No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 08-24-92MUSSER 31156 REGUIAR WEEKLY SESSION ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL August 24, 1992 7:00 p.m. AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL ARE PLEASED TO HOIJD TI-HS NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL MEETING AT MONTEREY F.I.FaMg. NTARY SCHOOL. THE COUNCIL WISHES TO EXPRESS APPRECIATION TO THE CHAIRPERSON AND MFMBERS OF THE SCHOOL BOARD, THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCEOOLS, AND THE PRINCIPAL AND HIS STAFF AT MONTEREY F.I .FMF~NTARY SCHOOL FOR THEIR ASSISTANCE AND HOSP1TAI.H'Y. Call to Order Roll Call. All present. The Invocation was delivered by The Reverend H. Kelly Dampeer, Pastor, Oakland Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United St~te-s of America was led by Mayor David A. Bowers. Introduction of Virginia Skyline Girl Scout Council ~'presen~ves who participated in the International Friendship Camp in England from July 30, 1992 to August 19, 1992. Mayor Bowers. 2. CONSENT AGENDA C-1 C-2 (APPROVED 7-0) ALL MATrERS LISTF. D UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE MAYOR AND MF. MBERS OF CITY COUNCIL AND W~ J. BE ENACTg. D BY ONE MOTION IN THE FORM, OR FORMS, I.IgTED BRIOW. TI-IF. RE Will. BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THE ITEM WHJ~ BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERF. D SEPARATF. LY. ITEM C-3 WAS RFMOVF. B FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WAS CONSIDERED WITH 5.B.1. Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday, April 6, 1992, Monday, April 13, 1992, and Monday, April 20, 1992; the Public Interviews of School Board candidates held on Tuesday, April 21, 1992; and the regular and special meetings held on Monday, April 27, 1992. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Dispense with the reading thereof and approve as recorded. A communication from Mayor David A. Bowers requesting an Executive Session to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.1- 344 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Concur in request for Council to convene in Executive Session to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (A)(1), Code of Virginia Q.-- 3 ~ ~ ~[-' 5. I0(.t.950)' as amended. C-4 Qualification of ~'s. Bonnie A. Nethery as a member of the Roanoke Public Library Board fo~ a term ending June 30, 1995. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file. 2 C-5 Qualification of Council Member Delvis O. McCadden as a member of the Fifth Planning District Commission, to fill the unexpired term of William White, Sr., ending June 30, 1995. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file. REGULAR AGENDA 3. I-IF. ARING OF C1TIT:F. NS UPON PUBLIC MATI'ERS: ao Request to address Council with regard to an update on activities and accomplishments of Downtown Roanoke, Incorporated, during the past year, and plans for the coming year relative to ongoing downtown Roanoke development efforts. Mr. Franklin D. Kimbrough, Executive Director, Spokesperson. Received and filexl. Request to address Council on behalf of a delegation of Roanoke City employees with regard to concerns relating to the revised Pay Plan and the recently announced focus group process. Mr. Robert L. Henderson, Spokesperson. No action was taken. 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board requesting appropriation of funds to certain school grant accounts. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31156-082492. (7-0) 5. REPORTS OF OFFICERS: a. CITY MANAGER: 3 BRIEFINGS: None. ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION: A report recommending acceptance of a grant from the Virginia Department of Forestry to provide for establishment of an Elm Tree Injection Program; and appropriation of funds in connection therewith. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31157-082492 and Re~olution No. 31158--082492. (7--0) o A report recommending execution of Real Estate Options with owners of properties selected for the Home Purchase Assistance Program, located at 2757 Hoover Street and 2930 Glenrose Avenue, N. W. Adopted Ordinance No. 31159-082492. (7-0) A report recommending appointment of a bid committee to receive bids for Carvins Cove Improvements, Phase I, and report back to Council, rather than receiving said bids at a regular meeting of City Council. Concurred in the recommendation and appointed Meaars. William White, Sr., Chairperson, Kit B. Kiser and William F. Clark. A report recommending authorization to enter into an amended interjurisdictional agreement with the County of Roanoke to provide for quarterly reporting of pretreatment activities, as stipulated in the Consent Order with the State Water Control Board. Adopted Resolution No. 31160-082492. (7-0) 4 A report recommending acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators, and concurrence in the purchase of two Monroe Model 935DX copiers at the State contract price of $6,050.00 each, for a total cost of $106,118.00; and appropriation of funds in connection therewith. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31161--082492 and Resolution No. 31162-082492. (7-0) A report recommending award of an engineering services contract to Mattem & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors, in the amount of $118,000.00, to perform preliminary work for Phase I, Replacement of Walnut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River; and transfer of funds in connection therewith. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31163-082492 and Resolution No. 31164-082492. (7-0) A report recommending acceptance of the bid submitted by Cues, Inc., in the amount of $27,910.00, for providing pipe inspection system equipment in order to visually inspect the internal condition of sanitary sewer lines. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 31165-082492 and Resolution No. 31166-082492. (7-0) Adopted Resolution No. 31167-082492 authorizing execution of a written agreement with the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority relating to the performance of c. er~n Community Development Block Grant program activities to be undertaken by the City during Program Year 1992-1993. (7-0) b. CITY ATTORNEY: A report recommending amendments to the City Code to the dangerous and vicious dog ordinance. o Adnnted Ordlnan~e No. 31168-082492. (7--0) A report recommending certain amendments to the City Code in order to enhance collection of the prepared food and beverage tax. Adopted Ordinance No. 31169--082492. (7-0) A report recommending certain amendments which will enhance collection of the business license, real estate and personal property taxes. .~ Adopted Ordinance No~. 31170-082492 and(3117,1--082492 (7-0) ~- e.~x~e -- -~_~ee-~a- ~,, REPORTS OF COMM1TFF F S: ao A report of the committee appointed to tabulate bids received for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courmey Avenue, N. E., and Hildebrand Road, N. W., recommending award of a contract to John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated, in the amount of $32,971.94; and transfer of funds in connection therewith. Council Member William White, Sr., Chairperson. Adol~d Budget Ordinance No. 31172-082492 and Ordinnn~e No. 31173-082492. (7-0) A report of the Water Resources Committee with regard to donation of City-owned property to the Greater Raleigh Court Civic League, Inc. Council Member Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairperson. Adopted Ordinance No. 31174 on first reading. (7-0) 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None. 8. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION ORDINANCES AND RESOLLrrIONS: OF Ordinance No. 31138, on second reading, pro'viding for sale and conveyance of City-owned property located at 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue, S. W., upon certain terms and conditions. Adopted Ordinance No. 31138--082492. (7-0) Ordinance No. 31140, on second reading, rezoning a tract of land located at 759 Welton Avenue, S. W., lying at the intersection of Welton Avenue, Lawnhill Street and Floyd Avenue, described as Official Tax No. 1250133, from RM-1, Residential Multi-Family, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multi-Family, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioner. Adopted Ordinance No. 31140-082492. (7-0) Ordinance No. 31141, on second reading, authorizing alteration and closing by barricade, Day Avenue, S. W., at its intersection with Franklin Road. Adopted Ordinance No. 31141-082492. (6-0, Mr. Harvey abstained from voting.) ** Ordinance No. 31154, on second reading, providing for vacation of an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir Roadway Access Easement, upon certain terms and conditions. Adopted Ordinance No. 31154-082492. (7-0) Ordinance No. 31155, on second reading, providing for dedication of portions of Official Tax Nos. 1110713 and 2014008 to the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Transportation for use as street right-of-way needed for replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge, upon certain terms and conditions. fo Adopted Ordinan~ NO. 31155-'082492- (7-0) A Resolution designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Meeting of the National League of Cities. Adopted Resolution No. 31175-082492. (7-0) MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor and Members. of City Council. Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered a motion that Council direct the City tO prel:nlre ordinances tO be considered by City Council on Attorney bor 14, 1992, repealing thc "two for one" benefit Monday, Septem m'antmi to CRv Council Members and Council Appoinl~! G.~'~..,un~ for lack of a second. Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council. 8 10. OTHER HEARINGS OF CITIZENS: CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. (7-0) Reappointed the following persons: John H. Pan'oR- Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Management Board Eli:rabeth M. Legg - Personnel and Employment Practices Commi.~sion (waived City residency requirement) Carolyn M. John~n - Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority Robert W. Glenn, Jr. - Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Mayor Bowers voted no.) James W. Burks, Jr. - Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority Appointed the following persons: Council Member Delvis O. McCadden - Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, Board of Directors Mary Maier- Roanoke Public Library Board Brenda A. PoweH- Fair Housing Board Michael W. Ridenhour - Advisory Board of Human Development Gary C. Walker - Special Events Committee 9 NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE The regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke will be held on Monday, August 24, 1992, at 7:00 p.m., in the Monterey Elementary School Gymnatorium, 4501 Oliver Road, N. E. Citizens are invited and encouraged to attend the Council meeting, as well as an informal discussion hour at 6:00 p.m., to talk with the Mayor, Members of City Council, the City Manager and City staff with regard to matters of mutual interest and concern. For more information about the meeting, please call the City Clerk's Office at 981-2541. Given under my hand this llth day of August, 1992. Mary F. Parker City Clerk Please publish in BLOCK STYLE in the Roanoke Times & World-News on Friday, August 14, 1992. Send publisher's affidavit and bill to: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Room 456, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536 MINUTES CONSIDERED AT THIS COUNCIL MEETING MAY BE REVIEWED ON LINE IN THE "OFFICIAL MINUTES" FOLDER, OR AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE David A. Bowers Mayor CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 452 Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1594 Telephone: (703) 981-2444 August 24, 1992 The Honorable Vice-Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: I wish to request an Executive Session to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.1- 344 (A) (1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. · Sincerely ~ David A. Bowers Mayor DAB: se 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File#15-323 Dr. Frank J. Eastburn, Chairperson Roanoke Public Library Board 1810 Denniston Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Dear Dr. Eastburn: This is to advise you that Bonnie A. Nethery has qualified as a member of the Roanoke Public Library Board, for a term ending June 30, 1995. Sincerely, ~0~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:sw Ene. pc: Ms. Beverly Bury, City Librarian 0-2 Oath or Afflrmafion' 'Of Office State of Virginia, Cit~/ of Roanoke, to.wit: I, Bonnie A. Nethery , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as a member of the Roanoke Public Library Board, for a term ending June 30, 1995. according to the best of my ability. So help me God.% Subscribed and sworn to before ~ne, this //9 , Deputy 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) 98 I-2~41 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #15-200 The Honorable Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairperson Fifth Planning District Commission Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mrs. Bowles This is to advise you that Delvis O. MeCadden has qualified as a member of the Fifth Planning District Commission, to fill the unexpired term of William White, Sr., ending June 30, 1993. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc.' Mr. Wayne G. Strickland, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District Commission, P. O. Box 2569, Roanoke, Virginia 24010 0-2 Oath or Affirz a io_o Of..: Office 8taiz of Virginia, Cit?] of Roanoke, to.wlt: I, Delvis O. McCadden , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as a member of the Fifth Planning District Commission to fill the unexpired term of William White, Sr., ending June 30, 1993, according to the best of my ability. So help me God. Subscribed and sworn to before me, this OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS WILLIAM H FULTON IBM Colporation President JOSEPH B WRIGHT Carillon H earth System Vice President ROBERT G BENNETT Grand Piano & Furniture Co Inc H LAWRENCE DAVlDSON Davidson s Vice President TED MOOMAW, JR World Travel Service Vice President RICHARD C WALTERS Books Strings & Things Vice Pfesider~t DOUGLAS C. WATERS Sovran Bank Secretary/Treasurer BEVERLY T FITZPATRICK, JR Dominion Bankshares Corporatl0n J RANDOLPH GARRETT, III Chancy Thomas S~ephenson & Hill PAUL M GRISSO M ounlain Top Orchards JOHN C GROVE Woods Rogers & Hazlegrove EDWIN C. HALL Hall Associates JAMES W HARKNESS Dominion Bankshares Corporation WILLIAM F HAWKINS ProForrna Mid Atlantic WILLIAM S. HUBARD Center in The Square REGINALD K HUTCHERBON Mutua of New York T BLAINE JARRETT Jarrett s Greenhouse JOHN W LAMBERT, JR John Lambert Associates ROBERT C. LAWSON, JR Crestar Bank ROBERT B MANETTA Community Hospital JAMES B MASSEY, HI Coleman & Massey P C KATHRYN B McQUADE Norfolk Southern Corporalion MARK f MULHOLLAND Roanoke Times & World-News BITTLE W. PORTERFIELD, III JAMES M TURNER JR J M Turner & CO MICHAEL M WALOVOGEL CHARLES E WARSAW II paine Webber ROBERT D WEBSTER ,~ppalachian Power Company BRIAN J WISHNEFF Economic Dev¢opment Ofhce City Ct Roanoke FRANKLIN O KIMBROUGH August 3, 1992 Ms. Mary Parker City Clerk City of Roanoke 215 Church Avenue Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Dear Mary: As per our telephone conversation a couple of weeks ago, I am again requesting time on the Monday, August 24, 1992 City Council agenda. The purpose of this request is to allow our leadership to update members of Council about the activities and accomplishments of Downtown Roanoke Incorporated during the past year and our plans for the coming year with regards to the ongoing downtown development effort in Roanoke. This presentation will not take longer than ten minutes and probably will also include a short slide show. As you will recall, we have made a similar informational presentation each of the last several years. It is further my understanding that the City Council meeting on Monday, August 24, 1992 is an evening meeting beginning at 7:30 p.m. and being held at Monterey Elementary School. Please let me know if this request creates any difficulties or problems. Otherwise, we'll look forward to seeing you on the evening of August 24, 1992. Executive Director pc: W. Robert Herbert DOWNTOWN ROANOKE, INCORPORATED 310 FIRST STREET, S.W · ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24011 · (703) 342-2028 COMMENTS - WILLIAM H. FULTON PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL MONDAY EVENING, AUGUST 24, 1992 - MONTESt- Y ELI~ENi'ARy SCHOOL Good evening. I'm Bill Fulton, President of Downtown Roanoke Incorporated. It's a pleasure and a privilege to stand before you this evening and report on the activities of our organization in regards to the continuing development of downtown Roanoke, its tax base and its image. While the last twelve months have been a time of economic stagnation for our nation and our state, a slightly different and more positive experience has been recorded in our downtown. We have seen work completed on 3 new structures, 2 building expansion projects, and 27 existing building rehabilitations or renovations. All of these projects collectively represent over $7.6 million dollars of new pdvate sector reinvestment in our downtown service district. I'd like to provide you a quick snapshot of what has transpired downtown dudng the last twelve months in raw economic development figures. There have been 30 new businesses locating in our downtown during the past year creating 310 new jobs. This growth against the backdrop of the normal number of business closings and the downsizing of some of our larger corporate operations, has allowed us to prevent a significant reduction in the total number of downtown employees. Our organization's ongoing mission is to preserve and promote Roanoke's central business district as the center of cultural, business, and governmental activities for all of western Virginia. This is accomplished through traditional economic development efforts, image marketing, cooperative retail activity, environmental design, coordinated downtown management, urban planning, historic preservation and the staging of special events. During the past year, we have continued to offer our assistance to Virginia Tech, the private sector developer, and the City to facilitate the reopening of the Hotel Roanoke and construction of the adjoining Conference Center. Towards this end, we have established a grass roots support organization composed of neighborhood groups, civic clubs, and service organizations from not only the City of Roanoke but the entire Roanoke Valley. This group was very active in helping secure passage of House Bill #135, commonly known as the Public Facilities Act. We have kept the downtown business community informed about progress and activities related to the hotel through our information flyer entitled "Hotel Roanoke Update". We stand ready to support this project in any additional way necessary because we believe as you do that it has the greatest potential within the next decade to generate growth and economic vitality for the downtown and the entire Roanoke Valley. Also during the last year, we concluded our Iow interest loan program for the rehabilitation of older downtown commercial buildings resulting in: 10 loans for a total of $768,000.00. These loan funds were used to leverage an additional $5.6 million dollars of private sector capital reinvestment over a twenty-four month period. Six vacant buildings were reoccupied with new or expanded businesses as a result of this program. This program also created 85 new jobs - 53 of which went to Iow and moderate income individuals. After the conclusion of this financial incentive program, we joined with six downtown financial institutions to form a new private-sector Iow interest loan pool. The 2 pool assists the development of housing units in existing buildings by converting vacant and under-utilized upper stories. To date, this program has been directly responsible for placing three units into service. An additional 30 units are currently going through the review process. We have also assisted in promoting and marketing the federal rental rehab program targeted at downtown. This program is making some of the proposed housing developments like CityCenter homes, the Trinkle Buildings and Howard's Soup Kitchen possible. We thank the City and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority for adhering to our request to target these federal dollars downtown during 1992. Also, we have completed our 22 month effort to organize and capitalize the Roanoke Community Development Corporation. This new organization is a for-profit multi-bank community development whose primary purpose is to assist the development of housing in the downtown area and the close-in ring of older neighborhoods through equity investments for qualifying projects. This new entity has been capitalized with $900,000.00 of private sector money. Downtown Roanoke Incorporated provides administration and marketing services under contract for this new development partner. In an effort to keep our data base of statistical information on the downtown current to attract new businesses and investment, we began work in May on our bi-annual downtown-wide census. The results from this undertaking should be available within the next few weeks. We continue to update and provide building inventory profiles on all available space in the downtown area to prospects, real estate firms, and your City departments. We ara also in the process of updating pedestrian counts at various locations to provide better evidence of the potential for development, expansion and 3 locating in downtown. To further our retail recruitment efforts, DRI also collects and analyzes sales figures for downtown each year. Through our direct recruitment efforts this past year, we successfully sited four new businesses in the downtown area. In the area of marketing, DRI places a special emphasis on retaining and promoting downtown's uniqueness and charm. As a result, we have centered our marketing efforts on showcasing downtown's excitement and festive image. We now annually conduct and sponsor 13 special events and festivals collectively attracting almost 100,000 visitors and tourists. In addition, we coordinated and marketed four cooperative sales events for the downtown retailers with an emphasis on increasing sales during traditionally slow periods. In late 1990, DRI set out to position downtown Roanoke as a cornerstone in our City's tourism development effort. During the last 12 months, we distributed 25,000 Downtown Passports, 75,000 Visitor Guides, 20,000 Downtown Dining Guides and 2,000 promotional calendars and cards. We are also pleased to have helped in the negotiation and facilitation of keeping First Fridays at Five in the downtown area when their previous location became too small for their successful after 5:00 p.m. event. Our "Convention Express" shuttle bus service continues to bring thousands of convention goers from the major suburban hotels to the downtown area free of charge to shop, dine, visit attractions, or sightsee. The holiday season continues to be brighter and more beautiful as a result of the decorations and the electricity to illuminate them which we provide. We greatly appreciate the deference that the City has given to Downtown Roanoke Incorporated in regards to determining when and where special events will occur. This has allowed us 4 to shape and focus these events into activities which not only create positive impressions of downtown but also ring the cash registers and thersby enhance the downtown area as a business location and tax base generator. In the area of environmental design, we applaud the City for joining with us in implementing and installing the directional sign matrix system to guide tourists, visitors, and newcomers to our six major attractions in the City of Roanoke. We continue to appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests and opinions of the downtown business community and property owners in making proposals for inclusion in your capital improvement plan, in developing a more comprehensive recycling program for the downtown arsa, in suggesting changes to the composition of the architectural review board which would enhance representation of those who are governed, and in allowing us to join with you in saving the American Elm trees on Jefferson Street from dutch elm disease. We have also spent a considerable amount of time and resources trying to educate the general public and the downtown employees about the value and importance of curbside parking spaces. Our parking guides and maps showing locations of parking facilities and information on how to access them were reprinted and widely distributed during recent months. With regards to that special and most colorful area of our downtown, the historic market area, DRI has helped rally support among the business community and the general public in raising money and awareness to keep Center In The Square functional and operational during the last year. We changed the color and design of the market area shopping bags to depict a fresher image of this important area in our downtown. 5 The second year of our image marketing campaign for the historic market area is nearing completion with an even greater response and feedback than in 1991. This past year the campaign consisted of: two outdoor advertising efforts - one in the fall and one in the spring - print media and radio advertising during the holiday season centered around the "Dickens of a Christmas" special event, and the production of a summer point of purchase promotional piece. This past year also saw a continuation of our efforts to attract families to the market after 5:00 p.m. with another rendition of our old-fashioned trick-or-treating. December in the Market again brought the decoration of the stalls, streetlights and fountain with fresh evergreens and bows. In March, we negotiated and implemented the extension of business hours on Friday evenings for 40 of the historic market area's businesses and attractions. It is our hope that the results from the trial period through the end of this year will be sufficient enough to sustain these extended hours indefinitely into the future. One of the most important components of the Historic Market Area is the farmers. Working under our farmers market management and marketing contract from the City, we have been able to increase the number of monthly and daily renters as well as the overall number of available stalls. Our farmer recruitment efforts are also continuing. A parking tag was designed and produced for farm vehicles and trucks to advertise our market above their state license plates. And finally, the delicate issue of providing restroom facilities in the market area for farmers and their customers was also adequately addressed for the short term during the last year. Some of the other services and initiatives undertaken during the past year by DRI 6 have included: providing educational seminars to downtown businesses, raising funds to bring six endangered peregrine falcons to the downtown area as a wildlife conservation effort and a tourism draw, providing information to the downtown business community about candidates for local public office, realizing changes to the banner and flag ordinance, exploring established and innovative programs in other cities which deal with the problems of public inebriation and panhandling, and exploring ways to make the downtown area feel and look as safe as it really is. We hope you will agree that our efforts and our labors have been fairly successful in fulfilling the confidence that you have placed in us by designating us the primary management entity for the furtherance of downtown Roanoke. With the continued cooperation of the numerous City departments and offices which we now enjoy on a daily basis, we believe that even greater accomplishments are possible during fiscal year 1992-1993. In that vane, you will most likely see Downtown Roanoke Incorporated take a very active role in helping close the financial gap for the Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center Project. We will become more involved in the placement of the D-Day monument in downtown Roanoke. Expect us to developcloserlinkages and cooperative efforts with our surrounding older residential neighborhoods. Our efforts will also include support and promotion of the Jefferson Center as it ushers in the beginning of the anticipated metamorphosis to the western end of downtown. We anticipate bringing before you in the coming year proposals requiring contributions and participation from both the public and private sectors for: 1.) the long discussed placement of mounted police patrols in the downtown area, 2.) a potential 7 problem bird control mechanism and 3.) the placement of information kiosks on our sidewalks. These anticipated initiatives and the continuation of our existing efforts can only be successful during the next year if we maintain the strong partnership we have developed by working together over the last 32 years. On behalf of the 30 member volunteer board of Downtown Roanoke Incorporated, its officers, and its membership, I want to thank the City of Roanoke for its support and participation dudng the last year in helping us accomplish our initiatives and in helping us address the broader issues facing downtown. The environment and economy in which we function today requires greater cooperation, innovation and understanding - an ingredient we seem to have in groat supply here in Roanoke. I appreciate this opportunity to sharo our annual story about the economic, aesthetic and image development of the most unique and identifiable part of our community with you this evening. Thank you again for your attention and your continuing support of our efforts to further advance the fortunes of downtown Roanoke. Good evening. 8 Office of the City Clerk 215 W. Church Ave., Room 456 Roanoke, VA 24011 215 W. Church Ave., Room 312 Roanoke, VA 24011 August 18, 1992 Dear Ms. Parker: This letter is written to request an opportunity to address the Roanoke City Council at their August 24th meeting at Monterey Elementary School. I will be representing a delegation of City Employees who wish to register their concerns regarding the revised pay plan and the recently announced focus group process. Should you require further information, my office extension is 2619 and my home phone is 774-7294. Correspondence may be sent either through interdepartment mail or to my home address: 3697 Bower Road, SW, Roanoke, VA 24018 Sincerely, Robert L. Henderson CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC MEETING August 24, 1992 Mayor Bowers, Members of Roanoke City Council, Mrs. Parker, and, most importantly, fellow citizens of Roanoke...thank you for hearing my concerns this evening. Tonight, I come before you as a taxpaying citizen of Roanoke to request that you rescind and extinguish forever the 2 for 1 Pension Plan and the double retirement. The citizens of Roanoke deserve to have several questions answered regarding the 2 for 1 Pension Plan and the double retirement which were passed by the City Council, June 30, 1989 and extended on May 11, 1992. Because of time constraints, I will read the questions, so that they will be formally included in the minutes and then ask for a commitment by this council to respond to the questions with detailed answers printed in the Roanoke Times & World-News and the Roanoke Tribune by the next public meeting. MR. VICE MAYOR FITZPATRICK: Congratulations to you for demonstrating positive and courageous leadership in stating that "the 2 for 1 pension is not in the best interest of the city or its citizens" and recommending that the Council take action right away and "shut it down". I further appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule to call me personally last Friday to discuss the pension problem and for your candid response that you did not remember how you voted on the pension plan in 1989. My questions to you: . . - What are ALL the legal options available? - What are all the financial ramifications (short-term and long-term) of each option? - And, Mr. Vice Mayor, why is there such an apparent reluctance to take these issues of vital concern to the taxpayers of Roanoke directly to Attorney General Mary Sue Terry for a ruling? The crisis of confidence that taxpayers are now feeling could partially be restored by receiving Attorney General Terry's opinion on the matter...because, members of City Council, Roanoke is not at'the~financial altitude to give people golden parachutes. COUNCILF~%~ ~4USSER: According to the Roanoke Times & World-News, August 20, 1992, you could not support the Vice Mayor's Pension Proposal until you saw it. Have you seen his proposal and had the opportunity to review it? And, if so, what is your position? And if you haven't seen the proposal, why not? 2 COUNCILMAN HARVEY: In 1989, before you returned to your present council seat, you led a citizens group against unfair taxation. While the 2 for 1 Pension and double retirement idea had a purpose as it related to Consolidation, after consolidation fell through, why did the 2 for I pension plan and double retirement remain in effect? Councilman Harvey, this pension issue has created a severe problem for this city. We all need to work together to solve this problem. As a taxpayer and a voter, I call upon you to make public the names of the City Council members you were referring to when you stated in the August 20, 1992 Roanoke Times & Wo~ld-News article that some Council members were politically posturing on this issue. I'm puzzled, Councilman Harvey, isn't your current position regarding the pension issue in direct conflict with the citizens protest you led in 19897 Could it be that in 1989 you didn't benefit from the plan and now you do? MAYOR BOWERS: We know that five days after the election, on May 11, 1992, you demonstrated your commitment to the people of Roanoke by voting NO for the 2 for 1 pension plan and double retirement. For that, you are to be congratulated! However, according to the Roanoke Times & World-News, August 20, 1992, you hadn't formulated a current opinion regarding the pension problem. Yet, during your campaign you spoke often of "TAKING BACK CITY HALL FOR THE CITIZENS". If ever there was a time when strong leadership is needed...that time is NOW. Mr. Mayor, listen to the anguished cries of your people, the citizens of Roanoke! Correct this serious breach of trust. Tonight, we're here to let City Council know that the citizens are at the gates of City Hall...and we're here to take it back! When elected, you each pledged to serve the citizens - not be served by the citizens. Roanoke has no silver trays upon which to bring you special pension deals while city employees get 3% raises and a select few get 10% raises...while schools are under funded...while health care services need to be increased...while many of our citizens are either underemployed or unemployed...while there are homeless and hungry citizens walking our streets. 4 Members of City Council, if indeed it truly is impossible to "repeal" your action, then I call upon you and all top officials covered by this "plan" to do something that is heroic - something that will prove your good faith to each citizen and restore our confidence in you individually and collectively. What is-this action? Put it in writing that you will - each of you - refuse to personally accept the special 2 for 1 pension plan and double retirement. Your positive leadership and swift action of individually turning back the pensions, would solve the legal problem and relieve the taxpayers of the fiscal neglect which you (City Council) caused July, 1989 and again, on May 11, 1992. Put our beloved Roanoke back on track and let our Star City shine as it shouldi, Thank you for your time. Diane Poff 2028 Mt. Vernon Rd, SW Roanoke,' Virginia 24015 343-4655 5 A PRESENTATION TO ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS BY ROBERT L. HENDERSON, CITY EMPLOYEE FOR 13½ YEARS ON BEHALF AND AT THE REQUEST OF CITIZENS & FELLOW ~MPLOYEES AUGUST 24, 1992 It has been two months since a delegation of Roanoke City Employees last aPpeared before you to voice their concerns regarding Roanoke City's revised pay plan. During these past 60 days, a number of new developments have occurred which in our opinion compells us to address you once again. First and foremost in this list of developments was the implementation of the pay plan's revisions on July 1 - the beginning of Roanoke's fiscal year. These revisions were protrayed as the solutions to the problems of pay compression and "salary leaping" and they were made also to address concerns over the competitiveness and fairness of the pay system. Two weeks after,the revisions went into effect, employees all over the City opened their Paychecks to learn exactly how these revisions effected them. Here is what they learned: 951 City employees with less than seven years of service were granted pay increases of up to 25% of their salary depending on the number of years they had worked. 