HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 05-13-91 White
(30506)
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ...... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 13, 1991
7:30 p.m.
AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL
Call to Order -- Roll Call. Ail present.
The invocation will be delivered by Mayor Noel C. Taylor.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America will be led by Mayor Noel C. Taylor.
Election of three Trustees to the Roanoke
Board for terms of three years each~ commencing
and ending June 30~ 1994.
MS. Marilyn C. Curtis, Ms. M. Wendy O'Neit,
M. Turner, Jr., were elected as members of the
School Board.
City School
July 1, 1991,
and Mr. James
Roanoke City
BID OPENINGS
A. Bids for bituminous concrete overlays and pavement
profiling of various streets within the City of
Roanoke.
Four bids were referred to a cor~nittee composed of
Messrs· White, Chairman, Clark and Kiser, for tabula-
tion, report and recom~nendation to Council.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public hearing on the request of Mr. Ivan M. Brewer
that a tract of land located at I026 Gilmer Avenue~
N. W., containing .12 acre, more or less, described as
Lot 2, Block 49~ Map of Rogers, Fairfax and Houston
Addition, Official Tax No. 2111302, be rezoned from CN~
Neighborhood Commercial District, to RM-2~ Residential
Mutti-Family~ Medium Density District~ subject to cer~
rain conditions proffered by the petitioner. Mr. Ivan
M. Brewer, Spokesperson.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30506 on first reading. (7-0)
Public hearing on the request of Messrs. Robert C.
Spencer and John W. Hollingsworth that a tract of land
(1)
Ce
containing approximately 3.3 acres~ located adjacent to
Duke of Glouchester Street and/or Roberts Road~ S.
Official Tax No. 5500110, be rezoned from RM-2,
Residential Multi-Family, Medium Density District, to
C-1, Office District~ subject to certain conditions
proffered by the petitioners. Mr. Michael M.
WaldvogeI, Spokesperson.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30507 on first reading· (7-0)
Public hearing with regard to the proposed Fiscal Year
1991-1992 Community Development Block Grant Budget and
Statement of Objectives. Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City
Manager.
Adopted Resolution No. 30508-51391. (7-0)
CONSENT AGENDA (Approved
ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED
TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE
MOTION IN THE FORM LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DIS-
CUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
C-1
A report of the City Manager requesting that Council
schedule a public hearing for Monday, May 29, 1991, to receive
citizen comments on a proposed change in the Downtown Service
District boundaries.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Concur in request.
REGULAR AGENDA
3. Hearing of Citizens Upon Public Matters:
a. (I)
A co~r~nunication from Mr. Edward S. Grandis, Attorney,
representing Mr. John P. Cone, Jr., appealing a deci-
sion rendered by the Architectural Review Board in
connection with denial of the request of his client to
obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness for property
located at 526 Mountain Avenue~ S. W.
(2) A report of the Architectural Review Board with regard
to the above matter.
Council affirmed the decision of the Architectural
Review Board. (7~0)
Petitions and Con~nunieations: None.
Reports of Officers:
(2)
a. City Manager:
Briefings: None.
Items Recommended
for Action:
1. A report recommending that the Junior League of
Roanoke Valley, Virginia, Incorporated~ be authorized
to display flags from street lighting poles in the
Central Business District of the City for the period
of June 14 to June 24~ 1991.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30509 on first reading· (7-0)
A report recommending authorization to execute an
agreement with the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority in connection with interim construc-
tion financing for the proposed Downtown East Parking
Garage.
Adopted Resolution No. 30510-51391. (7-0)
A report concurring in a report of a bid committee
recorrgnending acceptance of the bid submitted by Wilbar
Truck Equipment, Inc., in the total amount of
$78~250.00, to provide one new recycling truck for use
by the Refuse Collection Department; and appropriation
of funds therefor.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30511-51391 and Resolution No.
30512-51391. (7-0)
A report concurring in a report of a bid committee
recommending acceptance of the bid submitted by
Tribbett's Portable Foods to provide food and beverage
concession services at the River's Edge Sports Complex,
for a term of one year commencing on May 15~ 1991.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30513 on first reading. (7-0)
Director of Finance:
1. A report with regard to appropriation of personnel
lapse for the third quarter of fiscal year 1990~91.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30514-51391. (7~0)
Reports of Congnittees: None.
Unfinished Business: None.
Introduction and Consideration of Ordinances and Resolutions:
The City Manager was requested to confer with the City's Pay
Plan consultant with regard to salaries of certain positions
(3)
which appear to be out of line with comparable positions in the
Pay Plan and submit a report and reco,~endation to Council
during 1992-93 budget study.
The City Manager was requested to investigate the possibility of
retaining a consultant to review areas of ]oint cooperation
where the City and the school system could combine activities in
an effort
a. (1)
to save money.
A certificate of the Director of Finance advising that
funds required for the 1991~92 General Fund, Water
Fund, Sewage Treatment Fund, Roanoke Civic Center
Fund, Internal Service Fund, and Transportation Fund
budgets will be available for appropriation.
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Received and filed.
An Ordinance adopting the annual General Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for tile fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992;
and declaring the existence of an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30515-51391. (7-0)
An Ordinance adopting the annual Water Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992;
and declaring the existence of an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30516-51391. (7-0)
An Ordinance adopting the annual Sewage Treatment Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992;
and declaring the existence of an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30517-51391. (7-0)
An Ordinance adopting the annual Civic Center Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992;
and declaring the existence of an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30518-51391. (7-0)
An Ordinance adopting the annual Internal Service Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992;
and declaring the existence of an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30519-51391. (7-0
(4)
(7) An Ordinance adopting the annual Transportation Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992;
and declaring the existence of an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30520~51391. (7-0)
(8) An Ordinance amending and reordaining Ordinance No.
30035~50790, adopted May 7, 1990, by suspension of
merit increases effective July 1, 1991; and providing
for an emergency.
Adopted Ordinance No. 30521-51391. (7-0)
Motions and Miscellaneous Business:
a. Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor and Members of City
Council.
be
Council Member Bowers submitted a written report of the
Legislative Cor~nittee with regard to a luncheon meeting
which was held with Delegate C. Richard Cranwell on
Thursday~ May 9~ 1991.
The City Attorney was requested to obtain information with
regard to a Sales Tax Rebate Program~ which program is
currently in operation in Alabama and Arkansas for the
benefit of the development of conference centers in said
states~ in order that said information may be presented at
meetings of a subco.vnittee of the House of Representatives
chaired by Delegate David G. Brickey.
The City Manager was requested to contact other local
government officials with regard to the possibility of
holding an informal public meeting within the next 120 days
in order to have continuing dialogue relative to issues and
pro]ects of mutual interest and concern.
Vacancies on various authorities, baards, commissions and
committees appointed by Council.
10. Other Hearings of Citizens:
(~)
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper of the records thereof,
do hereby certify that at a regular
the 13th day of May, 1991, JAMES M.
a member of the Roanoke City School
~ea~s, commencing July i, 1991,
Given under my hand and the
14th day of May, 1991.
meeting of Council held on
TURNER, JR., was reelected as
Board for a term of three
and ending June 30, 1994.
Seal of the City of Roanoke this
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper of the records thereof,
do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council held on
the 13th day of May, 1991, M. WENDY O'NEIL was elected as a
member of the Roanoke City School Board for a term of three
yea~s, commencing July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1994.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke
14th day of May, 1991.
this
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F.
Council of the
do hereby
certify that ac a regular meeting of Council held on
the 13th day of May, 1991, MARILYN C. CURTIS was reelected as a
member of the Roanoke City School Board for a term of three
yea~s, commencing July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1994.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke
14th day of May, 1991.
Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the
City of Roanoke and keeper of the records thereof,
this
City Clerk
MARY F, PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virgm~a 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 199l
$ANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
Pile ~60-236
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
'! am enclosing copy o[ Resolution Ho. 30508-51391 approving the
proposed Fiscal Year 1991-1992 Budget for the Community
Development Block Orant Program, and the Statement of Community
Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds; authorizing
you or the Assistant City Manager to execute and submit the
Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use
of Funds to the United States Department of Rousing and Urban
Development (HUD); and authorizing you or the Assistant City
Manager to execute the requisite Grant Agreement with HUD.
Resolution Ho. 30508-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting hel4 on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely, f/~.._
4.
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc:
Dr. Fred P. Roessel, Jr., Executive Director, Mental Health
Services Board of Directors, 301 Elm Avenue, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24016
Mr. Herbert D. McBride, Executive Director, Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 2624 Salem Turnpike,
N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Mr. Stanley R. Hale, President, Southwest Virginia Community
Development Fund, 401 First Stree%, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24016
Mr. Theodore J. Edlich, III, Executive Director, Total Action
Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley, Inc., P. 0. Box 2868,
Roanoke, Virginia 24001
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30508-51391.
A RESOLUTION approving the proposed Fiscal Year 1991-1992
Budget for the Community Development Block Grant Program, and the
Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use
of Funds; authorizing the City Manager or Assistant City Manager
to execute and submit the Statement of Community Development
Objectives and Projected Use of Funds to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and authoriz-
ing the City Manager or Assistant City Manager to execute the
requisite Grant Agreement with HUD.
WHEREAS, by report dated May 13, 1991, the City Manager has
transmitted to this Council for its review and consideration the
proposed Fiscal Year 1991-1992 Budget for the Community Develop-
ment Block Grant Program and the Statement of Community Develop-
ment Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, and this Council is
desirous of approving these documents and authorizing the City
Manager to execute them for submittal to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development; and
WHEREAS, Council was briefed on this matter on May 6, 1991,
and conducted a public hearing on it on May 13, 1991, and citizen
input was received earlier during hearings on January 15, 1991,
and April 18, 1991.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke as follows:
1. Council approves the Proposed Fiscal Year 1991-1992
Budget for the Community Development Block Grant Program, and the
Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use
of Funds.
2. The City Manager or Assistant City Manager is authorized
to execute and submit the Statement of Community Development
Objectives and Projected Use of Funds to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for final
review and approval.
3. The City Manager or Assistant City Manager is authorized
to execute the requisite Grant
understandings, assurances and
and on behalf of the City.
Agreement with HUD and any and all
documents relating thereto, for
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
May 13, 1991
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
FY 1991-92 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Statement of Objectives submission to HUD for its
review and approval.
I. Background:
City Council was briefed May 6, 1991 on recommended CDBG
program including $1,767,000 new funds from U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
citizen input has been received and considered on three
occasions: January 15, 1991, April 18, 1991 and this
evening, May 13, 1991.
C. Current CDBG fiscal year ends June 30, 1991.
II. Issues:
A. Impact on community development o__f city
B. Funding
C. Timing
D. Citizen participation
III. Alternatives:
ae
Authorize City Manager to submit FY 1991-92 CDBG
Statement of Objectives to HUD for its review and
approval.
Impact on community development in the city would
be positive, continuing programs which Council has
endorsed in the past, and funding new initiatives
to address citizens' concerns.
2. Funding is available from sources as listed:
1991-92 CDBG Entitlement
Estimated Program Income
Funds transferred
Estimated Funds remaining
6/30/91
Non-CDBG matching fund~
TOTAL BUDGET
$1,767,000
$ 628,631
$ 235,000
$2,017,150
$6f866t870
$11,514,651
Timing is important. The CDBG Statement of
Objectives must be submitted as soon as possible to
ensure timely receipt of new entitlement funds.
Citizen participation has been positive on at least
two successive occasions. Citizens' comments,
suggestions and proposals have been considered as a
part of the process to develop the City's final
program and budget.
Do not authorize City Manager to submit FY 1991-92 CDBG
Statement of Objectives to HUD for its review and
approval.
Impact on community development in the City could
be negative if programs are delayed or cancelled.
2. Fundinq would not be an issue.
Timing could be a problem if construction projects,
acquisitions or staff salaries are delayed.
Citizen participation could be negative if concerns
of neighborhood groups and residents are not
addressed.
IV. Recommendation:
It is recommended that City Council adopt Alternative A
thereby authorizing the City Manager to submit the CDBG
Statement of Objectives to HUD for final review and approval,
and authorize the City Manager to execute the grant agreement
with HUD on behalf of the City.
Upon receipt of program and budget approval from HUD, a
report detailing the necessary budget appropriations by
program and line item, as well as contracts necessary to
carry out the FY 1991-92 program, will be presented to City
Council for adoption.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:mtp
2
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Human Resources
Chief of Economic Development
Chief of Community Planning
Building Commissioner
Grants Monitoring Administrator
Executive Director, Mental Health Services
Executive Director, Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing
Authority
Executive Director,
Executive Director,
Fund
Total Action Against Poverty
Southwest Virginia Community Development
B:COUNCIL.RPT
3
NOTICE TO '£~ PUBLIC
CITY OF ROANOKE
1991-1992 COM~4UNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGI~
PUBLIC HEARING
Ail interested groups and individuals are invited to participate
at a public hearing on the 1991-1992 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program for the City of Roanoke on Monday, May 13, 1991 at 7:30
p.m. in City Council Chambers, fourth floor of the Municipal Building.
The CDBG public hearing is being held in order to obtain citizens'
views and comments on the Proposed Statement of Objectives and Proposed
Use of Funds delineated below.
