adopted by the following recorded vote:
Supervisors Myers, Minter, Johnson, Nickens and Burton
None
FISCAL AGENT SERVICES FOR THE $10 HILLION BOND SALE
John Chambl iss, Director of Finance presented his report on bids
for the fiscal agent services, suggesting the bid be awarded to the First
and Merchants National Bank, who submitted the low bid and that the co-paying
agent in New York be Banker's Trust Company of New York City, New York.
Supervisor Minter moved that the fiscal agent services be awarded
to the First and Merchants National Bank. His motion was adopted by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
I
NAYS:
IN RE:
Supervisors Myers, Minter, Johnson, Nickens, and Burton.
None
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County Administrator Flanders requested that the Board meet in
executive session.
i-
i
.....
"..-
9-28-82
') 1 8
..:.,.,~ .
Supervisor Minter requested time for discussion of four questions.
supervisor Myers moved that Supervisor Minter's request be allowed and the
motion was adopted by unanimous voice vote.
Supervisor Minter stated his questions were in reference to the
I
proposed industrial park.. He advised he was still receiving questions
from the Bonsack area citizens. His first question was concerning the
$50,000.00 under column "C" under 'Site Acquisitionl of the grant budget.
Administrator Flanders repl ied he could not answer the question as to what
the $50,000 was designated because the item was not on the agenda and he
did not have the information at hand. Supervisor Johnson informed Supervisor
Minter that she had looked at the application very closely and she had
talked to several people about it and $770,000 would be spent. She continued
by stating that $700,000 would come from the grant, if approved, and $70,000
would come from the County in cash or "inkind".
Chairman Burton responded to the question by stating that in
I
preparation of a grant there were all sorts of items that have an assigned
figure and the Board had decided on a matter of pol icy of a grant and not
the specifics.
County Administrator Flanders asked Supervisor Minter under which
column of the grant he was referencing and it was felt after some discussion,
that Supervisor Minter was referring to the rough draft and not the final
grant appl ication and there was a difference.
Supervisor Minter then asked if the $700,000 grant money plus the
local matching of $70,000 would be adequate to fund or perform all necessary
obI igations of the County in development of the park.
I
Mr. Flanders reponded that he was anticipating it would cover most
I of the costs, but he could not guarantee what the County would want to put
I
into the park and it was up to the Board to determine the priorities.
Supervisor Minter asked about the water and sewer costs. He stated
-t- according to his rough draft it was for engineering and design of water and
I
I
lIio...
~
9-28-82
219
sewer. Mr. Flanders informed him the engineering and design would be done
inhouse, the County had the staff to handle this and it was the actual
construction cost for the park that was reflected in the appl ication.
I
IN RE:
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 11 :28 P.M. Supervisor Nickens moved the Board go into executive
session to consider matters pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a), (1), (2), (4),
and (6) of the Code of Virginia. His motion was adopted by a unanimous
voice vote.
IN RE:
RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Motion made by Supervisor Myers to return to open session at
12:30 pm., motion carried.
I
IN RE:
ADJOURNMENT
Supervisor Myers moved the County Board adjourn this session to
Thursday, September 30, 1982, at 2:00 p.m. to the Vinton Town Council
Chambers for continuation of the prepared agenda.
~~~
CHAIRMAN
I
~
~