862 employees with more than seven years of service got all of a 3% increase regardless of the number of years they had worked. Did this plan solve all the problems it was designed to? We still have pay compression - only now everyone is clumped around the middle of the scale. We still have gross inequities in wages - for people in similar jobs. In fact, in several specific instances, new ~nequities have been created because of the adjusted wages for those employees with fewer than seven years. How about fairness? Is the revised pay plan fair? We submit to you that when half of your employees get a significant raise and the other half get an insignificant ~ncrease, and it clearly favors those People with less than seven years of service - then no, it's not fair either. In fact what resulted was that City employees were divided into two groups on the basis of pay and seniority. You couldn't do more to lessen the morale of these people if you could drive a wedge between them and send them off to war against each other. D~d anyone recognize this? In an interview in the August 10 Roanoke Times & World News, one top City administrator conceded that morale was probably Iow for a few individual workers, but he didn't know how widespread it was. (2) Tonight, August 24, we'd like to give you an idea: [Call on those city employees who have been pay plan to stand up.] effected by the revised These are not "a few disgruntled workers" as you may have been told, nor do these employees work only in the police or fire departments as YOU may have been told. and by their presence here about this inequitable pay There are representatives here from . tonight, they are registering their concern plan. In conversations I have had this past week, it has been suggested to me that we employees should cultivate the qualities of patience and Patience because changes in so massive a system as the City's pay plan take time, or so I am told. "Understandin "because in addition to a fair salary for its 1,800 employees there are other demands upon the City's limited resources. Health care costs continue to rise, solid waste dumping costs are going up - everything has to be carefully evaluated and responsibility prioritized. We City employees know about patience. We have been waiting seven years for the inequities of the 1985 pay p~an to be corrected and now here we are in 2992 with a revision and the damn thing is ~till brokenJ We City employees know about understanding, too. All of us have to assign Priorities when making decisions about how our own personal money gets spent. And all of us were understanding in fiscal year 91-92 when revenue shortfalls froze our salaries. So we can understand you when you say that there are matters that in the best interests of the City might occupy a higher priority than fair compensation, But it is hard to be understanding when you top officio'Is award yourselves .the most lucrative retirement plan of any city in the entire state! And that's a development that's occurred recently cries out for justification, (3) that While we're on the subject of qualities, one ought to cultivate, let's talk about two more, This mess is no longer only about the City's revised pay plan and your lucrative pensions, It started with those issues, but in the last 60 days it has grown beyond them, It is now also about trust and credibility. Trust that the public gives to their elected officials when they vote them into office, Trust that employees give to their employer that they will receive a fair wage for each day's work, and .credibility, as in, when you say you are a representative of the people then that is how you act, And, when you say the new pay plan is going to correct inequities, then that is exactly what it does, I'd like to propose a bargain, We will work on the patience and the understanding; You work on the credibility and the trust, MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 21 ~ Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN I~puty City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #60-467 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31156-082492 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1992-93 Grant and General Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation of funds for the following school grants: Summer Youth Education Program $54,608.00; Alternative Education Program - $445,242.00; Special Education Jail Program - $100,000.00; GED Testing Program - $11,372.00; Regional Adult Education Specialist Program - $35,163.00; 1992-93 Perkins Act Program - $314,114.00; Family ERA Program - $156,417.00; and Hurt Park Elementary School Early Childhood Demonstration Project - $143,774.00. Ordinance No. 31156-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. po; Mr. Finn D. Pincus, Chairperson, Roanoke City School Board Dr. Frank P. Tota, Superintendent of Schools Mr. Richard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs and Clerk of the Board Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROi~IOEEs VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31156-082492. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1992-93 Grant and General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to Government of the exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that certain sections of the 1992-93 Grant and General Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: Grant Fund APprOPriations Education Summer Youth Education 1992 (1-il) ................... Alternative Education 1992-93 (12-33) ................ Special Education Jail Grant 1992-93 (34-44) ......... GED Testing 1992-93 (45-46) .......................... Regional Adult Education Specialist 1992-93 (47-54).. Perkins Act Funds 1992-93 (55-62) .................... Family ERA Program 1992-93 (63-80) ................... Hurt Park Early Childhood Demonstration Project 1992-93 (81-96) ..................................... $ 23,990,312 54,608 445,242 100,000 11,372 35,163 314,114 156,417 143,774 Revenue Education Summer Youth Education 1992 Alternative Education 1992-93 (98-99) ................ Special Education Jail Grant 1992-93 (100) ........... GED Testing 1992-93 (101) ........... Perkins Act Funds 1992-93 (103) ...................... Family ERA Program 1992-93 (104) ..................... Hurt Park Early Childhood Demonstration Project 1992-93 (105) ....................................... $ 23,990,312 (97) ..................... 54,608 445,242 100,000 11,372 35,163 314,114 156,417 143,774 ~eneral Fund o r' tions Education Instruction (106-107) ................................ Other Uses of Funds (108) ............................ 1) Teachers 2) Social Security 3) Field Trips 4) Student Participant Allowances 5) Clerical 6) Social Security 7) Contractual Services 8) Insurance 9) Office Materials 10) Instructional Materials 11) Miscellaneous Materials 12) Secondary Teachers 13) Coordinator 14) Teachers Aides 15) Social Security 16) State Retirement 17) Health Insurance 18) Group Life Insurance 19) Contractual Services 20) Instructional Travel 21) Supplies 22) Instructional Materials 23) Clerical 24) Social Security 25) State Retirement 26) Health Insurance (035-060-6433-6449-0121) $ 10,700 (035-060-6433-6449-0201) 818 (035-060-6433-6449-0583) 3,880 (035-060-6433-6549-0129) 32,300 (035-060-6433-6549-0151) 2,600 (035-060-6433-6549-0201) 199 (035-060-6433-6549-0331) 1,000 (035-060-6433-6549-0538) 26 (035-060-6433-6549-0601) 145 (035-060-6433-6549-0614) 2,700 (035-060-6433-6549-0615) 240 (035-060-6434-6100-0121) 201,151 (035-060-6434-6100-0123) 30,900 (035-060-6434-6100-0141) 21,671 (035-060-6434-6100-0201) 19,409 (035-060-6434-6100-0202) 28,823 (035-060-6434-6100-0128) 28,765 (035-060-6434-6100-0205) 2,284 (035-060-6434-6100-0331) 10,000 (035-060-6434-6100-0551) 28,528 (035-060-6434-6100-0614) 40,284 (035-060-6434-6100-0615) 3,000 (035-060-6434-6300-0151) 13,389 (035-060-6434-6300-0201) 1,024 (035-060-6434-6300-0202) 1,521 (035-060-6434-6300-0128) 2,615 $69,254,607 50,632,893 1,349,493 27) Group Life Insurance 28) Participant Support 29) Communications 30) Insurance 31) Administrative Travel 32) Administrative Supplies 33) Miscellaneous Materials 34) Educational Coordinators 35) Part Time Psychologist 36) Part Time Clerical Assistance 37) Social Security 38) State Retirement 39) Health Insurance 40) Group Life Insurance 41) Travel 42) Administrative Supplies 43) Instructional Supplies 44) Equipment 45) GED Examiners 46) Social Security 47) Specialist 48) Clerical 49) Social Security 50) Indirect Costs 51) Printing 52) Communications 53) Travel 54) Instructional Supplies 55) Teachers 56) Social Security 57) State Retirement 58) Health Insurance (035-060-6434-6300-0205) $ 120 (035-060-6434-6300-0331) 1,000 (035-060-6434-6300-0523) 4,500 (035-060-6434-6300-0538) 2,000 (035-060-6434-6300-0551) 1,200 (035-060-6434-6300-0601) 2,058 (035-060-6434-6300-0615) 1,000 (035-060-6506-6329-0138) 64,559 (035-060-6506-6329-0132) 3,000 (035-060-6506-6329-0551) 5,168 (035-060-6506-6329-0201) 4,118 (035-060-6506-6329-0202) 7,223 (035-060-6506-6329-0204) 5,230 (035-060-6506-6329-0205) 581 (035-060-6506-6329-0554) 1,200 (035-060-6506-6329-0601) 321 (035-060-6506-6329-0614) 1,800 (035-060-6506-6329-0801) 6,800 (035-060-6755-6550-0121) 10,564 (035-060-6755-6550-0201) 808 (035-060-6756-6351-0124) 17,000 (035-060-6756-6351-0151) 7,500 (035-060-6756-6351-0201) 1,875 (035-060-6756-6351-0212) 588 (035-060-6756-6351-0351) 1,000 (035-060-6756-6351-0523) 2,000 (035-060-6756-6351-0551) 4,000 (035-060-6756-6351-0614) 1,200 (035-060-6757-6138-0121) 52,572 (035-060-6757-6138-0201} 4,022 (035-060-6757-6138-0202) 5,972 (035-060-6757-6138-0204) 5,230 59) Group Life Insurance 60) Business Equipment 61) Technology Education Equipment 62) Trade and Industrial Equipment 63) Family Training /Outreach Specialist 64) Substitute Teachers 65) Parent Aides 66) Parent Volunteers 67) Social Security 68) State Retirement 69) Health Insurance 70) Group Life Insurance 71) Travel 72) Instructional Equipment 73) Instructional Supplies 74) Inservice Training 75) Social Security 76) Evaluation Travel 77) Evaluation Supplies 78) Contracted Evaluation Services 79) Communications 80) Indirect Costs 81) Principal Investigator 82) Instructional Services 83) Substitute Teachers 84) Inservice 85) Volunteers (035-060-6757-6138-0205) $ 474 (035-060-6757-6136-0821) 152,000 (035-060-6757-6137-0821) 25,000 (035-060-6757-6138-0821) 68,844 (035-060-6993-6000-0121) 43,570 (035-060-6993-6000-0021) 900 (035-060-6993-6000-0141) 2,513 (035-060-6993-6000-0151) 2,325 (035-060-6993-6000-0201) 6,513 (035-060-6993-6000-0202) 4,949 (035-060-6993-6000-0204) 5,230 (035-060-6993-6000-0205) 392 (035-060-6993-6200-0554) 10,913 (035-060-6993-6200-0801) 1,795 (035-060-6993-6200-0614) 9,507 (035-060-6993-6200-0129) 21,389 (035-060-6993-6200-0201) 2,356 (035-060-6993-6200-0553) 350 (035-060-6993-6200-0601) 900 (035-060-6993-6200-0311) 38,200 (035-060-6993-6200-0523) 2,000 (035-060-6993-6200-0212) 2,615 (035-060-6994-6000-0121) 10,410 (035-060-6994-6000-0121) 32,400 (035-060-6994-6000-0021) 3,600 {035-060-6994-6000-0129) 8,995 (035-060-6994-6000-0151) 1,250 86) Social Security 87) State Retirement 88) Health Insurance 89) Group Life Insurance 90) Local Travel 91) Conference Travel 92) Contracted Inservice 93) Communications 94) Indirect Costs 95) Supplies 96) Capital Outlays 97) Federal Grant Receipts 98) Local Match 99) Federal Grant Receipts 100) State Grant Receipts 101) Fees 102) Federal Grant Receipts 103) Federal Grant Receipts 104) Federal Grant Receipts 105) Federal Grant Receipts 106) Purchased Services 107) Matching Funds 108) Transfer to Grant Fund (035-060-6994-6000-0201) $ 4,334 (035-060-6994-6000-0202) 3,681 (035-060-6994-6000-0204) 2,615 (035-060-6994-6000-0205) 292 (035-060-6994-6000-0551) 460 (035-060-6994-6000-0554) 7,480 (035-060-6994-6200-0381) 56,950 (035-060-6994-6200-0523) 300 (035-060-6994-6200-0212) 2,992 (035-060-6994-6200-0614) 6,220 (035-060-6994-6200-0821) 1,795 (035-060-6433-1102) 54,608 (035-060-6434-1101) 305,242 (035-060-6434-1102) 140,000 '035-060-6506-1100) 100,000 '035-060-6755-1103) 11,372 '035-060-6756-1102) 35,163 '035-060-6757-1102) 314,114 035-060-6993-1102) 156,417 035-060-6994-1102) 143,774 001-060-6001-6400-0381) (90,000) 001-060-6001-6400-0588) (215,242) (001-060-6005-6999-0911) 305,242 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. existing, this ATTEST: City Clerk. August 24, 1992 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance School Board Request for the Appropriation Funds of Grant I have reviewed the attached request to appropriate funding for the School Board. This report will appropriate funding for eight grants in the Grant Fund. These are funded with federal and state funds and fees. In addition to these funding sources, the Alternative Education grant will receive a local match. Funding for the local match is available in the Education portion of the General Fund budget in the following accounts: Purchased Services Matching Funds (001-060-6001-6400-0381) $ 90,000 (001-060-6001-6400-0588) 215,242 I recommend that you concur with this request of the School Board. JMS:pac Attachments fector of Fin~ -~ Finn D. Pincus, Chairman Charles W. Day, Vice Chairman Marilyn C. Curtis fRoanoke., City School Board C. Nelson Harris Martha W. O'Neil Clubert G. Poff James M. Turner, Jr. Frank P. Tota, Superintendent Richard L. Kelley, Clerk of the Board P.O. Box 13145, Roanoke, Virginia 24031 · 703-981-238t "Fax: 703-981-2951 August 5, 1992 The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Members of Council: As the result of official School Board action at its August 4, 1992 meeting, the Board respectfully requests City Council to appropriate funds to the following school grants: Grant No. 6433 - $54,608.00 for the Summer Youth Education Program for the summer of 1992 to provide remedial and basic education in the areas of English, Math, Science and Social Studies. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds. Grant No. 6434 - $445,242.00 for the Alternative Education Program to provide instruction and guidance services to secondary level students who are at risk of leaving school. The program will be funded by local match in the amount of $305,242 and by federal funds in the amount of $140,000. Grant No. 6506 - $100,000.00 for the Special Education Jail Program to provide for the education of juveniles and inmates under age 22 incarcerated in the Roanoke City Jail and who are in need of special education services. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by state funds. Grant No. 6755 - $11,372.00 for the GED Testing Program to provide instructors for GED preparation classes and for the administration of the GED examinations. The source of funds will be student fees. Grant No. 6756 - $35,163.00 for the Regional Adult Education Specialist Program to provide ancillary and support services for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education Program in the planning district. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by state funds. Grant No. 6757- $314,114.00 for the 1992-93 Perkins Act Program to provide funds for vocational instructors and equipment. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds. Grant No. 6993 - $156,417.00 for the Family ERA Program to provide for Educational Readiness and Achievement through the training of the teaching staff in parent involvement. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds. Excellence in Education Members of Council Page 2 August 5, 1992 rg CC: Grant No. 6994 - $143,774.00 for the Hurt Park Elementary School Early Childhood Demonstration Project to provide for the development of an early childhood education program. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds. Sincerely, ~ ~,~ Richard L. Kelley Clerk of the Board and Executive for Business Affairs Mr. Finn D. Pincus Dr. Frank p. Tota Mr. William L. Murray, Jr. Mr. Kenneth F. Mundy Mr. W. Robert Herbert v~;: Wilburn C. Dibling Joel M. Schlanger (with accounting details) ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOA. PI) Roanoke. Virginia APPROPRIATION REQUEST Summer Youth Education 1992 6433 035-060-6433-6449-0121 035-060-6433-6449-0201 035-060-6433-6449-0583 035-060-6433-6549-0129 035-060-6433-6549-0151 035-060-6433-6549-0201 035-060-6433-6549-0331 035-060-6433-6549-0538 035-060-6433-6549-0601 035-060-6433-6549-0614 035-060-6433-6549-0615 Appropriation Unit Z4Y 035-060-6433-1102 Teachers Social Security Field Trips Student Participant Allowances Clerical Social Security Contractual Services Insurance Office Materials Instructional Materials Miscellaneous Materials Federal Grant Receipts 10,700.00 818.00 3,880.00 32,300.00 2,600.00 199.00 1,000.00 26.00 145.00 2,700.00 240.00 $ .54,608.00 $ 54,608.00 The Summer Youth Education Program for the summer of 1992 will provide remedial and basic education in the areas of English, Math, Science and Social Studies. The program will be one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds, and will end September 30, 1992. August 4, 1992 ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD Roanoke, Virginia APPROPRIATION RE~}UEST Alternative Education 92-93 6434 035-060-6434-6100-0121 035-060-6434-6100-0123 035-060-6434-6100-0141 035-060-6434-6100-0201 035-060-6434-6100-0202 035-060-6434-6100-0128 035-060-6434-6100-0205 035-060-6434-6100-0331 035-060-6434-6100-0551 035-060-6434-6100-0614 035-060-6434-6100-0615 035-060-6434-6300-0151 035-060-6434-6300-0201 035-060-6434-6300-0202 035-060-6434-6300-0128 035-060-6434-6300-0205 035-060-6434-6300-0331 035-060-6434-6300-0523 035-060-6434-6300-0538 035-060-6434-6300-0551 035-060-6434-6300-0601 035-060-6434-6300-0615 Approprfation Unit Z4Z Secondary Teachers Coordinator Teacher Aides Social Security State Retirement Realth Insurance State Group Life Insurance Contractual Services Instructional Travel Supplies Instructional Materials Clerical Social Security State Retirement Realth Insurance State Group Life Insurance Participant Support Communications Insurance Administrative Travel Administrative Supplies Miscellaneous Materials $ 201,151.00 30,900.00 21,671.00 19,409.00 28,823.00 28,765.00 2,284.00 10,000.00 28,528.00 40,284.00 3,000.00 13,389.00 1,024.00 1,521.00 2,615.00 120.00 1,000.00 4,500.00 2,000.00 1,200.00 2,058.00 1,000.00 $ 445~242.00 035-060-6434-1101 035-060-6434-1102 Local Match Federal Grant Receipts $ 305,242.00 140,000.00 ~ 445~242.00 The Alternative Education program will provide instruction and guidance services to secondary level students who are at risk of leaving school due to poor academic achievement, low or unrealistic self-concept, or a poor understanding of academic preparation required to achieve their career interests. Program expenditures will be funded by local match from accounts 001-060-6001-6400-0588 in the amount of $215,242 and account 001-060-6001- 6400-0381 in the amount of $90,000 and by federal funds in the amount of $140,000. The proqram will end June 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD Roanoke, Virginia APPROPRIATION REQUEST Special Education Jail Grant 1992-93 6506 035-060-6506-6329-0138 035-060-6506-6329-0132 035-060-6506-6329-0551 035-060-6506-6329-0201 035-060-6506-6329-0202 035-060-6506-6329-0204 035-060-6506-6329-0205 035-060-6506-6329-0554 035-060-6506-6329-0601 035-060-6506-6329-0614 035-060-6506-6329-0801 Appropriation Unit YSZ 035-060-6506-1100 Educational Coordinators Part Time Psychologist Part Time Clerical Assistance Social Security State Retirement Health Insurance State Group Life Insurance Travel Expenses Administrative Supplies Instructional Supplies Equipment State Grant Receipts $ 64,559.00 3,000.00 5,168.00 4,118.00 7,223.00 5,230.00 581.00 1,200.00 321.00 1,800.00 6,800.00 $ lOOtO00.O0 $ 100,000.00 The Special Education Jail Grant is a pilot program which provides funds for the education of juveniles and inmates under age 22 incarcerated in the Roanoke City Jail who are in need of special education. One hundred percent of expenses are reimbursed by state funds. The program will operate July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 ROANOKE CITY SCHOOl, BOARD Roanoke, Virginia APPROPRIATION RE~EST GED Testing 1992-93 6755 035-060-6755-6550-0121 035-060-6755-6550-0201 Appropriation Unit ZTD 035-060-6755-1103 GED Examiners Social Security Fees $ 10,564.00 808.00 $ 11_~372.00 The GED Testing program will provide instructors for GED preparation classes and for the administration of the GED examinations. The source of funds will be student fees. The program will operate July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 RO~OKE CITY SCHOOL Roanoke, Virginia APPROPRIATION REQUEST Regional Adult Education Specialist 92-93 6756 035-060-6756-6351-0124 035-060-6756-6351-0151 035-060-6756-6351-0201 035-060-6756-6351-0212 035-060-6756-6351-0351 035-060-6756-6351-0523 035-060-6756-6351-0551 035-060-6756-6351-0614 Appropriation Unit Z7E Specialist Clerical Social Security Indirect Costs Printing Communications Travel Instructional Supplies $ 17,000.00 7,500.00 1,875.00 588.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 4,000.00 1,200.00 $ 35/63.00 035-060-6756-1102 Federal Grant Receipts 35,163.00 The Regional Adult Education Specialist program will provide ancillary and · support services for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education Program in the planning district which includes the Cities of Roanoke, Salem, Covington and Clifton Forge and the Counties of Roanoke, Craig, Botetourt and Alleghany. The program is one hundred percent rgimbursed by state funds. The program will end June 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD Roanoke, Virginia APPROPRIATION REQUEST Perkins Act Funds 92-93 6757 035-060-6757-6138-0121 035-060-6757-6138-0201 035-060-6757-6138-0202 035-060-6757-6138-0204 035-060-6757-6138-0205 035-060-6757-6136-0821 035-060-6757-6137-0821 035-060-6757-6138-0821 Appropriation Z7F 035-060-6757-1102 Teachers Social Security State Retirement Health Insurance State Group Life Insurance Business Education Equipment Technology Education Equipment Trade & Industrial Equipment Federal Grant Receipts 52,572.00 4,022.00 5,972.00 5,230.00 474.00 152,000.00 25,000.00 68,844.00 314~114.00 314,114.00 The 1992-93 Perkins Act program will provide funds for vocational instructors and equipment. One hundred percent of expenditures will be reimbursed by federal funds. The program will end J~ne 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 RO~OKE CITY SCgOOL BOARD Roanoke, Virqinia APPROPRIATION ~UEST Family EP.~ Program 1992-93 6993 035-060-6993-6000-0121 035-060-6993-6000-0021 035-060-6993-6000-0141 035-060-6993-6000-0151 035-060-6993-6000-0201 035-060-6993-6000-0202 035-060-6993-6000-0204 035-060-6993-6000-0205 035-060-6993-6200-0554 035-060-6993-6200-0801 035-060-6993-6200-0614 035-060-6993-6200-0129 035-060-6993-6200-0201 035-060-6993-6200-0553 035-060-6993-6200-0601 035-060-6993-6200-0311 035-060-6993-6200-0523 035-060-6993-6200-0212 Appropriation Unit zgL Family Training/Outreach Specialists $ Substitute Teachers Parent Aides Parent Volunteers Social Security State Retirement Health Insurance State Group bile Insurance Travel Expenses Instructional Equipment Instructional Supplies Inservice Training Social Security Evaluation Travel Evaluation Supplies Contracted Evaluation Services Communications Indirect Costs 43,570.00 900.00 2,513.00 2,325.00 6,513.00 4,949.00 5,230.00 392.00 10,913.00 1,795.00 9,507.00 21,389.00 2,356.00 350.00 900.00 38,200.00 2,000.00 2,615.00 $ 156~417.00 035-060-6993-1102 Federal Grant Receipts $ 156,417.00' The Family ERA Program for 1992-93 will provide for Educational Readiness and Achievement (ERA) through the training of the teaching staff in parent involvement and also the training of parents in child development. The program is one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds and will end 4une 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 ROAI~OKE CITY $CIt00I, BOARD Roanoke, Virginia APPROPRIATION RI~tJ~gT Hurt Park Early Childhood Demonstration Project 92-93 6994 035-060-6994-6000-0121 035-060-6994-6000-0121 035-060-6994-6000-0021 035-060-6994-6000-0129 035-060-6994-6000-0151 035-060-6994-6000-0201 035-060-6994-6000-0202 035-060-6994-6000-0204 035-060-6994-6000-0205 035-060-6994-6000-0551 035-060-6994-6000-0554 035-060-6994-6200-0381 035-060-6994-6200-0523 035-060-6994-6200-0212 035-060-6994-6200-0614 035-060-6994-6200-0821 Appropriation Unit zgM Principal Investigator Instructional Services Substitute Teachers Inservice Volunteers Social Security State Retirement Realth Insurance Group Life Insurance Local Travel Conference Travel Contracted Inservice Communications Indirect Costs Supplies Capital Outlays $ 10,410.00 32,400.00 3,600.00 8,995.00 1,250.00 4,334.00 3,681.00 2,615.00 292.00 460.00 7,480.00 56,950.00 300.00 2,992.00 6,220.00 1,795.00 143 774.0~ 035-060-6994-1102 Federal Grant Receipts $ 143~.774.00 The Hurt Park Elementary School Early Childhood Demonstration Project will provide for the development of an early childhood education program as part of the World Class Education initiative. The program is one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds and will end June 30, 1993. August 4, 1992 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-236 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31158-082492 authorizing acceptance of an "America the Beautiful" grant from the State Department of Forestry, in the amount of $770.00, for establishment of an Elm Tree Injection Program. Resolution No. 31158-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a reguiar meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, ~_ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: Ms. Bettina K. Ring, Urban Forestry Coordinator, Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Forestry, Box 3758, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 Mr. John D. Fulton, Jr., President, Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, 2202 Richelieu Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Ms. Betty Pence, President, Valley Beautiful, Inc., 2605 Avenham Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Mr. William H. Fulton, IBM Corporation President, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., 310 First Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Franklin D. Kimbrough, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., 310 First Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Gary N. Fenton, Manager, Parks and Recreation Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31158-082492. A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of an "America the Beautiful" grant from the State Department of Forestry and authorizing the execution on behalf of the City of any necessary documents. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The City accepts the offer made to the City by the State Department of Forestry of an "America the Beautiful" grant in the amount of $770.00, as more specifically provided in the City Manager's report of August 24, 1992, to this Council; 2. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager, or his designee is authorized to execute on behalf of the City any documents required in conjunction with the City's acceptance of such grant. ATTEST: City Clerk. MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 4S6 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2~41 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #60-67-236 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31157-082492 amending and reoi-daining certain sections of the 1992-93 General Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation of $1,230.00, in conr/eetion with acceptance of an "America the Beautiful" grant from the State Department of Forestry for establishment of an Elm Tree Injection Program. Ordinance No. 31157-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Gary N. Fenton, Manager, Parks and Recreation Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget 1992-93 emergency. WHEREAS, IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31157-082492. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an 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 Roanoke that certain sections of the Appropriations, be, to read as follows, Council of the City of 1992-93 General Fund and the same are hereby, amended and reordained in part: A ro riations Public Works Parks Maintenance.(1) ............................. Revenue Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth Other Categorical Aid (2) ......................... Miscellaneous Revenue Miscellaneous (3) ................................. 1) Project Supplies 2) Elm Tree Injection Program 3) Miscellaneous (001-050-4340-3005) $ 1,230 (001-020-1234-0688) 770 (001-020-1234-0859) 460 $ 20,249,303 3,674,788 $ 55,926,732 10,313,179 258,560 228,460 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: this City Clerk. Honorable Mayor David A. Bowers and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Dear Mayor and Members of Council: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: Grant - Elm Tree Injection Program City American Elm tree population has declined steadily over the past decades due to the tree's susceptibility to Dutch Elm Disease. Eiqht mature American Elms are located along Jefferson Street in Elmwood Park. Injection of American Elms with a fungicide is a proven method of offering protection for the disease. Urban Forestry staff are responsible for the management of these trees. II. C~]tRENT SITUATION: Elms along Jefferson are an extremely valuable asset to Elmwood Park and this area of downtown Roanoke. Current maintenance of these trees does not include the most effective method of Dutch Elm Disease prevention: injection. Parks and Recreation, Downtown Roanoke, Beautiful, Inc. and Roanoke Valley Foundation share concern for the survival other Elms within the City. Inc., Valley Preservation of these and Application for "America the Beautiful" Grant was filed with the Virginia Department of Forestry, by the Parks and Recreation Department, with support of these other agencies. Mayor and Members of Council August 24, 1992 Page 2 Ee "America the Beautiful" Grant of $770.00 was approved, with a local match of $2,370.00 from the City of Roanoke and contributions of $260.00 from Valley Beautiful, Inc. and $100.00 each from Downtown Roanoke, Inc. and the Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation, for a project total of $3,600.00. III. ISSUES: A. Need B. Fundinq C. Timinq IV. ALTERNATIVES: Accept the "America the Beautiful" Grant, and contributions from Valley Beautiful, Inc., Downtown Roanoke, Inc., and Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation and appropriate $1,230.00 to the Parks and Grounds budget. Need for Dutch Elm Disease injection proqrmm would be met. Fundinq for local shar~ is available within the departmental budget account 001-050-4340-3005. Timinq issue would be met, as acceptance of Grant would meet established project time frame. Do not accept the not appropriate budget. "America the Beautiful,, Grant, and do $1,230.00 to the Parks and Grounds Need for Dutch Elm Disease injection proqrmm would not be met. Mayor and Members of Council August 24, 1992 Page 3 2. Funding issue would be moot. 3. Timin~ issue would be moot. V. RECOMMENDATION: citY Council concur with Alternative "A" and accept the "America the Beautiful" Grant for $770.00 and contributions from Valley Beautiful, Inc., Downtown Roanoke, Inc. and Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation and appropriate $1,230.00 to Project Supplies (001-050- 4340-3005). Establish a corresponding revenue estimate of $1,230.00 into accounts to be established by Director of Finance. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the necessary documents accepting the Grant. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH:GNF:gnf Attachment CC: John Fulton, President, Roanoke Valley Preservation Foundation Betty Pence, President, Valley Beautiful, Inc. William Fulton, President, Downtown Roanoke, Inc. Kim Kimbrough, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Manager, Recreation, Parks and Grounds Maintenance Urban Forester Inc. COMMONWEALTH of VIRC_jlNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY Alderman 8c McCormick Roads Box $758, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 (804) 977-6555 July 2, 1992 Dan Henry, Urban Forester City of Roanoke 210 Reserve Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24016 Dear Mr. Henry: On behalf of the Virginia Department of Forestry, it is my pleasure to notify you that a grant of $770.00 has been awarded to the City of Roanoke, Parks & Recreation Department for its "Roanoke the Beautiful" proposal through the America the Beautiful Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program. The America the Beautiful Grant Program recognizes innovative approaches to developing partnerships between local governments, corporations, non-profit organizations and citizens. I applaud your organization for taking advantage of this program to enhance the forests in your community. You will be setting an example for citizens across the Commonwealth. In order to qualify for reimbursement of your project expenses, please comnlete and return the following documents to the ATB Program, c/o Department of Forestry, P. O. Box 3758, Charlottesville, VA 22903, no later than Jnlv 20. 1992: 1. SF 424: Application for Federal Assistance (hiEhlighted sections only). 2. America the Beautiful Agreement. AD 1048: Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclu- sion - Lower Tier Covered Transactions. 4. SF 424B: Assurances Non-Construction Programs. 5. Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements. 6. Maintenance Agreement (if ATB funds are used for tree planting). Qualifying project expenses should be incurred between July 15, 1992 and June 1, 1993. The date of record will be the date shown on an invoice, or in the case of donated materials or services, the date the materials or services were used on the project. Sincerely, Bettma K. Ring Urban Forestry Coordinator Mission: A Forest Resource to Meet the Needs of the Commonwealth 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) 981-2~41 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #178-236 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31159-082492 authorizing certain real estate options to be entered into in connection with the Home Purchase Assistance Program for real estate located at 2757 Hoover Street, N. W., and 2930 Glenrose Avenue, N. W., which properties are currently owned by Susan Lane, as more particularly set forth in a report of the City Manager under date of August 24, 1992. Ordinance No. 31159-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sv~ Enc. pc: Ms. Susan Lane, 2636 South Hills Drive, Missoula, Montana 59803 Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Mr. H. Daniel Pollock, Housing Development Coordinator Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31159-082492. VIRGINIA, AN ORDINANCE authorizing certain real entered into in connection with the Home Program; and providing for an emergency. estate options to be Purchase Assistance BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The City Manager be, and he is hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to execute a Real Estate Option on real estate located at 2757 Hoover Street, N.W., currently owned by Susan Lane, as more particularly set out in an attachment to the City Manager's report to Council dated August 24, 1992, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, upon approval of the form of the Option by the City Attorney, and upon such other terms and conditions as are provided therein. 2. The City Manager be, and he is hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to execute a Real Estate Option on real estate located at 2930 Glenrose Avenue, N.W., currently owned by Susan Lane, as more particularly set out in an attachment to the City Manager's report to Council dated August 24, 1992, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, upon approval of the form of the Option by the City Attorney, and upon such other terms and conditions as are provided therein. 3. 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 upon its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. Honorable Mayor and Members of Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Execution of Real Estate Options at 2757 Hoover Street NW and 2930 Glenrose Avenue N~V under the Home Purchase Assistance Program I. Background: $220~000 from the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Develop- ment's Single Family Rehabilitation and Energy Conservation Loan Program~ and $2#0~000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds were allocated to the Home Purchase Assistance Program by City Council on June 26, 1989, allowing the City to provide loans to low-moderate income households agreeing to buy and repair approximately 18-20 certain ident- ified substandard houses. The Program is administered jointly by the City and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA), as outlined in the City's current contract for services with RRHA. Ce Real Estate Options were selected as the best way to allow the City to implement the Home Purchase Assistance Program. These Options define the property owner's and the City's responsibilities under the Program, establish a purchase price for the property, and allow the City to access and market the property for sale to qualifying low and moderate income purchasers in the Program through assignment of the Real Estate Option. This provides for a direct sale of the property from the current owner to the purchaser selected through the Program. The City will not exercise any Option and will not actually purchase any property in the Program. Should the City be unable to find a buyer for the property, the Real Estate Option would be allowed to expire. Council previously authorized the City Manager to execute Options with individual property owners of several properties to be included in the Home Purchase Assistance Program. II. Current Situation: Real Estate Options have been executed by the owners of vacant single- family homes, as outlined in Attachments A & B. Housing Development staff has determined that the offered price is reasonable to allow homes to be included in the Program. Council authorization to the City Manager to execute Real Estate Options (Attachments A & B) with the owners of the properties is necessary to allow these properties to be marketed through the Program. August 2~ 1992 Page 2 III. Issues: A. Cost to the City B. Consistency with established housing plans and policies of the City C. Timing IV. Alternatives: A. Authorize the City Manager to execute Real Estate Options as outlined in Attachments A & 5~ to be approved as to form by the City Attorney, with the owners of these properties selected for the Home Purchase Assistance Program. Cost to the City would be $1.00 per Option· Under separate sub- sequent action, Council will be asked to approve assignment of the Options to qualifying purchasers under the Program and authorize loaning COBG funds allowing the purchase and rehabilitation of the properties to occur. Consistency with established housing plans and policies of the City will be met as two additional home-ownership opportunities will be provided to low-moderate income households. Owner occupancy and rehabilitation of two additional vacant substandard houses will provide significant contribution toward stabilization and rejuve- nation within each neighborhood. 3. Timing is such that prompt execution of these Options will allow immediate marketing of the houses. B. Do not authorize the City Manager to execute Real Estate Options as outlined in Attachments A & B~ to be approved as to form by the City Attorney, with the owners of these properties selected for the Home Purchase Assistance Program. I. Cost of the City can be recognized as lost opportunity cost. Consistency with established housing plans and policies of the City will not be met as home-ownership opportunities will not be pro- vided to low-moderate income households in the Northwest quadrant of the City. 3. Timing would not be an issue. August 24, 1992 Page 3 V. Recommendation: Adopt Alternative A, thereby authorizing the City Manager to execute Real Estate Options as outlined in Attachments A & B, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney, with the owners of these properties selected for the Home Purchase Assistance Program. Respecttully Submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH:BC (CR.71.1,2,3) CC: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Building Commissioner Housing Development Coordinator Grants Monitoring Administrator 2757 Hoover Street NV/ Official Tax Map 111120315 OPTION PRICE CITY ASSESSMENT House & Lot ATTACHMENT A $15,000.00 21~300.00 REAL ESTATE OPTION THIS REAL ESTATE OPTION (hereinafter referred to as "Option"), made this 28th day of 3ul)' , 1992, by and between Susan Lane (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), and the CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (hereinafter referred as "Grantee"). W IT N ESSE T H: 1. GRANT OF OPTION. For and in consideration of One Dollars ($ 1.00 ), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor gives and grants to Grantee, its successors and assigns, the exclusive, assignable and irrevocable right and option to purchase the property, more particularly described in Section No. 2 of this Option, together with all easements, rights and appurtenances attached thereto, and all improvements thereon (hereinafter referred to as "Real Estate"). By giving and granting this Option to Grantee, Grantor certifies that Grantor, and only Grantor, owns the Real Estate in fee simple. follows: DESCRIPTION OF REAL ESTATE. The Real Estate is described as 2757 Hoover Street NW A parcel in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, City of Roanoke Official Tax No. 2~a0716, consisting of approximately 0. 