Funds available through Title I of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974, as amended, are estimated to be as follows:
ESTIMATED 1991-1992 SOURCE OF FUNDS
CDBG Entitlement Grant $1,767,000
Program Income $ 628,631
Funds from other CDBG projects $ 235,000
Carry-Over grant funds $2,007,150
Leveraged non-CDBG funds (est) $6,866,870
TOTAL $11,504,651
CDBG funds are made available for the planning and execution of
eligible projects and activities where the majority of the funds
benefit low and moderate income persons. Projects may also aid in the
prevention or elimination of slums and blight, or respond to community
development needs having a particular urgency.
PROPOSED USE OF FUNDS 1991-1992 CDBG PROGRAM YEAR
Public Facilities:
1. Downtown East Parking Garage - $5,254,756 project costs
($1,625,020 CDBG funds) to construct five story parking garage at 25
Church Ave SE to support downtown development and the creation of 75
jobs.
Clearance:
1. Fairfax Clearance - $18,000 past years' CDBG funds to complete
acquisition and demolition of vacant house at 326 Harrison Ave. NW.
2. Demolition - $85,000 ($70,000 CDBG funds) for demolition and
boarding up vacant and hazardous buildings in the conservation and
rehabilitation areas.
Public Services:
1. Emergency Assistance Fund - $70,000 ($45,000 CDBG funds) to
provide immediate assistance to low income city residents to avert
potential disasters resulting in the disruption of their homes and
families.
2. Drug and Alcohol Abuse Council - Staff $35,810 CDBG funds to
provide contractual staff support for the follow-up council recommended
by the City Manager's Drug Strategy Task Force in Roanoke At Risk.
Will coordinate city-wide efforts to combat substance abuse.
3. Parental & Co~nunity Drug Prevention Activity - $13,725 ($6,375
CDBG funds) - activity by Mental Health Services to provide workshops
and drug-free activities to promote drug abuse prevention.
4. TAP Customized Job Training - $88,000 ($25,000 CDBG funds) to
match Job Training Partnership Act funds to provide job training for 60
low/moderate income persons.
5. Adolescent Detoxification - $30,225 CDBG funds to allow Mental
Health Services to purchase bed space in existing medical facilities to
provide medical detoxification from alcohol and other drugs to
low/moderate income teenagers.
Housing Revitalization:
1. Operation Paintbrush - $66,440 CDBG funds to paint the exteriors
of 11 houses of low and moderate income families in Gainsboro, Hurt
Park, Melrose-Rugby, Mountain View and Southeast neighborhoods.
2. Home Ownership Assistance - $424,035 ($224,035 CDBG funds) will
provide low interest loans for low income families, in conservation and
rehabilitation areas, to purchase homes they will rehabilitate with
funds from other sources.
3. Limited Critical Repair $345,980 ($331,980 CDBG funds) - Grants
and no-interest loans to low and moderate income property owners city
wide for critically needed repairs to their homes and rental
properties.
4. Neighborhood Stabilization & Enhancement Program (NSEPtion) -
$767,095 ($267,095 CDBG funds) Program combines strict code enforcement
and rehabilitation incentives to improve houses in concentrated target
areas in Mountain View and Melrose neighborhoods.
5. Mod Rehab SRO Project - $1,103,880 project ($171,445 CDBG funds)
to allow TAP to acquire 5-6 buildings for clusters of single-room
occupancy units for Iow income individuals.
Code Enforcement:
1. Code Enforcement - $69,568 Provides salaries and support costs
for two building inspectors to enforce the Building Maintenance Code in
all conservation and rehabilitation areas.
Historic Preservation:
1. Downtown Historic Design Assistance - $10,175 in past years' CDBG
funds to provide schematic design assistance and technical advice to
eligible H-1 property or business owners in the H-1 Downtown Historic
District.
2. Downtown Historic Facade Improvement Grants - $60,000 project
($30,000 in past years' CDBG funds) - Rehabilitation matching grant
assistance up to $5,000 to property owners in H-1 Downtown Historic
District for facade improvements.
2
3. Stabilize Old First Baptist Church - $48,500 CDBG funds to allow
Preservation Foundation to repair roof, belfry and steeple of historic
church at 407 North Jefferson St.
Economic Development:
1. Coca-Cola 108 Loan Repalament -$529,873 - These funds will pay the
seventh of ten annual repayments to HUD of the $3,015,000 borrowed by
the City for the Coca-Cola UDAG.
2. Shaffer's Crossing Industrial Park - $193,686 CDBG funds for
continuing acquisition and development of Phase I of the designated
Shaffer's Crossing Redevelopment Area.
3. Deanwood/Shaffer's 108 Palament - $191,508 in CDBG funds to pay the
fifth of six annual repayments to HUD of the $922,300 borrowed for
development of the Deanwood Expansion area and Shaffer's Crossing
Industrial area.
4. Deanwood Addition - $12,890 CDBG funds to complete acquisition of
a ten-parcel tract of less than one acre fronting on Orange Avenue near
Williamson Road.
5. NW Supermarket - $677,000 ($85,000 CDBG funds) to allow the
renovation and reopening of a vacant grocery store at 1916 Orange
Avenue N.W.
6. Western VA Revolving Loan Fund - $598,000 ($46,000 CDBG funds) to
allow for a small business revolving loan fund for disadvantaged
portions of greater northwest Roanoke.
7. Small Business Development - $123,000 project ($10,000 CDBG funds)
to the Blue Ridge Small Business Development Center to provide
technical assistance to existing small businesses city wide.
Special Activities by Neighborhoods:
1. L/M Housing Downpayment Assistance - $50,000 CDBG funds to provide
downpayment assistance to iow/moderate income families with the
purchase of ten townhouses to be built by Gainsboro Neighborhood
Development Corporation on Madison Ave NW at Gainsboro Road.
2. Loudon Ave New Houses $143,225 ($23,225 CDBG funds) for site
preparation for Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization to
build three houses in 800 and 900 blocks of Loudon Ave NW.
Planning:
1. Neighborhood Plans - $25,000 CDBG funds - Provides partial costs
for three neighborhood plans in support of the Roanoke Vision
comprehensive plan.
2. Preservation Technical Assistance - $4,809 CDBG funds will provide
technical assistance and guidance to owners and developers of historic
properties in the rehabilitation of older buildings.
3. C~mprehensive Needs Assessment - Youth - $5,000 to fund city-wide
needs assessment for youth and families in order to develop six-year
plan.
3
Program A~ministr&tion:
1. City CDBG Administration - $147,640 ($98,267 CDBG funds) -Provides
operating costs for three member city Office of Grants Compliance, for
monitoring and general administration of the CDBG program.
2. Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority General Administration
$65,856 CDBG funds - Funds for supervisory and general administration
salaries and benefits for RRHA personnel directly related to the
administration and delivery of CDBG projects.
3. City Housing Development Administration - $50,152 CDBG funds -
Provides salaries, fringes and related expenses for administration of
the City's Housing Development Office.
4. Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership - $137,278 CDBG funds - Provides
operating costs for three staff members to assist 22 member
neighborhood organizations and three business associations to plan and
carry out neighborhood development and improvement projects.
5. Housing Marketing/Vacant House Catalog - $12,000 CDBG funds - to
promote neighborhood revitalization generally and housing
rehabilitation particularly. Includes production of an edition of the
"Vacant House Catalog".
6. Operation Bootstrap Administration - $18,969 project ($10,969 CDBG
funds) to provide administrative support for former "Project Self-
Sufficiency", a HUD program to assist single parent families to become
self sufficient.
Unprogra~edFunds:
1. Mini-Grants - $16,600 - ($11,600 CDBG funds) A matching grant
program by the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership to provide financial
assistance to qualified neighborhood organizations undertaking
neighborhood improvement projects.
2. Neighborhood Development Grants $20,000 (10,000 CDBG funds)
funds for larger development grants to neighborhood organizations
ranging from $2,000 to $10,000 to carry out community development
projects.
Of the $3,440,195 CDBG funds expected to be available for projects in
the FY 1991-92 budget, $3,000,266 or 87% will fund activities to
benefit low and moderate income persons.
Copies of the 1991-1992 Draft Statement of Objectives are available for
public review in the City Clerk's Office, 4th Floor Municipal Building,
the Office of Grants Compliance Room 362, Municipal Building, all City
libraries, and the main offices of the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority, Salem Turnpike. Persons who would like to speak at
the hearing are requested to call the City Clerk's office at 981-2541.
Given under my hand this 24th day of April, 1991.
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
NOTICE OF PUBLIC ~R~N~
BEFORE '£~
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
The Roanoke City Council will hold a public hearing on
Monday, May 13, 1991, at 7:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard, in the City Council Chambers, fourth floor of
the Municipal Building, in order to consider the proposed Fiscal
Year 1991-1992 Community Development Block Grant budget and
Statement of Objectives to the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) for funding of such budget.
On May 15, 1991, the City of Roanoke will submit to HUD, the
City's Statement of Community Development Objectives for fiscal
year July 1, 1991 through June 30, 1992. Public meetings were
held on January 15, 1991, and April 18, 1991, to receive citizen
comments on the proposed objectives.
Of the $3,440,195 CDBG funds available for projects in FY
1991-92 budget, $3,000,266 or 87% are expected to benefit low and
moderate income persons or low and moderate income neighborhoods.
More details of the prop6sed activities and budgets are
available in the City Clerk's Office, Room 456, the Office of
Grants Compliance, Room 362, 215 Church Avenue Roanoke, phone 981-
2141, the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and at all
City of Roanoke Public Libraries.
Given under my hand this 24th day of April 1991
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
Display ad to run in the Roanoke Tribune on Thursday May 2, 1991.
Bill to:
Office of Grants Compliance
Room 362, Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Office of the City Manager
May 8, 1991
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Taylor and members of City Council:
This office received a copy of a correspondence which Downtown Roanoke,
Inc., sent to the Mayor's office requesting that Council set a public hearing to
receive citizen comment on a proposed change in the Downtown Service District
boundaries. The City Attorney advises that said public hearing must be adver-
tised in the newspaper not less than seven days prior to the public hearing.
Sufficient information concerning the proposed boundary changes was not
available so that this request could be considered by Council at your most
recent meeting (May 6, 1991). In order to honor Downtown Roanoke's request that
the public hearing be held at your May 20, 1991, regular meeting, Council must
consider this matter on Monday, May 13, 1991. To meet the legal advertising
requirements, the proposed boundary changes must be advertised in the Sunday,
May 12, edition of the Roanoke Times and World News. Again, this is merely to
meet the legal advertising requirement described above and will not in any way
commit Council to approving the proposed boundary changes.
This correspondence is being forwarded to you ahead of time for your infor-
mation and will be listed again on your May 13, 1991, regular agenda under the
consent section. If you should have questions or comments concerning this
matter prior to your Monday, May 13, meeting, please feel free to contact me or
Brian Wishneff.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/EBRJr/ga
cc:
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Mr. Brian Wishneff, Chief of Office of Economic Development
Mr. Jerome S. Howard, Commissioner of Revenue
Mr. Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer
Room 364 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, 5.W. Roanol~e, V~rginia 24011 (703)981-2333
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke. ¥irgim& 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File #249
Mr. Edward S. Grandls
.Attorney
1708 R Street, N.
Washington, D. C. 20009
Dear Mr. Grandis:
Your communication appealing a decision rendered by the
Architectural Review Board in connection with denial of the
request of your client, Mr. John P. Cone, Jr., to obtai~ a
Certificate of Appropriateness for property located at 526
Mountain Avenue, S. W., was before the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a reEular meetin$ held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
On motion, duly seconded and unanlmouRly adopted,
affirmed the declslou of the Architectural Review Board.
Sincerely, p
Mary F. l:arker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
Council
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. John P. Cone, Jr., 522 Mountain Avenue, S. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24016
Mr. W. L. Whitwell, Chairman, Architectural Review Board,
1255 Reffield Street, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Ms. Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural Review Board
A HISTORY OF 526 MOUNTAIN AVENUE, S.W.- ROANOKE, VA.
The dwelling at 526 Mountain Avenue appears to have been built
soon after its neighbor at 522 Mountain Avenue, as they have a simi-
lar facade, roof and window treatment. This would place its con-
struction between the years 1900 and 1910.. Its internal division of
space ia markedly different, however, and strongly suggests that it
was built as a multi-family dwelling. It was built in a working class
neighborhood during the early years of the City, probably to house
railroad workers. At least two additions were constructed in the rear
of the dwelling at a later date, probably to increase the multi-family
capacity of the structure. The two additions were of construction
much inferior to the original building. They housed 3 of the 4 bath-
rooms that were present ia the structure ia 1986.
Over the years, the house has received sub-standard maintenance.
Sometime in the 1920's or 30's, it was covered with asphalt brick to
avoid the cost of exterior painting. The metal roof has been coated
with aluminized asphalt to close leaks. The two additions with the
three bathrooms fell into an extreme state of disrepair. In 1986 the
dwelling was condemned. At that time it had 4 dwelling units within
it, with an additional upstairs room, as evidenced by 5 electric me-
ters at the service entrance.
In 1986, the house was completely rewired to comply with electrical
codes, and refurnished with 2 bathrooms. The other 2 bathrooms had
to be demolished due to their advanced state of disrepair. Finishes
were generally patched up, including the exterior asphalt brick, and
the dwelling was again certified for habitation by the City Building
Department. On October 1, 1990, the house was attacked by an
arsonist, and was once again condemned. The accompanying pictures
indicate the dwelling's present condition.