175 acres, more particularly described on the map at:ached here:o, labeled Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference herein, together with all easements, rights of way, water rights, appurtenances and improvements thereto belonging~ the legal description for which is Acreage Forest Park. 3. TERM OF OPTION. This Option shall commence on the date and at the time of execution of this Option by Grantor and Grantee. This Option shall expire at 11:59 p.m., on October 31, 1992, unless earlier exercised or terminated by Grantee. #. EXERCISE OF OPTION. This Option shall be deemed validly and effectively exercised if notice of the exercise hereof is either sent by certified mail to Grantor at Susan Lane1 2636 South Hills Drive~ Missoula~ MT 59g03 , or delivered in person to grantor, on or before the expiration date and time of this Option. Notice of such exercise which is given by certified mail shall be deemed effective when deposited in the mai] as aforesaid. For the period that this Option is effective, neither Grantor nor Grantor's employees, agents, tenants or representatives shall use or alter the Real Estate in a manner which would adversely affect its use by Grantee, and Grantor shah not sell, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose of the Rea[ Estate to any other party. The exercise of this Option shall result in Grantor selling and conveying the Real Estate to Grantee~ and Grantee purchasing and accepting the Real Estate from Grantor~ for the amount of the Purchase Price~ subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Option. Grantee reserves for it and its successors and assigns the right to terminate this Option at any time for cause or no cause at all, either before or after the assignment of this Option. 5. FAILURE TO EXERCISE OPTION. If Grantee does not exercise this Option, Grantor shall have no rights or claims against Grantee. 6. INSURANCE. Upon execution of this Option, Grantor shall maintain general liability insurance on the real estate during the - 2- term of this Option, or any extension of said term, in an amount of $300~000 , and shall supply Grantee with a Certificate of Insurance, demonstratin§ that Grantee is a named insured on the policy of genera] liability insurance. 7. RIGHT OF ENTRY AND MARKETING OF REAL ESTATE. After the execution of this Option by Grantor and Grantee, and either before or after the exercise of this Option by Grantee, Grantee, or its agents or employees, may enter upon the Real Estate and perform ali sur- veying, engineering, soil borings, appraisals, estimates of repairs and other tests and acts deemed necessary by Grantee to satisfy Grantee that the Real Estate is suitable for the uses and purposes intended by Grantee and is suitable for the Home Purchase Assistance Program (hereinafter referred to as the "Program"). All such tests and acts shall be performed at reasonable hours and at Grantee's cost and expense. In addition, Grantee shall be entitled to publicize the Real Estate for sale, endeavor to identify a purchasemr for the Real Estate, place a "For Sale" sign on the Real Estate, show the property to prospective purchasers, and take other reasonable and appropriate action deemed necessary by the Grantee to sell the Real Estate. Under no circumstances shall this section create any rights in the Grantor or impose any obligations upon the Grantee. 8. REAL ESTATE MAINTENANCE. Grantor shall maintain the Real Estate and adjoining sidewalks and walkways in a safe and attractive manner during the term of this Option, and in the event of the exer- cise of this Option, until the date of closing. -3- 9. RISK OF LOSS. Grantor shall bear any risk of loss of the Real Estate during the term of this Option, or, in the event of the exercise of this Option, until the date of closing. 10. ASSIGNMENT. Grantee may assign this Option by written noti- fication to Grantor. Grantor shall not assi§n this Option, unless approved in writing by Grantee, and Grantee's approval of such an assignment may be withheld for any reason or no reason at all. If the Grantor assigns this Option, ali references in this Option to the Grantor shall apply to the assignee. If the Grantee assigns this Option, all references in this Option to the Grantee shah apply to the assignee. In the event of an assignment by either the Grantor or the Grantee, no claim may be asserted against the assignor based upon, arising out of, or related to this Option. 11. PURCHASE PRICE. The purchase price for the Real Estate shall be Fifteen Thousand and NO/100 DOLLARS ($13~000.00). 12. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE. The purchase price for the Real Estate shall be payable at closing. 13. CLOSING. If this Option is exercised, closing of the sale of the Real Estate shall be held within sixty (60) days of the date on which Grantor receives notice of Grantee's exercise of this Option, or as soon thereafter as may be practically possible. Closing shall be held in Room 170~ Municipal Building, 213 Church Avenue~ Roanoke, Virginia~ or at some other location selected by the City and mutually satisfactory to the parties. At closing, Grantor shall execute, acknowledge~ and deliver to Grantee, a general warranty deed, with modern English covenants of tit[e, in form satisfactory and acceptable to the Grantee, conveying the Real Estate to Grantee, free and clear of ail liens, tenancies, encumbrances, material defects, and exceptions, other than current taxes, and any other matters that may have been approved by Grantee in writing after examination of title. Said deed shaJl be prepared at Grantor's expense. Grantor shall pay grantor's tax, and all documentary, transfer, and excise taxes imposed upon that conveyance. Grantor shall execute and deliver a non-foreign affidavit to Grantee at closing in the form required by Section 16~ of the Internal Revenue Code~ otherwise, Grantee wi]] withhold a portion of the Purchase Price and remit the same to the internal Revenue Services for the account of Grantor as required by law. Grantor also shall execute, acknowledge, and deliver any of the instruments, documents, and assurances required or requested by Grantee or a title insurance company in order to con- summate this transaction and effect the conveyance of the Rea] Estate to Grantee as herein provided~ including, without limitatio% a yen- dor's affidavit in form satisfactory and acceptable to Grantee's coun- se[. Possession of the Rea! Estate shall be delivered to Grantee at the closing, in the same condition as it now is, ordinary wear and tear only excepted, free and clear of the rights or claims of any other party. All warranties and representations of Grantor, and any covenants and obligations of Grantor hereunder which remain unper- formed upon closing, shall survive the closing. 1~. GRANTEE UNABLE TO CLOSE SALE. The terms of this Option notwithstanding, should Grantee be unable or unwilling for any reason to close on the sale of the Real Estate, including being determined ineligible for the Home Purchase Assistance Program by the Virginia Housing Development Authority~' after the exercise of this Option, this Option shall terminate without any liability incurred by Grantee, Grantee's assigns, successors, administrators, executors, officers, agents, employees, or any and all of Grantee's predecessors in inte- rest of this Option, if any. 15. GRANTOR UNABLE TO CLOSE SALE. If Grantor fails to close on the sale of the Real Estate for any reason, Grantor shall pay Grantee and its assigns, and all of Grantee's predecessors in inte- rest of this Option, if any~ all costs incurred, including costs incurred in the arrangement of the rehabilitation and financing for the sale of the Real Estate. 16. INDEMNITY. Grantor shall indemnify and hold Grantee, its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns, executors and administrators, and any and all of Grantee's predecessors in interest of this Option, if any, harmless from any and all claims, damages, losses, expenses, costs and attorney fees, as a result of, arising out of, or relating to the performance by Grantee under this Option. 17. TAXES. At closing, Grantor shall be responsible for and pay all real estate taxes upon the subject Real Estate to be pro- rated as of the Date of Closing. -6- I$. SUCCESSORS. The parties agree and fully understand that this Option shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors, assigns, executors and administrators. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT,. This Option contains and constitutes the entire agreement of the parties regarding the subject matter hereof, and there are no other agreements, written or oral, between the parties affecting the subject matter hereof. No amendment of this Option shall be effective unless the same is made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. 20. THIRD PARTY. This Option creates no rights in any party, except Grantor and Grantee. 21. DETERMINATIONS~ FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. All determina- tions~ findings and conclusions made by Grantee under this Option shall be made in the sole and absolute discretion of Grantee, and Grantor shall have no rights~ claims or causes of action against Grantee, its officers, agents~ employees, successors~ assigns~ exe- cutors and administrators~ and any and all of Grantee's predecessors in interest of this Option~ if any~ for Grantee's determinations, findings and conclusions. 22. NOTICES. Notice of exercise of this Option shall be given in the form attached as Exhibit B and in the manner set forth in this Option. All other notices~ requests or other correspondence relating to this Option shall be sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, by each party to the other party hereto at the addresses specified below or at such other address as a party may by written notice give as the - 7- address to which such future notices, requests and correspondence shall be sent hereunder: GRANTOR: GRANTEE: w/copy to: 2636 South Hills Drive Missoula, MT 39803 W. Robert Herbert, City Manager City o! Roanoke 36t~ Municipal Building Roanoke, Virginia 2~011 Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/ Zoning Administrator, City of Roanoke Room 170, Municipal Building Roanoke, Virginia 2#011 23. CONSTRUCTION. The interpretation, construction, and performance of this Option shall be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. All headings of sections of this Option are inserted for convenience only, and do not form part of this Option or limit, expand, or otherwise alter the meaning of any provisions hereof. This Option shall be executed in duplicate, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. This Option shall be construed without regard to any presumption or rule requiring construction against the party causing the Option to be drafted. 2t~. RECORDING. This Option shall be recorded in the land records of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke. EXECUTED and DELIVERED by Grantor and accepted by Grantee as of this 28th day of 3u1¥ , 1992 GRANTOR: ~(SEAL) (SEAL) -8- ATTEST: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk GRANTEE: CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA By W. Robert Herbert, City Manager COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ~~ } To-wit: I hereby certify that the foregoing Real Estate Option Agreement was acknowledged before me by Susan Lane , this 28th day of July , 1992. My Commission expires: January 29~ 1993 / COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ) To-wit: CITY OF ROANOKE ) I hereby certify that the foregoing Real Estate Option Agreement was acknowledged before me by W. ROBERT HERBERT and MARY F. PARKER, City Manager and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, on behalf of that municipal corporation, this day of , 1992. My Commission expires: Notary Public -9- EXERCISE OF OPTION I or we the undersigned do hereby exercise the Option dated ., 1991, assigned to me or us by the City of Roanoke. This Exercise of Option is done pursuant to the Agreement of Assign- ment dated , 19__. (SEAL) (SEAL) COMMON~I/EALTH OF VIRGINIA ) ) To-wit: CITY OF ROANOKE ) I hereby certify that appeared before me and acknowledged the ioregoing Exercise of Option on this__ day of , 19__. My Commission expires: Notary Public I of 1 EXHIBIT B EXERCISE OF OPTION I or we the undersigned do hereby exercise the Option dated , 1991, assigned to me or us by the City o{ Roanoke. This Exercise of Option is done pursuant to the Agreement of Assign- ment dated , 19 , (SEAL) (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ) ) To-wit: CITY OF ROANOKE ) I hereby certify that appeared before me and acknowledged the foregoing Exercise of Option on this__ day of , 19__. My Commission expires: Notary Public I of I EXHIBIT B 2930 Glenrose Avenue NW Official Tax Map #2#40~11 OPTION PRICE CITY ASSESSMENT House & Lot ATTACHMENT B $24,000.00 21,300.00 REAL ESTATE OPTION THIS REAL ESTATE oPTION (hereinafter referred to as "Option"), made this Ilth day of August , 1992, by and between Susan Lane (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), and the CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA (hereinafter referred as "Grantee"). W IT N ESSE TH: 1. GRANT OF OPTION. For and in consideration of One Dollars ($ 1.00 ), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor gives and grants to Grantee, its successors and assigns, the exclusive, assignable and irrevocable right and option to purchase the property, more particularly described in Section No. 2 of this Option, together with all easements, rights and appurtenances attached thereto, and all improvements thereon (hereinafter referred to as "Real Estate"). By giving and granting this Option to Grantee~ Grantor certifies that Grantor, and only Grantor, owns the Real Estate in fee simple. follows: DESCRIPTION OF REAL ESTATE. The Real Estate is described as 2930 Glenrose Avenue NW A parcel in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, City of Roanoke Official Tax No. 2t~t~0~ll, consisting of approximately 0.225 acres, more particularly described on the map attached hereto, labeled Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference herein, together with all easements, rights of way, water rights, appurtenances and improvements thereto belonging, the legal description for which is Pt Lots 7 & 8~ Block 6t Forest Park. 3. TERM OF OPTION. This Option shall commence on the date and at the time of execution of this Option by Grantor and Grantee. This Option shall expire at 11:59 p.m., on October 31, 1992, unless earlier exercised or terminated by Grantee. ~. EXERCISE OF OPTION. This Option shall be deemed validly and effectively exercised if notice of the exercise hereof is either sent by certified mail to Grantor at Susan Lane~ 2636 South Hills Drive Missoula~ MT 59803 , or delivered in person to grantor, on or before the expiration date and time of this Option. Notice of such exercise which is given by certified mail shall be deemed effective when deposited in the mail as aforesaid. For the period that this Option is effective, neither Grantor nor Grantor's employees, agents, tenants or representatives shall use or alter the Real Estate in a manner which would adversely affect its use by Grantee, and Grantor shall not sell, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose, of the Real Estate to any other party. The exercise of this Option shall result in Grantor selling and conveying the Real Estate to Grantee, and Grantee purchasing and accepting the Real Estate from Grantor, for the amount the Purchase Price, subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Option. Grantee reserves for it and its successors and assigns the right to terminate this Option at any time for cause or no cause at all, either before or after the assignment of this Option. 5. FAILURE TO EXERCISE OPTION. If Grantee does not exercise this Option, Grantor shall have no rights or claims against Grantee. G. INSURANCE. Upon execution of this Optio% Grantor shall maintain general liability insurance on the real estate during the - 2 - term of this Option, or any extension of said term, in an amount of $300~000 , and shall supply Grantee with a Certificate of Insurance, demonstrating that Grantee is a named insured on the policy of general liability insurance. 7. RIGHT OF ENTRY AND MARKETING OF REAL ESTATE. After the execution of this Option by Grantor and Grantee, and either before or after the exercise of this Option by Grantee, Grantee, or its agents or employees, may enter upon the Real Estate and perform all sur- veying, engineering, soil borings, appraisals, estimates of repairs and other tests and acts deemed necessary by Grantee to satisfy Grantee that the Real Estate is suitable for the uses and purposes intended by Grantee and is suitable for the Home Purchase Assistance Program (hereinafter referred to as the "Program"). All such tests and acts shall be performed at reasonable hours and at Grantee's cost and expense. In addition,. Grantee shall be entitled to publicize the Real Estate for sale, endeavor to identify a purchaser for the Real Estate, place a "For Sale" sign on the Real Estate, show the property to prospective purchasers, and take other reasonable and appropriate action deemed necessary by the Grantee to sell the Real Estate. Under no circumstances shall this section create any rights in the Grantor or impose any obligations upon the Grantee. g. REAL ESTATE MAINTENANCE. Grantor shall maintain the Real Estate and adjoining sidewalks and walkways in a safe and attractive manner during the term of this Option, and in the event of the exer- cise of this Option, until the date of closing. -3- 9. RISK OF LOSS. Grantor shall bear any risk of loss of the Real Estate during the term of this Option, or, in the event of the exercise of this Option, until the date of closing. 10. ASSIGNMENT. Grantee may assign this Option by written noti- fication to Grantor. Grantor shall not assign this Option, unless approved in writing by Grantee, and Grantee's approval of such an assignment may be withheld for any reason or no reason at all. If the Grantor assigns this Option, all references in this Option to the Grantor shall apply to the assignee. If the Grantee assigns this Option, all references in this Option to the Grantee shah apply to the assignee. In the event of an assignment by either the Grantor or the Grantee~ no claim may be asserted against the assignor based upo% arising out of, or related to this Option. 11. PURCHASE PRICE. The purchase price for the Real Estate shall be Twenty Four Thousand and NO/100 DOLLAR5 ($2#~000.00). 12. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE. The purchase price for the Real Estate shall be payable at closing. 13. CLOSING. If this Option is exercised, closing of the sale of the Real Estate shall be held within sixty (60) days of the date on which Grantor receives notice of Grantee's exercise of this Option~ or as soon thereafter as may be practically possible. Closing shall be held in Room 170, Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue~ Roanoke, Virginia, or at some other location selected by the City and mutually satisfactory to the parties. At closing, Grantor shall execute, acknowled§e, and deliver to Grantee, a §eneral warranty deed, with modern En§lish covenants of title, in form satisfactory and acceptable to the Grantee, conveying the Real Estate to Grantee, free and dear of all liens, tenancies, encumbrances, material defects, and exceptions, other than current taxes, and any other matters that may have been approved by Grantee in writing after examination of title. Said deed shall be prepared at Grantor's expense. Grantor shall pay grantor's tax, and all documentary, transfer, and excise taxes imposed upon that conveyance. Grantor shall execute and deliver a non-foreign affidavit to Grantee at closing in the form required by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code; otherwise, Grantee will withhold a portion of the Purchase Price and remit the same to the Internal Revenue Services for the account of Grantor as required by law. Grantor also shall execute, acknowledge, and deliver any of the instruments, documents, and assurances required or requested by Grantee or a title insurance company in order to con- summate this transaction and effect the conveyance of the Real Estate to Grantee as herein provided, including, without limitation, a ven- dor's affidavit in form satisfactory and acceptable to Grantee's coun- seh Possession of the Real Estate shall be delivered to Grantee at the closing, in the same condition as it now is, ordinary wear and tear only excepted, free and clear of the rights or claims of any other party. A11 warranties and representations of Grantor, and any covenants and obligations of Grantor hereunder which remain unper- formed upon dosing, shall survive the closing. -5- 1#. GRANTEE UNABLE TO CLOSE SALE. The terms of this Option notwithstanding, should Grantee be unable or unwilling for any reason to close on the sale of the Real Estate, including being determined ineligible for the Home Purchase Assistance Program by the Virginia Housing Development Authority, after the exercise of this Option, this Option shall terminate without any liability incurred by Grantee, Grantee's assigns, successors, administrators, executors, officers, agents, employees, or any and all of Grantee's predecessors in inte- rest of this Option, if any. 1~. GRANTOR UNABLE TO CLOSE SALE. If Grantor fails to close on the sale of the Real Estate for any reason, Grantor shall pay Grantee and its assigns, and all of Grantee's predecessors in inte- rest of this Option, if any, all costs incurred, including costs incurred in the arrangement of the rehabilitation and financing for the sale of the Real Estate. 16. INDEMNITY. Grantor shall indemnify and hold Grantee, its officers, agents, employees, successors~ assigns, executors and administrators, and any and all of Grantee's predecessors in interest of this Option, if any, harmless from any and all claims~ damages~ losses~ expense% costs and attorney fees~ as a result of, arising out of~ or relating to the performance by Grantee under this Option. 17. TAXES. At closing~ Grantor shall be responsible for and pay all real estate taxes upon the subject Real Estate to be pro- rated as of the Date of Closing. -6- 18. SUCCESSORS. The parties agree and fully understand that this Option shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors, assigns, executors and administrators. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Option contains and constitutes the entire agreement of the parties regarding the subject matter hereof, and there are no other agreements, written or oral, between the parties affecting the subject matter hereof. No amendment of this Option shall be effective unless the same is made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. 20. THIRD PARTY. This Option creates no rights in an)' party, except Grantor and Grantee. 21. DETERMINATIONS~ FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. AIl determina- tions, findings and conclusions made by Grantee under this Option shall be made in the sole and absolute discretion of Grantee, and Grantor shall have no rights, claims or causes of action against Grantee, its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns, exe- cutors and administrators, and any and all of Grantee's predecessors in interest of this Option, it any, for Grantee's determinations~ findings and conclusions. 22. NOTICES. Notice of exercise of this Option shall be given in the form attached as Exhibit B and in the manner set forth in this Option. All other notices, requests or other correspondence relating to this Option shall be sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, by each party to the other party hereto at the addresses specified below or at such other address as a party may by written notice give as the - 7- address to which such future notices, requests and correspondence shall be sent hereunder: GRANTOR: GRANTEE: w/copy to: Susan Lane 2636 South Hills Drive Missoula, MT 59803 W. Robert Herbert, City Manager City of Roanoke 36t~ Municipal Building Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/ Zoning Administrator, City of Roanoke Room 170, Municipal Building Roanoke, Virginia 24011 23. CONSTRUCTION. The interpretation, construction, and performance of this Option shall be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. All headings of sections of this Option are inserted for convenience only, and do not form part of this Option or limit, expand, or otherwise alter the meaning of any provisions hereof. This Option shall be executed in duplicate, each of which shall be deemed to be an 'original. This Option shall be construed without regard to any presumption or rule requiring construction against the party causing the Option to be drafted. 2#. RECORDING. This Option shall be recorded in the land records of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke. EXECUTED and DELIVERED by Grantor and accepted by Grantee as of this llth day of August , 1992 . GRANTOR: (SEAL) (SEAL) -8- ATTEST: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk GRANTEE: CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA By W. Robert Herbert, City Manager COMMONWEALT.-~ OF VIRGINIA . ~"i/~he~eb ~the )fore om y ' y g ' g Real Estate Option Agreement was acknowledged before me by Susan Lane , this llth day of August , 1992. My Commission expires: 3anuary 29~ 1993 Notary Public /] - COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ) CITY OF ROANOKE ) To-wit: I hereby certify that the foregoing Real Estate Option Agreement was acknowledged before me by W. ROBERT HERBERT and MARY F. PARKER, City Manager and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, on behalf of that municipal corporation, this __ day of , 1992. My Commission expires: Notary Public -9- \ A¥£. EXERCISE OF OPTION I or we the undersigned do hereby exercise the Option dated , 1991, assigned to me or us by the City of Roanoke. This Exercise of Option is done pursuant to the Agreement of Assign- ment dated , 19 . (SEAL) (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ) ) To-wit: CITY OF ROANOKE ) I hereby certify that appeared before me and acknowledged the foregoing Exercise of Option on this day of , 19__. My Commission expires: Notary Public I of I EXHIBIT B 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) 981-2~41 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #468B The Honorable William White, Sr., Chairperson Mr. Kit B. Kiser Mr. William F. Clark Gentlemen: A report of the City Manager recommending appointment of a bid committee to receive bids for Carvins Cove Improvements, Phase I, and report back to Council, rather than receiving said bids at a regular meeting of City Council, was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, Council concurred in the recommendation and you were appointed as members of the bid committee. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. L. Bane Coburn, Civil Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Const~action Cost Technician Ms. Dolores C. Daniela, Assistant to the City Manager for Community Relations Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Request Change in Bid Date Carvins Cove Improvements, Roanoke, Virginia Phase I II. I. Backqround: Phase I of Carvins Cove Improvements for engineering services was awarded by City Council to Mattern & Craig, Inc. in association with Alvord, Burdick, and Howson, on August 26, 1991. Desiqn work under the Phase I contract includes everything from the intake chamber at the dam, the redesign of the low lift pump station, all design work relating to the filter plant expansion and update, a new filter backwash system and a new 4 million gallon water storage reservoir. The project at the plant terminates with the water main connection below the connection of the existing and proposed finished water reservoirs, and some renovations to Boxley Hills Pump Station. Current Situation: Contract documents for construction have been completed and submitted to the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Health. The comments from the regional office have been incorporated into the contract documents and re-submitted for approval. From there they are forwarded to the Richmond office for final approval. It is anticipated that the project could be advertised by August 30, 1992. Consultants have recommended that bids be received on a date other than Monday which is the normal Council meeting time. They have recommended Friday, October 16, 1992. Page 2 III . IV. Issues are as follows: A. Anticipation of the number of bidders. B. Time of bid opening. C. Disruption of regular Council meeting. Alternatives are as follows: City Council approve the reception of bids at a time other than a regular Council meeting and appoint a Bid Committee to receive bids and report back to Council. Anticipation of the number of bidders on a project of this magnitude is that there will be quite a few. In addition to the general contractors, it is anticipated that quite a few subcontractors and material suppliers will also be in attendance. Time of bid opening, other than Monday, is recommended by the consultants. They believe that communication between contractors, subcontractors and material suppliers is better late in the week as compared to the first day after the weekend, thus resulting in lower, more responsive bids. Disruption of regular Council meeting could be avoided by having a Bid Committee receive bids and report back to Council. With a project of this magnitude, it is conceivable that the bid opening could require half the normal time of a regular Council meeting and fill the Council Chambers. Do not appoint a Bid Committee to receive bids open proposals before Council at its regular meeting. and Anticipation of the number of bidders would not change. Page 3 Time of bid opening would remain on a regularly scheduled Council meeting. Communication between contractors, subcontractors and material suppliers would not be as good as if the project were bid mid-week which could result in higher bids. Disruption of regular Council meeting would occur. With the number of contractors, subcontractors and material suppliers anticipated for this bid opening, it would definitely disrupt the regular Council meeting causing it to be much longer. V. Recommendations are as follows: A. Approve the implementation of Alternative A. City Council appoint a Bid Committee to receive bids at a time other than regular Council meeting and to report back to City Council at their next regular scheduled meeting time. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manger WRH/LBC/mm cc: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Director of Utilities & Operations City Engineer Citizens' Request for Service Construction Cost Technician MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virg/nia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 August 28, 1992 Deputy City Clerk File #27-468B Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31160-082492 authorizing execution of an Amendment to the Interjurisdictional Agreement with Roanoke County to provide for quarterly reporting of pretreatment activities, as stipulated in the Consent Order with the State Water Control Board. Resolution No. 31160-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: Ms. Mary H. Allen, Clerk, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, P. O. Box 29800, Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. Steven L. Walker, Manager, Water Pollution Control Plant Mr. M. Craig Sluss, Manager, Water Department IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31160-082492. VIRGINIA, A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of an Amendment to the Interjurisdictional Agreement with Roanoke County relating to pretreatment activities, upon certain terms and conditions. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that the City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute and attest respectively, in form appropriate Amendment to the Roanoke County for Industrial approved by the City Attorney, an InterJurisdictional Agreement with Pretreatment to include quarterly reporting, as more particularly set forth in the report by the City Manager to this Council dated August 24, 1992. ATTEST: City Clerk Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Amendments to Interjurisdictional Agreement to provide for Quarterly Reporting. I. BAC~G~OIJND: Consent Order has been entered into by City with the State Water Control Board to address specific items dealing with Industrial Pretreatment. (See attachment A) Inter~urisdtctional Agreement, dated Feb. 9, 1989, with Roanoke County needs to be amended to provide quarterly reporting of pretreatment activities as stipulated in the Consent Order. All other jurisdictions have provided for quarterly reporting in their agreements. 1972 Contract A~reements with the jurisdictions require all jurisdictions to adopt and enact sewer use ordinances identical to the City of Roanoke. Industrial pretreatment is a part of the sewer use ordinance. Do City Council is requested to authorize the City Manager to enter into an interjurisdictional agreement with Roanoke County to include quarterly reporting in the form approved by the City Attorney (see attachment B). II. 1. Timin~ 2. Need 3. Benefit 4. Cost III. ALTgI~IATIVE: City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an interjurisdictional agreement with Roanoke County to include quarterly reporting. Page 2 Timing is important as the agreement to include quarterly reporting is required by September 1, 1992. This is in accordance with the signed Consent Order. Need to comply with this condition of the signed Consent Order will be met. Benefit will be derived from a approved Pretreatment Program. Cost of administering the Pretreatment Program will remain the same. Council not authorize the City Manager to enter into an interjurisdictional agreement with Roanoke County to include quarterly reporting. TiminK requirement in Consent Order will not be met and could result in substantial penalties. Need to comply with the signed Consent Order will not be met. Benefit will not be derived from an approved Pretreatment Program. Cost of administering the Pretreatment Program will remain the same, unless fines or penalties are imposed. V. RECOMMENDATION: City Council concur with "Alternative A" authorizing the City Manager and City Clerk to execute and attest respectively an interjurisdictional agreement with Roanoke County in form approved by the City Attorney to include quarterly reporting. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH:SLW/ike CC: City Attorney Director of Utilities and Operations Attachment (A) City of Roanoke Consent Special Order e APPENDIX B Evaluate industrial users and POTW monitoring data from 1991 in terms of criteria for significant noncompliance as defined in 40 CFR Part 403.8 (f)(2)(vii). Publish the names of those industries determined to be in significant noncompliance, as accurately identified ~.. regulatory definitions, in the largest daily newspaper in the municipality and initiate aDDromriat~ enforcement action against such industrial users. -- ~ - Minimum level of enforcement for violators in significant noncompliance shall consist of an administrative order with a compliance schedule, including provisions for initiation of judicial proceedings with monetary penalties if the final compliance date is not achieved· The preceding shall be accomplished as soon as possible but no later than Sept~er 1, 1992. Correct the Enforcement Response Plan (the "ERP',) to conform with 40 CFR Part 403·8 (f)(5) in accordance with the comments outlined in correspondence dated March 11, 1992 from Robert K. Johnson, State Water Control Board Environmental Engineer to Mr. Steven L. Walker, Manager, Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant. A corrected ERP shall be submitted for the State Water Control Board Executive Director's approval as soon as possible, but no later than Bepte~ber 1, 1992. In accordance with Section 7.7 (B)(1) of VR 680-14-01, submit local ordinance and local limits for formal approval by the State Water Control Board,s Executive Director. This submittal shall be submitted as soon as possible, but no later than September lS, 1992. In accordance with Section 7.7 (B)(3) of VR 680-14-01, amend in ' ' ter]urlsdictional agreements for Roanoke and Botetourt Counties, to require quarterly reporting. The agreements shall be amended as soon as possible, but no later than September 1, 1992. Review and correct local and categorical limits in permits and industrAal user classification, by Deoember 1, 1992. Implement approved local ordinance (including the Interjurisdictional Agreement), local limits and Enforcement Response Plan within 30 ~&ys of approval by the Board's Wweoutive Direotor or his designee. City of Roanoke Consent Special Order Appendix B Page 2 7e No later than fourteen (14) calendar days following the dates identified in the above paragraphs, Roanoke shall submit to the Board,s Office of Enforcement, at P. O. Box 11143, Richmond, VA 23230-1143, a written notice of compliance, or noncompliance, with the requirements of said paragraphs. In the case of noncompliance, the notice shall include the cause of noncompliance and any remedial actions taken to address such noncompliance. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 August 14, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (703) 772-2005 Mr. W. Robert Herbert Roanoke city Manager 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Mr. Herbert: Attached is a certified copy of Resolution No. 81192-4 and Action Report No. 81192-4.b concerning authorization to amend the interjurisdictional pretreatment agreement between Roanoke County and Roanoke City. This resolution and board report were adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, August 11, 1992. Also attached are two copies of the agreement. Please execute both of these agreements, retain one for your file, and return the other to my office. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, bjh Attachment cc: Mary F. Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Parker, Clerk, Roanoke city Council Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Clifford Craig, Director, Utility XnterJurisdiotional Pretreatment ~greement Between City o£ Roanoka ~nd Roanoke County This Agreement is entered into this day of , 19 , between the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County. RECITALS WHEREAS, the City of Roanoke owns and operates a wastewater treatment system and, WHEREAS, Roanoke County currently utilized this wastewater treatment system pursuant to the Service Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County dated March 17, 1972; and WHEREAS, the City of Roanoke has developed and implemented an industrial pretreatment program pursuant to conditions contained in its discharge permit #VA002520 issued by Virginia State Water Control Board~ and WHEREAS, Section VII (B) of the above mentioned Service Agreement includea provisions to comply with lawful orders concerning mattere of pretreating wastes, and ~EREAS, the parties to this Agreement have agreed to amend the 28 March 1989 Agreement by the adoption of this amendment, which amends Agreement~ and the provisions of Section 7 of this WHEREAS, Roanoke County desires to continue to utilize the wastewater treatment system and recognizes its industrial waste control obligation under 40 CRF 403. In consideration of the following terms and conditions the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County agree: 1. Roanoke County shall adopt and diligently enforce a sewer use ordinance which is identical to the sewer use ordinance adopted by the City of Roanoke. Additionally, Roanoke County shall include a provision in its sewer use ordinance requiring any industrial user responsible for an accidental discharge to notify immediately both the city of Roanoke and Roanoke County. In order that the Roanoke County sewer use ordinance be adequate to administer the industrial pretreatment program within Roanoke County, the City of Roanoke shall explicitly incorporate the following provisions into its sewer use ordinance; (a) a prohibition on the use of dilution as a control technique for compliance with discharge limits except as allowed by Federal Pretreatment Standards; (b) a grant of authority to impose mass discharge limits in lieu of, or in conjunction limits; (c) a prohibition against with, concentration discharge and penalty for the knowing transmittal of false information by an industrial user in any reports they are required to submit; 2 e (d) a grant of explicit authority to require the installation of all monitoring and pretreatment facilities. The City of Roanoke and Roanoke County shall periodically (at a minimum of every three (3) years review their respective ordinances and jointly draft and adopt equivalent amendments to their respective ordinances when necessary to ensure the effective administration and operation of the pretreatment program. Whenever either the City of Roanoke or Roanoke County becomes aware of a problem with the pretreatment 9rogram which can be mitigated by a change in the sewer use ordinance, the City of Roanoke may adopt an amendment which Roanoke County shall adopt. The City of Roanoke ordinance shall not contain more stringent requirements to be met by industrial users in Roanoke County than are required to be met by industrial users within the City of Roanoke. The Roanoke County sewer use ordinance shall always remain identical to or more stringent than the City of Roanoke sewer use ordinance. The City of Roanoke ordinance shall require that the categorical pretreatment standards promulgated by the U.S. En¥iro~ental Protection Agency (EPA) (promulgated by authority of the Clean Water Act Section 307(B) and (C)) be auto~atically incorporated by reference into the City of Roanoke ordinance. The identical ordinance adopted by Roanoke County will, therefore, contain those same provisions. These standards shall supersede any specific 4e discharge limits in the ordinance which are less stringent than the categorical standard as they apply to a particular industry subcategory. Roanoke County shall notify all affected industrial users of pertinent categorical standards and monitoring and reporting requirements contained in 40 CFR 403.12 or included as part of the categorical standard. Roanoke County shall provide the City of Roanoke with copies of all required reports and monitoring documentation for submittal to the appropriate regulatory agencies by October of each year or as determined by the City of Roanoke. The city of Roanoke shall make the final determination as to whether a particular industrial user is classified as & significant industrial user or an industrial user based on information the City of Roanoke may request from Roanoke County. Roanoke County shall control, through industrial discharge permits, industrial waste discharge from each significant user or industrial user discharging into the public sewer. Roanoke County shall provide draft discharge permits to the City of Roanoke for review and incorporate any changes legally required by the City of Roanoke. If there exists any industrial user discharging to Roanoke County public sewer system but located outside the jurisdictional limits of Roanoke County, then Roanoke County shall negotiate and enter into an agreement with this outside jurisdiction. Such agreement shall be substantially equivalent to this Agreement, and shall be jointly executed by Roanoke County, the City of Roanoke and the outside jurisdiction. If the outside jurisdiction refuses to negotiate and execute an agreement, then Roanoke County shall enter into a contract with the industrial user which contains terms and conditions substantially equivalent to Roanoke County industrial discharge permits. Roanoke County shall file with the City of Roanoke a certified copy of its ordinance and any amendments thereto, other interjurisdictional agreements relative to sewer use, each industrial waste discharge permit issued, and any contract entered into for the purpose of industrial waste control within sanitary sewers. In October of each year, Roanoke County shall submit a report to the city of Roanoke which summarizes the pretreatment activities; inspection, sampling, self-monitoring, compliance status, enforcement actions, permit status, and industrial waste survey updates conducted by Roanoke County. On a quarterly basis, Roanoke County shall provide the city of Roanoke copies of all industrial monitoring report including 40 CFR 403.12 complianoe ~eports, self-monitoring reports, baseline re,rrm, records of violations and action taken, and any other monitoring or reporting requirements legally imposed by Federal, State or local regulations. These reports, records and relevant information shall be maintained for at least three (3) years. 5 Se 10. Any authorized officer or employee of the City of Roanoke may enter and inspect at any reasonable time any part of the public sewer system of Roanoke County. The right to entry and inspection shall extend to public streets, easements, and property within which the public system is located. Additionally, the City of Roanoke shall be permitted when accompanied by an authorized representative of Roanoke County, and as appropriate, to enter onto private property to inspect industrial waste dischargers. Roanoke County shall make all necessary legal and administrative arrangements for these inspections. The right of inspection shall include on-site inspection of pretreatment and sewer facilities, observation, measurement, sampling, testing, and access to (with right to copy) all pertinent compliance records located on the premises of the industrial user. The City of Roanoke shall review the Roanoke County ordinance and amendments thereto, and any interjurisdictional agreements for conformance with 40 CFR Part 403, and to ensure inclusion of all other legal provisions mandated by this Agreement. The City of Roanoke shall~eriodically review the enforcement efforts of Roanoke County to ascertain whether pretreatment requirements are being diligently enforced. If the City of Roanoke determines failed or has refused to fulfill obligations, the City of that Roanoke County has any legal pretreatment Roanoke may develop and issue a 6 11. remedial plan containing a description of the nature of the pretreatment deficiencies, an enumeration of steps to be taken by Roanoke County, and a time schedule for attaining compliance with all pretreatment requirements. Such plans shall be specifically enforceable in a court of competent jurisdiction. Where Roanoke County fails to satisfy the terms of the remedial plan, the city of Roanoke may, upon thirty (30) days written notice, refuse to accept any industrial waste discharges from Roanoke County. Roanoke County shall reimburse the City of Roanoke for fines or costs stemming from injury to City of Roanoke personnel, damages to the City of Roanoke facilities, disruption of treatment processes or operations, degradation of sludge quality, NPDES permit violations, and other air, water, and sludge quality violations proven to have been caused by a failure to Roanoke County to fulfill its pretreatment obligations. Where a discharge to the City of Roanoke wastewater treatment system reasonable appears to present an imminent danger to the health and welfare of persons, or presents or may present an imminent danger to the environment, or threatens to interfere with the operation of the wastewater treatment system, the city of Roanoke may ~mmediately initiate steps to identify the source of discharge, and to halt or prevent said discharge. The City of Roanoke may seek injunctive relief against Roanoke County and/or any 7 12. 13. 14. industrial user contributing to the emergency and/or may pursue other self-help remedies. The terms and conditions of this Agreement condition, shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The terms of this Agreement may be amended only by written agreement of the parties. This Agreement will remain in effect so long as the Service Agreement dated March 17, 1972 remains in effect. Termination of the Service Agreement shall also result in the termination of this agreement. The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date shown above. Elmer C. Ho~ge County Administrator Roanoke Courity, VA W. Robert Herbert City Manager City of Roanoke, VA ~ttest Attest APPROVED AS TO FORM: 8 MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virsinia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, ~0~< Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eric. pc: Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Gary N. Fenton, Manager, Parks and Recreation 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, Virginia 2~011 Telephone: (703) 981-2~41 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. Tony C. Price Sales Manager Monroe Systems for Business 3795 Aerial Way Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Mr. Price: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed equipment. Sincerely, ~O~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 2~1011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAI/IN D~puty City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. Frank Green Office Systems Representative ACME Business Machines P. O. Box 5129 Roanoke, Virginia 24012-0129 Dear Mr. Green: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed equipment. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eric. 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN D~puty City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. Joe Kephart High Volume Specialist Copy Van Company 5338 Peters Creek Road, N. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24019 Dear Mr. Kephart: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a reguiar meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed equipment. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN D~uty City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. Pat Bloodworth Branch Manager Paul B. Williams, Inc. P. O. Box 13341 Roanoke, Virginia 24033 Dear Mr. Bloodworth: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed equipment. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. MARY F. PARKER City Cl~rk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 212 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 4~6 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2~1 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. Norris Perry Sales Representative Commercial Imaging Group Eastman Kodak Company 3959 Electric Road Suite 330 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Mr. Perry: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed equipment. Sincerely, ~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:sw Eric. 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67-183-299-472 Mr. Mark Epperly Sales Representative Lanier Imaging Systems 1310 Plantation Road, N. E. Roanoke, Virginia 24012 Dear Mr. Epperly: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed equipment. Sincerely, ~O~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. 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) 981-2341 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #67=183=299=472 Ms. Donna B. Kemp Account Representative Xerox Corporation Charter Federal Building 2706 Ogden Road, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Dear Ms. Kemp: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31162-082492 authorizing acceptance of the bid submitted by Xerox Corporation, in the amount of $94,018.00, for two new Xerox 1090 Duplicators. Resolution No. 31162-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31162-082492. A RESOLUTION providing for the purchase of certain photcopier/duplicators for use by the City, upon certain terms and conditions, by accepting a bid made to the City for furnishing and delivering such equipment; and rejecting all other bids made to the City for such equipment. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The bid of Xerox Corporation made to the City offering to furnish and deliver to the City two (2) Xerox 1090 Duplicators for the sum of $94,018.00, is hereby ACCEPTED. 2. The City's Manager of General Services is authorized and directed to issue the requisite purchase order therefor, incorporating into said order the City's specifications, the terms of said bidder's proposal, and the terms and provisions of this ordinance. 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 to each 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #60-67-183-299-472 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31161-082492 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1992-93 Internal Service Fund Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $106,118.00 from Retained Earnings Unrestricted to Other Equipment - Management Services, in connection with purchase of certain photocopier/duplicators for use by the City, upon certain terms and conditions. Ordinance No. 31161-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, ~~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Gary N. Fenton, Manager, Parks and Recreation Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31161-082492. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1992-93 Internal Service 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 1992-93 Internal Service Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: Management Services (1) ........................ Retained Earning~ Retained Earnings Unrestricted (2) ............. 1) Other Equipment 2) Retained Earnings $ 570,874 (006-002-1617-9015) (006-3336) $ 3,503,680 $ 106,118 (106,118) BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: this City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Council Roanoke, Virginia Subject: Bid to Purchase and Appropriation of Funds for Replacement of Photocopiers/Duplicator - Bid Number 92-7-40 Dear Mayor and Members of Council: I. Back.qround: The Department of Management Services is charqed with the responsibility of providinq/maintaininq photocopy equipment capable of reproducinq an average of 210,000 copies per month for all City departments and agencies. These copiers are strategically located throughout the Municipal Complex, Courthouse and at outlying City facilities. B. The followinq equipment needs to be replaced in order to maintain the current level of productivity: Municipal Complex - The City's main copiers (2 Xerox 1090 Duplicators) reproduce an average of 150,000 copies per month. These particular copiers have a copy log in excess of 6,000,000 copies and have become unreliable due to maintenance requirements/downtime. Recreation Department - The Recreation Department currently has a small tabletop Savin - Model 895 copier which is extremely antiquated, makes very poor quality copies and is inadequate to meet their needs of approximately 7,000 copies per month. This particular copier was designed to handle a maximum of only 1,000 copies per month. Public Works Service Center - A Xerox Model 1025 copier was purchased in October, 1988, for use by the eight (8) City departments located at the Service Center. This copier, which was designed to handle between 3,000 - 5,000 copies per month, is inadequate to meet their needs of 9,000 copies per month. II. Current Situation: Municipal Building - There were no duplicators/copiers designed to adequately replace one of the existing main units (100,000 copies per month) listed on State Contract. Therefore, specifications were developed for a large-volume duplicator to replace the existing equipment. tonorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 2 Bid requests were specifically sent to thirteen (13) firms currently listed on the City's bid list with six (6) firms responding. A public advertisement was also published in the Roanoke Times and World News on April 1, 1992. Bids were received, after due and proper advertisement, until 2:00 p.m., on April 13, 1992, at which time, all bids so received were publicly opened and read in the Office of the Manager of General Services. All bids were evaluated in a consistent manner by representatives of Management Services and General Services. Due to complaints of restriction of bids from vendors concerning speed and size of copiers required and the shod time frame involved, all bids were rejected. Specifications were reevaluated and the speed required was reduced from 92 copies per minute to 85 copies per minute to allow for more competitive bids. It was determined at that time that further reduction of speed would greatly hamper our ability to provide timely and quality service to our users. Due to limited space, however, the size of the copiers required was not an item that could be altered. Bid requests were again requested and sent to thirteen (13) firms currently listed on the City's bid list with eight (8) firms responding. A public advertisement was also published in the Roanoke Times and World News and the Roanoke Tribune on July 19, 1992. Bids were received, after due and proper advertisement, until 2:00 p.m., on July 31, 1992, at which time, all bids so received were publicly opened and read in the Office of the Manager of General Services. All bids were evaluated in a consistent manner by representatives of Management Services and General Services. Bid tabulation is attached. The lowest responsible bid, meetinq specifications was submitted by the Xerox Corporation for a Model 1090 Duplicator at a total cost of $471009 each. All other bids took exceptions to the specifications that were substantial and could not be waived as informalities and are as follows: 1. 3RD FLOOR COPIER - 200,000 VOLUME PER MONTH: a. Monroe Systems for Business ($171595 Includinq Trade-In): Offset Stacker/Collator - This company bid their equipment without any type of sorter in order to meet size requirements. However, to manually sort needed information would be very time consuming and tedious, , Ionorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 3 Internal Auditor/Copy Controller - To account for all copies made and backcharge user departments, each department is assigned a specific account number which is programmed into the auditor. A five-digit account number is used to allow more efficient recognition/retrieval of account numbers/departments. b. Acme Business Machines ($21,495 Includinq Trade-In): Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. Offset Stacker/Collator - Offset stacker-styled collators are more time efficient, take up less space and create fewer instances of downtime due to jams and misfeeds. Again, space is extremely limited in this area. Internal Auditor/Copy Controller - To account for all copies made and backcharge user departments, each department is assigned a specific account number which is programmed into the auditor. A five-digit account number is used to allow more efficient recognition/retrieval of account numbers/departments. 4 Work-Hour Turnaround for Maintenance Calls - This company's stated average turnaround for maintenance calls was 8 hours. A 4 work-hour turnaround for maintenance calls is required as this copier is the main copier for the City. Copier downtime due to equipment malfunction/breakage lowers productivity and slows down the flow of required forms/documents. Copy Van Company: 85 Copies/Minute - The current copier produces approximately 92 copies per minute. Even at this speed, at times, users are lined out into the hallway waiting to make copies. 75 copies per minute will not meet the needs of the users, will decrease productivity and slow down the flow of required forms/documents. Paul B. Williams Company ($28,000 Includinq Trade-In): 220 Electrical Requirements - This particular copier uses 110 electrical outlet. Current area has 220 installed. In order to use this copier, outlet would have to be downgraded to 110. ,~onorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 4 Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. 85 Copies/Minute - The current copier produces approximately 92 copies per minute. Even at this speed, at times, users are lined out into the hallway waiting to make copies. 80 copies per minute will not meet the needs of the users, will decrease productivity and slow down the flow of required forms/documents. e. Kodak Company ($33,250 Includinq Trade-In): o New Equipment The equipment bid is a used/refurbished/ remanufactured piece of equipment; not new. Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. Enlarqement An enlargement feature was desirable, but not mandatory. Without this, however, users would have to go to copiers that do have this feature which are located in other departments - less time efficient. Xerox Corporation - Lowest responsible bid meeting specifications was submitted by Xerox Corporation. g. A.B. Dick Products - No bid submitted. h. Lanier Company - No bid submitted. 2. 4TH FLOOR COPIER - 1201000 VOLUME/MONTH: a. Monroe Systems for Business ($20,715 Includinq Trade-In): Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. · ~lonorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 5 O Internal Auditor/Copy Controller - To account for all copies made and backcharge user departments, each department is assigned a specific account number which is programmed into the auditor. A five-digit account number is used to allow more efficient recognition/retrieval of account numbers/departments. b. Acme Business Machines ($21,495 Includin.q Tradeqn): Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. o Internal Auditor/Copy Controller - To account for all copies made and backcharge user departments, each department is assigned a specific account number which is programmed into the auditor. A five-digit account number is used to allow more efficient recognition/retrieval of account numbers/departments. o 4 Work-Hour Turnaround for Maintenance Calls - This company's stated average turnaround for maintenance calls was 8 hours. A 4 work-hour turnaround for maintenance calls is required as this copier is the main copier for the City. Copier downtime due to equipment malfunction/breakage lowers productivity and slows down the flow of required forms/documents. c. Lanier Company ($23,635 Includinq Trade-In): 220 Electrical Requirements - This particular copier uses 110 electrical outlet. Current area has 220 installed. In order to use this copier, outlet would have to be downgraded to 110. Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. 85 Copies/Minute - The current copier produces approximately 92 copies per minute. Even at this speed, at times, users are lined out into the hallway waiting to make copies. 83 copies per minute will not meet the needs of the users, will decrease productivity and slow down the flow of required forms/documents. ,-Ionorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 6 Computer Paper Reduction/Feed - A great deal of paperwork is generated by the mainframe computer and is used by all City departments and agencies. Without this feature, copying computer forms would be tedious and extremely time consuming. Internal Auditor/Copy Controller - To account for all copies made and backcharge user departments, each department is assigned a specific account number which is programmed into the auditor. A five-digit account number is used to allow more efficient recognition/retrieval of account numbers/departments. d. Copy Van ($26,000 Includinq Trade-In): 85 Copies/Minute - The current copier produces approximately 92 copies per minute. Even at this speed, at times, users are lined out into the hallway waiting to make copies. 75 copies per minute will not meet the needs of the users, will decrease productivity and slow down the flow of required forms/documents. e. Paul B. Williams ($28,000 Includinq Trade-In): 220 Electrical Requirements - This particular copier uses 110 electrical outlet. Current area has 220 installed. In order to use this copier, outlet would have to be downgraded to 110. Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. 85 Copies/Minute - The current copier produces approximately 92 copies per minute. Even at this speed, at times, users are lined out into the hallway waiting to make copies. 80 copies per minute will not meet the needs of the users, will decrease productivity and slow down the flow of required forms/documents. Reduction (64% Varying) - Capability to reduce large documents is a necessity. This particular copier can reduce, but only to 65%. However, this would not cause any hardship for user departments. ~-Ionorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 7 f. Kodak Company ($33,250 Including Trade-In): o New Equipment The equipment bid is a used/refurbished/ remanufactured piece of equipment; not new. Size - The space where the copiers are to be located is extremely limited in size. In order to allow adequate ventilation (safety precautions), adequate room for maintenance of copiers and access to and from two City departments and a telephone utility room, the size of any copier for this area can be no larger than 6'L x 3"W. Enlargement An enlargement feature was desirable, but not mandatory. Without this, however, users would have to go to copiers that do have this feature which are located in other departments - less time efficient. g. Xerox Corporation - Lowest responsible bid meeting specifications was submitted by Xerox Corporation. An analysis was made by the Department of Management Services to determine actual copier needs for the Recreation Department and Public Works Service Center. Based on the information received, a Monroe - Model 935DX was selected. This copier is on State Contract at a cost of $6,050 each. III. Issues: A. Need. B. Compliance with specifications. C. Fund availability. IV. Alternatives: Council accept the lowest responsible bid meetinq specifications for two (2) new Xerox 1090 Duplicators as submitted by the Xerox Corporation at a cost of $471009 each and concur in the purchase of two (2) Monroe - Model 935DX copiers listed at State Contract cost of $6,050 each, for a total cost of $1061118. 1. Need - Requested equipment is needed to replace existing equipment which is unreliable and/or inadequate to meet the copying needs of the City of Roanoke. ,-Ionorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 8 2. Compliance with Specifications - The units recommended in this alternative meet required specifications. 3. Fund Availability - Funds are available in Internal Services Retained Earnings for equipment replacement. B. Reject all bids and the purchase of two (2) copiers listed on State Contract. 1. Need - Required replacement equipment would not be purchased resulting in copying needs of the City not being met in a timely and cost effective manner. 2. Compliance with Specifications - would not be a factor in this alternative. 3. Fund Availability - Available funds would not be expended. V. Recommendation: Council concur with Alternative "A", thereby accepting the lowest responsible bid meeting specifications for two (2) new Xerox 1090 Duplicators as submitted by the Xerox Corporation at a cost of $47,009 each and concur in the purchase of two (2) Monroe - Model 935DX copiers listed at State Contract cost of $6,050 each, for a total cost of $106,118. Appropriate $106,118 from Internal Services Retained Earnings account to Management Services' "Other Equipment" account #006-002-1617-9015 for these purchases. C. Reject all other bids. Respectfully submitted, City Manager BLK/MDS Attachment cc; City Attorney Director of Finance 0 E E ~ 0 · 8 · · 8 8 8 8 8 ~ g o© ~ o 5~ o o c~ 0 0 Z 0 0 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #102-405 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31164-082492 authorizing execution of a contract with Mattern & Craig, P. C., in the amount of $118,000.00, to perform preliminary work for Phase I, Replacement of Wainut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River, as more particularly set forth in a report of the City Manager under date of August 24, 1992. Resolution No. 31164-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw EHC. pc: Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Mr. Earl Sturgill, Civil Engineer Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Public Safety Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKF OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981=2541 SANDRA H. EAI(IN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #102-405 Mr. Steven A. Campbell Project Manager Mattern and Craig, Inc. 701 First Street, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Dear Mr. Campbell: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31164-082492 authorizing execution of a contract with Mattern & Craig, P. C., in the amount of $118,000.00, to perform preliminary work for Phase I, Replacement of Walnut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River, as more particulariy set forth in a report of the City Manager under date of August 24, 1992. Resolution No. 31164-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31164-082492. A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of a contract with Mattern & Craig, P.C. to provide certain engineering services, specifically the preliminary Phase I work relating to the replacement of the Walnut Avenue Bridge over the Roanoke River. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the City, to execute and attest, respectively, an agreement with Mattern & Craig, P.C. for the provision by such firm of engineering services, specifically, the preliminary Phase I work relating to the replacement of the Walnut Avenue Bridge over the Roanoke River, as more particularly set forth in the August 24, 1992, report of the City Manager to this Council. 2. The contract amount authorized by this resolution shall be in the amount of $118,000.00. 3. The form of the contract with such firm shall be approved by the City Attorney. 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #60-102-405 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31163-082492 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1992-93 Capital Fund Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $118,000.00 from the General Fund to Streets and Bridges - Walnut Avenue Bridge Repiacement Engineering, in connection with award of an engineering services contract to Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors, to perform preliminary work for Phase I, Replacement of Walnut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River. Ordinance No. 31163-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Mr. Earl Sturgill, Civil Engineer Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Public Safety Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, 1992-93 emergency. WHEREAS, Government of the exist. VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31163-082492. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the Capital Fund Appropriations, and providing for an for the usual daily operation of the Municipal City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Roanoke that certain sections of the Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, to read as follows, in part: Council of the City of 1992-93 Capital Fund amended and reordained A ro r'atlons Streets and Bridges $ 8,422,574 Walnut Avenue Bridge Replacement Engineering (1) ..... 118,000 1) Appropriation from General Revenue (008-002-9653-9003) $ 118,000 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor & Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF THE WALNUT AVENUE BRIDGE OVER ROANOKE RIVER II. I. Backqround: Annual Bridge Inspection Proqram has determined that the Walnut Avenue Bridge over the Roanoke River has continued to deteriorate to the point where major repairs and/or total replacement is required. Various avenues of repair and maintenanc~ to rehabilitate the bridge to safety standards were investigated but the necessary modifications were so extensive that partial or total replacement became the only feasible and cost effective approach. Advertisement requesting qualifying proposals (RFP) to do the necessary survey work, perform required environmental assessments, and produce design plans and all related construction documents was placed in the Roanoke Times & World News on May llth, 1992. Current Situation: A. Three consultant enqineering firms responded with qualifying proposals to perform the work in accordance with the Request for Professional Services as advertised. These firms were as follows: 1. Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors of Roanoke, Virginia 2. Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Architects, Engineers, & Planners of Roanoke, Virginia 3. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., Engineers, Planners, & Surveyors of Raleigh, North Carolina Honorable Mayor & Members of City Council RE: Replacement of the Walnut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River August 24, 1992 Page 2 Personal Interviews were held with all three of the referenced firms in the office of the City Engineer on Friday, July 10th, 1992, with the following persons representing the City as the review committee: 1. Charles M. Huffine, P.E., City Engineer 2. Philip C. Schirmer, P.E., L.S., Civil Engineer I 3. Earl Sturgill, Project Manager, Civil Engineer I Interview Process demonstrated to the Review Committee that Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors of Roanoke, Virginia, had the most compre- hensive understanding of the bridge problems and the scope of work involved. They further demonstrated that they had the professional and technical staff and specialized equipment to do the job on schedule. On this basis, it was decided that it would be in the best interest of the City of Roanoke to select this firm to do the project. Negotiations were conducted with Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors of Roanoke, Virginia, submitting a contract proposal to perform certain preliminary work designated as Phase I prior to final design and construction. This will provide the City with a recommendation for a design alternative with cost estimate for use in a future capital improvements bond referendum. Phase II (Design) and Phase III (Construction Quality Control) will be negotiated at a later date as funds become available. The work proposed in the contract is as follows: Phase I, Preliminary 1. Surveys $23,650.00 2. Geotechnical Investigations 11,000.00 3. Hydraulic Analysis 8,875.00 4. Approach Roadway Improvements 29,400.00 5. Bridge with Recommended Alternate & Estimate 39,075.00 6. Environmental Site Assessments 6~000.00 TOTAL CONTRACT PROPOSAL $118,000.00 A copy of the proposed contract is attached to this report. Honorable Mayor & Members of City Council RE: Replacement of the Walnut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River August 24, 1992 Page 3 III. Issues in Order of Importance: A. Engineerinq concerns in providing continued safety to the traveling public. B. Reasonableness of contract fee. C. Available fundinq. IV. Alternatives: Award Enqineering Services Contract to Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors to perform the work for the preliminary Phase I in the amount of $118~000.00. Engineerinq concerns will be met by providing adequate safety to the traveling public when construction is completed. Reasonableness of fee has been confirmed by comparing similar projects and VDOT guidelines. 3. Fundinq is available in the General Fund account number 001-004-9310-9508. Do not award engineering services contract to Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors, in the amount of $118,000.00 for Phase I· Enqineerinq concerns in providing adequate safety to the traveling public will not be alleviated; and the Walnut Avenue Bridge will continue to deteriorate to worsened conditions. Reasonableness of fee will have to be re-negotiated in the near future as the bridge will continue to deteriorate. Loads in excess of the posted 10 tons limit will be exceeded and result in an accellerated deterioration. Available fundinq will not be an issue at the present time but will have to be reconsidered in the near future. Honorable Mayor & Members of City Council RE: Replacement of the Walnut Avenue Bridge over Roanoke River August 24, 1992 Page 3 V. Recommendation is that the City of Roanoke: Award engineering services contract in a form approved by the City Attorney to Mattern & Craig, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Surveyors, for the preliminary Phase I work in the amount of $118,000.00. Authorize the Director of Finance to transfer $118~000.00 from the General Fund to the Capital Projects Fund to a new account entitled Walnut Avenue Bridge Replacement Engineering. Sincerely, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH/ES/fm cc: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Director of Administration and Public Safety City Engineer CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES This AGREEMENT, made at Roanoke, Virginia, this 6th day of~ust in the year 19 92 , by and between the City of Roanoke, Virginia (hebeinafter referred to as the "Owner.), and Mattern & Craig, Inc., 70] First Street, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 240]6 (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant,). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Owner intends to sponsor the accomplishment of the re. cement of the Walnut Avenue Bridge over the Roanoke River and Related Work (hereinafter referred to as the "Project", and other additional services as defined herein. WHEREAS, the Owner intends to contract for consulting services for the scope of services as hereinafter stated and as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto - (Scope of Services). , and WHEREAS, the Consultant agrees to furnish an executed "Certification of Consultant. and certain professional architectural, engineering, and land sur- veying services as appropriate and enumerated hereinafter, in connection with the Project. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the benefits which will accrue to the parties hereto by virtue of the Agreement and the Respective Covenants herein contained, IT IS MUTUALLY COVENANTED AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS: -1- II. C~ONSULTANT SERVICES FOR PHASE I ~ PRELIMINARV Consultant shall provide the following professionai services in eonnee- tion with the preparation of a development Plan for the orderly devel- opmen~t of the Project, 1. Consistent with the Owner,s intent to proceed as rapidly as possible with construction, the Consultant will emphasize, in prepa- ration of the development plan, the early identification bf Priorities in the project. 2. Attend various general public meetings (conducted and scheduled by the Owner) as the Owner may request and thereby meet with various resi- dents to obtain their knowledge of specific problems. 3. Prepare preliminary opinion of probable Project Costs. 4. Provide the'Phase I services as described in Exhibit A ___~e of Services). Not Used CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR PHASE II - DESIGN Consultant agrees to furnish and perform the various profes~ ~s required for the design of the Project scope of work, and upon written notice to proce~ follows: Ldescribed in Exhibit A 1. Attend ~ded, detailed conferences with the ~ representa- tives and other involved in the of the Project. 2. Prepare fa, where applications required by ., State, 3. Furnish Owner up to five and Other contract drawings authority. for regulatory permit authorities. of drawings, specifications, by Owner and approving 4. Render nlarifica of the construction provisions, when if such clarification is 5. Prepar~ ~d Project Cost Estimate and for the Owner. ~s and special provi- necessary, quence of -2- staff dur the Owner up to five (5) copies of approved ions and other contract documents for use by the 7. Prepare ents for the Projeet for use Issue documents for Conduct ~ eonstruntion 8. Assist the O~ner in securing bid results, and furnish contrant. the O~ner. conference forgone (l proJeet design. tablulat[ons, and analysis of the award or. construction ~the 9. Assist in the of formal eontraet for the award needed. lC. -3- " I II. ~ot Used CONSULTANT SERVICES F~R PHASE III - CONSTRUCTION Upon Owner,s written direction to Consultant to proceed with 'of A. the Consultant agrees to the various professional services required for the Project as follows: Coordination: and ion the pre-construction meeti and advise the O~mer during elementary sketches and sup to resolve problems arising diti, ~ md. Prepare where ,riate. ' sketches actual field con- for Chan~e Orders ® Check der mitred by. construction, for comp] Review and contractors, Record Pre are ~.A..4L.~,, P .......... dr on information the Owner,s ins reproducible drawl (without professi( Autocad format (! and erection drawings sub- with design concept. requests monthly and final payment to overview visits. and verify final quantities based the contractors and verified by rnish Owner one (1) set of mylar '£de Owner one (1) set ofe~_~ngs seal) 3-1/2" computer discs in Record or B. ~d Consultation: /~. Conduct at least four (4) fle~d overviews er men / .Gon~rru~ti~n C~a~,-~t Curing '~e construet~. ~ ~.even days between ~ucn complaint· with the a$Dro~ed ~lans and specifications. .~ct -4- Render a semi-final inspection report including a punch li of uncompleted items on the project work to the Owner, a final report or reports that shall certify to the that the work involved has been completed in substantial dance with the plads, speoifieations and eontraet ks the same may have been modified, or supplemenl by change SUpPlementary contract, or otherwise such is acceptable or shall indicate in what the Work is cient and what steps need to be work ptable. Tender the Observe order to on the part however, is not safety in, on, or Consultant is not in equipment, building, work aids; nor is Cons the work. and advise the Own, the Owner against Work of the of the Provide assis~ as an expe~t wi ment or coflst to he ri,got deficiencies in and deficiencies Consultant, Contractor,s work, or site. Owner recognizes that the safety or adequaey of any scaffolding,. responsible for superintending as assooiated at the time assi~ requested, to the Owner, from the develop. Jeer, for a fee is requested. IV. S~CHEDULE FOR DELIVERY OF WORK By CONSULTANt- The Consultant shall accomplish the work with due diligence and complete work as follows: A. Phase I -~ks of Owner's written not,ce to proceed ~ with this phase. Included in this time is an allowance of 4 weeks for the 0~er to review the Concept StUdy Report. The Contract schedule shall be extended a like amount of time for any time exceeding this 4 week review time. -5- B. Phase. I! - C. Phase !I! - Exhibit The ~e~ ~ee~ to pay the ~nsultant as oOmpensablon fo~ ~ende~tn~ the P~ofess~onal services above dese~Ebed as follows: A. FoP sePvices..outlined in ~eotion I PPeliminary, a fee .not to exoeed ~red e~ ~ee~ ~housa~d d basis O~the ~~...~. ~ l o_e~'s time at a m uted ulti le of 2.3 times Direct Per- s~l E~p~S' plus Reimbursable Expenses times a multip]e 0f l.lS. Z~ ~ ~jom eb~ase om ~ddlt~on to the aeope oE ~omk ~ eztems~oms o~ t~me Eo~ eomplet~on oB the pmoJeeta a~e mequl~ed (mot. caused b~ the Co~ault~:t),a eb~m~e to tb~s ~reement ~11 be me~ot~ted b7 the Pamt~ee. ~he abo~e Eec ~e based breakdown sho~ ~~ ~ . on the oost pomtion to se~iees.perfommed as de2emmined by the ~em. ~equests for pa~en~ meoeived by 2he ~em by 2he 20th of the month will be paid by ~he loth oF the following month. or servioes ou21ined Seotion II - DeSign, a fee no2 2o [~a ~Jor ~ange om ad scope of work is required (no2 oaused by the ~nsul2a ehan e -6- Direct Personnel Expense is defined as the salaries of pro- fessional, technical, and clerical employees engaged on the Project by the Consultant and the cost of mandatory and customary fringe benefits such as statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, etc. The cost of ~andatory a~d customary fringe benefits shall be computed at 30 percent of salaries. Current hourly rates of employees are' attached as Exhibit~ and may vary during the term of t~s AG~££M£NY. C Reimbursable Expenses are. ]- Expenses of transportation and living expenses for required out of Roanoke travel in connection with the Project. Expenses claimed shall not exceed Runzheimer Meal - Lodging Cost Pocket Guide, latest edition, amounts for nearest loca- lities listed.to places traveled. 2. Fees paid by the Consultant for securing approval of authori- ties having Jurisdiction over the project. 3. Costs to the Consultant for aerial topography or photogram- metric mapping of the Project as are approved by the Owner prior to obtaining services. 4. Costs to the Consultant for outside consulting geotechnical and laboratory testing services for this Project as are approved by the Owner prior to obtaining the services. 5. Costs to the Consultant for outside consulting services for this Project as are approved by the Owner prior to obtaining the services. 6. Other costs to the Consultant for this Project as are approved by the Owner prior to obtaining the services. ?. Ail approved reimbursable expenses shall be billed to the Owner at the direct cost to the Consultant multiplied by o Costs to the Consultant for rental of equipment necessary to complete the field inspection (ladders, etc.) as approved by the Owner prior to obtaining the equipmment. -7- Fe Consultant,s Computer Aided Drafting and Design (CADD) and equipment use shall be billed to the Owner at the hourly rate set forth in Exhibit ~' to this Agreement. C N/^ VI. SPECIAL CONDITIONS It is further agreed by the Parties hereto that one reproducible copy each of the drawings, tracinEs' construction plans, specifi- cations and maps prepared or obtained under the terms of the contract shall be delivered to and become the property of the Owner and basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations and other data shall be made available upon request by the Owner without restriction or limitation on their use. Consultant shall deliver to Owner, at Owner,s request, drawings in Autocad format (Release l~at no additional cost to the Owner. higher It is further agreed by the Parties hereto that the Consultant shall proceed to furnish professional services on any phase of the Project under the terms provided in this Agreement, only after the Notice to Proceed has been given in writing by the Owner. Each party binds itself, its principals, successors, executors, administrators and assigns to perform all covenants of this Agreement. Except as above noted, neither the Owner nor the Consultant shall assign, or transfer his interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other Party hereto. This agreement expires upon final approval and acceptance of the completed Project by Owner and any participating agencies. The Consultant a~rees to conduct the services in compliance with all the requirements imposed by or pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Part 21 of the Regulations of the Secretary of Transportation and Executive Order No. 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity, as supplemented in Department of Labor Regulations (49 CFR, Part 60); and agrees to comply with appli- cable standards, orders or regulations issued pursuant of the Clean Air Ant of 1970; and will maintain an Affirmative Action Program. -8- Owner advises Consultant that failure of Consultant to carry out the requirements set forth in 45 Federal Register 21186, Section 23.43 (a) (1980) dealing with m~nor%ty business enterprise, where appropriate, shall constitute a breach of contract and may result in termination of this a~reement or such remedy as Owner deems appropriate. Owner requires Consultant to comply with any and all applicable and lawful Federal regulations, as they may be from time to time amended. H. The Consultant agrees that the Owner, and any approving Federal or State Agency or any of their duly authorized representatives, shall have access to any books, documents, papers, and records of the Consultant which are directly pertinent to any specific grant program with respect to this Project for the purpose of making audit, examinations, exnerpts and transcriptions. I. Consultant shall maintain insurance with a quality company durinE the life of the Contract and furnish Owner Ce~tif[ea~es of Insurance naming the Owner, its officers, agents, and employees as additional insureds, providing coverage against any and all claims and demands made by any person or persons whomsoever for property damages or bodily injury (including death) incurred in connection with the services to be provided under this Agreement~ 'Minimum limits of liability shall be as indicated below: a. Commercial General Liability: $2,000,000 Combined Single Limit to include Contractual, Owners and Contractors Protective, and Personal Injury (Libel, Slander, Defamation of Character, etc.) b. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 Combined Single Limits. The above amounts may be met by an umbrella liability poliny following form of the underlying primary coverage in a minimum amount of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000). e. Professional Liability: $1,000,000 per claim/ $2,000,000 aggregate. The Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless Owner and its officers, agents, and employees against any and all liability, losses, damages, claims, causes of action~ suits of any nature, cost, and expenses, including reasonable attorney,s fees, resulting from or arising out of Consultant,s negligent activities or omissions on Owner,s property or arising out of or resulting from Consultant,s negligence in providing the services under this Agreement, including, without limitation, fines and penalties, violations of federal, state or local laws, or regulations pro- mulgated thereunder, personal injury, w~ongful death or Property damage claims. -9- 11/26/91 VII. Be While on Owner,s property and in its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall not transport, dispose of.or release any hazardous substance, material or waste, except as necessary in performanc6 of its work under this Agreement and Consultant shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances controlling air, water, noise, solid wastes and other pollution, and relating to the storage, transport, release or disposal of hazardous materials, substances or waste. Regardless of Owner,s acquiescence, Consultant shall indemnify and hold Owner, its officers, agents, and employees, harmless from all costs, liabilities, fines 'or penalties, including attorney,s fees resulting from violation of the preceding paragraph and agrees to reimburse Owner for all costs and expenses incurred by Owner in eliminating or remedying such violations. Consultant also agrees to reimburse Owner and hold Owner, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from any and all costs, expenses, attorney,s fees 'and all penalties or civil Judgments obtained against the Owner'as a result of Consultant,s use or release of any hazardous substance or waste onto the ground, or into the Water or air from or upon Owner,s premises. The Consultant agrees to waive any and all statutes of limitations applicable to any controversy or dispute arising out of the pre- ceding paragraphs and Consultant further agrees that it will not raise or plead a statute of limitations defense-against Owner in action arising out of Consultant,s failure to comply with the pre. ceding paragraphs. SPECIAL PROVISIONS A. 'If any of the services outlined in Section I, -I-I--~---~-I-are fur- nished by the Consultant by obtaining such services outside the Consultant,s organization, the Consultant shall provide an exe- cuted contract between the person(s) or firm and the Consultant shall outline the services to be performed and the charges for the same. Two copies of the executed contract shall be submitted to the Owner for approval prior to the services being performed. Approvals shall not be unreasonably withheld. The consultant shall comply with the provisions of Roanoke City Code 23.1-20, a copy of which is attached. The Owner shall make available to the Consultant all technical data that is in the Owner,s possession, including maps, surveys, property descriptions, borings, and other information required by the Consultant and relating to his work. The Owner shall designate, in writing to the Consultant, the name of the Owner,s project manager for the Project. -10- The Owner shall pay for publishing costs for advertisements of notices, public hearings, requests for bids, and other similar items; shall pay for all permits and licenses that may ~e require~ by Local, State or Federal authorities; and sh~ll seeure the necessary land, easements, right-of-way required for the Projent. The Owner and Consultant, by seven days written notice, may ter- minate this agreement in whole or in part at any time, because of the failure of the other party to fulfill its' agreement obliga- tions. Upon receipt of such notice, the Consultant shall: (1) Immediately discontinue all services affected (unless the notice directs otherwise), and (2) deliver to the Owner all data, drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries and sunh other information and materials as may have been accumulated by the Consultant in performing this agreement whether completed or in process. 1. If the termination is due to the failure of the Consultant to fulfill his agreement obligations, the Owner may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by agreement or otherwise. In such ease, the Consultant shall be liable to the Owner for any damages allowed by law, and upon demand of Owner shall promptly pay the same to Owner. 2. Should the agreement be terminated, the Consultant shall be entitled to and shall receive a fee based on nest plus a fixed fee to the day of notification, provided such fee be approved by any applicable Federal or State approving agency. For services completed the Consultant shall receive payment for his costs plus a percentage of the fixed payment as described in Section V. The percentage shall represent the amount of work completed to date compared to the estimated amount of work to complete the total project. 3- The rights and remedies of the Owner provided in this Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this agreement. If the oonstruntion plans are completed in accordance with cri- teria and/or decisions made by the Owner and the said nonstruction plans are substantially changed or revised, for any reason other than the fault of the Consultant in preparing same, then the Consultant shall he entitled to compensation for rendering the services necessary to complete the changes. The amount of this fee shall be negotiated between the parties, with the conourrenee of any applicable Federal or State approving agency, prior to authorizing the Consultant to proceed with the changes. The fee for the changes shall be due and payable when the revisions are approved by the Owner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have affixed their hand and seals. ATTEST: Secreta~ Mattern & Craig, Inc. (SEAL) . ~-- (SEAL) President~--f~re~-i~wn~r CITY OF ROANOKE, ATTEST: By., City Manager City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Appropriation and Funds Required for this Contract Certified Director of Finance Date: Account #: -12- ROANOKE CODE Sec. 23.1-20. Employment discrimination by contractor prohibited. Every. contract of over ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) to which the City is a party shall contain the provisions in subparagraphs (a) and (b) herein: (a) During the performance of this contract, the-contractor .ggrees as follows: (1) The contractor will not discriminate against any subcontract, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin, except where religionf sex, or national origin is a bonafide occupational qualification reasonable necessary to the normal operation of the contractor. The contractor agrees to post in conspIcuous places, available .to employees and applicants, for employment,.not~c~s ~etting forth the provlslons of this nondlscr~mlnatlon Clause. (2) The contractor, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by oron behalf of the contractor, will state that such contractor is an equal employment opportunity employer. (3) Notices, advertisements and solicitations placed in accordance with federal law, rule or regulation shall be deemed sufficient for the purpose of. meeting the requirements of this section. (b) The contractor will include the provisions of the foregoing subparagraph (a)(1), (2) and (3), in every sLlbcontract or purchase order of over ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), so that the previsions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. (Ord. No. 26298, & 1, 12-6-82) Sec. 23.1-21. Debarment. Prospective contractors may be debarred from contracting for particular types of supplies, services, insurance or construction for specifiedperiods of time. Any debarment procedure, which may provide for debarment on the basis of a contractor'sunsatisfactory performance of the City or for violation of federal or state laws relating to antitrust or federal or state law or local ordinance. -13- CERTIFICATION OF CONSLrLTANT I hereby certify that I am the President and duly authorized (Title) representative of the f-irm of Mattern & Craig, Inc. whose address is __~ First Street, --~oano e, lrg , and that neither I nor the above f~-h~re ~ ~s.' .... __, (a) employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bonafide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) to solicit or secure this contract; (b) agreed, as an expresa or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the contract; or, (c) paid or agreed to pay any firm, organization, or person (other than a bonafide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) any fee contri- bution, donation, procuring or carrying out the contract, except as here expressly stated (if any); NONE I acknowledge that this certificate is furnished to the City of Roanoke in con- nection with this contract and is subject to applicable state and federal laws, both criminal and civil, 8/6/92 DATE Sam H. McGhee, III President Johnson & Biggins of Virginia, Inc. Post Office Box 2470 Roanoke, Virginia 24010 INSURED Mattern & Craig, Inc. 701 First Street, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24016 COVERAGES ISSUE DATE (MM/DDIYY) 07/14/92 THIS CERTIFICATEISISSUED AS A MATTER OFINFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POL C ES BELOW. COMPANY LETTER A COMPANY LETTER B COMPANY LETTER C COMPANY LETTER O COMPANY LETTER E COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company Lloyd's of London THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. LCT~ TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. OWNER'S & CONTRACTOR'S PROT, 1MP14095801500 01/01/92 01/01/93 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000 ~ 000 PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG. $ 2 ~ 000,000 PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY $ I ~ 000 ~ 000 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1 , 000~ 000 FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) $ 100,000 MED~ EXPENSE (Any one pemon) $ ~ · ~ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY A X ANY AUTO X ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILITY 1AB30049972700 01/01/92 01/01/93 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT BODILY ~NJURY (Per person) BODILY INJURY {Per accident) $ $ $ PROPERTY DAMAGE $ EXCESS LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 2~/000~000 A X UMERELLAFORM 1MP14095801500 01/01/92 01/01/93 AGGREGATE * OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM WORKER'S COMPENSATION VA STATUTORY LIMITS A A.S 66 44995926 01/01/92 01/01/93 EACH ACCIDENT $ 100,000 EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY DISEASE--POLICY LIMIT $ .~00 DISEASE--EACH EMPLOYEE $ OTHER $2,000,000 Per Claim B Architects/Engineers CJ920618 05/01/92 05/01/93 $2,000,000 Aggregate $ 65,000 Deductible DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONSIVEHICLESISPECIAL ITEMS RE: Walnut Avenue Bridge Replacement CF=R¥iFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION City Of Roanoke ~ngineering Department Rm 350, bJuniciple Bldg. 215 W. Church Avenue Roanoke, Virginia 24015 ACORD 25-$ (7/90) SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL c~ DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO MA~L SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY O~F ANY KIND UPON TI~ COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. THORIZE E~PRESENT VE ~ EXHIBIT A TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR WALNUT AVENUE BRIDGE OVER ROANOKE RIVER REPLACEMENT This is an Exhibit attached to, made a part of and incorporated by reference into the Agreement made on August 6, 1992 between the City of Roanoke, Virginia (OWNER) and Mattern & Craig, Inc. (CONSULTANT) providing for professional engineering services. The scope of services are supplemented as indicated below. The work to be performed by the CONSULTANT under THIS AGREEMENT shall consist of conceptional studies and the preparation o~ Right-of-Way and construction plans, easement plats, utilities, signs, pavement markings, and lighting plans. PHASE I - PRELIMINARY SURVEYS - A complete location survey shall be made as necessary for design of the Project. A survey centerline or baseline shall be established following as closely as practical the alignment expected for the final road and bridges plans. Before the survey is begun, the CONSULTANT shall furnish a list of the names and addresses of all property owners to THE CITY that may be affected by the survey. THE CONSULTANT will prepare and mail to each property owner a letter executed by the City Engineer advising of the necessity to enter their property. All letters returned hthe post office will ~e delivered to the CONSULTANT. e CONSULTANT shall notify the City Engineer in writing before sending survey crews to the project. The CONSULTANT shall perform all surveys involved in staking out the location of soil investigations and structure borings. This work will involve the staking of the centerline of both main lines, and intersecting roads as may be required and will cover the entire length of the project. All data in possession of the Owner covering previous surveys on the proposed route and project will be made available to the CONSULTANT. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION - Provide a geotechnical investigation of the area adjacent to the existing abutments. Geotechnical Investigation shall include four boring locations. The Owner will provide flagmen and traffic control devices during the drilling operations. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS - Provide hydraulic analysis to include the following: Revise Army Corps of Engineers, HEC-II analysis for up to four (4) bridge alternatives. - Provide sketches showing proposed channel change and cross sections. Rerun Army C.O.E. HEC-II program for the four. alternatives. - Provide Owner copies of program runs. APPROACH ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS - Concept Studies' The conceptual study drawings shall be prepared by the CONSULTANT on manuscript scrolls for up to four concepts. The layouts shall show the roadway base lines and edges of pavement, approximate limits of construction, proposed connections, approximate proposed right of way limits, existing ground profiles along the base lines and proposed grade lines, approximate major structure limits and location, proposed typical roadway sections and any other data which may be deemed necessary in determining the final location and preliminary plan development of the project. Sufficient preliminary hydrologic and hydraulic data shall be included for structures whose design may affect the proposed roadway alignment and/or grade. Preliminary cross sections will be plotted as deemed necessary for estimating purposes. Preliminary plans and estimates of construction costs shall be furnished by the CONSULTANT for review and approval by the Owner. Right-of-Way and easement cost estimates will be prepared by the Owner. BRIDGE Conduct Field investigations Concept Studies to determine: and Preliminary - Condition of existing pier and abutments - Scour Potential - One Or two spans (simple vs. continuous) Steel framing (rolled girders, thru-beams, etc.) structure depths for each beams, plate and required Lengthen span to widen abutment type channel/new Vertical clearance (above Flood Plain)/coordinate with hydraulics A-2 Be - Alignment/curvature in bridge - Parapets (match standard) - Expansion joints - Lighting (Historical research) _ Utilities (over construction site) utility _ Handicapped access - Constructability (work platform in waterway) Cost estimates/advantages/disadvantages - Report preparation (including recommendations) - Review report with Owner Provide preliminary construction plans and cost estimates for selected scheme to include: - Bridge plan and elevation - Typical sections - Miscellaneous details - Preliminary cost estimates - Review with Owner adj. bridge/VDOT bridge/within coordinate with 6J ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS - Perform Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESA's) on sites other than those associated with the Corps of Engineers Flood Reduction Project suitable for use in property acquisition. The ESA's will culminate in a report that will convey our professional opinion about the property's potential for being contaminated by hazardous materials. The report will document the boundaries of the site, off-site research, and identify sources of information and when information was obtained. If appropriate, the report A-3 will discuss additional work that could be undertaken to provide a more reliable opinion. The scope of our services will include: ae Review of Public and Other Historical Record~ Review existing maps and similar data such as available historical aerial photos, historical maps, soil maps, Sanborn Fire Insurance maps and USGS prints. Review published surface and subsurface information for the site vicinity, including geotechnical boring logs and available utility plans. Review public documents to ownership at least since 1942, prior uses of the site properties, when possible. identify site and to identify and adjacent Be Site Determine the proximity of the closest National Priority List Superfund cleanup site. Reconnaissance and Interview~ Walk over the sites and make visual reconnaissance of surface conditions, drainage, utility lines, general housekeeping, soil, odor, vegetation, debris, and note evidence of any illegal disposal practices. Note and record information about the location and sizes of structures on site. Note and record appropriate information gained by observing adjacent sites. Interview appropriate Public officials with respect to water supply, soil or groundwater contamination, or waste disposal at or in the vicinity of the site; make inquiries to determine if there may be any records about underground tanks. When possible, interview parties who may be familiar with past uses of the site or adjacent sites. C. prepare Environment Evaluation ReDort Report will include documentation of our work and results of our environmental assessment of the site with respect to potential contamination by hazardous waste. The report will also include recommendations on the need for Phase II investigation if needed.. Submit two (2) copies of draft report for City's review prior to final report being issued. - Submit five (5) copies of final report. The scope of services to be provided by Mattern & Craig under THIS AGREEMENT does not include asbestos investigation in buildings on site, radon evaluation, or other ancillary studies, nor does it include perforating sampling and testing of air, soil, or groundwater. Based on the course of action selected by the Owner for the Walnut Avenue Bridge, the Owner reserves the right to negotiate with the Consultant for additional environmental studies and final design phase, bidding phase, and construction phase services and full time resident inspection services under this Agreement. A-5 EXHIBIT B TO AGREEHENT BETWEEN OWNER ~ ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR WALNUT AVENUE BRIDGE OVER ROAIq'OKE RIVER REPLACEMENT OWNER shall pay CONSULTANT for Professional Services rendered as described in Exhibit A fees not to exceed the following amounts: Phase I - Preliminary 1. Surveys $ 23,650.00 2. Geotechnical Investigations 11,000.00 3. Hydraulic Analyses 8,875.00 4. Approach Roadway Improvements 29,400.00 5. Bridge 39,075.00 6. Environmental Site Assessments 6,000.00 TOTAL $ 118,000.00 EXHIBIT C TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR WALNUT AVENUE BRIDGE OVER ROANOKE RIVER REPLACEMENT HOURLY EQUIVALENT DIRECT PERSONNEL EXPENSES* July 15, 1992 Principals Vice President Engineer Inspector Marketing Manager Design Technician Technician $ 37.32 40.~3 Surveyors $- 31.53 29.45 28.78 28.33 27.83 26.77 23.62 21.88 18.99 17.28 16.81 16.17 16.07 15.60 14.68 13.00 12.17 Clerical 13.52 20.80 18.20 CADD 17.62 17.23 PC/AT 16.90 16.54 16.25 16.03 12.14 12.05 11.91 11.70 10.97 8.84 8.45 8.28 *Includes fringe benefits. Divide by 1.3 to obtain hourly pay rates. 24.21 16.25 15.99 15.70 13.00 11.71 9.56 9.46 9.10 8.88 8.70 7.15 6.83 6.18 5.85 5.53 17.24 12.06 11.05 10.41 10.00 9.66 9.37 8.45 42.49 10.00 ~0 <o 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 ~NDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #27-472 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31166-082492 accepting the bid of Cues, Inc., in the amount of $27,910.00, for providing pipe inspection system equipment in order to visually inspect the internal condition of sanitary sewer lines in the City, as more particularly set forth in a report of the City Manager under date of August 24, 1992. Resolution No. 31166-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services Mr. Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of AuEust, 1992. No. 31167-082492. A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of a written agreement with the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority relating to the performance of certain Community Development Block Grant program activities to be undertaken by the City during Program Year 1992-1993. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager is hereby authorized to execute, for and on behalf of the City, a written agreement, more particularly described in the report of the City Manager dated August 24, 1992, and providing for the provision of certain administrative services under the City' s Community Development Block Grant for the 1992-1993 Program Year, between the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority and the City of Roanoke, and providing for the services to be rendered by said Authority to the City in implementing certain program activities identified in the City's application and budget for the aforesaid Grant, along with certain terms and conditions described in the aforesaid report, including the compensation to be paid to the Authority. 2. The form of the contract between the City and the Authority shall be approved by the City Attorney. 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #27-472 Mr. John P. O'Hara Regional Sales Manager 3501 Vineland Road Orlando, Florida 32811 Dear Mr. O'Hara: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31166-082492 accepting the bid of Cues, Inc., in the amount of $27,910.00, for providing pipe inspection system equipment in order to visually inspect the internal condition of sanitary sewer lines in the City, as more particularly set forth in a report of the City Manager under date of August 24, 1992. Resolution No. 31166-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, f~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eric. IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31166-082492. VIRGINIA A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Cues, Inc., made to the City for furnishing and delivering certain pipe inspection equipment upon certain terms and conditions. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The bid of Cues, Inc., made to the City, offering to supply pipe inspection equipment for the inspection of the internal condition of sanitary sewer lines, such equipment meeting all of the City's specifications and requirements therefor, for the total bid price of $27,910.00, which bid is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and as more particularly set forth in the report of the city Manager to this Council dated August 24, 1992, is hereby ACCEPTED. 2. The City's Manager of General Services is hereby authorized and directed to issue the requisite purchase order therefor, incorporating into said order the City's specifications, the terms of said bidder's proposal and the terms and provisions of this resolution. ATTEST: City Clerk MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 21S Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #60-27-472 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlangev: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31165-082492 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1992-93 Internal Service Fund Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $27,910.00 from Retained Earnings Unrestricted to Other Equipment - Utility Line Services, Capital Outlay, in connection with acceptance of the bid submitted by Cues, Inc., for providing pipe inspection system equipment in order to visually inspect the internal condition of sanitary sewer lines in the City. Ordinance No. 31165-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eric. pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, Generai Services Mr. Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charies M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROi~NOKE, VIRGINIa The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31165-082492. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1992-93 Internal Service Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to Government of the exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the city of Roanoke that certain sections of the 1992-93 Internal Service Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: appropriations Utility Line Services $ 2,829,079 Capital Outlay (1) ................................... 161,285 Retained Earninas Retained Earnings Unrestricted (2) ..................... $ 3,581,888 1) Other Equipment 2) Retained Earnings Unrestricted (006-056-2625-9015) (006-3336) $ 27,910 (27,910) BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Bids on Pipe Inspection System Bid No. 92-7-21 I. Background: Equipment to visually inspect the internal condition of sanitary sewer lines is vital and critical to efficiently maintain and trouble shoot sewer lines. The pipe inspection system will replace a similar system purchased in December of 1990 but returned to the vendor due to a lack of reliability. The City recovered $40~000.00 or 81% of the purchase price of the unit. One bid was received on July 27~ 1992~ after due and proper advertisement and was publicly opened and read at 2:00 p.m. in the office of the Manager of General Services. II. Current Situation: A. Evaluation of bids received was accomplished by: Mr. Kit B. Klser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services Mr. D. Darwin Roupe, Manager, General Services Competitive bid process was used due to inability to determine sole source status. Specifications for combined crawler and lateral inspection system were general in nature to allow for competitive bidding. Other known source of requested equipment was firm City had returned same equipment to in April, 1992, due to lack of reliability. The bid submitted by Cues~ Inc.~ was in the amount of $27~910.00 which includes alternates as requested by the City. The bid submitted met all specifications. Members of Council August 24, 1992 Page 2 III. Issues in order of IV. B. C. Funding Alternatives: importance: Need Compliance with specifications Council accept the bid meeting specifications as submitted by Cues, Inc. in the amount of $27~910.00. Need to replace returned specialized pipe inspection equipment that proved to be unreliable. Compliance with specifications - bid submitted met specifications. Fundinq is available in Internal Service Fund previous year's retained earnings. Reject all bids: Need to replace equipment in a timely manner will not be met. 2. Compliance with specifications is a moot 3. Fundinq is a moot issue. Recommendation: A. Accept bid meeting all specifications. B. issue. Appropriate $27~910.00 from Internal Service Fund retained earnings to account number 006-056-2625-9015 for the purchase of equipment. Members of Council August 24, 1992 Page 3 WRH:dpe Attachment: cc: Tabulation of Bids Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Utilities & Operations Manager, Utility Line Services Manager, General Services Manager, Management & Budget 0 n. 0 C n~ A C m ~ E~ Q 0 0 {J MARY F. PA~K~k City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #178-236 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 31167-082492 authorizing execution of a written agreement with the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority relating to performance of certain Community Development Block Grant program activities to be undertaken by the City during Program Year 1992-1993. Resolution No. 31167- 082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw El*lC. pc: Mr. H. Wesley White, Acting Executive Director, Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 2624 Salem Turnpike, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Ronald H. Miiler, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Mr. H. Daniel Pollock, Jr., Housing Development Coordinator Mr. John R. Mariles, Chief, Community Planning Mr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator C~fi~ of the City Manager August 24, 1992 The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council Roanoke, VA Dear Members of City Council: On the agenda for your consideration at the August 10th meeting was the annual contract for services with the Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Because that contract had not been considered by the Authority Board of Commissioners at that time, the report was removed from the agenda. The intent was to present the matter to you at your meeting of August 24th, but it was inadvertently left off of the agenda which was sent to you earlier. Accordingly, I am providing it to you at this time and asking Mrs. Parker to include it on the agenda for your consideration. I apologize for having to take these measures and thank you for your indulgence. Respectfully submitted, City Manager WRH/hdp Room 364 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981-2333 Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Contract for Services with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority I. Background: ae City Council appropriated Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds on June 22, 1992 by Ordinance No. 31067-062292. CDBG funds for Fiscal Year 1992-93 total $2,437,000 including $1,899,000 new entitlement and $538,000 in program income. Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) historically has administered certain portions of CDBG programs for the City, including housing rehabilitation and economic development activities. Ce For Fiscal Year 1993, RRHA will also administer $642',500 of the City's $756,000 HOME allocation from HUD. II. Current Situation: Funds budgeted for RRHA's services in FY 92-93 total $444,463 for administration and support of five (5) economic development programs, eight (8) housing programs, one (1) neighborhood redevelopment project, and three (3) categories of housing projects under HUD's HOME program. Project funds to be administered by RRHA, and covered by this contract, total $739,218 in CDBG funds and $642,500 in HOME funds. Total value of contract - administration plus project funds is $1,826,181. (Not including State and private matching funds). CJ Total value of projects to be administered by RRHA through this contract exceeds $3 million including CDBG funds, other HUD funds, State, and private funds (Please see Appendix 1) Administrative Agreement between the City and the RRHA is necessary before the RRHA can perform and receive payment for administrative activities regarding CDBG- funded or assisted programs. Members of City Council Page 2 III. Issues: A. Cost to the City B. Funding C. Administrative Capability D. Timing IV. Alternatives: ae Authorize the City Manager to execute the attached Agreement with the RRHA for the administration and implementation of various community development activities. Cost to the City for implementation and administration of designated projects will be $444,463 in CDBG funds. No other City funds will be expended. Funding is available in CDBG accounts listed in Appendix 1. Administrative capability to perform the services specified is possessed by the RRHA. The RRRA is experienced in and knowledgeable of the programs specified, having performed similar responsibili- ties in previous years. Timing is important since previous contract expired on June 30, 1992 and several programs are ongoing and should be continued. Do not authorize the execution of the attached Agreement with the RRF~ for the administration of various community development activities. Cost to the City would depend on the cost of performing the activities directly with existing and additional City staff, or of contracting for services from private agent~. Funding for administration and projects would be available in CDBG accounts shown in Appendix 1. Administrative capability to perform the various activities is available in some cases with existing City staff. However, other capability would have to be obtained by hiring additional CDBG-funded staff and/or contracting with private agencies. Members of City Council Page 3 e Some projects may be limited without the RRHA's redevelopment and acquisition authority. Timin~ would delay the implementation of many program activities, until necessary staff could be hired and trained or until other arrangements could be made. Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council concur in Alternative A and authorize the City Manager to execute the attached Agreement with the RRHA for the performance of various community development activities. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager Attachments WRH:MTP CC: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Director of Human Resources Chief of Economic Development & Grants Chief of Community Planning Housing Development Coordinator Grants Monitoring Administrator Neighborhood Partnership Coordinator Acting Executive Director, Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority MA:RRRACONT.RPT RRHA PROJECT ACCOUNTS Fiscal Year 1993 APPENDIX 1 ~ roject Name Limited Critical Repair Other funds: TOTAL LTD CRITICAL RE~ALR Private Loan Program Other funds: TOTAL PRIVATE LOAN PROGRAM Operation Paintbrush Other funds: TOTAL OPERA~ION PAINTBRUSH Mod Rahab SROs TOTAL MOD R~IiAB SMOs Rental Rehabilitation Other funds: TOTAL RENTAL RI~qAB NSEPtion Other funds: TOTAL NSEPTION Homeowner ship Assist~nce Other funds: TOTAL HOMEOWNERSHIP ASST Owner-~c~i~ Rehab Otherfunds: ~TALOWNER-~CUPI~REHAB Gainsboro Enhancement Rehab Other funds: TOTAL GAINSBORO E~qANCR ................. CDBG FUNDS ................. Private HOME Total Account Numbers Project Admin/Support Funds Funds Program 035-092-9220-5101 162,500 O35-091-9120-5203 6,485 035-092-9210-5036 -- 68,258 0 0 0 168,985 68,258 0 0 237,243 O35-090-9020-5105 3, ? 19 035-092-9220-5105 40,000 035-092-9210-5037 -- 52,680 600,000 0 0 43,719 52,680 600,000 0 696,399 O35-091-9120-5102 6,867 035-092-9220-5102 40,000 035-092-9210-50~8 -- 11,085 0 0 0 46,867 11,085 0 0 57,952 035-092-9210-5073 -- 12,658 0 0 12,658 12,658 035 -092-9210- 5039 -- 27,363 160,000 200,000 0 0 27,363 160,000 200,000 387,363 035-091-9120-5078 86,614 035-092-9210-5072 -- 21,521 48,000 60,000 O 86,614 21,521 48,000 60,000 216,135 035-091-9120-5115 31,656 O35-091-9120-5118 16,824 O35-092-9210-5034 -- 53,653 182,500 0 48,~80 53,653 182,500 284,633 035-092 -9210-5032 - - 48,785 100,000 0 0 48,785 100,000 148,785 035-O91-9120-5109 75,000 035-092-9220-5109 25,000 035-092-9210-5050 -- 14,605 0 0 100,000 14,605 O 114,605 Page 1 pLAN: RRHA9293 .ACT APPENDIX 1 Fiscal Year 1993 toject N~ De~n~ood Addition I~ DEAD~D ADDI~IO~ Shaffers Crossi~ Other funds: TOTAL SH~e~ CROSSING Hotel Roanoke Redevelop I)o~ntow ~ast C~raEe Economic Dev Inves~ent Other funds: TOTAL ECON DEV INVEStmenT Downpayment & ClosinE Costs Other funds: TOTAL IX~ & CLOSING Urban Renewal Disposition irst St/Henry St TOTAL MIS~3,%NEOUS RRHA General Administration PROGRAM TOTALS ................. CDBG FUNDS ................. Private HOME Total Account Numbers Project Admin/Support Funds Funds Program 035-092-9210-5045 -- 13,052 O35-090-9030-5157 11,163 0 11,163 13,052 24,215 035-091-9130-5145 457 035-092-9230-5145 40,000 035-092-9210-5047 -- 13,052 0 40,457 13,052 53,509 035-092-9210-5049 -- 13,053 13,053 035-092-9210-5074 -- 13,053 13,053 035-092-9230-5136 133,000 399,000 035-092-9210-5031 -- 13,053 0 133,000 13,053 399,000 545,053 035-091-9120-5117 55,617 100,000 0 55,617 100,000 155,617 035-090-9030-5138 035-090-9030-51~ 3,836 0 4,316 4,316 035-092-9210-5035 -- 68,592 68,592 0 739,218 ~%~:,463 1,207,000 642,500 3,033,181 Page 2 PLAN:RR~A9293.ACT ACa~ENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 1992, by and between the following parties: the Grantee: City of Roanoke 215 Church Avenue S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 and the Subgrantee City of Roanoke Redevelopment Authority 2624 Salem Turnpike, N.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24017 day of and Housing It is the intent of the Grantee to entrust the Subgrantee with the. implementation of certain projects and activities relating to community development and neighborhood revitalization, including, but not limited to, projects outlined in the Grantee's 1992-93 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program and the Grantee's HOME Program Description. The Grantee and Subgrantee agree as set forth below: The Subgrantee shall implement certain projects and activities as set forth in Part I of the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement. II. The Grantee shall compensate the Subgrantee as set forth in Part II of the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement. T~MS AND CONDITIONS OF A~ Part I - Sco~e of Services: The Subgrantee shall, in a satisfactory and proper manner, as determined by the Grantee, and within the scope of the 1992-93 Grant Programs Funds Appropriations for CDBG provided for the services included herein and approved by the Roanoke City Council, perform the following tasks: A. Rehabilitation and Revitalization of Residential Areas: Limited Critical Repair Program - The Subgrantee shall administer portions of the Limited Critical Repair Program in accordance with written guidelines as set forth in Attachment A. Essentially, the Limited Critical Repair Program consists of limited grants or loans to qualified homeowners and landlords to repair or replace seriously substandard components of the owner's structure, using CDBG funds. The total of all such grants/loans to be made in Fiscal Year 1992-93 shall not exceed $168,985 of CDBG funds. Program delivery costs for this program, including salaries shall not exceed $68,258. Total program cost is $237,243. RRHA-City Contract page 2 Private Loan Program - The Subgrantee shall sell a mortgage revenue bond of approximately $600,000 during Fiscal Year 1993, and shall lend the proceeds of the bond for the rehabilitation or purchase/rehabilitation of owner-occupied houses within the City of Roanoke. The Grantee shall provide a loan loss reserve fund, equal to 5% of the amount of the bond, as cash collateral for the bond. All costs of said mortgage revenue bond, including loan loss reserve, auditing, legal expense, cost of issuance and all other related expenses (excluding staff costs), and additional costs incurred relative to previous mortgage revenue bonds for the Private Rehabilitation Loan Program, shall require no more than $43,719 of CDBG funds or other funds by the Grantee. Program delivery costs, including salaries, shall not exceed $52,680. Total Program cost is $696,399. Operation Paintbrush - The Subgrantee shall administer an exterior home painting and minor repair program in accordance with written guidelines as set forth in Attachment B_~ using funds made available by the Grantee. The general purpose of Operation Paintbrush is to make a strong visual statement about the viability of the neighborhood by dramatically improving a selected area through painting the exterior of homes. The Subgrantee shall procure contractors to paint the homes according to standard procurement procedures. Regulations concerning lead-based paint shall be complied with. The total of all such grants to be made in Fiscal Year 1992-93 shall not exceed $46,867 of CDBG funds. Program delivery costs, including salaries, shall not exceed $11,085. Total Program cost is $57,952. Rental Rehabilitation Program - The Subgrantee shall administer the Rental Rehabilitation Program as developed by the Grantee and Subgrantee and approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) and the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) as required and as outlined in Attachments C-1 and C-2. Such Program shall consist of rehabilitation subsidies granted or loaned by the Subgrantee to rental property owners, from funds allocated to the Program by the Grantee, HUD, or other agencies. In addition, the Subgrantee will continue administration of previously funded Rental Rehabilitation programs with incomplete projects. The Subgrantee shall assist in the marketing of the Program, and shall perform financial packaging, oversee the rehabilitation, hold the deeds of trust, service loans made from Grantee's or HUD funds as required, and monitor the projects after rehabilitation for compliance with requirements. HUD Rental Rehabilitation funds in the amount of $29,500 for FY 1991 and HOME funds not exceeding $200,000 shall be used for rehabilitation subsidies during the contract year. Program delivery costs shall not exceed $27,363. Total program cost is $227,363, excluding private matching funds and funds allocated to earlier RRHA-City Contract page 3 Be Se e programs by the Grantee, HUD, or other agencies. Neighborhood Stabilization and Enhancement Pro~ram (NSEPtion) The Subgrantee shall assist the Grantee in the administration of the Neighborhood Stabilization and Enhancement Program (NSEPtion) in accordance with the general guidelines as described in Attachment C-3. Specifically, the Subgrantee shall make the loans and hold the deeds of trust on properties improved with HOME, Rental Rehabilitation, or CDBG funds, and oversee rehabilitation work undertaken in conjunction with the Program, regardless of the funding source. The Grantee shall assist in the marketing of the Program, and shall perform the financial packaging, oversee the rehabilitation, hold any deeds of trust, service loans made from Grantee's or HUD funds as required, and monitor the projects after rehabilitation for compliance with requirements. The total of all such NSEPtion loans shall not exceed $86,614 in CDBG funds, plus $60,000 in HOME funds. Program delivery costs for the NSEPtion program, including salaries shall not exceed $21,521. Total Program cost for NSEPtion is $168,135, excluding private matching funds and funds allocated to the NSEPtion program earlier by the Grantee, HUD, or other agencies. Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Pro~ram - The Subgrantee shall administer the Section 8 Moderate Rehab SRO Project as approved and funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This Project will provide HUD subsidized single occupancy units for homeless men and women. Program delivery costs for this Project shall not exceed $12,658. Home Ownership Assistance - The Subgrantee shall assist the Grantee in the administration of the Homeownership Assistance Program as developed by the Grantee and Subgrantee. Specifically, as required by the financial arrangements of individual projects, the Subgrantee may prepare detailed work write-ups and cost estimates on targeted houses, verify applicant's eligibility, package loan applications for review and approval by DHCD and/or VHDA, and bid and oversee rehabilitation. The Subgrantee may also make second mortgages available to homebuyers to enhance affordability of conventional financing or financing from other agencies. The Subgrantee may acquire houses in need of rehabilitation, repair them, and sell them to homebuyers. The total of all such activities in Fiscal Year 1992-93 shall not exceed $48,480 of CDBG funds, and $182,500 in HOME funds. Program delivery costs, including salaries, shall not exceed $53,653. Total CDBG and HOME program cost is $284,633.- Down Payment and Closin~ Cost Assistance Program - The Subgrantee shall administer the Down Payment and Closing Cost Assistance Program on behalf of the Grantee, in accordance with Attachment D. This program consists of grants, of up to RRnA-City Contract page 4 e 10. $3500 each, to low-moderate income buyers of their first homes. Grant funds may be used to pay for up to one-half of the required down payment, all closing costs, and all prepaid expenses, including buy-downs of interest rates. Grants may apply to purchase of any owner-occupied home throughout the City. The Grantee will assist with the marketing and outreach for the Program, will process applications, determine eligibility, and make grants as required for closing of home purchases, secured by a grant agreement with each assisted homebuyer. All such grants shall not exceed $55,617 from CDBG funds, which may not be used for this activity beyond September 30, 1992 unless extended by the Federal government, and $100,000 of HOME funds. Total CDBG and HOME Program cost is $155,617. Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Loan Pro~ram - The Subgrantee shall administer an Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Loan Program, as projects are approved and funded by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development from DHCD's Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program. Such Program makes grants and loans for qualifying rehabilitation of low and moderate income owner-occupied houses not meeting Building Maintenance Code and Housing Quality Standards. The Grantee agrees that the Subgrantee shall be the applicant to DHCD for funding for the Program. The Program will be administered in accordance with the guidelines in Attachment E., supplemented by the Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program operations manual provided by DHCD. Based on the intentions of DHCD at the time of this Contract, the Subgrantee shall package as many loan applications to DHCD as possible, for submission as early as DHCD will accept them. Grants and loans made under the Program will be made directly from DHCD to the borrower, with the Subgrantee assisting in the packaging of the loans and monitoring of the rehabilitation. Total Program funding will be determined by the projects approved by DHCD from its Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program. However, at its option, the Grantee may allocate up to $100,000 of HOME funds to the Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Program to supplement DHCD funding. Program delivery costs, including salaries, shall not exceed $48,785 in CDBG funds. Total Program cost is $148,785 excluding funding from DHCD's Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program. Technical Assistance, Counselin~ and Services - The Subgrantee shall assist the Grantee in providing advice and counseling to citizens, individually or in groups, concerning community development and housing concerns. Such assistance and services will be provided as requested by citizens and shall include but not be limited to: Property inspections and technical advice concerning repair, remodeling, rehabilitation and maintenance; b. Guidance and counseling concerning possible financial RRHA-City Contract page 5 11. 12. 13. arrangements for purchase and/or rehabilitation, including possible options available in the private financing market. CJ Providing technical assistance to the Grantee's Housing Development Office relative to long-term housing and education/information programs in accordance with guidelines set forth in Attachment F. Marketing - The subgrantee shall play a principal role in assisting the Grantee in publicizing and marketing housing programs, and rehabilitation and neighborhood revitalization generally. Included in this role will be arranging for the placement of signs, supplied by the Grantee, on the site of rehabilitation projects assisted under programs described herein. Relocation Assistance and Counselinq - The Subgrantee shall assume responsibility for the relocation assistance and guidance to be provided to residents and businesses displaced by community development projects and activities of the Grantee, in accordance with HUD regulations and guidelines. In addition, the Subgrantee shall participate with the Grantee in updating the City-wide housing resource summary and a plan to meet the total relocation needs for the program year. Outstanding Loans and Grants; Foreclosures - The Subgrantee shall continue to service outstanding loans, forgivable and/or deferred payment loans, grants, etc., made in previous years as appropriate and in accordance with guidelines of the specific programs. The subgrantee shall provide counseling to parties delinquent in their repayments in a reasonable effort to avoid foreclosure. However, where delinquencies persist, the Subgrantee shall institute appropriate foreclosure procedures. The Subgrantee shall maintain and protect properties on which it has foreclosed, and in consultation with the Grantee, shall arrange for resale, assumption of loan, or other disposition of the property. Gainsboro Conservation/Redevelopment Plan: The Subgrantee shall implement the Gainsboro Conservation/ Redevelopment Plan (Amendment No. 2), coordinating-its activities with the Grantee, the Gainsboro Project Area Committee (PAC) and the Gainsboro Neighborhood Development Corporation (GNDC). Gainsboro Enhancement Rehab - As part of the Gainsboro Conservation/Redevelopment Plan, the Subgrantee shall assist RRHA-City Contract page 6 the Grantee with the physical relocation and rehabilitation of up to six (6) structures in the proposed right-of-way of the relocated Second Street-Gainsboro Road highway project. CDBG funds available for this project total $100,000. Program delivery costs for this activity shall not exceed $14,605. Total Program cost is $114,605. Hotel Roanoke Redevelopment - The Subgrantee shall assist the Grantee, as needed, with the Hotel Roanoke Redevelopment project; including, but not limited to, financing assistance, acquisition, and relocation assistance. Program delivery costs for this activity shall not exceed $13,053. Henry Street Redevelopment - The Subgrantee shall implement the Gainsboro Conservation/Redevelopment Plan (Amendment No. 2), in the "Henry Street" area of the Gainsboro Project area in accordance with such Plan, and in accordance with any amendment or supplement to the Plan relating to the "Henry Street" area after its adoption by Grantee's City Council and the Subgrantee's Board of Commissioners. Funds available to the Subgrantee for these activities shall not exceed $3,836. All expenditures shall be approved in advance by the Grantee. The subgrantee shall arrange for and oversee the operation of two (2) parking lots on Centre Avenue and First Street in the "Henry Street" redevelopment area. Interaction: The Subgrantee shall assist the Grantee in the performance of certain basic community-oriented tasks which include, but are not limited to, the following: Planning, organization and implementation of neighborhood meetings. Development and distribution of materials necessary to inform the public regarding neighborhood revitalization activities performed by the Subgrantee pursuant to this contract. Planning, organization and implementation of the CDBG public workshops and/or hearings incidental to the Grantee's annual application process. The Subgrantee shall provide information monthly to the Grantee concerning the status and activity of the various housing programs, which the Grantee then may distribute to community organizations or representatives, as the Grantee sees appropriate. Co~mercial/Industrial Development: Deanwood Redevelopment - The Subgrantee shall continue to implement Redevelopment Plan (1975), as amended by Amendment No. 2, by Resolution No. 27751, adopted by City Council on RRHA-City Contract page 7 e August 16, 1985, to include additional property within the redevelopment area. Within this expanded area, the Subgrantee shall perform, during the term of this Agreement, relocation of signage and limited site development. Funds are available to the Subgrantee for the area known as the Deanwood Additiont that ten-parcel tract fronting on Orange Avenue, in the amount of $11,163. Program delivery costs, including salaries, shall not exceed $13,052. All work shall proceed with the assistance of the Grantee's City Engineer and Chief of Economic Development who shall approve all requests for proposals, final plans and change orders for this project within ten working days, except for issues requiring action by City Council. All expenses related to Deanwood property acquisition, disposition, site clearance/improvements, maintenance, engineering and plan development shall be charged directly to the Deanwood account and not to the Subgrantee's general program administration. Total Program cost is $24,215. Downtown East Parking Garage - The Subgrantee shall continue its administration and oversight of the construction of the Downtown East Parking Garage as outlined in the contract for services between the Grantee and the subgrantee, entered into in December 1990. Program delivery costs for this activity shall not exceed $13,053. Downtown East Parkin~ Lots The Subgrantee shall continue to arrange for and oversee the operation of three (3) parking lots in the Downtown East area. The Subgrantee shall participate actively with the Grantee to expedite the sale of these properties and shall return any revenue realized from such sales to the Grantee's program income accounts in accordance with Part II, paragraph B of this Agreement. Redevelopment Plans - Preparation and Amendment - The Subgrantee shall produce and amend as needed Redevelopment Plans for areas within the City. Property Marketin~ and Disposition - The Subgrantee shall continue to promote and sell parcels available in all Redevelopment Areas, including but not limited to the Kimball, Downtown East, Deanwood and Gainsboro areas. All contacts with potential developers shall be coordinated between the Grantee's Chief of Economic Development and the Subgrantee's Director of Land Planning. Each of these parties or his representative shall be afforded the opportunity to be present at any showing of any available site by either the Grantee or the Subgrantee. Negotiations incidental to land sales will also be coordinated between the aforementioned parties. Expenditures for Urban Renewal disposition costs shall not exceed $480 unless additional funds are otherwise approved. Expenses related to land disposition shall be charged directly to the affected program account and not charged to the Subgrantee's general program RRHA-City Contract page 8 administration. Shaffer's Crossing Redevelopment - The Subgrantee shall continue to implement Phase I of the Shaffer's Crossing Redevelopment Plan (1985), within the financial limits of the funds appropriated by City Council. All work shall proceed with the assistance of the Grantee's City Engineer and Chief of Economic Development, who shall approve all requests for proposals, contracts regarding site design and development, final plans and change orders for this project within ten (10) working days, except for issues requiring action by City Council. All expenses relating to property acquisition, disposition, site clearance/improvements, maintenance, engineering and plan development shall be charged directly to the Shaffer's Crossing Project account. Activities to be completed during the term of this Agreement primarily include demolition and site work, as funds permit. Funds are available to the Subgrantee for these activities in the amount of $40,457. Program support costs shall not exceed $13,052. Total program cost is $53,509. Economic Development Investment Fund - The Subgrantee shall assist the Grantee's Office of Economic Development in administering this investment program by serving as the vehicle to dispense and to receive payment from business participants in the program. In addition, the subgrantee will assist the Grantee in the distribution of materials necessary to inform the business community, as well as other potential investors, regarding the development fund and its intended purpose. The Subgrantee shall further assist the Grantee's Office of Economic Development and Office of Grants Compliance by providing financial reports relating to this program to the Grantee in accordance with Part IV. B. of this Agreement. Funds are available to the Subgrantee for these activities in the amount of $133,000. Program support costs shall not exceed $13,053. Total program cost is $146,053 excluding private matching funds. Property Maintenance: The Subgrantee shall be responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of all properties acquired by the Subgrantee as a result of CDBG activities or other activities under this contract. The cost of these activities shall be charged directly to the applicable program account and not to the Subgrantee's general program administration. All equipment purchases, as part of this activity, must receive prior approval of the Grantee. Program Coordination: Appropriate staff of the Subgrantee shall meet and consult regularly and as needed as determined by either party, with appropriate staff of the Grantee. Such staff of the Grantee may RRHA-City Contract page 9 include, but are not limited to, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Director of Public Works, Building Commissioner, Housing Development Coordinator, Chief of Economic Development, and Grants Monitoring Administrator. The intent of such meetings and consultations shall be to facilitate the efficient and effective implementation of program services listed above, and consider the need for and planning of other activities of the Grantee, Subgrantee, or both, consistent with the general purpose of community development and neighborhood revitalization. PART II - C09~P~SATIO~ AND ~£~OD OF PAYMENT: A. Program Funds: The following funds, as detailed in Table I, shall be made available to the Subgrantee for program activities: (See Table following). B. Program Income: "Program income" means net income received by the Grantee or Subgrantee directly generated from the use of CDBG funds. Program income from any and all sources shall be submitted to the City on a quarterly basis. C. Limits of Funding Sources: Payments to the Subgrantee may be made from any active CDBG project and general administration accounts up to the amount designated by Roanoke City Council; however, the total payments, from all sources, to the Subgrantee for program support and general administration of the identified program activities shall not exceed $444,463 for the 1992-32 program year, unless increased by amendment to this agreement. D. Disbursement Procedures: The Subgrantee shall file the necessary papers with the Director of Finance ten (10) working days prior to the date that actual disbursements are needed. Cash advances shall be reasonably estimated, therefore, excess advances will not be allowed. Cash advances will be recorded as Accounts Receivable due from the Subgrantee. The Subgrantee shall submit, by the fifth working day of each month, a monthly report to the Director of Finance, indicating the actual expenditures incurred against all cash advances not previously reported to the Director of Finance. Expenditures reported will be deducted from the Accounts Receivable balance due from the Subgrantee. The Subgrantee also shall submit time sheets, by the tenth working day-of each month, to the Grants Monitoring Administrator, which indicate Subgrantee's staff time committed to each project. No additional cash advances shall be made to the Subgrantee until these reports are submitted. Monthly financial status reports issued by the Director of Finance shall be reviewed by the Subgrantee and any RRHA-City Contract page 10 discrepancies reported in writing within ten (10) working days of receipt of said report. E. Annual Audit and Monitoring: The Subgrantee shall provide for an independent audit of all CDBG expenditures in accordance with Circular A-128 for the contract period covered by this Agreement as set forth in Part IV, Section A. Two copies of said audit report shall be furnished to the Grantee within 30 days after completion of the audit. In addition, it is the intention of the Grantee to perform quarterly monitoring visits to verify the Subgrantee's performance from a financial and compliance auditing perspective during the contract period covered by this Agreement. PART III - GRANTEE ~R~PONSIBILITIES: A. General Guidance: The Grantee shall provide general guidance and direction to the Subgrantee concerning the intent and operation of programs developed by the Grantee to be administered by the Subgrantee under this Agreement. Reports prepared by the Grantee's staff for presentation to City Council relating to matters covered by this Agreement shall be provided to the Subgrantee for review and comment as early as possible before the day of the Council meeting. B. Existing Data: The Grantee shall make available existing reports, maps, or other existing data that may assist the Subgrantee's performance of services covered under this Agreement. records C. Project Planninq: Within a Redevelopment Area, public improvements, such as streets, curb and gutter, public utilities, etc., unless otherwise approved by the Grantee, shall be the responsibility of the Grantee. Copies of the project plans may be obtained by the Subgrantee upon request to the Grantee's City Engineer. D. Non-Personnel Costs - Program Development: Expenses relating to the development of a new program or the continuation of an existing program not contained in Part I of this Agreement may be furnished by the Grantee. Said expenses shall not be incurred by the Subgrantee without written approval of the Grantee. RRHA-City Contract page 11 PART IV - PERFOP~ANCE AND I~CORD KEEPING: A. Time Period: The Subgrantee shall commence the provision of the services described in Part I of this Agreement as of July 1, 1992, and continue through June 30, 1993. Reporting requirements and annual audit shall cover the full program year period from July 1, 1992, through June 30, 1993. Re~ortinq Rec/uirements: The Subgrantee shall report monthly, by the tenth (10th) working day of each month, the progress of each activity covered by this Agreement, using a reporting format acceptable to the Grantee's Grants Monitoring Administrator. Such monthly reports shall include, but not be limited to the following: Activity report for each conservation area and rehabilitation' district, identifying units completed, dollars spent, applications on file and applications being reviewed for each program. The general property maintenance activities undertaken by project area. List of gross program income receipts from all sources and itemized disposition expenses on a quarterly basis. List of loans delinquent and foreclosed, identifying property by street address, total repayments made, outstanding loan balance and amount of grant, if any. Staff time expended on each program, as specified in Part II D above. Number and type of contacts for housing counseling, outreach activities and workshops, seminars, meetings, etc. PART V - THIRD PARTY CON'£KACTS AND BIDS: The Grantee shall not be obligated or liable hereunder to any party other than the Subgrantee. However, unless otherwise directed by the City Manager, all bid documents, contracts, contract amendments and change orders between the Subgrantee and a third party which relate to construction or consultant services to be performed by the Subgrantee hereunder, must receive written authorization from the Grantee prior to execution. The Grantee shall complete its review of documents furnished by the Subgrantee within ten (10) working days of their receipt. PART VI - PERSONNEL: The Subgrantee represents that it has, or will secure (limited to the funds provided under this Agreement) all personnel required in RRHA-City Contract page 12 performing the services under this Agreement. Such employees shall not be employees of or have any contractual relationship with the Grantee. All of the services required hereunder will be performed by the Subgrantee or under its supervision, and all personnel engaged in the work shall be fully qualified to perform such services. Should any position(s) funded in whole with CDBG funds become vacant, the Subgrantee must provide the Grantee with written notification prior to advertisement for new applicants and/or filling said vacant position(s). PART VII - UNIFOI~ AI~INISTRATIVE The Subgrantee agrees to abide by the HUD conditions for CDBG programs as set forth in Attachment H, those described in 24 CFR 570.502, and all other applicable federal regulations relating to specific programs performed hereunder. All proposals for CDBG-assisted rehabilitation in the City will be submitted to the Grantee's Grants Monitoring Administrator for determination of the structure's eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. If property is historically eligible, all project plans and specifications will be submitted to the Grantee's Grants Monitoring Administrator for review as to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. PART VIII - C(~hICT OF IBT~u~ST: No employee, agent, consultant, officer or appointed official of the Subgrantee, who is in a position to participate in a decision-making process or gain inside information with regard to any CDBG activities, may obtain a personal or financial interest in or benefit from any of the activities, or have an interest in any contract, subcontract or agreement with respect thereto, or in the proceeds thereunder, either for themselves, their family or business associates, during their tenure or for one (1) year thereafter. PART IX - INDEMNITY PROVISION: The Subgrantee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Grantee, its officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims, legal actions and judgments advanced against the Grantee and for expenses the Grantee may incur in this regard, arising out of the Subgrantee's intentional acts and negligent acts or omissions with respect to the rights or privileges granted by the Grantee to the Subgrantee in this Agreement. PART X - AMENDMENTS: Either party to this Agreement may, from time to time, require changes in the scope of services to be performed hereunder. Such changes which are mutually agreed upon by and between the parties to this Agreement shall be incorporated into written amendment to this Agreement. PART XI - TERMINATION OF AG~RRMENT FOR CAUSE: If either party to this Agreement should fail to fulfill in a timely RRHA-City Contract page 13 and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, either party shall thereupon have the right to terminate this agreement by giving thirty (30) calendar days written notice of such termination to the affected party and specifying the effective date thereof. PART XII - RE~SION OF ASSETS: Upon expiration of this Agreement, the Subgrantee shall transfer to Grantee any CDBG funds on hand at the time of expiration and any accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds. the PART XIII: - GO~/~ING LAW: This Agreement shall be governed by laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantee and Subgrantee have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. Attest: City of Roanoke, Virginia (Grantee) City Clerk W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Witness: City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Subgrantee) H. Wesley White Acting Executive Director RRHA-City Contract page 14 ATTACHMENT A - ATTACHMENT B - ATTACHMENT C-1 - ATTACHMENT C-2 - ATTACHMENT C-3 - ATTACHMENT D - ATTACHMENT E - ATTACHMENT F - ATTACHMENT G - ATTAc~U~]~TS Limited Critical Repair Program Guidelines Operation Paintbrush Program Guidelines 1991 Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines 1992-93 Rental Rehabilitation Program Guidelines Neighborhood Stabilization and Enhancement Program (NSEPtion) Guidelines Down Payment and Closing Cost Assistance Program Guidelines Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Program Guidelines Technical Assistance, Counseling and Services Required Federal Regulations MA:RRHA9293.CON TABLE 1 RRHA iDB/;& HOME PROJECT ACCOUNTS Fiscal Year 1993 Project Name Limited Critical Other funds: TOTAL LTD C~ITICAL REPAIR Private Loan Pro,ram Other funds: TOTAL PRIVATE LOAN PROGRAM Operation Paintbrush Other funds: TOTAL OPERATION PAINTBRUSH ................. CDBG FUNDS ................. ~ Total Account Numbers Project Admin/Support Funds CDBG & HOME 035-092-9220-5101 162,500 O35-091-9120-5203 6,485 035-092-9210-5036 -- 68s258 0 0 168,985 68,258 0 237,243 035-090-9020-5105 3,719 035-092-9220-5105 40,000 035-092-9210-5037 -- 52,680 O 0 43,719 52,680 0 96,399 035-091-9120-5102 6,867 035-092-9220-5102 40,000 035-092-9210-50~8 -- 11,085 0 0 46,867 11,085 0 57,952 Mod Rehab SROs 035-092-9210-5073 -- TOTAL MOD R~%~B SROs 0 0 12,658 12,658 12,658 Rental Rehabilitation 035-092-9210-5039 -- 27,363 Other funds: 200,000 TOTAL RENTALR~iAB 0 0 27,363 200,000 NSEPtion 035-091-9120-5078 86,614 035-092-9210-5072 =- Other funds: TOTAL NSEPTION 0 86,614 Homeownership Assistance O35-091-9120-5115 31,656 035-091-9120-5118 16,824 035-092-9210-503~ -- Other funds: TOTAL HOMEDWNERSA!IP ASST 0 227,363 21,521 60,000 21,521 60,000 168,135 53,653 182,500 48,480 53,653 182,500 284,633 Owner-Occupied Rehab 035-092-9210-5032 -- Other funds: TOTAL OWNER-OCCUPIED R~{AB 0 0 Gainsboro Enhancement Rehab Other funds: TOTAL GAINSBORO E~{ANCE 48,785 100,000 48,785 100,000 148,785 O35-091-9120-5109 75,000 O35-092-9220=5109 25,000 035-092-9210-5050 -- 14,605 0 100,000 la,605 114,605 Pa~e 1 PLAN:RRHAg293.ACT TABLE 1 RRHA CDBG & HOME PRO3ECT ACCOUNTS Fiscal Year 1993 Project Name Deanwood Addition TOTAL DEANWOOD ADDITION Shaffers Crossta~ Other funds: TOTAL SH~'~$ CROSSING Hotel Roanoke Redevelop Downtown East Garage Economic Der Investment Other f~nds: TOTAL ECON DEW INVES~4E~T Downpa~ent & Closin~ Costs Other funds: TOTAL DOWNPM~ & CLOSING Urban Renewal Disposition First St/Henry St TOTAL MI $~m~.r.