The proposed rehabilitation of this dwelling will be extensive and
will include the ordinary maintenance of the following elements:
1. Windows: The original window openings, unusually narrow and
tall (2'-8" x 7'-4") are to be maintained. Both sash and frames have
deteriorated beyond repair (see attached letters from the Pella
Window Company). The proposed new windows and frames have a
glass area that is the tallest available for the given width for resi-
dential windows. Louvers, painted to match the window exteriors,
are provided below as a part of the window element, for fresh air,
privacy, and to preserve the unique original window lines.
2. Porch roof: The original porch roof (325 square feet) has had many
leaks over the years which has caused severe rot in both structure
and finishes. Portions of the main building structure have been dam-
aged by water saturation from these leaks, which will be corrected
by the replacement of the porch roof.
3. Siding: The original wood siding was covered with asphalt brick
because of its state of disrepair. The. asphalt brick, which has been in
pla~e for 50 to 70 years, is no longer available, and requires re-
placement. The proposed siding installation would be solid, laminated
Southern yellow pine, of great strength and durability. With proper
back priming and a finish of 3 coats of opaque stain, it would have a
very long life expectancy, assuming proper maintenance.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
April 10, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
DeputyCizyCierk
Mr. Edward S. Grandis
Attorney
1706 R Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20009
Dear Mr. Grandis:
Pursuant to my telephone conversation with Mr. Steven J. Talevi,
Assistant City Attorney, on this date, please be advised that
your petition on behalf of Mr. John P. Cone, Jr., to appeal a
decision rendered by the Architectural Review Board on Thursday,
December 13, 1990, in connection with denial of the request of
your client to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness for pro-
perty located at 526 Mountain Avenue, S. W., will be placed on
the agenda of the Roanoke City Council on Monday, May 13, 1991.
The meeting will convene at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council
Chamber, fourth floor of the Municipal Building.
With kindest regards, I am
Sincerely yours,~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
APPEAL.SB
pc:
Mr. John P. Cone, Jr., 522 Mountain Avenue, S. ~., Roanoke,
Virginia 24016
Mr. W. L. Whitwell, Chairman, Architectural Review Board,
1255 Keffield Street, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Mr. ~ilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
Ms. Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural Review Board
WILBURN C. DIBLING, ,IR.
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24011-1595
April 9, 1991
WILLIAM X PARSONS
MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS
STEVEN J. TALEVI
KATHLEEN MARIE KRONAU
Edward S. Grandis, Esquire
1706 R Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
Re: Property owned by John P. Cone, Jr., at 526 Mountain
Avenue~ S.W.~ Roanoke~ Virginia
Dear Mr. Grandis:
This letter will confirm our conversation of April 5, 1991,
during the course of which I stated that, in my opinion, your
client's appeal was timely filed.
SJT:sm/'
cc:~ary F. Parker,
Erie Gunter,
John P. Cone,
Very truly yours,
Steven J. Talevi
Assistant City Attorney
City Clerk
Planning Department
Jr.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue. S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703) 981o2541
April 9, 1991
SANORA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
Mr. Edward S. Grandis
Attorney
1706 R Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 2000g
Dear Mr. Grandis:
Pursuant to our telephone conversation on Friday, April 5, 1991,
and consistent with my letter under date of April 3, 1991, your
petition to appeal a decision rendered by the Architectural
Review Board on Thursday, December 13, 1990, in connection with
denial of the request of your client, Mr. John P. Cone, Jr.,
to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness for property located
at 526 Mountain Avenue, S. W., will be considered timely filed.
With kindest regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
~FP:ra
APPEAL.5A
pc:
Mr. W. L. Whitwell, Chairman, Architectural Review Board,
1255 Keffield Street, ~. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
Ms. Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural Review Board
LAW OFFICES
RICHARD HUBER
1706 R STREET, NW
\ WA.SHINGTON, DC ~000~
(:~0~) 797-4632
April 5, 1991
Steven J. Talevi
Assistant City Attorney
Office of the City Attorney
City of Roanoke
464 Municipal Building
Roanoke, VA 24011-1595
Re:
Property Owned by John P. Cone, Jr. at
526 Mountain Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Talevi:
Thank you for your letter dated April 3, 1991, acknowledging
receipt of Mr. Cone's petition and cover letter requesting an
appeal of the Roanoke Architectural Review .Board's decision
before the City Council as set forth in section 36.1-642(d).
This letter is a follow-up to our conversation this date.
We look forward to receiving your letter acknowledging that Mr.
Cone's petition and cover letter was timely filed with the City
Clerk an4 will be set down for hearing before the Roanoke City
Council.
Once we receive such letter, my client will consider your
request that he meet with Ms. Gunter, Secretary for the
Architectural Review Board, prior to the hearing on his appeal
before the Roanoke City Council. As discussed in our phone
conversation this date, I assure you that my client will consider
your request seriously and in good faith.
Please note that it has been my client's position from the
outset that certain elements of his plan fall outside of the
scope of review by the Roanoke City Architectural Review Board as
provided in section 36.1-345(b) and will maintain this position
if such a meeting is held with Ms. Gunter, or other
representatives of the Planning Department or Roanoke City
Architectural Review Board.
I recommend that the City Clerk acknowledge in writing the
petition and cover letter as timely filed and to set the appeal
Steven J. Talevi
April 5, 1991
Page 2
down for a hearing before an upcoming City Council meeting. If
my client and the Roanoke City Architectural Review Board are
able to come up with a mutually agreed upon solution of this
matter then it would be a simple matter to delete the appeal as
an agenda item by the Roanoke City Council. I suggest this
approach in meeting your desire that there be a "speedy
resolution" of the current dispute.
Sincerely yours
cc: Mary F. Parker/
John P. Cone
ESG/msc
WILBURN C. DIBLING, JR.
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24011-1595
April 3, 1991
WILLIAM X PARSONS
MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS
STEVEN J. TALEVI
KATHLEEN MARIE KRONAU
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS
Edward S. Grandis, Esquire
1706 R Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
Re: Property owned by John P. Cone, Jr., at 526 Mountain
Avenue, S.W., Roanoke~ Virginia
Dear Mr. Grandis:
Enclosed please find a letter from the City Clerk of the City
of Roanoke, acknowledging the filing of your client's appeal.
In accordance with our conversation of April 2, 1991, I
suggest that your client contact Ms. Evie Gunter of the Roanoke
City Planning Department to discuss revision of your client's
plans. If a meeting can be set up some time within the next
thirty (30) days, the appeal shall be considered timely filed.
In such case, the City Clerk is willing to hold in abeyance your
client's appeal until Ms. Gunter and your client have had ample
opportunity to discuss acceptable revisions to the plans. I am
hopeful that the combined expertise of Ms. Gunter and your client
will result in plans which can be recommended by the Planning
Department to the Roanoke City Architectural Review Board. If
revised plans result from the meeting between Ms. Gunter and your
client which are substantially different from his previous plans,
your client may file a second Application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness with the City Clerk to be considered by the
Architectural Review Board.
As we further discussed, your client bases his appeal upon
Section 36.1-345(b). If Ms. Gunter and your client are able to
meet within the next 30 days, but if plans acceptable to your
client and the Planning Department are not generated within the
next 60-90 days, I do not see any problem with your client argu-
ing his appeal under Section 36.1-345(b) of the City Code as it
is currently written. You should not, however, construe this
letter as an admission on behalf of the City that Section 36.1-
345(b) applies to the present case or that Section 36.1-345(b)
mandates reversal of the Architectural Review Board's decision.
Edward S. Grandis,
April 3, 1991
Page 2
Esquire
In accordance with your request, I am sending a copy of this
letter to Mr. Cone. If your client is interested in reaching an
amicable solution, please have him contact Ms. Gunter at (703)
981-2344.
Very truly yours,
Assistant City Attorney
SJT:sm
Enc~loy~e
ec:~mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Erie Gunter, Planning Department
John P. Cone, Jr.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, $ W ,Room 456
Roanoke, V~rg~ma 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
April 3, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
Mr. Edward S. Grandis
Attorney
1706 R Street, N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
Dear Hr. Grandis:
I wish to acknowledge receipt of your communication which was
filed in the City Clerk's Office on Monday, April I, 1991, on
behalf of Mr. John P. Cone, Jr., to appeal a decision rendered by
the Architectural Review Board on Thursday, December ~3, 1990, in
connection with denial of the request of your client to obtain a
Certificate of Appropriateness for property located at 526
qountain Avenue, S. W.
With kindest regards, I am
Sincerely yours,I~~
Ma ry F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP: ra
APPEAL. 5
pc:
qr. W. L. Whitwell, Chairman, Architectural
1255 Keffield Street, N. ~., Roanoke, Virginia
qr. Wilburn C. Diblinq, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney
Ms. Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural
Review Board,
24019
Review Board
LAW OFFICES
RICHARD HUBER
1706 R STREET, NW
WASHINGTON~ DC 20009
March 28, 1991
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council:
Please accept the enclosed Petition for Appeal (Attachment
1) of the Roanoke City Architectural Review Board's March 10,
1991, formal denial of my client's application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness for 526 Mountain Avenue, S.W., Roanoke,
Virginia.
For the purpose of this appeal my client is asking for
review of the decision that the replacement of siding, window
replacement, and replacement of the front porch roof requires a
Certificate of Appropriateness where the structure is located
within a H-2, Neighborhood Preservation District.
With thanks for your consideration, I remain
Yours truly,
Enclosure
ESG/msc
cc: John P. Cone, Jr.
Attachment 1
VIRGINIA:
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE
IN THE MATTER OF )
)
526 Mountain Avenue, S.W. )
Roanoke, VirGinia 24016 )
)
PETITION FOR APPEAL
This is a Petition for Appeal from a decision of the
Architectural Review Board under Section 36.1-642(d) of the
Zoning Ordinance of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
amended.
as
1. Name of the Petitioner(s): John P. Cone, Jr.
2. Doing business as (if applicable): N/A
Street address of property which is the subject of this
appeal: 526 Mountain Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, VA
Overlay zoning (H-I, Historic District or H-2, NeiGhborhood
Preservation District) of property or properties which is
the subject of this appeal:
H-2
o
Date the hearing before the Architectural Review Board was
held at which the decision being appealed was made:
December 13, 1990
Section of the Code of the City of Roanoke under which the
Certificate of Appropriateness was requested from the
Architectural Review Board (Section 36.1-327, if H-I, or
Section 36.1-345, H-2): § 36.1-345
Description of the request for which the Certificate of
Appropriateness was sought from the Architectural Review
Board: Rehabilitation of existing structure at 526 Mountain
Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, VirGinia.
Grounds for appeal: Subsection (b) of Section 36.1-345
unequivocally states that replacement of siding, window
replacement, and replacement of front porch roof clearly
falls outside of the review of the Architectural Review
Board. Subsection (b) "Nothing in this section shall be
construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance of any
building, structure or historic landmark in the district.
Ordinary maintenance shall include such things as painting,
roof and window repair and replacement, installation of
siding, awnings, or other similar modifications, and other
routine or necessary maintenance for structural
preservation." (Emphasis added.)
Name, title, address and telephone number of person(s) who
will represent the Petitioner(s) before City Council:
Edward S. Grandis, Esq.
1706 R Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 797-4632
WHEREFORE, your Petitioner(s) requests that the action of
the Architectural Review Board be reversed or modified and that a
Certificate of Appropriateness be granted.
Signature of Owner(s)
(If not Petitioner(s)):
John Jr.
(Print or Type)
Signature of Petitioner(s)
or, where applicable,
representative(s):
Name: ~ward S. Grandis, Esq.
(Print or Type)
Name:
(Print or Type)
(Print or Type)
TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK:
Received by: ~' ~
Date: ////~/ )
Remarks to Roanoke City Council, May 13, 1991, by Petie
Brigham, in regard to the appeal by John Cone to overturn
the ARBs denial of a Certifi'./~te of ~ppropriateness for
alterations to a house at 52~Mountaln Avenue in the H2
district
Mayor Taylor and Members of Council:
At your last meeting, ~ay 6, I had the pleasure of
addressing you on the occasion of Mayor Taylor proclaiming
May 12 through 18 as National Historic Preservation Week
in the City of Roanoke. Our city thereby joined hundreds
of cities and towns nationwide in celebrating this
nation's architectural and cultural heritage.
· My ap~earagce before you today, the second day of
Natlonal Hlstorlc Preservation Week, is not as happy an
occasion, for I am here, pitted against one of my
neiqhbors, simHly because the wording of one section of
our-historic z~nlng code is misleading if taken out of the
context of the code as a whole. A property owner, John
Cone, wishes to use that fact to overturn many years of
hard work within the Old Southwest Historic District.
When I spoke to you last week, I left with you a copy
of an article entitled "Districts Make the Difference",
which appeared in Southern Living Magazine in 1989. I hope
that all of you found time to read this. If you will
recall, the article informs us that "Historic District
Zoning was born in 1931 when Charleston, South Carolina,
established the Old and Historic District and a board to
regulate building and restoration. Hundreds of other towns
and cities have followed suit. Preservationists estimate
that nationally there now may be as many as 4,000 zoned
local historic districts regulated by some 2,000
commissions."
. Obvio~sly~ Roanoke is far from alone in having
historic dzstrzcting regulated by an architectural review
board. The difference is only in the fact that Roanoke
lagged several decades behind in historic districting and
certain people just refuse to accept it as a positive
thing. We are faced with an example of that here tonight
with Mr. Cone.
Old Southwest and the City of Roanoke are at a crisis
point in regard to preservation. Section 36.1-345(b) of
the code, addressing "ordinary maintenance" is being
challenged based on language. The Board of Directors of
Old Southwest, Inc., believes that when the writers of the
Code wrote this section on ordinary maintenance, what was
envisioned was maintenance or replacement with LIKE
materials, what we would all think of as routine repairs,
and was certainly NOT intended to address a proposition
such as Mr. Cone's of changing the entire look of a
building. We fail to see how Mr. Cone's plan falls under
the designation of "ordinary maintenance."
We believe that our argument for this interpretation
is backed elsewhere in the code, beginning with Section
36.1-342, which states the INTENT of establishing the H2
District, particularly subsection (b) which clearly states
"Encouraae new construction, or alterations which are
COMPATIBLE with the existina scale and CHARACTER of
surroundin~ DroDertles." Mr. Cone's home at 522 Mountain,
and his proposed renovations at 526 are certainly NOT
c?mpa~ibl~ with either his ?wn blo?k and street or the
district in general. Also, in Section 36.1-347,
"Guidelines for new construction or structural enlargement
or reduction," subsection (b) states "EverY reasonable
effort should be made to MINIMIZE alteration of the
structure or site and its environment." It would seem, at
least to our way of thinking, that Mr. Cone's plans
MAXIMIZE alteration, in total opposition to the stated
intent of the code.
Preservationists, including the hardworking members
of Old Southwest, Inc., have a history of looking out for
the ~r~ater good. In this case, that greater good is the
retaining of the character of the Old Southwest
neighborhood. We must protect - and the Arc~i~e?tural
Review Board and city Council have a resposlblllty to
protect - those property owners who have embraced the
INTENT of the historic zoning code and maintained or
improved their properties accordingly. To allow Mr. Cone
to proceed with th. ese.plans would be a slap in the face to
those who have maintained or restored their homes,
including horizontal wood siding, original windows, and
other elements, as well as to those who have dedicated
literally millions of man-hours to the betterment of Old
Southwest through preservation of its character.
In Mr. Cone's presentation to the Architectural
Review Board in December, he stated very clearly that he
would not want to see the kind of renovation he proposes
used widely in the district. I quote Mr. Cone from the
minutes of that meeting: "I do not recommend vertical
sidin~ for every Dro~ect in this historic district and I
would like, NOT LIKE to see it become a magor component of
this district." We fail to understand why Mr. Cone thinks
HE should be an exception to a rule which he apparently
would like to see everyone else have to follow. Perhaps
Mr. Cone does not understand that if this ARB decision is
overturned by Council in his favor, that decision then
will ~ive license to any owner in the district to do the
same - at least until the Code is rewritten and clarified.
If Mr. Cone should succeed with you in his appeal
toniqht, twenty years of hard work on the part of hundreds
of o~ne~s and residents of Old Southwest will be undone.
City Council will be saying to us, as Mr. Cone is doing,
"your accomplishments mean nothing to us." The thousands
of hours.on the part ~f the City Planning Department and
the Architectural Review Board itself will have all been
for naught. We respectfully ask you to uphold the decision
of the Architectural Review Board tonight.
May 13, 1991
The Honorable Mayor Noel C. Taylor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Taylor and Members of Council:
SUBJECT:
Architectural Review Board
Appeal of John P. Cone, 526 Mountain
Avenue, S. W.
I. Background:
ae
Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was
filed in November, 1990, to remodel the building at
526 Mountain Avenue, S. W., which had been damaged
by fire. (See attached Application and plans.)
Architectural Review Board discussed the application
at their meeting on December 10, 1991. The Board
unanimously denied a Certificate of Appropriateness.
It was the Board's belief that the proposed
construction was not compatible with the
distinguishing characteristics of the surrounding
properties and the district and that the proposed
modifications would significantly alter tb~
contributing architectural features of the existing
structure. The Board advised that the applicant
consider using more typical windows, front porch
elements and other architectural features which are
characteristic of that particular style of house.
There was considerable public discussion on th~
matter at the meeting on 12/10/90. Mr. John Sabean,
523 Mountain Avenue, sent a letter in support of the
request. Mrs. Joel Richert and Ms. Petie Brigham
spoke on behalf of Old Southwest, Inc., in
opposition to the request. An adjacent property
owner, Mr. Jeffrey Parkhill, 532 Mountain Avenue,
spoke in opposition. In addition, three other
individuals spoke in opposition to the request: Mr.
Kent Chrisman, 632 Walnut Avenue; Mr. Robert
Szathmary, 3273 Avenham Avenue; and Mr. Ben Bono,
302 Washington Avenue.
Room 355 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981 2344
Appeal was filed on March 28, 1991. ApDlicant
contends that siding, windows, and front porch roof
modifications are ordinary maintenance and
therefore, are not subject to the Board's purview.
(See attached letter and appeal.)
II. Current Situation:
Staff to the Board maintains that the proposed
modifications to the structure at 526 Mountain
Avenue, includin~ the removal and replacement of
windows of different size and design and porch
reconstruction, are within the purview of the Board.
The proposed modifications are not "ordinary
maintenance;" they are new construction of major
distinguishing architectural features.
In recent weeks, staff has conscientiously worked
with Mr. Cone and his attorney to consider design
alternatives that may be mutually acceptable for
sensitive rehabilitation of the structure. No
resolution was reached. Mr. Cone has indicated that
he desires to rehabilitate the structure in a
contemporary manner, consistent with the structure
at 522 Mountain Avenue. The exterior design choice
is the main issue, not costs.
III. Alternatives:
Affirm the decision of the Architectural Review
Board.
Proposed modifications are under the purview of
the Board. Modifications are not compatible
with the distinguishing characteristics of
surrounding properties and the district.
2. Certificate of Appropriateness not granted.
Applicant may file a substantially different
application for Board consideration at any
time.
Applicant can appeal Council's decision to
Circuit Court.
Reverse the decision of the Architectural Review
Board.
Proposed modifications on appeal are not under
the purview of the Board and do not require a
Certificate; or
Proposed modifications on appeal are under the
purview of the Board, require a Certificate,
and are compatible with surrounding properties
and the district. Certificate of
Appropriateness is granted.
Modify the decision of the Architectural Review
Board.
Board decision may be modified in whole or in
part.
Certificate of Appropriateness granted for
specified work on windows and porch roof.
Applicant can appeal Council's decision to
Circuit Court.
IV. Recommendation:
On behalf of the Architectural Review Board, it is
respectfully requested that City Council affirm our
decision and not grant a Certificate of Appropriateness.
The modifications, as presently proposed, are not
compatible with the distinguishing architectural
characteristics that the district was established to
protect. Furthermore, the modifications, including
the windows, and front porch reconstruction, would
significantly alter the major contributing architectural
features of the existing structure.
mitted,
May 7, 1991
Honorable Mayor Noel C. Taylor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Dear Mayor Taylor and Members of Council:
SUBJECT: Appeal of Architectural Review Board Decision
John P. Cone, 526 Mountain Avenue, S. W.
An appeal of an Architectural Review Board decision is
scheduled for your consideration and final determination at
City Council's meeting on May 13. Prior to receiving the
Board's official report on the matter in the next few days, I
want to make you aware of the.issues in the matter and offer
you an opportunity to discuss it further with me or the
Board's staff, Mrs. Evelyn Gunter, prior to the meeting.
Mr. Cone requested a Certificate of Appropriateness to
remodel a house at 526 Mountain Avenue, S. W. which had been
damaged by fire. He desired to remodel the structure in the
same manner as his property at 522 Mountain Avenue. The
request was unanimously denied by the Board in December of
1990 on the basis that the proposed construction was not
compatible with the distinguishing characteristics of the
surrounding properties and the district. The proposed
modifications would significantly alter the contributing
architectural features of the existing structure. Mr. Cone
has appealed the Board's decision on the basis that his desire
to rehabilitate the structure, particularly with respect to
siding, windows, and porch construction is "ordinary
maintenance" and, therefore, is not subject to the Board's
review and approval. It is our opinion that the modifications
are not "ordinary maintenance," that they constitute new
construction in that major architectural features are being
removed and reconstructed.
You will receive a detailed report on this matter in your
Council package. Please contact Mrs. Gunter at 981-2344 if you
have any questions or if you would like to be briefed on the
matter prior to the meeting.
Room 355 Municipal Bu,ld,ng 215 Church Avenue S W Roanoke V,rcJ~n,a 24011 (703) 981-2344
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
Application is hereby made to the Architectural Review Board of the
City of Roanoke, Virginia, for a Certificate of Appropriateness to
make the modifications or improvements described below to the
property or properties in the H-2, Neighborhood Preservation
District, in the City of Roanoke.
1. Name of Applicant: ~'~ ~ ~
2.
Doing business as
(if applicable):
Address of Applicant: FZ~ ~0Oq+d'~ Ave
Telephone (office):
Location (address) of property or properties for which the
Certificate of~A~ppropriateness is requested:
Attach to this application the names and addresses of owners
of the lots or properties immediately adjacent, to the rear,
and directly opposite the property.
General description of each modification or improvement:
8. Attach scaled draw~nqs, ~otoqrap~s, ma~rials, s~ples and
any other items which detail your re~est.
Will these modifications or improvements be visible from any
public street, alley or right-of-way? ~C ~
10. Is there an application relevant to this property and the
subject modifications or improvements pending or contemplated
before the Board of Zoning Appeals, City Planning Commission
or City CounCil?, If so, specify:
11. Who will represent the applicant before the Architectural
Review Board (representative should have authority to commit
applicant to make changes that may be suggested by the Board)?
Name:
Title or relationship to applicant:
Address:
Telephone:
(zip code)
Signature of Owner:
~ature ij
(please print or type)
Signature of applicant or agent:
(where applicable)
Signature
(please print or type)
TO BE COMPLETED BY ARB STAFF ONLY:
Received by: ~'~//c~'~ ~.~..__-..
Date: /J,//~/~
Scheduled for ARB meeting
on: 13, ./~/~0
/
Zoning: //-~ ./~/~/- ~
Tax No.: ~//~<//~3
Historic Distric~
Zoning: ~-~2---~-
0
Z
IIl lIJ
Z
0
Z
A'~O U N TA I f',J. AV.E
0--~
rn
Z
Fn
N %3~ IO'W - SOLO"
6',
rn- ALLEY {GRAS/EL StJ~FACE]
41 - t '
Il
ii
i
I
I
I
I
--~]
II
I1
I
LAW OFFICES
RICHARD HUBER
r706 R STREET, NW
WASHINGTON, DC =~0009
(20:~) 797-4532
March 28, 1991
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council:
Please accept the enclosed Petition for Appeal (Attachment
1) of the Roanoke City Architectural Review Board's March 10,
1991, formal denial of my client's application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness for 526 Mountain Avenue, $.W. Roanoke
Virginia. ' '
For the purpose of this appeal my client is asking for
review of the decision that the replacement of siding, window
replacement, and replacement of the front porch roof requires a
Certificate of Appropriateness where the structure is located
within a H-2, Neighborhood Preservation District.
With thanks for your consideration, I remain
Yours truly,
Enclosure
ESG/msc
cc: John P. Cone, Jr.
Attachment i ;
VIRGINIA:
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROAROKE
IN THE MATTER OF
526 Mountain Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
PETITION FOR APPEAL
This is a Petition for Appeal from a decision of the
Architectural Review Board under Section 36.1-642(d) of the
Zoning Ordinance of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979)
amended. '
as
1. Name of the Petitioner(s): John P. Cone, Jr.
2. Doing business as (if applicable):
3.
Street address of property which is the subject of this
appeal: 526 Mountain Avenue, $.W., Roanoke, VA
Overlay zoning (H-l, Historic District or }{-2, Neighborhood
Preservation DistriCt) of property or properties which is
the subject of this appeal:'
H-2
Date the hearing before the Architectural Review Board was
held at which the decision being appealed was made:
December 13, 1990
Section of the Code of the City of Roanoke under which the
Certificate of Appropriateness was requested from the
Architectural Review Board (Section 36.1-327, if H-l, or
Section 36.1-345, H-2): § 36.1-345
Description of the request for which the Certificate of
Appropriateness was sought from the Architectural Review
Board: Rehabilitation of existing structure at 526 Mountai~
Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, VirGinia.
Grounds for appeal: Subsection (b) of Section 36.1-345
unequivocally states that replacement of sidina, window
replacement, and replacement of front porch roof clearly
falls outside of the review of the Architectural Review
Board. Subsection (b) "Nothing in this section shall be
construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance of any
building, structure or historic landmark in the district.
Ordinary maintenance shall include such things as Daintina,
roof and window repair and replacement, ~-~tallation of
sidinu, awnings, or other similar modifications, and other
routine or necessary maintenance for structural
preservation." (Emphasis added.)
Name, title, address and telephone number of person(s) who
will represent the Petitioner(s) before City Council:
Edward S. Grandis, Esq.