~EOUS R~IA General Administration PROGRAM TOTALS ................. CDBG FUNDS ................. HOME Total Account Numbers Project Admin/Support Funds CDBG & HOME 035-092-9210-5045 -- 13,052 035-090-9030-5157 11,163 0 11,163 13,052 035-091-9130-5145 457 035-092-9230-51~5 40,000 035-092-9210-5047 -- 13,052 0 40,457 13,052 035-092-9210-5049 -- 13,053 035-092-9210-5074 -- 13,053 035-092-9230-5136 133,000 035-092-9210-5031 -- 13,053 0 133,000 13,053 035-091-9120-5117 55~617 0 55,617 035-090-9030-5138 ~80 035-090-9030-51/+/+ 3,836 0 4,316 035-092-9210-5055 -- 68,592 0 739,218 100,000 100,000 642,500 24,215 53,509 13,053 13,053 146,053 155,617 4,316 68,592 1,826,181 Page 2 pLAN: RRHA9293 .ACT AT~A~4E~T A LIMITED CRITICAL REPAIR PROGRAM Critical Home Repair and Quick Response to Emergencies Components 1992 Program Guidelines July, 1992 GENERAL The Limited Critical Repair Program is a flexible subsidy program of grants and/or loans. These subsidies are oriented toward housing units with badly needed repairs occupied by low-moderate income residents, and are intended to keep the units fundamentally liveable. The Program provides subsidies for owner-occupied and rental units upon certain conditions. Depending upon the income of the resident, whether the resident is the owner or a tenant, and other circumstances, the subsidy may be a loan, a grant, or a combination, and may require a matching contribution from the rental owner. Eligible repairs will also depend on these and other factors. The Limited Critical Repair Program is distinguished from other rehabilita- tion subsidy programs by its purpose and extent of repairs intended. The Program intends to stabilize the existing building's conditions, prevent or delay further deterioration, improve its current health, safety and decency standards, without necessarily answering all existing Building Maintenance Code violations. The Program is a combination of several individual components, specifically Critical Home Repair, Quick Response to Emergencies, and Emergency Home Repair. The combination of components is intended to allow administrative flexibility and to provide a more complete and continuous form of assistance to remedy or prevent unsafe or unhealthy structural living con- ditions by low-moderate income citizens. This document relates the guidelines specifically of the Critical Home Repair and Quick Response to Emergencies components. CRITICAL HOME REPAIR GENERAL DESIGN The Critical Home Repair Component will be administered by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA). Basic Eligibility -- Owner-occupants of homes in truly critical need of significant, but moderate repairs to the extent that lack of such repairs may make the house unliveable. Homes should not be in such bad condition that the Program cannot make the house basi- cally safe and healthy. _ Previous recipients of assistance under the Critical Home Repair Program or the Gainsboro Grant Program will not be eligible again, except in exceptional circumstances as determined by the RRHA's Neighborhood Development Director. Page 2 Form of Subsidy -- A qualifying homeowner may receive up to $8,000 in critically needed repairs, necessary to keep the home liveable. In addition, upon the recommendation of the rehabilitation inspec- tot and approval of the Neighborhood Development Director, exterior painting or re-siding may be performed, the cost of which is not counted toward the $$)000 maximum. If the house would require more than $8~000 of repairs to remedy the critical deficiencies) the owner will be allowed the opportunity to finance the cost beyond the Program's $8)000 maximum. The owner may use other programs of the City and Housing Authority for this pur- pose. If the $8)000 will not stabilize the house, and if the owner is unwilling or unable to commit additional resources to make the house liveable, the house and the applicant will be dropped from the Program. For applicants with incomes below 50% of the area median family income, the subsidy will be in the form of a grant, with no repayment expected. It is expected that most recipients will be in this income category. For other eligible applicants, the subsidy will be in the form of a loan secured only by a promissory note. The loan will be at 0% interest, with repayment over a five-year period. The monthly payments, however, are not to exceed 10% of the applicant's net income. (Net income is defined as gross income less immediate withholdings or deductions from the income for taxes, Social Security, mandatory insurance, retirement, or dues, over which the applicant has no control.) In a case in which monthly payments over a five-year term would exceed 10% of the applicant's net monthly income, the repayment term will be extended beyond five years. Application and Selection -- A brief application period for both the Critical Home Repair component and the Indoor Plumbing/ Rehabilitation Program will be scheduled and publicized by the RRHA. The RRHA will receive applications during the time until a total of 100 are received or the scheduled period expires, whichever comes first. The RRHA will screen the applications to eliminate ones for rental property, with reported income over 80% of median income, or otherwise apparently ineligible. Applicants ruled ineligible for either type of assistance will be so notified promptly and referred to other programs, e.g. the Emergency Home Repair component or the Private Rehabilitation Loan Program. Applications clearing the initial screening will be distributed among the RRHA's rehabilitation inspectors. The inspectors will schedule an inspection of each house and evaluate the condition of each using an objective scale of need. These applications will then be prioritized on level of need as indicated by the scale score. Page 3 (Recipients of assistance under the Critical Home Repair component will be selected from applicants not receiving approval for the Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program of the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (1)HCI)). Because that program provides for a higher level of rehabilitation for approximately the same type of homeowner, without cost to City funds, that program is to be accessed to the maximum extent possible. Accordingly, after prioritization of applications, further processing for repair under the Critical Home Repair component will be suspended temporarily until determinations are made regarding projects' status under the Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program. At that time, based on the success of accessing DHCD funds, the City in consultation with the RRHA will determine whether to continue processing of remaining applications, in priority order, for Critical Home Repair assistance. For more informatio% see section of Contract for Ser- vices regarding the Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program.) If it is determined to continue processing for Critical Home Repair, the RRHA will inform the next top-rated applicants that they will receive a repair subsidy and for what repairs, whether it will be a grant or a loan, and what conditions (e.g. self-help, counseling classes, etc.) may apply. The RRHA will verify homeownership and income and will perform a detailed inspection and work write-up for each of the highest- ranking applications. Other high ranking applicants will be notified of their standing and the possibility of their eligibility for later assistance. Lowest ranking applicants will be notified promptly of their ineligibility and will be informed of other options that may be available to assist with repairs. The RRHA will obtain a credit report on each applicant due to receive a loan, at the applicant's expense, to use to evaluate cre- ditworthiness. The applicant also will furnish information to the RRHA concerning amounts and sources of income and debt. In the interest of expediency, the RRHA will not seek independent verifications of this information, but will rely on the applicant's certification. No loan for critical repairs will be made to an applicant who has declared bankruptcy within the last two years, or has more than two debts with credit ratings of 5 or worse, or has more than two outstanding judgements, or whose debt to adjusted income ratio (including the Program loan) is more than 50%. When the RRHA determines that the applicant satisfies all criteria for its Program loan, and all related information is collected (rehabilitation cost bids, etc.), the applicant will execut~ a pro- missory note for repayment of the Program loan on terms as provided above. No rehabilitation work will be authorized until this note is signed. Page In the event ol default on the loan from the RRH^, collection may be pursued through established legal mechanisms, including judge- ment awarded by a court, but will not extend to foreclosure on the recipient's home. Eligible Improvements -- The Critical Home Repair component will finance repairs or installations critically needed to keep the house habitable, or to render it habitable, principally: a. Structural repairs; b. Roofing and chimney repairs or replacement, including prudent repair or replacement of gutters and downspouts; c. Electrical system repair, replacement, or installation; d. Plumbing system repair, replacement, or installation; e. Heating system repair, replacement, or installation; Exterior siding or porch repair or replacement, but only if major health or safety hazards are present. (Exception: If exterior painting or siding is undertaken, appropriate repair work may be included.) Conditions which are deteriorating and are likely to become criti- cal within six months may be corrected under the Program. Program benefits may be used to provide elements of the house not previously existing but necessary to the basic habitability of the house, such as indoor bathroom or septic system. In all cases, Program benefits may pay only for those repairs, etc., without which the property may be condemned or vacated. Self-Help -- In most cases, an applicant receiving a grant or loan will be expected to perform certain improvements or repairs to his/her property as a condition to the award of Program funds. Examples are: a. Exterior painting and cosmetics; b. Cleaning of yard; c. Removal of junked vehicles; d. Removal of improper open storage; e. Demolition of dilapidated out-buildings; f. Payment to a private contractor for the self-help home repairs. Page 5 These are intended to be tasks that would be of low cost to the owner if performed by him (e.g., painting house) or even if per- formed by others for pay (e.g., cleaning yard, demolishing dilapi- dated out-buildings). The maximum impact is to be sought within the reasonable physical and financial capabilities of the appli- cant, in exchange for the benefits of the Program. For the top-ranked applicants, the Inspector will encourage the applicant to begin self-help activities immediately, since in some cases the repairs covered by the grant will not be done until the self-help is completed. Therefore, the sooner the applicant begins and completes the self-help, the sooner the program-funded work can be performed. In negotiating the self-help contribution required of the owner- occupant, the Rehabilitation Inspector will exercise discretion, flexibility, and latitude. The self-help contribution required of each owner-occupant must be reasonable and consistent with those required of others in similar circumstances. In negotiating and approving the self-help contribution each applicant is to accomplish, the Inspector will consider the applicant's: a. Physical abilities; b. Financial condition; c. Possibility of receiving help from other sources, including family and neighborhood organizations, and; d. Past conscientiousness in maintaining the home. There may be situations in which it would be equitable not to require any self-help contribution by the owner-occupant, con- sidering the four criteria given. In cases where the owner reasonably is unable to undertake painting of the house, siding or exterior painting and associated minor exterior repairs may be undertaken. Such improvements will be made upon the authorization of the RRHA's Neighborhood Development Director, and may be required as a condition of receiving the Program subsidy e.g., in the case of a house of poor outside appearance having a significant negative influence on the surrounding area. The RRHA will use discretion and judgement in allowing or requiring exterior improvements and the relation to possible required self-help by the owners. Self-help contribution by the applicant is to be accomplish_ed in a timely fashion. When the self-help contribution is agreed upon, the applicant will be expected to accomplish this work within the time agreed or forfeit eligibility and the reservation of funds for major repairs. In unusual circumstances, this time period may be extended with on a case-to-case determination by the RRHA. Page 6 In extreme cases, some critical repairs may be made concurrent with or before the owner-occupant performs his responsibilities (e.g., replacin§ an inoperative furnace in the winter, with the remaining repairs delayed until the app]icant paints and cleans in the spring). In all cases, the Authority wim] ensure that the intent of the Program is served. A written agreement between the homeowner and the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) will specify the self- help input items and the date of completion. It shall further con- tain the initial violation listing which will be the items to be completed by the RRHA under the Program. Counseling and Education -- In the interest of helping recipients of assistance maintain their homes over a long term such that the need for other repairs will be minimized, and to keep these houses from deteriorating again into a critical state, each recipient for assistance will be required to attend a course of instruction, approved by the City's Housing Development Office, concerning basic home repair and preventive maintenance, e.g., Community Home Buyer's Program. Before repairs are begun on any house approved for the Program, the owner(s) will sign an agreement with the RRHA agreeing to par- ticipate in the classes. To the extent possible, the class will begin prior to rehab work beginning on the houses selected for the year. However, development of the course will not delay provision of the critically needed repairs. QUICK RESPONSE TO EMERGENCIES COMPONENT GENERAL DESIGN The Quick Response to Emergencies Component will be administered by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA). The general intent of this component is to provide emergency assistance to low-moderate income homeowners encountering sudden emergency situations, requiring a costly repair that would threaten the habitability of the house if not addressed and for which the homeowner cannot wait several months for the processing of. ab ia,an application. 1. Basic Ellgibili'ty =- Same as for the Critical Home Repair component. 2. Form of Subsidy -- Same as for the Critical Home Repair component. Application and Selection -- There will be no open application period for this component. Instead, low-moderate income homeowners may apply to the RRHA at any time and be considered for assistance. Page 7 The RRHA will receive requests for assistance under the Program. An inspector will visit the home within g working hours, evaluate whether an eligible emergency or other eligible need exists, determine what work is necessary, and receive eligibility information, e.g. evidence of income and homeownership. This information will be verified by the quickest means possible, so as not to delay having the repairs made. The RRHA will obtain a credit report on each applicant due to receive a loan, at the applicant's expense, to use to evaluate creditworthiness. The applicant will also furnish information to the RRHA concerning amounts and sources of income and debt. In the interest of expedien- cy, the RRHA will not seek independent verifications of this infor- marion, but will rely on the applicant's certification. No loan for emergency repairs will be made to an applicant who has declared bankruptcy within the last two years, or has more than two debts with credit ratings of 5 or worse, or has more than two outstanding judgements, or whose debt to adjusted income ratio (including the Program loan) is more than 50%. When the RRHA determines that the applicant satisfies all criteria for its Program loan, and all related information is collected (rehabilitation cost bids, etc.), the applicant will execute a pro- missory note for repayment of the Program loan on terms as provided above. No rehabilitation work will be authorized until this note is signed. In the event of default on the loan from the RRHA, collection may be pursued through established legal mechanisms, including judgement awarded by a court, but will not extend to foreclosure on the reci- pient's home. Eligible Improvements -- This component may finance repair of con- ditions having just arisen, as contrasted to conditions developing over time. Generally these will be conditions that should be repaired within 24-72 hours lest the house be vacated or suffer serious damage. Examples include: a. Overflowing or unworkable septic systems; b. Broken pipes; c. Inoperative heating systems; d. Inoperative electric systems; e. Inoperative water punps; f. Significant fire damage not covered by insurance. Page g An exception to this rule is roof replacement, which is specifi- cally included as an eligible quaJifying repair item, even though the condition may not be suddenly occurring. The cost of repairs may not exceed $8~000. In some cases, the inspector may determine that the house is an exceptionally attractive candidate for exterior painting or siding, even though such improvements are not the primary intent of the Quick Response component. In such cases, the inspector may recom- mend to the RRHA Neighborhood Development Director that the house be painted or sided. As with the Critical Home Repair component, the cost of such exterior cosmetics will not be subject to the $8~000 limit. If the house would require more than $8~000 of repairs to remedy the emergency deficiencies, the owner will be allowed the opportunity to finance the cost beyond the Program's maximun subsidy, from some other source, as long as such supplemental financing can be arranged in a timely manner in keeping with the emergency. If the subsidy will not stabilize the house, and if the owner is unwilling or unable to commit additional resources to make the house liveable, the house and the applicant will be dropped from consideration. Construction -- As soon as eligibility is verified, the RRHA inspector will attempt to contact a minimum of three contractors for bids on the required work, and for indication as to when the work can be performed. Each of the three contractors need not bid, but at least three should be invited to do so. Because the primary concern is repair in the shortest time possible, the iob will be awarded to the bidder able to perform within the shortest time at a reasonable cost, compared to the other bidders. In the absence of multiple bids, the inspector will document the file as to the basis of the conclusion that the single bid received is reasonable. Files will also be documented care- fully to reflect the time of performance of the bids. Counseling and Education -- Because of the need to make the fun- damental repairs quickly, the owner will not be required to attend training classes prior to the repairs, except in the case of exterior painting or siding. However, the RRHA will strongly encourage the owner to register for and attend a round of classes regarding home maintenance and repair. If the exterior is to be sided or painted in conjunction wi_th the Program, then the owner must attend appropriate classes before the exterior improvements are made. Page 9 ALLOCATION OF FUNDING The Critical Home Repair Component ot the Limited Critical Repair Program is funded in Fiscal Year 1992-93 at $100~000 in CDBG funds for subsidies. The Quick Response to Emergencies Component is funded at $62~500 in CDBG funds for subsidies. These funding levels reflect the intention of the level of service to be provided by the two operations. Nowever, the RRNA may transfer CDBG funds between the two components, upon notice to the City's Housing Development Office, in order to meet realized needs. In addition, the Housing Development Office may have some additional funds that may be released for use with one of the components, if need be. IV. PROGRAM AMENDMENTS These program guidelines may be modified by the City Manager, upon the recommendation of the City staff and in consultation with and as agreed to by the RRHA. ATTAChmeNT B OPERATION PAINTBRUSH Program Guidelino~ I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION Operation Paintbrush is a program of grants for painting the exterior of homes and related minor repair up to a total of $4,000 per house. The Program is limited to low and moderate income owners of homes referred by the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership. The general purpose of the Program is to make a strong visual statement about the viability of the neighborhood by dramatically improving a selected area through painting the exterior of homes. In addition, the Program encourages neighborhood volunteerism by involving neighborhood, civic and religious organizations, and local businesses in house painting projects on weekends. The Program is designed to improve the q~ality of life for neighborhood residents participating in the program by painting their houses and by making minor exterior repairs necessary for the painting job. II. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT~ A. The applicant must be an owner-occupant; and B. The applicant must be within HUD Income Guidelines, including from all sources; and The applicant's home must be referred to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) by the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership. The applicant's home must be capable of being painted with minor repairs, as necessary, at a cost not to exceed $4r000. If the house is too large to be painted for $4;000, it will be rejected from the Program. (This provision may be waived under special circumstances by the Director of Public Works). III. APPLICATION AND SRT.FCTION ' The Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership staff will accept referrals ~rom selected neighborhood organizations to establish a list of hOUSeS to De considered for Operation Paintbrush. (These neighborhoods include: Gainsboro, Hurt Park, Melrose-Rugby, Mountain View and Southeast). Prior to referring applicants to P.~HA, the Neighborhood Partnership will screen the referrals to eliminate requests for work on rental properties, persons with reported income over the HUD Income Guidelines, or otherwise apparently ineligible. ATTAcHMeNT B The Neighborhood Partnership will contact the applicant and request they fill out a full application. RRHA will verify homeownership and income and will perform a detailed inspection and work write-up for each of the applicants referred. No previous recipient of assistance under the Operation Paintbrush program will be eligible again, except in special circumstances as determined by RRHA's Neighborhood Development Director. IV. CONSTRUCTION AND PAINTING REQUIREMENTS The Program will finance only exterior painting and minor repairs, principally: Scraping, priming (if necessary), and painting (colors to be selected by the homeowner from a palette approved by RRHA); B. Caulking and glazing windows; C. Repairs necessary for the safety of the homeowner to include repairing or building new steps, replacing broken windows, adding stair rails, repairing or replacing porch floor boards, replacing or repairing entrance doors, and replacing a limited number of siding boards necessary to undertake the painting job. Exterior repairs shall not exceed $500 in value.. No interior repairs or painting shall be performed by the crew. The owner will sign a release at completion of work, indicating that the job is complete and work was satisfactory. v. FORM OF SUBSIDY Painting and repair work subsidy will be in the form of a grant, not to exceed $4,000 (including all costs). No repayment is expected. VI. SELF-HELP In limited cases, an applicant may be referred to RRHA by the Neighborhood Partnership as a self-help project. In this instance, an estimate will be made by RRHA inspectors as to the amount of paint required to paint the house. After the applicant is screened under normal procedures by the RRHA, as to homeownership and income, the paint will be purchased by P, RHA and delivered to the applicant. Applicant will sign an agreement that the house will-be painted within six (6) months of receipt of materials or the paint will be returned. RRHA staff will confirm that painting has been completed. ATTACHMENT C- Rental Rehabilitanon Pro,ram--1991 i. BackKround Roanoke is a city of approximately lO0,000 citizens housed in "~,,a00 d*'ellin§ units. Like most cities, Roanoke has had periods of rapid §rowth and of stability. The' last ~0 years has been a time ot maturation for the C~ty. ' Compared to the Roanoke metropolitan area, the Citv's housing stock is relatively old, more likely to be rental property, and' more likely to be in need of repair. Almost two-thirds of all housing units in the City are more than 30 years old. Approximately 28% are more than §0 years old. With age comes the need for substantial repairs or renovations and more diligent preventive main- tenance. Because of the expense, many owners have deferred taking these measures, without which the houses have tended to deteriorate at an acce- lerating pace. The too frequent result of this can be seen in the figures for vacant housing units (about 3,3~0) and values of single-family houses (~3% are valued at less than $~0,000.) The City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority have administered a variety of neighborhood revitalization programs over recent years. Most of these programs and the funds allocated to them have been targeted toward the rehabilitation of owner-occupied houses in neigh- borhoods designated as Conservation Areas or Rehabilitation Districts under Virginia law. This concentration has begun to have a significant positive effect in these neighborhoods. Past and current programs for rehabilitation of rental property have included Section 8/Moderate Rehabilitation, Substantial Rehabilitation/ Public Housing, the HUD Rental Rehabilitation Program, and the Multi-Family Rehabilitation Loan Program of the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund. These programs and activities have operated in established residential neighborhoods. However, several plans and reports prepared over the last few years for the City have advocated that housing be developed in the downt include t. he ~esi~:n '79 and Design '8~ downtow- a-..-, .... o~.n area. These . . ,, ., u~,~up,nen: plans, tile report ot the 198& Downtown Housing Task Force", the 198.~ Roanoke Vision Comprehensive Development Plan, and the 1988 report of the ~ Development Strategic Plan Task Force". A substantial part o! the reasoning for this consensuaJ recommendation is the recognition that approximately ig,000 people work in the downtown area, many of whom are o! low-moderate income. This includes retail personnel, clerks, secretaries, and entry-level office workers o~ all types, munici- pal, state and federal employees, maintenance workers, waiters and waitresses, etc. Having housing close to their places of employment would help some of these workers, without the expense of a car, as "Downtown housing provides a Convenience to people in terms of walking to work, church, shopping, and hospital care that no other location in the Roanoke Roanoke Valley provides.,, (Downtown Housing Task Force report, p. 8) Rental Rehabilitation- 1991 Page 2 In addition, housing downtown is expected to have significant spin-off effects, specifically to "increase the vitality and attractiveness of downtown as a cultural, entertainment and retail center." (Roanoke Vision, p. t~6) The Rental Rehabilitation Program described herein is designed to attract and subsidize private investment for the conversion to apartments of upper levels of existing commercial buildings in the downtown Roanoke area, on terms that will allow the units to be affordable to low-moderate income tenants. II. Program Design A. Form of Rehabilitation Subsidy The City's Rental Rehabilitation Program will supplement private funding to assist an owner of qualifying property to rehabilitate portions of a building for residential use, while receiving a fair return on investment. Financing by the Program will be flexible and will depend on the charac- teristics of the individual project, lhe most liberal terms considered will be: 1. Program funding will take no less than fourth mortgage position, if other aspects of the financing provide adequate security 2. Final debt including Program funding and all superior mortgages not exceed 100% of after-rehabilitation value 3. Program funding may amount to no more than 50% of rehabilitation cost, and may not exceed: $6500 for a one-bedroom unit, $7500 for a two-bedroom unit, $8500 for a three-bedroom unit or larger #. Project must project at least break-even cash flow 5. Program funds will be loaned and secured by a deed of trust, but interest may be as low as 0% 6. Repayable loan payments may be deferred for as long as 10 years, with a balloon payment due then. 7. In exceptional cases, loans may be forgiveable. ~Vithin these contraints, the City will consider the economics of each project and will negotiate financing terms to assist the project while allowing a reasonable return to the owner on his equity. Depending on the circumstances, terms of Program funding may relate to interest rate, principal amount, amortization term, proportion of total development cost or rehabilitation cost, loan-to-value ratio, return on equity, etc. The City's purpose in the Program is to help make the pro formas_attractive enough to encourage developments and to reinforce the likely success of projects in a new, untested market. Beyond that goal, however, the priori- ties of the City in determining the financing terms to be offered will include repayment of principal (security of loan), number of projects that may be assisted (amount of subsidy), rapidity of funds revolving back to the City (amortization terms), and return on investment (interest rate). Rental 'Rehabilitation- i99l Page 3 Matching Funds Funds to finance the portion of rehabilitation not covered by Program funds may come from any source. However, it is expected that the bulk will come from conventional len(~ers interested in development of housin§ downtown. Downtown Roanoke, [nc. is facilitating financing for this purpose and expects arrangements to be in place by the Fall of 1991. C. General Conditions of Eligibility Each unit subsidized must be located in the downtown area designated as eligible. Each unit subsidized under the Program must be substandard according to either Section 8 Housing Quality Standards (HQ5) or the City's Building Code. Each unit subsidized under the Program must be renovated to at least Section 8 HQS and be certified by the City Building Department to be safe to occupy according to the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC). Each unit must be maintained at least to Section g HQS and USBC standards for the term of the financing. No unit rehabilitated under the Program may be converted to a condominium or cooperative for the term of the financing. 6. There may be no discrimination against a prospective tenant specifically because of receipt of or eligibility for housing assistance, or because of residence with a minor child, for the term of the financing. 7. Each property owner will agree to comply with applicable require- ments for nondiscrimination and "affirmative marketing" of units rehabilitated under the Program for seven years after completion. Guidelines and procedures for property-owners have been developed jointly by the City and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to insure that each owner is aware of his/her obligations in this regard. (See attachments to this Program Description. ) D. Area of Eligibility The downtown area eligible for inclusion in this phase of the Rental Rehabilitation Program is bounded generally by [-~sgl on the east, Day Avenue on the south~ ~th Street SW on the west and the railroad tracks on the north (map attached). This area includes almost all of the Downtown Service District and most of Census Tract 11. This area mee~s criteria established by Federal Program regulations, as follows: Rental' Rehabilitation- 199 ! Page t~ I. Median income not exceedin~ 80% of median income for the Roanoke area. According to the 1980 Census, the median household in~-mome in the Roanoke SMA was $16,119, of which 80% was $12,895. The median income for the City of Roanoke was $13,272. The median income of th& residents in Census Tract Il, of which the target area is the bulk, was only $7,366, which in fact was only (*6% of the area median, and 56% of the City median. Seventy-three per cent (73%) of the households had annual incomes below SI0,000, compared to a City-wide rate of 3gR. [n addition, the average salary of clerical workers downtown is estimated to be approximately $15,500. Considering the skewing effect of several large, relatively high- paying employers, e.g. Norfolk Southern, APCo, C & P Telephone, it is apparent there are many downtown workers who meet the definition of low-moderate income. Clearly the target area and its immediate vicinity is a low-income pocket of residents and workers. 2. Rents affordable to lower income families. The 1980 Census reports that Census Tract II had a median gross contract rent of $137~ compared to the City-wide median of $150. Little reliable informa- tion is available at this time concerning rents now received on the few housing units within the target area, but it is expected that new units produced under the Program will likely rent in the S32§-$A~00 range, which is within current Fair Market Rents for one- and two-bedroom units. A St~00 per month rent would amount to 23% of the monthly income of a family of three at only 50% of the area median income income of $17,350. 