1706 R Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 797-4632
WHEREFORE, your Petitioner(s) requests that the action of
the Architectural Review Board be reversed or modified and that a
Certificate of Appropriateness be granted.
Signature of Owner(s)
(If not Petitioner(s)):
~me: John P. Co~e, Jr.
(Print or Type)
Signature of Petitioner(s)
or, where applicable,
representative (s):
(Print or Type)
Name:
(Print or Type)
(Print or Type)
TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK:
Received by: ~3' ~
Date: /h/~t
December 14, 1990
Mr. John P. Cone, Jr.
522 Mountain Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24016
Dear Mr. Cone:
Subject: Application for Certificate of Appropriateness
526 Mountain Avenue, SW - No. 90-085
The Architectural Review Board of the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, considered your above-referenced request and a
Certificate of Appropriateness was denied.
If you should have further questions relative to this
matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office at the
number listed below.
Sincerely,
Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary
Architectural Review Board
ESG:mpf
attachment
cc: Mr. Ronald H.
Miller,
Zoning Administrator
Room 355 Mun,c~pa, E~uJld,ng 215 ChurCh Avenue S W Roono~e v,~g,ma 24011 (703 981 2344
March 19, 1991
Mr. John P. Cone, Jr.
522 Mountain Avenue, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Dear Mr. Cone:
SUBJECT: 526 Mountain Avenue, S. W.
In response to a letter dated March 6, 1991, from Mr.
Edward S. Grandis, I am providing you with additional
information regarding denial of your request for a Certificate
of Appropriateness at the December 13, 1990 meeting of the
Architectural Review Board.
To summarize briefly the Architectural Review Board's
review and denial of your request, the Board was guided by the
stated intent of the H-2, Neighborhood Preservation District,
as set forth in Section 36.1-342 of the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended ("City Code"), and by the standards
and guidelines set forth in Section 36.1-347 of the City Code.
Included in the grounds for the denial was the Board's belief
that the proposed construction was not compatible with the
distinguishing characteristics of the surrounding properties
and the district or those visual and spatial qualities that
the H-2 district is established to protect. The Board found
that the proposed modifications would significantly alter the
contributing architectural features of the existing structure
and recommended that further study be given to using more
typical siding, windows, front porch design, and other
architectural features which were characteristic of that
particular style of house. The Board's decision to deny your
request was unanimous.
I hope that this information clarifies the Board's
decision on the matter. You may again be heard before the
Board if you file a substantially different application or
file an amended application which addresses the
recommendations of the Board. Regarding the written notice o5
' the Board's decision, I wish to extend my sincere apologies
for the oversight in not including the reason for denial. It
is our standard policy to include the Board's reasons for
denial of a Certificate when formally notifying an applicant
of such a decision.
Room 355 MUmODO~[~uHOincj 215Church Avenue SW Roanoke V~rg~ma 24011 (703)984 2344
Mr. John P. Con(
March 19, 1991
Page Two
Jr.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions
or would like additional assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Secretary
cc: Ronald H. Miller, Zoning Administrator
Edward S. Grandis, Attorney
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W. Room 456
Roanoke, Wrg~n~a 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H, EAKIN
Deputy CiTy Clerk
File ~178-255
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 30510-51391 authorizing
extension of a temporary line of credit, in an amount not to
exceed $3,825,000.00, to the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority (RRHA) to guarantee interim construction
financing for the construction of a parking garage at 25 Church
Avenue, S. E.; and authorizing the proper City officials to exe-
cute an appropriate Agreement on behalf of the City. Resolution
No. 30510-51391 vas adopted by the Council of the C~ty of Roanoke
at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sinceff%ly,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. Herbert D. · HcBrlde, Executive Director, Roanoke
Redevelopment and Rousing Authority, 2624 Salem Turnpike,
N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Hr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Hr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief of Economic Development
Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30510-51391.
A RESOLUTION authorizing the extension of a temporary line of
credit to the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority
(RRHA) to guarantee interim construction financing for the con-
struction of a parking garage at 25 Church Avenue, S.E.; and
authorizing the proper City officials to execute an appropriate
Agreement on behalf of the City.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. A temporary line of credit, in an amount not to exceed
$3,825,000.00, be extended to RRRA in order to guarantee interim
construction financing for the construction of a parking garage
at 25 Church Avenue, S.E., the terms and conditions of such line
of credit being more particularly set forth in the City Manager's
report to Council dated May 13, 1991.
2. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager and the
City Clerk are hereby authorized on behalf of the City to execute
and attest, respectively, an Agreement for the above purpose with
RRHA, upon such terms and conditions as are deemed appropriate by
the City Manager and in accordance with the recommendations con-
tained in the report of the City Manager, dated May 13, 1991,
said Agreement to be in such form as is approved by the City
Attorney.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
May 13, 1991
Honorable Mayor Noel C. Taylor
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Taylor and Council Members:
Subject: Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority -
Downtown East Parking Garage Construction Financing
I. Background:
City Council authorized an agreement and lease agreement
with the Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority (RRHA) on
November 26~ 1990 for a proposed Downtown East Parking
Garage in the 200 block of Church Avenue, S. E.
Parking garage is necessary in order to replace parking
which has been displaced by the construction of the Norfolk
and Western Office Building in downtown east. RRHA has a
legal commitment with Crestar Bank to have the parking
garage completed no later than October 1992.
Total pro.]ect cost is estimated to be $5,750~000 (see
Attachment A). Previous land sales by RRHA, interest, and
payments-in-lieu of taxes will provide approximately
$1,925,000. Therefore, approximately $3~825,000 will be
needed to complete the project.
II. Current Situation:
Plans and specifications have been prepared and RRHA has
advertised for bids to be received on May 21, 1991.
Construction could begin in June.
Financial advisors for RRHA have recommended that permanent
financing through the sale of bonds occur closer to the time
(approximately January 1992) such funds will actually
actually be required and to minimize interest cost.
III. Issues:
A. Construction financing.
B. Legal authority.
C. Timing.
- 2 -
IV. Alternatives:
City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an
agreement with RRHA in a form approved by the City Attorney,
and authorize the Director of Finance to temporarily extend
a line of credit from idle Capital Funds for the purpose of
ensuring interim construction financing not to exceed
$3~825t000 for the proposed Downtown East Parking Garage.
The City would temporarily provide funds only after the RRHA
has expended its cash and if the bonds are not issued when
planned. No temporary City funding is anticipated, however,
if it was necessary, the City would be repaid for any
expenditure promptly upon the sale of bonds for permanent
financing.
Construction financing would be assured in the most
cost effective manner.
Legal authority exists for City Council to provide this
financial support to RRHA.
Timing will allow RRHA to award a contract for
construction of the parking garage to meet the deadline
of October 1992.
City Council not authorize the City Manager to enter into an
agreement with Pd{HA, and not authorize the Director of
Finance to extend a line of credit from the Capital Fund,
for the purpose of providing interim construction financing
not to exceed $3~825t000 for the proposed Downtown East
Parking Garage.
Financing would be more expensive and the RPJ{A would
have to seek other financing before awarding a contract
for the parking garage. Any such alternate financing
would most certainly add to the overall cost of the
project and could delay construction.
2. Legal authority would be moot.
TiminK would likely be delayed and RRHA may not have
the parking garage complete by the October 1992
deadline.
- 3 -
V. Recommendation:
City Council approve Alternative "A", thus allowing the City
Manager to enter into an agreement with P~, in a form approved
by the City Attorney, and authorize the Director of Finance to
extend a line of credit to the ~ from existing idle Capital
Funds, to be repaid from the sale of the bonds for permanent
financing, for the purpose of providing interim financing not to
exceed $3,825~000 for the proposed Downtown East Parking Garage.
~'~Respectf~ubmitted
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH: WF~_C :pr
cc:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Chief of Economic Development
Executive Director, P~
Grants Monitoring Adiminstrator
ATTACHMENT A
Downtown East Parking Garage
Project Cost Estimate
April 1991
Land acquisition (actual)
Fees, A&E
legal, bond issuance,
construction interest
Construction
base bid
alternates
$ 139,860
403,000
157,140
4,150,000
900,000
Estimate total
$5,750,000
Funds available
previous land sales
payment-in-lieu of taxes
interest earnings
$1,525,000
354,726
45,274
$1,925,000
$3,825,000
Interim construction financing
MARY F. PARKER
C~ty Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue. S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virgins 2401 !
Telephone: (703}9R1-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C,ty Clerk
File ~472-282
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 30512-51391 accepting the
bid of Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc., for one new recyling truck,
along with a performance bond, in the total amount of $78,250.00.
Resolution No. 30512-51391 was adopted by the Council of the C~ty
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F9 Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc:
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Donald E. Reaton, Manager, Refuse Collection
Ms. Laura R. Wasko, Recycling Coordinator
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virgm~a 2401 !
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File ~472-282
Mr. Henry F. Hillman
,President
Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc.
8100 Alban Road
Springfield, Virginia 22150
'Dear Mr. Hillman:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 30512-51391 accepting the
bid of Wilbar Truck Equipment, lac., for one new recyling tru~k,
along with a performance bond, in the total amount of $78,250.00.
Resolution No. 30512-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eno.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANORA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
File ~472-282
Mr. C. V. Hall, III
Vice President - Operations
Solid Waste Equipment Company
306 South Leadbetter Road
Ashland, Virginia 23005
'Dear Mr. Hall:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 30512-51391 accepting the
bid of Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc., for one new recyling truck,
along with a performance bond, in the total amount of $78,250.00.
Resolution No. 30512-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like
to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above-
described vehicular equipment. ~
Sincerely, f~tA-~--.
Mary F. Perker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eric.
MARY It. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke. Virg~ma 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy Ozy Clerk
File ~472-282
Ms. Deborah M. Beck
'Corporate Secretary
Cavalier Equipment Company
P. O. Box 12507
Roanoke, Virginia 24026
Dear Ms. Beck:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 30512-51391 accepting the
bid of Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc., for one new recyling truck,
along with a performance bond, in the total amount of $78,250.00.
Resolution No. 30512-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like
to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above-
described vehicular equipment. ~
Sincerely,
City Clerk
MFP:ra
MARY F. PARKER
CiTy Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue. S w, Room 456
Roanoke. Virgima 24011
Telephone: (703) 981-2S41
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy Oty Clerk
File ~472-282
Mr. Robert Bankert
.Vice-President
Mid-State Equipment
P. O. Box 249
Buchanan, Virginia
24066
Dear Mr. Bankert:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 30512-51391 accepting the
bid of Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc., for one new recyling truck,
along with a performance bond, in the total amount of $78,250.00.
Resolution No. 30512-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a resular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like
to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the above-
described vehicular equipment. ~
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30512-51391.
A RESOLUTION providing for the purchase of a recycling
truck, upon certain terms and conditions, by accepting a bid made
to the City for furnishing and delivering such equipment; and
rejecting other bids made to the City.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. The bid of Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc., made to the
City offering to furnish and deliver to the City, f.o.b.,
Roanoke, Virginia, one (1) new recycling truck, along with per-
formance bond, for the sum of $78,250.00, is hereby ACCEPTED.
2. The City's Manager of General Services is authorized and
directed to issue the requisite purchase order therefor, incor-
porating into said order the City's specifications, the terms of
said bidder's proposal, and the terms and provisions of this
resolution.
3. The other bids made to the City for the supply of such
equipment are hereby REJECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to
notify such other bidders and to express the City's appreciation
for their bids.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke. Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
File #60-472-282
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30511-51391 amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 1990-91 General Fund
Appropriations, providing for transfer of $54,193.00 from General
Fund Contingency Equipment Replacement to Refuse Collection, and
appropriation of an additional $28,512.00 to Regional Solid Waste
Bond Recycling, in connection with purchase of one new recycling
truck for use by the Refuse Collection Department. Ordinance No.
30511-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at
a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Donald E. Keaton, Manager, Refuse Collection
Mr. George C. Suead, Jr., Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IN TH~ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30511-51391.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections
the 1990-91 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for
emergency.
WHEREAS, for
Government of the
exist.
of
the usual daily operation of the Municipal
City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1990-91 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Public Works $ 19,134,541
Refuse Collection (1) ............................. 4,375,647
Non-departmental 12,903,932
Contingency - General Fund (2) .................... 605,068
Revenue
Accounts Receivable - Regional
Solid Waste Board Recycling (3) ...................
Miscellaneous Revenue
Miscellaneous (4) .................................
28,512
828,561
511,717
1) Other Equipment
2) Equipment
Replacement
Contingency
3) Regional Solid
Waste Board
Recycling
4) Miscellaneous
(001-052-4210-9015)
(001-002-9410-2202)
(001-1257)
(001-020-1234-0859)
$ 82,705
54,193)
28,512
28,512
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing,
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
this
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
May 13, 1991
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
SUBJECT:
Bids on Recycling
Truck, Bid Number
91-3-88 and
Appropriation of
Funds
This is to concur in the Bid Committee's report
relative to the above subject and recommend it to you for
appropriate action.
Respect fully Submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
May 13, 1991
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
SUBJECT:
Bids on Recycling
Truck, Bid Number
91-3-88 and
Appropriation of
Funds
I. Background
December 17, 1990 City Council designated
Funds in the Capital Maintenance and
Equipment Replacement Program to provide for
the purchase of a Recycling Truck. Included
in those designated Funds is appropriate
radio equipment and a car vision system.
March 21, 1991 specifications were developed
on the recycling truck and along with request
for quotations, were sent to sixteen (16)
vendors currently listed on the City's bid
list. A public advertisement was also
published in the Roanoke Times and World
News.
Radios, necessary for appropriate
communication, are available under an
existing price agreement for the cost of
$1,240.00 per radio. Two radios are needed,
for the recycling truck and one for a refuse
truck approved by Council on April 1, 1991.
Car vision system for the recycling truck, a
system that allows the truck driver to see
what is behind the truck, is available from a
sole source supplier for the amount of
$1,975.00.
Bids, for the recycling truck, were received
after due and proper advertisement until 2:00
p.m. Friday, April 12, 1991, at which time
all bids so received were publicly opened and
read in the Office of the Manager of General
Services.
Recycling Truck
Bid Number 91-3-88
Page 2
II.
III.
IV.
Current Situation
Six (6) bids were received for the recycling
truck. Bid tabulation is attached.
All bids received, were evaluated in a
consistent manner by representatives of the
following departments:
Refuse Collection
Fleet Maintenance
General Services
The lowest bid on the recycling truck, as
submitted by Mid State Equipment took
exception to the performance bond requirement
which is substantial and cannot be waived as
an informality.
The lowest bid meeting sDecification~ is
submitted by Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc.,
provide one (1) new recycling truck,
including bond, for a total cost of
$78,250.00.
to
Issues
A. Need
B. Compliance with Specifications
C. Fund availability
Alternatives
Council accept the lowest responsible bid, as
submitted by Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc. to
provide and deliver one (1) new recycling
truck in accordance with City specifications
for the total amount, including bond, of
$78,250.00. Council also authorize the
appropriation of Funds to purchase radios and
a car vision system for the combined cost of
$4,455.00.
Recycling Truck
Bid No. 91-3-88
Page 3
Need - The recycling truck will provide
for the continuation of an efficient and
effective recycling program· The radios
and car vision system provides for
effective communications and safety·
Compliance with specifications. The bid
from Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc. on the
recycling truck, the radios and the car
vision system meets all required City
specifications.
Fund availability - Total cost of the
recycling truck, including radio and
vision system, is $81,465. A grant
sponsored by the Regional Solid Waste
Management Board will provide 35% of the
Funds needed, or $28,512. The remainder
of the Funds ($54,193) necessary for
purchase of the recycling truck with
radio and vision system, and the
additional radio for a refuse vehicle
are designated in the General Fund
Contingency Equipment Replacement
Account·
Reject Bids on Recycling Truck and not
appropriate Funds for radios and car vision
system·
Need - The continuation of the recycling
program would not be accomplished in the
most effective and safest manner·
Compliance with Specifications would not
be an issue in this alternative·
Fund availability - designated Funds
would not be expended with this
alternative·
Recycling Truck
Bid No. 91-3-88
Page 4
Recommendation
Council concur with Alternative "A" - accept
the lowest responsible bid as submitted by
Wilbar Truck Equipment, Inc. and authorize
the issuance of a purchase order for one (1)
new recycling truck for a total cost,
including performance bond, of $78,250.00.
Transfer $54,193.00 from General Fund
Contingency Equipment Replacement account
number 001-002-9410-2202 to Refuse Collection
account 001-052-4210-9015 to provide for the
purchase of recycling truck, two {2) radios
and car vision system.
Co
Appropriate an additional $28,512.00 to
Refuse Collection account 001-052-4210-9015
and establish an accounts receivable for that
amount.
Committee:
Respectfully Submitted,
William F. Clark
E. Keaton
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
· ,-tU 0
m~ e~
~ m
0
0
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
m ~ o
~ 0
0
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, $ W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virgm~a 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy Oty Clerk
Pile f60-184
Mr. Joel M. $chlanger
,Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30514-51391 amending and
reordalning certain sections of the 1990-91 General Fund
Appropriations, providing for adjustments in salary budgets with
regard to fiscal year 1990-91 third quarter persounel laPse.
Ordinance No. 30514-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eric,
pc: Mr.
Mr.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of
Management and Budget
IN T-~ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, viRGINIA
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30514-51391.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 1990-91 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal
Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1990-91 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained to read as follows, in part:
A o riations
City Manager (1) ................................... $
Contingency - General Fund (2-3) ...................
Billings and Collections
Treasurer (7)
Commissioner
Sheriff (9)
Jail :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Com-onwealth,s Attorney (11)
General Services (12)
Director, Administration and Public Safety (13)...
Personnel Management (14) .........................
Risk Management (15) .........
Police - Investigation (17)..
Police - Patrol (18) .............................
Police - Services (19) ...........................
Police - Training (20) ...........................
Fire - Administration (21) .......................
Fire - Operations (22) .............................
Fire - Trainin? (23) ....
Emergency ~edical Services (25).
Grounds Ma ntenanc. (26) ........
490421
791 931
864 217
405 494
155 211
670 999
735 390
1,326 816
3,818 811
671,361
248,500
111,847
570,024
365,750
228,980
2,461,267
6,133,371
1,362,315
202,415
278,022
10,046,375
129,032
213,271
786,346
3,032,675
Pa~ks and Recreation (27) $
Street Maintenance (29)..
Communications (30) ................................
Refuse. Collection (31)..
Building Maintenance (33) .........................
Community Planning (34) ...........................
Director, Human. Resources (35)
Social Services - Income Maintenance (37) .........
Social Services - Services (38) ...................
Social Services - Employment Services (39).
Libraries (40) ....
1,261 963
67] 449
2,477 768
1,488 780
4,289 422
862 708
2,974 594
356.360
159.385
156.209
3,529.017
6,078426
667 144
1,871 721
13~,047
Revenue
Commonwealth,s Attorney (42)
Sherif (43) .......... : .....
Commissioner of Revenue (44)
Treasurer (45) ..........
Jail ....
(46) ...............................
Employment Services (48).
513,924
1,089 030
209,647
256,139
3,591.702
1,927.765
321693
524 523
1) Regular Employee
Salaries
2) Personnel Lapse
3) Supplemental
Budget-Employee
Compensation
4) Regular Employee
Salaries
5) Regular Employee
Salaries
6) Regular Employee
Salaries
7) Regular Employee
Salaries
8) Regular Employee
Salaries
9) Regular Employee
Salaries
10) Regular Employee
Salaries
11) Regular Employee
Salaries
12) Regular Employee
Salaries
(001-002-1211-1002) $ 2,050
(001-002-9410-1090) 272,383
(001-002-9410-2207) (139,713)
(001-004-1232-1002) ( 8,259)
(001-005-1240-1002) (14,202)
(001-010-1310-1002) 267
(001-020-1234-1002) ( 3,169)
(001-022-1233-1002) ( 3,591)
(001-024-2140-1002) 617
(001-024-3310-1002) (10,564)
(001-026-2210-1002) ( 4,384)
(001-050-1237-1002) 98
13) Regular Employee
Salaries
14) Regular Employee
Salaries
15) Regular Emgloyee
Salaries
16) Regular Emgloyee
Salaries
17) Regular Employee
Salaries
18) Regular Employee
Salaries
19) Regular Employee
Salaries
20) Regular Employee
Salaries
21) Regular Employee
Salaries
22) Regular Employee
Salaries
23) Regular Employee
Salaries
24) Regular Employee
Salaries
25) Regular Emgloyee
Salaries
26) Regular Employee
Salaries
27) Regular Employee
Salaries
28) Regular Employee
Salaries
29) Regular Emgloyee
Salaries
30) Regular Employee
Salaries
31) Regular Employee
Salaries
32) Regular Emgloyee
Salaries
33) Regular Employee
Salaries
34) Regular Employee
Salaries
35) Regular Employee
Salaries
36) Regular Employee
Salaries
37) Regular Employee
Salaries
38) Regular Employee
Salaries
39) Regular Employee
Salaries
(001-050-1260-1002)
(001-050-1261-1002)
(001-050-1262-1002)
(001-050-3111-1002)
(001-050-3112-1002)
(001-050-3113-1002)
(001-050-3114-1002)
(001-050-3115-1002)
(001-050-3211-1002)
(001-050-3213-1002)
(001-050-3214-1002)
(001-050-3520-1002)
(001-050-3521-1002)
(001-050-4340-1002)
(001-050-7110-1002)
(001-052-3410-1002)
(001-052-4110-1002)
(001-052-4130-1002)
(001-052-4210-1002)
(001-052-4220-1002)
(001-052-4330-1002)
(001-052-8110-1002)
(001-054-1270-1002)
{001-054-3330-1002)
(001-054-5313-1002)
(001-054-5314-1002)
(001-054-5316-1002)
777
8,910
1,466
( 1,504)
25,629)
4,489
23,488)
5,459
8,629)
7,656)
4
5,966)
11,941
7,526)
910
11,308)
15,558)
8,012)
3,520)
6,533)
10,275)
1,881
17)
54
29,633)
31,974)
6,959)
40) Regular Employee
Salaries
41) Regular Employee
Salaries
42) Commonwealth,s
Attorney
43} Sheriff
44} Commissioner of
Revenue
45) Treasurer
46} Jail
47) PA Admin. and
Staff Develop-
ment
48) Employment
Services
49) Purchased
Services
(001-054-7310-1002)
(001-072-2110-1002)
(001-020-1234-0610)
(001-020-1234-0611)
(001-020-1234-0612)
(001-020-1234-0613)
(001-020-1234-0651)
2,348
461
4,384)
617
1,795)
1,584)
10,564)
(001-020-1234-0676) ( 23,706)
(001-020-1234-0681) ( 6,959)
(001-020-1234-0683) (25,579)
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing,
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
this
City Clerk.
May 13, 1991
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Joel M. Schlanger
Personnel Lapse
requested
Office.
The attached budget ordinance adjusts salary budgets as
by the accompanying report from the City Manager's
JMS/kp
Attachments
~nterdepartmental Communication
Office of Management and Budget
Date: May 8, 1991
To: Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
From: Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager thru
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
SUbject: Personnel Lapse Report for Third Quarter of
Fiscal Year 1990-91
The following figures represent the status of personnel
lapse for the General Fund following the third quarter of
Fiscal Year 1990-91. As you recall, the personnel lapse
balance in the Internal Service Fund was eliminated after the
second quarter of Fiscal Year 1990-91.
Total Budgeted Personnel Lapse
First Quarter Personnel Lapse Reduction
First Quarter Revenue Adjustment
Net First Quarter Reduction
Second Quarter Personnel Lapse Reduction
Second Quarter Revenue Adjustment
Adjustment
Net Second Quarter Reduction
Personnel Lapse Balance Remaining
after Second Quarter
Recommended Third Quarter Personnel
Lapse Reduction
Recommended Third Quarter Revenue
Adjustment
Transfer of Supplemental Budget -
Employee Compensation Account
Net Third Quarter Reduction
Personnel Lapse Balance Remaining
after ~hird Quarter
$284,534
_(77,797}
161,061
206,624
(73,954)
189 713
(8597,453~
208,857
118 233
($272,383)
272,383
$o
A spreadsheet which details recommended departmental
personnel lapse transactions is attached. Please note that
there are several POSitive lapse adjustments recommended to
offset increased Personal services expenditures as follows:
1. ~ ~ ~ ~_9~_Q - Seven minority student
internships were provided during the summer of FY 1990-
91, with the funding scheduled to come from personnel
lapse accrued from other departments. This recommended
positive lapse adjustment fully funds these positions.
P°lice-Patro~ i $4,489 and Police-Trainin i $5,459 -
These positive lapse adjustments merely reflect the
continual shifting of manpower between the various
Police cost centers to meet constantly changing work
demands. There are offsetting decreases in the other
Police cost centers.
Emergency Medical Services : ~ _ This positive
lapse adjustment is necessary to fund additional
temporary wage expenses necessary when a full-time
permanent employee was called to active duty in the
Persian Gulf, and to adequately fund overtime expenses
for this cost center.
All other positive adjustments shown are relatively
small amounts necessary to adequately fund regular
due to personnel situations that constantly change salaries
attrition and merit reviews, due to
Attachment
cc: Barry L. Key, Manager, Management and Budget
3ersdnnel Lapse Status Report - Third Quarter FY 1991-92
Derrc ~
Deflamnen! Name
3rd Qua/ret
1110 City Council
1120 City Clerk
1211 City Manager
1212 Management and Budget
1220 City Attorney
1231 Director of Finance
1232 Billings & Collections
1233 Commissioner..of Revenue
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(8,2Se.00)
(3,591.00)
1234 Treasurer
, (3,18g 00)
1235 'Real Estate Valuation 0.00
1237 General Services
1240 _Municipal Auditing
1250 Director, Utilities & Operations
1250 Director, Administration & Public Safety
1261 Personnel Management
1262 .Risk Management
t270 .Director, Human Resources
1280 Director, Public Works
~8.00
(14,202.00)
0.00
777.00
8,910.00
0.00
(17.00)
0.00
~ 310 Electoral Board
267 00
!110 Circu t Court
461.00
!111 Clerk of Circuit Court '
'.140 Sheriff
150 Law Library
:210 .Commonwealth's Attorney
3111 Police - Administration
3112 Police - Investigation
3113 Police - Patrol .......
3114 Police - Services
3115 Police - Training
3211 Fire - Administration
3212 Fire - Technical Servioes
3213 _ Fire - Operations
3214 Fire-Training
3310 Jail
0.00
817.00
0.00
(4,3~4.00)
(1,504.00)
(911.00)
4,488.00
(23,46a.o0)
5.45~.00
(a,e29.oo)
o.oo
(7,6.00)
4.00
(lO.Se4.oo)
Rev~rtue
(1,795.00)
(1,584.00)
617.00
(4,384.00)
(lO,Se4.oo)
=repared by OMB - 4/22/gl
)ersohnel Lapse Status Report - Third Quarter FY 1991-92
:~320 Juvenile Detention Home 0.00
)330 Outreach Detention 54.00
)350 Juvenile Probation House 0.00
)360 Crisis Intervention 0.00
)410 Building Inspection (11,308.00)
)520 Emergency Services (5,966.00)
3521 Emergency Medical Services 11,941.00
3530 Animal Control 0.00
H 1D Street Maintenance (15,558.00)
t130 Com m unication s (8,012.00)
~160 Signals and Alarms 0.00
t210 Refuse Collection
- (20,493 00)
t220 _Custodial Services
(e,533.00)
t310 Engineering 0.00
t330 Building Maintenance , (10.275.00)
t340 -Grounds Maintenance ' '
· (7 s2e.oo)
~311 Social Services- Administration '
0.00
~313 Social Services - Income Maintenance
~314 Social Services - Services
~316 Social Services - Employment Services
~340 Nursing Home
~110 Parks and Recreation
'310 Libraries
3110 _Community Planning
3120 Economic Development
~123 Grants Compliance
(29,633.00)
(31,974.00)
(6,959.0O). (e,959.oo)
0.~
910.00
0.~
0.~
0.00
0.~
0.00
(23,70e.oo)
(25,579.0o)
'TOTALs'~ eENE~'FU'ND'
[
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue. S W.Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)98%2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy CiTy Clerk
Pile ~60-18
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
"At the regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, May 13, 1991, you were requested to confer with the
City's Pay Plan consultant with regard to salaries of certain
positions which appear to be out of line with comparable posi-
tions in the Pay Plan, and submit a report and recommendation to
Council during 1992-93 budget study.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, Ci~.C/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc:
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. Kenneth $. Cronin, Manager, Personnel Management
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S w, Room 456
Roanoke, Virgima 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
File ~467
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
At the regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, May 13, 1991, you were requested to investigate the
possibility of retaining a consultant to review areas of joint
cooperation where the City and the School System could combine
activities in an effort to save money.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAg
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc:
Mr. James M. Turner, Jr., Chairman, Roanoke City School
Board, P. O. Box 1689, Salem, Virginia 24153
Dr. Frank P. Tots, Superintendent of Schools, P. O. Box
13145, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
Mr. Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs and
Clerk of the Board,. P. O. Box 13105, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
CITY OF ROANOKI~. VA.
May 6, 1991
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Joel M. Schlanger
I, Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance of the City
of Roanoke, in accordance with paragraphs (h) and (i) of Section
25.1 of the Charter of the City of Roanoke, do hereby certify
that funds required for the 1991-92 General Fund, Water Fund,
Sewage Treatment Fund, Civic Center Fund, Internal Service Fund
and Transportation Fund budgets will be available for
appropriation.
JMS/pac
MARY F. PARKER
Ot¥ Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Churcr~ Avenue. S W, Room 456
Roanoke. ¥irgm*a 24011
Telephone; (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File #60
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
.City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
-I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30515-51391 adoptin$ the
annual General Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the
fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and endinB June 30, 1992, in
the total amount of $152,090,022.00. Ordinance No. 30515-51391
was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eric.
pc: Mr.
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Mr. William P. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
Mr. James M. Turner, Jr., Chairman, Roanoke City School
Board, P. O. Box 1689, Salem, Virginia 24153
Dr. Frank P. Tota, Superintendent of Schools, P. O. Box
13145, Roanoke, Viriinia 24031
Mr. Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs and
Clerk of the Board, P. O. Box 1310~, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
of
1991, and ending June 30,
emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the
follows:
1.
for the
IN -f-~ COUNCIL OF '-'~ CIT~ OF ~OANO~, ~INIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30515-51391.
AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual General Fund Appropriation
the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1,
1992; and declaring the existence of an
Council of the City of Roanoke as
That all money that shall be paid into the City Treasury
General Fund in the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991,
and ending June 30, 1992, shall constitute a General Fund and
that as much of the same as may be necessary be, and the same is
hereby appropriated to the following uses and purposes, to-wit:
General Property Taxes
Other Local Taxes
Permits, Fees and Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Revenue from Use of Money and Property
Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth
Grants-in-Aid Federal Government
Charges for Current Services
Miscellaneous
Education:
State School Funds
State Sales Tax (ADM)
Federal School Funds
Other School Revenue
Total Revenue
$20,936,624
7,401,730
1,581,272
2 429 090
$ 49,932 300
38,694 556
471 000
656 000
909 000
23,953 143
27 000
4,930 207
168 100
32.348,716
Council
city Clerk
City Manager
Office of Management and Budget
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Office of Billings and Collections
Commissioner of Revenue
Treasurer
Real Estate Valuation
Board of Equalization of Real Estate
General Services
Municipal Auditing
Director of Utilities and Operations
Director of Administration and Public Safety
Personnel Management
Risk Management
Director of Human Resources
Director of Public Works
Registrar
Circuit Court
Clerk of Circuit Court
General District Court
Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court
Juvenile and Domestic Court Clerk
Sheriff
Law Library
Commonwealth's Attorney
Police - Administration
Police - Investigation
Police - Patrol
Police - Services
Police - Training
Fire - Administration
Fire - Technical Services
Fire - Operations
Fire - Training and Safety
Jail
Juvenile Detention Home
Outreach Detention
Youth Haven I
Crisis Intervention Center
Building Inspection
Emergency Services
Emergency Medical Services
Animal Control
Street Maintenance
Street Paving
Communications
Snow Removal
Street Lighting
Signals and Alarms
$ 242 903
2,673 663
5,983 696
1,365 068
185 729
275 520
248 244
8,770,878
125,216
$ 218,179
276,892
488,033
293,156
520,830
1,540,947
836,081
712,738
694,092
718,299
21,500
215 680
343 318
125 489
116 727
535 435
368 525
124 403
111 614
183 148
140 417
854 483
33,607
148,213
25,901
1,332,681
160,000
700,617
10,451,059
9,419,858
4,073,838
631 164
159 693
333 681
372 104
666 726
170 022
980 420
248 616
2,295 922
650 000
1,501 644
101 590
850 605
653 314
-- N (continued)
Recycling
Refuse Collection
Custodial Services
Engineering
Building Maintenance
Parks and Grounds
Roanoke city Health Department
Mental Health and Retardation
citizens Services Committee
Total Action Against Poverty
Social Services - Administration
Income Maintenance
Social Services - Services
Employment Services
Temporary Food Assistance
State and Local Hospitalization
Nursing Home
Roanoke City Public Schools
Recreation
City Market
Contributions
Libraries
Community Planning
Economic Development and Grants
Grants Compliance
Community Education
Cooperative Extension Program
Fringe Benefits
Miscellaneous
Transfer to Other Funds
Contingencies
Personnel Lapse Contingency
Total Appropriations
$ 434,971
3,677,991
6,149,800
576,370
14.103
$ 145,282
3,827,458
890,283
1,199,386
2,798,455
2,941,445
1,023,055
306,588
285,000
141,948
10,853,235
111,442
1,244,153
64,300,458
1,177,324
11,373
791,301
1,853,043
373,945
292.040
49373
44111
54855
917 000
110 500
10,603 811
1,216 897
(875,000)
$152.090.022
2. That all salaries and wages covered by the Pay Plan,
paid from the appropriations herein, shall be paid in accordance
with the provisions thereof;
3. That the Director of Finance be, and he is hereby
authorized and directed to transfer between accounts such
appropriations for salaries and wages for the labor force as may
be necessary to cover cost of labor performed by one department
for another;
4. That this Ordinance shall be known and cited as the
1991-92 General Fund Appropriation Ordinance; and
5. That in order to provide for the usual daily operation
of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and
this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after
July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue. $ W. Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deouty City Clerk
File ~60-468B
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
'City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30516-51391 adopting the
annual Water Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the
fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992, in
the total amount of $4,889,?90.00. Ordinance No. 30516-51391 ~as
adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eric o
pc:
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. M. Craig Sluss, Manager, Water Department
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IN 'r~u~ COUNCIL OF 'r-~ CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30516-51391.
AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Water Fund Appropriation of
the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991,
and ending June 30, 1992; and declaring the existence of an
emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. That all money that shall be paid into the City Treasury
for the Water Fund in the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and
ending June 30, 1992, shall constitute a Water Fund and that as
much of the same as may be necessary be, and the same is hereby
appropriated to the following uses and purposes, to-wit:
Operating
Non-Operating
Total Revenue
$4,412,419
116.000
$4,528,419
APPROPRIATIONS
General Operating Expense
Water Pumping Station and Tanks
Water Purification
Depreciation
Capital Outlay
$1,766,887
599,792
841.318
$3,207,997
758,793
923,000
Total Appropriations $4,889,790
2. That all salaries and wages covered by the Pay Plan,
paid from the appropriations herein, shall be paid in accordance
with the provisions thereof;
3. That this Ordinance shall be known and cited as the
1991-92 Water Fund Appropriation Ordinance; and
4. That in order to provide for the usual daily operation
of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and
this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after
July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
city Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virg~ma 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy Oty Clerk
File ~60-27
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30517-51391 adopting the
~annual Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke
for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30,
1992, in the total amount of $6,969,000.00. Ordinance No.
30517-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at
a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincere. ly,
CMC/AA~
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eric,
pc: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Steven L. Walker, Manager, Sewage Treatment Plant
Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IN 9'aK COUNCIL OF 'r'~ CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30517-51391.
AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Sewage Treatment Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year
beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992; and declaring
the existence of an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council
follows:
of the City of Roanoke as
1. That all money that shall be paid into the City Treasury
for the Sewage Treatment Fund in the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992, shall constitute a Sewage
Treatment Fund and that as much of the same as may be necessary
be, and the same is hereby appropriated to the following uses and
purposes, to-wit:
Operating
Non-Operating
Total Revenue
$6,693,000
276 000
$6.969,000
Administration
Lateral Maintenance and
Replacement
Maintenance
Operations
Laboratory
Depreciation
Interest Expense
Total Appropriations
$1,360,893
1,446,943
762,557
2,059,237
248 748
$5,878,378
1,037,372
$6.969,000
That all salaries and wages covered by the Pay Plan,
paid from the appropriations herein, shall be paid in accordance
with the provisions thereof;
3. That this Ordinance shall be known and cited as the
1991-92 Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation Ordinance; and
4. That in order to provide for the usual daily operation
of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and
this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after
July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File ~60-192
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
· City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30518-51391 adopting the
annual Civic Center Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for
the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992,
in the total amount of $2,061,730.00. Ordinance No. 30518-51391
was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eno.
pc:
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Adminlstratiou and
Public Safety
Mr. Bob E. Chapman,.Manaser, Civic Center
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IN THE COUNCIL OF 'l'~l~ CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30518-51391.
AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Civic Center Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year
beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992; and declaring
the existence of an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. That all money that shall be paid into the City Treasury
for the Civic Center Fund in the fiscal year beginning July 1,
1991, and ending June 30, 1992, shall constitute a Civic Center
Fund and that as much of the same as may be necessary be, and the
same is hereby appropriated to the following uses and purposes,
to-wit:
Operating
Non-Operating
Total Revenue
$ 968,100
725 566
Operating Expense
Promotional Expense
Depreciation
Capital Outlay
Total Appropriations
$1,572,305
$1,643,666
368,064
50 000
2. That all salaries and wages covered by the Pay Plan,
paid from the appropriations herein, shall be paid in accordance
with the provisions thereof;
3. That this Ordinance shall be known and cited as the
1991-92 Civic Center Fund Appropriation Ordinance; and
4. That in order to provide for the usual daily operation
of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and
this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after
July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W,Room 456
Roanoke, Virgima 24011
Tele~ohone: (703)901-2541
May 15, 1991
SANORA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File #60
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
'I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30519-51391 adopting the
annual Internal Service Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke
for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30,
1992, in the total amount of $7,360,372.00. Ordinance No.
30519-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at
a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,.f~
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAB
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enco
pc: Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IR T~ COUNCIL OF 'j"-~ CIT~ OF I~OK~, VTRGINIA,
The 13th Day o£ ~ay, 1991.
No. 30519-51391.
AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Internal Service Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year
beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992; and declaring
the existence of an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council
follows:
of the City Of Roanoke as
That all money that shall be paid into the City Treasury
for the Internal Service Fund in the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992, shail constitute an
Internal Service Fund and that as much of the same as
necessary be, and the same is hereby appropriated
following uses and purposes, to-wit:
may be
to the
Operating
Non-Operating
Total Revenue
$7,414,008
- 40.000
$7,454,008
City Information Systems
Materials Control
Management Services
Utility Line Services
Fleet Maintenance
Fringe Benefits
Personnel Lapse
Contingency Reserve
Total Appropriations
$2,096,495
211,714
449,796
2,708,400
1,853,967
40,000
(100,000)
$7,360,372
2. That all salaries and wages covered by the Pay Plan,
paid from the apgropriations herein, shall be 9aid in accordance
with the provisions thereof;
3. That this Ordinance shall be known and cited as the
1991-92 Internal Service Fund Appropriation Ordinance; and
4. That in order to provide for the usual daily operation
of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and
this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after
July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virg~nm 24011
Telelmone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANORA H. EAKIN
Deputy City Clerk
File ~60-331
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30520-51391 adopting the
annual Transportation Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke
for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30,
1992, in the total amount of $1,779,813.00. Ordinance 'No.
30520-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at
a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Opera=ions
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IN TH~ COUNCIL OF T~ CITY OF ROANOKe, VIRgINIA,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30520-51391.
AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Transportation Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year
beginning July 1, 1991, and ending June 30, 1992; and declaring
the existence of an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. That all money that shall be paid into the City Treasury
for the Transportation Fund in the fiscal year beginning July 1,
1991, and ending June 30, 1992, shall constitute a Transportation
Fund and that as much of the same as may be necessary be, and the
same is hereby appropriated to the following uses and purposes,
to-wit:
Operating
Non-Operating
Total Revenue
$1,156,470
Downtown East Parking Garage
Williamson Road Parking Garage
Market Square Parking Garage
Church Avenue Parking Garage
Tower Parking Garage
Transfer to Other Funds
Total Appropriations
$ 71,404
255,075
178,828
298,052
637,938
338 516
2. That all salaries and wages covered by the Pay Plan,
paid from the appropriations herein, shall be paid in accordance
with the provisions thereof;
3.
1991-92
That this Ordinance shall be known and cited as the
Transportation Fund Appropriation Ordinance; and
That in order to provide for the usual daily operation
of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and
this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after
July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clark
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S W. Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)981-2541
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File #18-184
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
'Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attac~ing copy of Ordinance No. 30521-51391 amending and
reordalnln 9rdlnance No. 30035-50790, adopted on Monday, May 7,
~1990', by s pension of merit increases, effective July 1, 1991.
Ordinance 30521-51391 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
Sincerely, ?~_
Mary F.~arker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc:
C. Minnix, Acting Director of Real Estate
Mr. James M. 'Turner, Jr., Chairman, Roanoke City School
Board, p. O. Box 1689, Salem, Virginia 24153
Dr. Frank p. Tote, Superintendent of Schools, p. O. Box
13145, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
Mr. Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs and
Clerk of the Board, F. O. Box 13105, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
The Honorable Jerome S. Howard, Jr., Commissioner of Revenue
The Honorable Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer
The Honorable Donall S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney
The Honorable Patsy TesCerman, Clerk of the Circuit Court
The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, City Sheriff
Ms. Nadlne
Valuation
Mr. Robert H. Bird, Municipal Auditor
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of UtilSties and Operations
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Ruman Resources
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., .Director of Administration and
Public Safety
Mr. Kenneth S. Cronin, Manager, Personnel Management
Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 13th Day of May, 1991.
No. 30521-51391.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Ordinance No. 30035-50790,
adopted May 7, 1990, by suspension of merit increases effective July
1, 1991; and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by
1. Ordinance No.
amended as follows:
the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
30035-50790, adopted May 7, 1990, is hereby
Effective July 1, 1991, all merit increases
shall be suspended as to classified officers
and employees of the City. Merit increases
shall be reinstituted only at such time and
upon such terms and conditions as shall be
established by this Council through duly
adopted ordinance.
2. Except as amended by this Ordinance and except as to any in-
consistency with this ordinance, Ordinance No. 30035-50790 is hereby
reordained.
3. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the
municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist and this ordi-
nance shall be in force and effect on and after July 1, 1991.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, $ W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Telephone: (703)981-254!
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~ty Clerk
File #79-308-137
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling,
.City Attorney
Roanoke, Virginia
Jr.
Dear Mr. Dibling:
'I am attaching copy of a report of the Council's Legislative
Committee with regard to a luncheon meeting which was held with
Delegate C. Richard Cranwell on Thursday, May 9, 1991, which
report was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a resular
meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
You were requested to obtain information with regard to a Sales
Tax Rebate Program, which program ts currently in operation in
Alabama and Arkansas for the benefit of the development of con-
ference centers in said states, in order that said information
may be presented at meetings of a~subcommittee of the Rouse of
Representatives which is chaired by DeLegate David G. Brlckey.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Council Member David A. Bowers
MARY F. PARKER
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, $ W, Room 456
Roanoke, Virglma 2401 ~
Telephone: (703) 981-254!
May 15, 1991
SANDRA H. EAKIN
Deputy C~zy Clerk
File ~137-132
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
,City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
~ am attaching copy of a report of the Council's Legislative
Committee with regard to a luncheon meeting which was held with
Delegate C. Richard Cranwell on Thursday, May 9, 1991, which
report was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, May 13, 1991.
You were requested to contact other local government officials
with regard to the possibility of ~ holding an informal public
meeting within the next 120 days in order to have continuing
dialogue relative to issues and projects of mutual interest and
concern. ~
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Council Member Davi& A. Bowers
Office of the Council
May 10, 1991
Honorable Mayor & Members of
Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles & Gentlemen:
I am pleased to report, as Chairman of your
Legislative Committee, that Mayor Taylor, Councilman
White, Councilman Harvey, X Parsons from the City
Attorney's Office, and Mary Parker from the City Clerk's
Office joined me in a luncheon with Delegate Dick Cranwell
from Vinton on Thursday, May 9, 1991. I am pleased to
report to you that this informal gathering, in my opinion,
was a most productive meeting between Mr. Cranwell, one
of the legislators' most influential delegates, and your
Legislative Committee.
We talked at length at the luncheon regarding the
possibility of the Commonwealth assisting us in the building
of the Hotel Roanoke conference center complex. I tried
to explain to the Delegate our interest in having a rebate
calculated for any sales tax increases generated to the
Commonwealth by the building of the complex, and the increased
sales incurred by conventioners attending the facility.
Mr. Cranwell was very interested in that, and asked that
we contact the Virginia Municipal League and gather additional
information regarding the rebate programs which were reportedly
in operation in Alabama and Arkansas for the benefit of the
development of conference centers in those respective states.
Accordingly, by this letter, I would respectfully request
that we ask our City Attorney to gather additional informa-
tion regarding this rebate procedure from the Virginia
Municipal League, or any other source, so that we might pre-
sent it to Delegate Cranwell for his review. The Delegate
indicated that he would like to have Delegate Brickey begin
subcommittee hearings on the issue prior to the 1992
General Assembly. Delegate Cranwell also indicated that
the Commonwealth may be interested in allowing Roanoke area
citizens to temporarily increase their own sales tax by
one-half cent in order to help pay for the facility. I know
that this idea is popular with some members of City Council,
but I would caution that any efforts to raise the one-half
cent sales tax should probably be passed across the board
to all valley residents, and not just city citizens, as the
refurbishing and reopening of the Hotel Roanoke and the build-
ing of the conference center and trade and convention center
Room 456. MuniciRalSuildmg 215 Chu~¢hAvenue. S W Rodnoke. Virginia 24011 (703)981-2541
Honorable Mayor & Members of
Roanoke City Council
May 10, 1991
PAGE TWO
is really the number one economic development and public
works priority for the entire valley.
The Delegate and Members of your Legislative Committee
also discussed the status of the Blacksburg/Roanoke "smart"
highway. We emphasized that although this project was in
the VDOT six year plan, only a couple hundred thousand dollars
has been proposed for engineering studies. Mr. Cranwell
indicated that, although he was in favor of the project,
he felt that it would take a concerted legislative effort
for specific funding in order to have this project begun.
Finally, Delegate Cranwell offered to mediate any
kind of group meeting between local area elected officials
so that we could begin a dialogue on issues and projects
of mutual benefit to us all. I know that Elmer Hodge, the
County Administrator, had earlier suggested getting everyone
in "one big room" in order that we might have some informal
discussion. I certainly hope that the Council will give
this item additional deliberation so that we can make some
definite proposals to our administrators to contact the
county and other governments in the valley to arrange some
kind of informal gathering this summer. Any time that you
get more than two elected officials together, it is by law
a "public meeting." However that does not mean that conduct
of the meeting has to be so formal. We conducted this
lunch with Delegate Cranwell as a "public meeting" but with
the help of Mary Parker who was taking minutes, we were none-
theless able to have an informal, free flowing and wide
ranging discussion with the Delegate. I would suggest that
we might need to do this same kind of meeting with other
elected officials from governments in the valley in order
to establish a working relationship first, prior to actually
working on any specific issue.
In summary, I thought that our meeting with Delegate
Cranwell was extremely worthwhile to the future of our City
and the valley, and I look forward to giving you further
reports in the future regarding contacts with the other area
legislators.
Best personal regards to you all.
DAB/jfk
Sincerely,
~fd A. ~ow%rs
Office of the Council
May 10, 1991
C. Richard Cranwell, Delegate
111 Virginia Avenue
Vinton, VA 24179
Dear Dick:
Just a brief note to express my thanks to you for
joining the members of the Roanoke City Council Legislative
Committee for lunch at the Charcoal Steak House on Thursday,
May 9, 1991 to discuss issues of interest to the citizens
of the valley.
I want to thank you also for accepting our good
faith effort, and responding in kind, in an attempt to
develop dialogue among the elected officials of the valley,
who serve in the legislature or on our various local Boards
and Councils. I believe Roanoke City Council will be very
interested in trying to arrange some kind of informal get
together with other local elected officials sometime this
summer.
Additionaly, I know that the Council will be very
interested in the assistance of you and the other legislators
from our area in obtaining financing for our Hotel Roanoke/
Virginia Tech conference center.
Again, thank you for joining us for a most productive
luncheon meeting.
Best personal regards.
Sincerely,
DAB/jfk
David A. Bowers
Councilman
cc: Members Roanoke City Council
ROOm 4S6, Muni(ipalBuildm(j 215 Chu,(hAver~ue. S W Roaloke Virginia 24011 (70])981-2541
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFIC[
May 13, 1991
FOR FURTHER INPORMATION CONTACT:
Steven A. McGraw
Chairman, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
772-2005, 982-O011, or 384-6506
FOR IMMEDIATE R~LEASE
The resent offer by Delegate Richard Cranwell to become a
mediator between Roanoke County 'and Roanoke City is much
appreciated.
At the Beard of Supervisors annual retreat on January 11 of
this year, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted a motion
designating me to work with ths Roanoke County staff to come up
with a proposed regional plan. After approval by the Board, the
plan would be presented to the other local governments. Since that
time, I h~ve discussed this possibility with Virginia Tech
President McComas, and have talked with several Roanoke City
Counoil members, one even as recently as this past Tuesday.
Several major issues face the Roanoke Valley. Only through
tong-range strategio planning and working together can we obtain
(more)
MRY-1~-i991 12:2~ ROANOKE COUNTY 703 772 2889 P.03
the best results for all our citizens. Although the consolidation
vote indicated that the majority of Roanoke County citizens were
not interested in combining governments, all elected officials
still have the obligation to work as efficiently and as
cooperatively as possible to provide the best service delivery at
the lowest cost tu all Roanoke Valley residents.
Specific issues of concern involve water supply, sewer system
improvements, landfill construction and
other possibilities as renovations to
environs.
The Spring Hollow Reservoir project
to be a joint valleywide effort. However,
implementation, and such
the Hotel Roanoke and
was originally intended
it now looks as if this
will be a project funded only by Roanoke County.
spending nearly $30 million to expand the
Treatment Plant, Roanoke City and Roanoke
to~ether and discuss what would be the best
concerned.
Certainly before
Carvins Cove Water
County should come
alternative for all
Sewer li~e improvements and increased capacity at the Regional
Sewage Treatment Facility are pres~ing n~ed~ a~ well. There is
still a need for further discussion between the various localities
involved.
The Regional Landfill will close out in the next two years
and the new facility at Smith Gap would solve our Solid waste
problems for the next sixty to one hundred years. Roanoke County
has suggested that the localities emulate the successful ~greement
between Roanoke City and Roanoke County regarding the regional
(more)
M~Y-1~-1991 12:24 ROANOKE COUNTY 70S ?72 2089 P.04
airport, and adopt a similar structure for the Landfill.
Negotiations are continuing on this recorm~endation.
The Hotel Roanoke is an integral part of downtown Roanoke and
the Roanoke Valley. All localities in this area should consider the
possibility of contributing towards the repairs and improvements
and other facility oonstruction in the immediate environs of Hotel
Roanoke. However, this is an issue which would involve the
possibility of County dollars going into another locality. Perhaps
the best way to ensure that our citizens have a voice in this
decision would be to allow them to vote for between one and two
million dollars in a separately stated question which could be
placed on a potential bond referendum for Roanoke County this fall.
I will be making these proposals to the Roanoke County Board
of Supervisors at our meeting on Tuesday, May 14, 1991. I hope
that Roanoke City Council will also begin to consider these
possibilities.
Long-range strategic planning with Delegate Cranwell serving
as the coordinator, and working with the offices, facilities and
resources of virginia Tech may be the answer to solving this
regional dilemma. If all parties agree that Virginia Tech could
conduct a valleywide efficiency study and mount a long-range
strategic plan for the region, then all localities could
participate on a per capita basis.
(end)