3. Expected rent stability. The downtown market is largely untested, with the units produced to be in competition with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Those areas have large inventories of relatively low-cost rental units. Therefore it is expected that owners of the units to be produced under the Program will price their units to be attractive and competitive in the market. Market rental rates for standard quality units are expected to ramain generally stable and affordable for at Least the next 5 years. Selection Criteria Generally it is expected that applications from the eligible area which meet the basic general conditions may be processed on a "first-come first-served" basis. However, in the event more applications are received than funding is available, they will be selected competitively based on a number of considerations. The 100-point evaluation scale, outlined below, will give priority to projects involving lower income or very low tenants, larger apartments, efficient lev,raging of other funds, strong financial projections, and handicapped accessibility. Rental Rehabilitation-1991 P~ge 5 EVALUATION SCALE Factor Current Occupancy: Very low income families Lower income tenant Vacant Tenant not of lower income Score (10) Size of Unit(s): Three bedrooms or more Two bedrooms One bedroom (15) Efficient Use of Program Funds (20) A. Leveraging of other funds (Program funds as percentage of total project cost) (10) 2.5% or more 26% - 40% 41% - 50% 10 5 5 0 15 I0 0 lO 0 .5. Location (1.5) In Core Zone Elsewhere in eligible area 6. Accessibility for handicapped (.5) 7. General Desirability (1.5) (Considering expected impact on surrounding area, visibility~ unusually attractive return on Program funds, consistency with Program goals,, etc.) 100 10 5 0 15 0 (10) Loan to Final Value Ratio (with rehabilitation financing): 60% or less 61% - 8.5% 86% - 100% g. Repayment terms (10) Loan repayable over 10 years or less 10 Loan with repayment deferred 5 years 5 or longer Grant or forgiveable loan '0 Financial Feasibility and Strength (20) A. Cash flow (ratio of projected net (10) operating income to total debt service payments) 1.25 or more lO 1.10 to 1.24 5 1.00 to 1.09 0 'Rental' Rehabilitation- 199 l Page 6 In some cases, the scoring of some factors will have to be "prorated.,, For example, a duplex with one two-bedroom unit and one single bedroom unit would be rated 5 in the Size of units category. In addition, as the Prbgram proposals are received and evaluated, it may be necessary to deviate somewhat from this Criteria in order to meet federal Program requirements, e.g. 70~ of units to be 2-bedroom or larger. The Program design and use of the Evaluation Scale address several of the mandates of the Program, as follows: Lower income benefit: The Current Occupancy factor gives priority to units occupied by iow and very low income tenants, or vacant units into which lower income tenants might locate after rehabilitation. In addition, owners making proposals for the Program will be told that units are expected to be rented to low income tenants upon completion. However, there is very limited experience with rental units in this downtown area. g/bile it is expected that there will be ample prospective tenants of low-moderate income from the downtown employment base, it may be that some units proposed for rehabilitation will in fact be occupied by tenants not meeting the definition of low-moderate income at the time of application and rehabilitation. To provide a reasonable margin for error, the City requests reduction of the 100% lower income benefit standard of 70%. This is consistent with the terms of previous rounds of the Rental Rehabilitation Program, which were administered after consulting with various public groups. The principal association of downtown interests (Downtown Roanoke, Inc.) supports this reduction to 70% to allow for unforeseen contingencies. _Housing for families: The Size of Unit(s) factor gives heavy priority to projects with two, three, or more bedrooms. This item too will be monitored as applications are processed, to insure that at least 70% of rehabilitation funds are used for units of 2 or more bedrooms. If it is found that smaller units are more appropriate for rehabilita- tion given the demand in this area and the characteristics of the supply of buildings, the City may ask HUD to relax this standard. Substandard units occupied by very low-income families: AIl units receiving assistance under the Program must be substandard. Those currently occupied by families of very low income are afforded greater weight by the Evaluation Scale (see "Lower income benefit" above in this section). Efficient use of Program fundst The Program design is expected to leverage approximately two dollars of non-HUD funds for rehabilitation for every dollar of HUD Rental Rehabilitation subsidy. In addition, HUD Program funds probably will revolve back to the City over 10 years, for reuse for rehabilitation of rental property or other eligible purposes. The terms and flexibility of the financing ~ackage expected to be offered will be attractive to investor owners. Rentai Rehabilitation-1991 P'age 7 Financial feasibility: Each part of the rehabilitation financing package provided by the Program will be secured by a deed of trust on the property. The total of all indebtedness against the property may not exceed 100% of the appraised after-rahab value. All approved projects must also' show a positive cash flow with a margin for main- tenance, vacancy loss and contingencies. Priority will be given to properties with lower loan-to-value ratios and more comfortable cash flow margins, thereby showing stronger financial feasibility and greater incentive to the property owner to adhere to the terms of the Program (e.g. maintenance of the property to Section g standards). Each applicant will be counseled that the Program design is such that the feasibility of the rehabilitation must be based on market, unsub- sJdized rents, and that if projected cash flow is not sufficient without subsidized rents, the rehabilitation may not be feasible. III. Administrative Organization and Procedures: The Rental Rehabilitation Program will be administered by the City, prin- cipally through the Housing Development Office, and the Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority, in cooperation with Downtown Roanoke, Inc. .Program Publicit¥~ Marketing~ and Outreach: Information about the Program will be provided by the Housing Development Office, with assistance from Downtown Roanoke, Inc. and the RRHA. An initial application period will be scheduled. .Receipt and Initial Screening o! Applications. Loan applications received from interested owners will contain basic information about the proposal, such as the location, number and size of units to be rehabilitated, general description and estimation of cost of repairs, current indebtedness that will remain on the property, projected rental income and expenses, characteristics of current occupants, etc. Each application received will be reviewed immediately to determine completeness and basic eligibility. Prioritization: If a surplus of applications is received such that the Evaluation Scale must be applied to select projects by priority, the Housing Development Office and RRHA will do so at this point to determine which proposals appear to be best suited to the intent and requirements of the Program. Tentative Commitment: After consultation with the Housing Development Office and Downtown Roanoke, Inc., the RRHA will notify the applicant of the tentative acceptance of the proposal, contingent on verifica- tions of information presented in the application. The RRHA inspector will conduct a rehabilitation inspection of the building and examine the work write-up and cost estimates included with the l~an- application, to verify that the work proposed is eligible, appropriate, and sufficient to correct Code violations cited and to bring the property to HQS, and that the estimate of costs or contractor's bid is reasonable. Rental' Rehabilitation- 1991 Page 8 IV. Negotiations: It is expected that all applicants for the Program will be seeking financing from funds arranged by Downtown Roanoke, Inc. from private lenders. The applicant will be required to provide information regarding income, debt, credit, etc. which is provided to the lender(s) for their processing. Based on this information, the Housing Development Office and the RRHA may negotiate financing terms with the applicant to insure that maximum benefit is gained from Program funds. Verifications: Based on the information contained in the application that is deemed reasonable, and supplementary information furnished by the applicant, the RRHA will issue a tentative commitment for Program funding, conditional upon verifications of information and arrangement for other financing. It is expected that verifications obtained by the private lender(s) will suffice for these purposes, and the applicant will be asked to furnish them to the RRHA. Loan Closing: Upon documentation by the applicant that private financing has been committed, the RRHA will coordinate with the lender to close simultaneously the Program funding with the private financing. Rehabilitation and Disbursement: Arrangement for rehabilitation work to be performed primarily will be the responsibility of the applicant property owner. Periodic in-progress inspections will be made by the rehabilitation inspector, relative to compliance with the work write-up and workmanship standards, and by City building inspector(s), to assure compliance with Building Code requirements. Because Program funds will be subordinated to other financing' and are drawn down from HUD as construction draws are needed, Program funds will not be escrowed and will only be disbursed after all superior financing has been disbursed. In most cases, Program funds will only be paid out upon completion of the project. Post-Rehabilitation Monitoring.. Property owners will be asked to submit periodic reports of the status of each project, especially concerning rents and tenants. Blank report forms will be sent by the RRHA to the owner for completion and return, in addition, on at least an annual basis, an inspector from the RRHA will perform an on-site inspection to verify that each unit is maintained in accordance with the terms of the financing package. Timetable: The tentative timetable for the Program is as follows: Approval of Program funding First proposals received and screened First tentative commitments issued Supplemental financing arranged; verifications received early August September [ate October November Renta'l Rehabilitation_1991 l~age 9 Hold first loan closings December Begin first rehabilitation January It is expected the Prdgram subsidy funds will be committed to Specified projects according to the following schedule: First Quarter (July-September 1991) $ 0 Second Quarter (October-December 1991) 10,000 Third Quarter (January-March 1992) 20,000 Pourth Quarter (April-June 1992) 19,000 $¢9,000 Certifications: A. A~uthority to Apply! The City is legally authorized to develop and administer housing rehabilitation and rent subsidy programs within the City, such as this Rental Rehabilitation Program. B. Public Consultation: The Rental Rehabilitation Program has been presented and discussed with representatives of business and resident organizations, public and private non-profit agencies concerned with housing issues, and organizations of rental property Owners~ as well as many individuals. This Program design reflects concerns, attitudes, and expectations expressed from these quarters. Also as a result of these public .consultations, the City requests continued reduction of the lower income benefit Standard to 70%, in order to avoid displacement ot tenants in otherwise high priority projects, to provide for unexpected contingencies that cannot be foreseen in the rental property market of the target area, and to allow for unexpectedly high leveraging ratios, resulting in more units being rehabilitated. Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity: The RRHA will provide detailed guidelines to applicant owners describing their obligations for fair housing include procedures to notify the RRHA and practices. These may · other community or service agencies of vacancies, posting of Equal Housing Opportunity logotype on premises, public advertisement of ments will be conditions of the deed vacancies, etc. These require- of trust for the loan fr~ HUD funds. Evidence of compliance will be examined by the City Office of Grants Compliance at least annually. Violation of Iair housing and nondiscrimination provisions will be grounds for requiring immediate payment of the Rental Rehabilitation loan as specilied in the deed of trust. 'Rental ' Rehabilitation- 1991 Page i0 Tenant Assistance Policy: All reasonable efforts '~ill be made to avoid involuntary displacement of current tenants due to rent increases, especially current tenants of lower income. Tenants a/ho would have to pay more than 30% ot their adjusted income for rent after rehab will be referred to the Redevelopment and Housing Authority for possible rental assistance. Tenants who ~/ould have to pay more than .5096 of their income will receive high priority from the RRHA for Public Housing or Section g rental assistance, in no case will a very low income family be displaced involuntarily by a tenant not of very low income, Any current low- income tenant who is eligible for Section 8 or Housing Voucher assistance will be given preference for such assistance to stay in the renovated unit or to find adequate housing elsewhere. Each tenant in a unit to be rehabilitated under the Program will be notified of the impending rehabilitation and the effect on him/her. Any tenants in jeopardy of being displaced will be referred to the RRHA for counseling and assistance, including descriptions of alter- native housing opportunities, ways to search for suitable alternative arrangements, and tenant rights under the Federal Fair Housing law. Direct referrals to other apartments also may be made. No tenant offered decent, safe, and sanitary housing at an affordable rent (as defined in 2t~ CFR §ll.10(h)(l) will be considered to be displaced. Compliance with Applicable Regulations: Administration ot the Rental Rehabilitation Program will comply with all applicable federal regulations and requirements, including but not limited to those concerning nondiscrimination and equal opportunity, as identified in 24 CFR ~ll.10(m). F. Neighborhood Preservation: Operation of the Program in the downtown area is expected to dramati- cally enhance the viability of this area as a residential community, an element not currently present to any significant degree. In addition, the presence of residents will support continued commercial and cultural vitality in the area. This in turn will reinforce the attrac- tiveness ot residential neighborhoods surrounding the downtown target area. RENTAL REHABIL[TATION PROGRAM EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND NONDISCRIMINATION POLICIES AND GUIDELINES General Policy: It is the Policy of the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing' Authority to administer the Rental Rehabilitation Program so that individuals of similar income have similar available housing choices, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, familial status, presence of minor child, or receipt of or eligibility for housing assistance. Each property owner applying for participation in the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall agree to avoid any discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, familial status, presence of minor child, or receipt of or eligibility for housing assistance, and shall agree to market their vacant rental units in good faith to inform and attract eligible tenants from all racial, ethnic, and gender groups. A. The RRHA shall give a copy of these Policies and Guidelines to the following: 1. Applicant property owners. 2. Current tenants of housing to be rehabilitated under the Program. 3. Social service agencies, including Total Action Against Poverty (TAP), League of Older Americans (LOA), Legal Aid Society, and Roanoke Neighborhood Alliance. 4. General public, upon request. In addition, all advertisements, press releases, information packages, application forms, and written communications prepared by the City or the RRHA relative to the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall include the Equal Housing Opportunity logo or statement. If the participating property owner wishes, the RRHA may refer holders of Section 8 certificates or housing vouchers to the rehabilitated pro- perty for possible occupancy. As provided in 24 CFR 511.10(m)(2), to the extent rent-subsidized tenants occupy Rental Rehabilitation units, other affirmative marketing procedures will not be required of the property owner. For any occupancy other than by tenants holding rental subsidy authorizations, the property owner must follow the procedures established in Section C (infra). Other than as allowed in Section B (supra), each participating property owner shall seek to attract tenants regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, familial status, presence of minor child, or eligibility for housing assistance, especially those unl.ikely to apply without special outreach, to units vacant after rehabilitation or that later become vacant. These marketing efforts shall include, at a minimum, the following: - Page 2' Notification to the RRHA, TAP, and Downtown Roanoke, inc. of any any and all vacancies. The RRHA may notify people on the Section 8, Housing Voucher, and public housing waiting lists of the vacancy. Posting of E(jua[ Housing Opportunity poster, provided by the RRHA, on vacant premises and rental offices, if existing. If qualified prospective tenants are not otherwise available, the owner shall advertise any and all vacancies in the Roanoke Times and ~I/orld News and the Roanoke Tribune, such advertisement to include the Equal Housing Opportunity logo or statement. Such advertisements will specify that vacant units are available for, but not limited to, Section g tenants. Documentation: Each participating property owner shall document affir- mative marketing, such records to include the following: Copies of all advertisements, notices, and other outreach for all vacancies. 2. A log of all contacts with potential tenants, including race, sex, approximate age, and reasons for not accepting as tenants. 3. Quarterly reports to the RRHA, in a format provided by the RRHA, regarding the ocgupancy of all assisted units and marketing activities for any vacancies. The RRHA shall keep records including the following: !. A log of vacancies reported by owners. 2. Copies or other evidence of notices regarding the Program and vacancies sent to agencies and/or organizations by the RRHA. 3. Copies of advertisements placed by owners. Records of characteristics of tenants occupying units, including race, sex, and approximate age. Assessment: The RRHA shall use the quarterly reports filed by property owners to verify compliance with affirmative marketing and Equal Housing Opportunity requirements. [n addition, the RRHA may make other periodic inspections of the property owner's records concerning tenants and marketing activities, or ask for other information about the same. Violations: Failure to comply with Equal Opportunity, Nondiscrimina- tion, or Affirmative Marketing requirements will result in a written notice from the RRHA to the property owner that specific provisions of the Deed of Trust between the two parties have been violatecl, defining what corrective actions, if any, are to be taken, and advising that further violations or failure to take the prescribed actions may require repayment of the Deferred Payment Loan and/or other financing provided. WELLS · - LUFf, Attachment C-2 Rental Rehabilitation Program - 1992-93 Background Almost three-fourths of the 4~,#00 housin§ units in the City of Roanoke are more than 25 years old, A]most half are more than 40 years old, With age comes the need for substantial repairs or renovations and di]igent preventive maintenance, Because of the expense, many owners have deferred taking these measures, without which the houses have tended to deteriorate at an accelerating pace, The too frequent result of this can be seen in the figures for vacant housing units (about 3,350) and relatively low values of many residential buildings, A large proportion of the City's housing stock is rental property (47.6%), especially in older neighborhoods. These rental units address a huge part of the housing demand and needs in the City, especially for citizens of modest incomes. This property comprises a vital part of the housing stock. However, a sizable percentage of these properties are in fair to poor condition. The incentive for private investments to be made in owner-occupied homes in these neighborhoods is weakened by nearby rental units in disrepair. It is obvious that the upgrading of deteriorated vacant and rental property must be a critical element of overall neigh- borhood revitalization, as well as reinforcing the supply of decent afford- able housing for our citizens. The Rental Rehabilitation Program described herein is designed to attract private investment while maintaining flexibility in an area's housing market, by the direct rehabilitation of 20-45 rental housing units occupied by [ower income families, indirectly, the improvement of these units will encourage maintenance and repair to other rental and owner- occupied buildings nearby. The Rental Rehabilitation Program is intended to build on the history of previous versions of the Program and the Neighborhood Stabilization and Enhancement Program (NSEPtion), which were funded with federal Rental Rehabilitation Program funds, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, and allocations from the Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) and the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund (VHPF). These earlier activities concentrated funding assistance in specific high-concentration areas, in support of code enforcement efforts, as well as scattering reha- bilitation over larger parts of the City with housing deterioration. In Fiscal Year 1992-93, the Rental Rehabilitation Program will be funded from allocations of federal HOME funds. It is expected that approximately $200~000 of HOME funds will be used throughout Conservation Areas, Rehabilitation Districts, and other designated areas. The Rental Rehabilitation Program will only support the rehabilitation of existing multi-family buildings for rental use. It is against the general policy and priorities of the City to encourage rental of single-family houses and the conversion of existing single-family buildings to multi- family use. ~age 2 II. The Program will allow property-owners three funding options, providing flexibility to assist different situations. The general preference will be to provide for substantial rehabilitation, especially of vacant unpro- ductive buildings; to provide relatively small amounts of funding for individual projects and encourage leveraging of additional funds from other sources, and to provide for repayment of Program funds for eventual reuse. Program Design A. Form of Rehabilitation Subsidy The Rental Rehabilitation Program will offer three forms of rehabili- tation subsidy, from which an applicant may choose. In no case may the HOME Program subsidy total more than $15~000 per unit. Grant equal to one-third of the rehabilitation expense. The owner will be required to provide the other two-thirds from other sources. Loan equal to one-half of the rehabilitation expense, bearing 0% interest rate, and with all payments deferred for 5 ),ears. At the end of 5 years, the original amount of loan will be due and payable. The owner will be required to provide the other one-half from other sources. Loan for the full amount of the rehabilitation (up to $15~000 per unit) 0 6_~_~ interest, amortizing on a D-year term, but with a balloon payment due after 5 years. It is expected that this array of options may be applied to a variety of different situations, including for existing owners of property with no current debt, property with existing mortgages, and new buyers of vacant buildings. The strong preference of the City will be for the first or second option presented above, due to the ease of admi- nistration, leveraging of outside funds, and suitability for substan- tial rehabilitation. The third option is included as a contingency for those desirable situations in which the owner cannot obtain out- side financing for a portion of the repair work, due to existing debt or other reasons. B. General Conditions 1. Each unit subsidized must be located in an area designated as eli- gible for the Program. 2. Each unit subsidized under the Program must be substandard according to Section 8 Housing Quality Standards (HQ5). Page 3 5. 6. 7. Each unit subsidized under the Program must be renovated to at lease Section 8 HQS and qualify for a Certificate of Occupancy from the City Building Department. As part of the rehabilitation, improvement of the exterior appearance of the building will be considered a priority. Any unit rehabilitated under the Program must receive work costing at least $6~000. No unit rehabilitated under the Program may receive more than $15~000 of HOME funds. Each unit must be maintained at least to Section 8 HQS and Certificate of Occupancy standards for five years. There may be no discrimination against a prospective tenant because of receipt of a eligibility for housing assistance, or because of residence with a minor child, for five years. Each property owner will agree to comply with applicable require- ments for nondiscrimination and "affirmative marketing" of units rehabilitated under the Program for five years. Guidelines and procedures for property owners will be developed jointly by the City and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to insure that each owner is aware of his/her obligations in this regard. Each property owner must agree to abide by occupancy and rent limitations of the federal HOME Program, as supplemented by local Program requirements, for five years, including: -No HOME-assisted unit may be rented to a tenant with income exceeding 60% of the area median income at the time of occupancy. -No HOME-assisted unit may be rented at more than 30% of the income of a household at 65% of the area median income, including utilities, specifically: $353 for a l-bedroom unit $#16 for a 2-bedroom unit $520 for a 3-bedroom unit -At least 2096 of the HOME-assisted units must be rented to tenants with income no more than 50% of the area median income at the time of the tenant's occupancy. -These units must rent for no more than 30% of the income of a household at 5096 of the area median income, including utilities~ specifically: $3ql for a l-bedroom unit Sqll for a 2-bedroom unit $#67 for a 3-bedroom unit Page -If a tenant's income increases to exceed $0% of the area median income during his/her lease period, the owner must increase the rent (including utilities to at least 30% of the tenant's adiusted income. C. Areas of Eligibility The Rental Rehabilitation Program will be offered in the areas shown on the attached map, including the following neighborhoods; Gainsboro Conservation Area Gilmer Avenue Conservation Area Harrison Avenue Conservation Area Hurt Park Conservation Area Belmont Conservation Area Highland Park Conservation Area Loudon Avenue Rehabilitation District Melrose Rehabilitation District Fallon Park Rehabilitation District Morningside Rehabilitation District Kenwood Rehabilitation District Washington Park Neighborhood In general, each of these neighborhoods has a significant degree of housing deterioration, especially of rental property. The Rental Rehabilitation Program is expected to make a valuable contribution to the revitalization of these older neighborhoods. D. Selection Criteria Program applicants satisfying the basic general conditions listed earlier will be selected competitively based on a number of con- siderations. The 100-point evaluation scale, outlined below, will give priority to projects leveraging other funds, receiving substan- tial rehabilitation, and currently under code enforcement orders. Evaluation Scale Factor Score 1. Leveraging -- percentage of rehabilitation paid from Program funds (20) a) No more than one-third b) More than one-third but not more than two-thirds c) More than two-thirds 2O 10 0 2. Requested terms of Program financing (7) a) Amortizing loan b) Deferred payment loan c) Grant 7 5 0 Page 5 3. Extent of rehabilitation (2O) a) $20,000 or more per unit b) $12,001 - $19,999 per unit c) $ 6,000 - $12,000 per unit BONUS: Handicapped accessibility Occupancy and condition a) b) c) d) Vacant and condemned Vacant but not condemned Occupied and under code enforcement orders Occupied and not under orders BONUS (except for Id]): Change in ownership Loan to Value ratio (with rehabilitation financing) (15) a) 60% or less b) 61% - 85% c) 86% - 98% (10) 20 10 0 15 10 10 0 10 5 0 5 5 Cash flow -- Proportion of debt service payments to projected gross rental income (10) a) 60% or less b) 61% - 70% c) 71% - 80% 10 5 0 Mixed income project -- Proportion of total units in project which Program funds assist (8) a) No more than one-third of units assisted b) More than one-third but no more than two- thirds of units assisted c) More than two-thirds but not all units assisted d) All units assisted 8 6 8. Impact on community revitalization (I0) BONUS: Community-based or other non-profit with demonstrated capacity 100 5 15 In some cases, the scoring of some factors will have to be "prorated". For example, a triplex with two units occupied without code enforce- ment orders and one unit vacant and condemned would be rated 5 in the Occupancy category. Page 6 This scale will be applied to those applications received during the initial application period and is based on the expectation that more applications will be received than can be funded. It this proves not to be the case, the application period will be reopened and proposals processed as received, until funding is depleted. All assistance provided by the Program will be secured by a deed of trust on the property. The total of all indebtedness against the pro- perty, including any grants or deferred payment loans from the Program, may not exceed 98 percent of the appraised value. Priority will be given to properties with lower loan-to-value ratios, thereby showing stronger financial feasibility and greater incentive to the property owner to abide by the terms of the deed of trust (e.g. main- tenance of the property to Section 8 standards). Each applicant will be counseled that the Program design is such that the feasibility of the rehabilitation must be based on market, unsub- sidized rents, and that if projected cash flow is not sufficient without subsidized rents, the rehabilitation may not be feasible. Informational sessions with the private financial community will be held as needed to explain the Program and to encourage them to par- ticipate in the Program by making loans to property-owners in conjunc- tion with Program funds. III. Administrative Organization and Procedures The Rental Rehabilitation Program will be administered jointly by the City and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA). A program management team will be formed to include at least the following: 3im Bean, Neighborhood Development Director Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority Dan Pollock, Housing Development Coordinator City of Roanoke Rehabilitation Inspector Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority The program management team will be responsible for general program admi- nistration and assignment of specific tasks, including: Program Publicity~ Marketing, and Outreach: The principal point of contact for Program information will be the RRHA. Receipt and Initial Screening of Preliminary Proposals: Preliminary proposals will contain basic information about the project, such as location, number and size of units to be rehabilitated, general description and rough estimation of cost of repairs~ expected source of private financing, characteristics of current occupants, etc. These basic proposals will be submitted to RRHA, who will also review each upon its receipt to determine completeness and basic eligibility. Page 7 Prioritization and Selection: Based on the preliminary proposals, the program management team will apply the Evaluation Scale to determine which proposals appear to be best suited to the intent of the Program. Those receiving the highest rankings will be asked to refine the application packages, providing more detail about pro- posed projects, including detailed work write-ups and estimates by the applicant's contractors. Those revised and refined applications will be approved by the team and will be issued funding commitments subject to obtaining private financing~ if appropriate, or other contingencies. Project Set-Up and Fund Disbursement: The RRHA will coordinate clo- sely with the City Housing Development Office and Finance Department to arrange for project set-up from HUD's HOME funds accounts, and to make required construction draws from the HUD system. The RRHA will be authorized to set up projects in the system, but because all HOME funds will come through the City, it will be necessary for the RRHA to notify City Finance Department when a disbursement from a project account is needed. Rehabilitation: Arrangement for rehabilitation work to be performed will primarily be the responsibility of the applicant property owner. Periodic in-progress inspections will be held by the rehabi- litation inspector, relative to compliance with the work write-up and workmanship standards, and by City building inspector(s), to assure compliance with code requirements. Final inspections will be performed to verify compliance with Section 8 Housing Quality Standards and to confirm Certificate of Occupancy quality. Post-Rehabilitation Monitoring: Property owners will be asked to submit brief periodic reports to the RRHA concerning the status of each project, especially concerning rents and tenants. Blank report forms will be sent by the RRHA to the owner for completion and return. In addition, on at least an annual basis, a Section 8 hous- ing inspector, rehabilitation inspector, or City building inspector will perform an on-site inspection to verify that each unit is main- tained in accordance with the terms of the deed of trust. The RRHA will be responsible for monitoring occupancy and rent of each pro- ject to verify its compliance with federal HOME regulations. The tentative timetable for the Program is as follows: Receive preliminary proposals by late September 1992 Screen and evaluate proposals by mid October Refine proposals; issue commitments by early November Private financing arranged by early December Hold first loan closings~ project funds encumbered by mid December Begin first rehabilitation 3anuary 1993 Rental RehabiLitation Program Equal Opportunity and Nondiscrimination Policies and Guidelines General Policy: It is the Policy of the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) to administer the Rental Rehabilitation Program so that individuals of similar income have similar available housing choices, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or handicap. Each property owner applying for participation in the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall agree to avoid any discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or handicap, and shall agree to market their vacant rental units in good faith to inform and attract eligible tenants from all racial, ethnic, and gender groups. A. The RRHA shall give a copy of these Policies and Guidelines to the following: 1. Applicant property owners; 2. Current tenants and tenants applying to the RRHA for housing rehabilitated under the Program; Social service agencies, including Total Action Against Poverty (TAP), League of Older Americans (LOA), Legal Aid Society, and Roanoke Neighborhood Alliance; Resident organizations of affected/eligible neighborhoods) 5. General public, upon request. In addition, all advertisements, press releases, information packages, application forms, and written communications preparted by the RRHA relative to the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall include the Equal Housing Opportunity logo or statement. Each participating property owner shall seek to attract tenants regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or han- dicap, of all minority and majority groups, especially those unlikely to apply without special outreach, to units vacant after rehabilita- tion or that later become vacant. Unless excepted under Section C below, these marketing efforts shall include, at a minimum~ the following: Advertisement of any and all vacancies in the Roanoke Times and World News and the Roanoke Tribune, such advertisement to include the Equal Housing Opportunity logo or statement. Such adver- tisements will specify that vacant units are available for, but not limited to, Section 8 tenants. Notification to the RRHA and TAP of any and all vacancies. This notice will be forwarded by the RRH^ to other service agencies and organizations. 3. Posting of Equal Housing Opportunity poster, provided by the RRHA, on vacant premises and rental offices, if existing. A participating owner of a property of no more than # units may be excused from any or all of the affirmative marketing requirements outlined in paragraph B above, at the option of the RRHA. Documentation: Unless excepted under Section C above, each par- ticipating property owner shall document affirmative marketing, such records to include the following: I. Copies of all advertisements, notices, and other outreach for all vacancies; 2. A Jog of all contacts with potential tenants, including race, sex, approximate age, and reasons for not accepting as tenants; Periodic reports to the RRHA, in a format provided by the RRHA, regarding the occupancy of all assisted units and marketing activities for any vacancies. The RRHA shall keep records including the following: 1. A log of vacancies reported by owners; 2. Copies or other evidence of notices regarding the Program and vacancies sent to agencies and/or organizations by the RRHA; 3. A log of referrals made to vacant units, including race, sex, and approximate age; 4. Copies of advertisements placed by owners; 5. Records of characteristics of tenants occupying units, including race, sex, and approximate age. Assessment: The RRH^ shall use the periodic reports filed by property owners to verify compliance with affirmative marketing and Equal Housing Opportunity requirements. In addition, the RRHA and/or the City may make other periodic inspections of the property owner's records concerning tenants and marketing activities, or ask for other information. Violations: Failure to comply with Equal Opprotunity, Nondiscrimination, or Affirmative Marketing requirements wilt result in a written notice from the RRHA to the property owner that specific provisions of the Deed of Trust between the two parties have been violated, defining what corrective actions, if any, are to be taken, and advising that further violations or failure to take the prescribed actions may require repayment of the assistance received from the Rental Rehabilitation Program. Attachment Neighborhood Stabilization and Enhancement Program Background Almost three-fourths of the ##,#00 housing units in the City of Roanoke are more than 25 years old. Almost half are more than 40 years old. VVith age comes the need for substantial repairs or renovations and diligent preventive maintenance. Because of the expense, many owners have deferred taking these measures, without which the houses have tended to deteriorate at an accelerating pace. The too frequent result of this can be seen in the figures for vacant housing units (about 3,350) and relatively low values of many residential buildings. A large proportion of the City's housing stock is rental property (¢7.6%), especially in older neighborhoods. These rental units address a huge part of the housing demand and needs in the City, especially for citizens of modest incomes. This property comprises a vital part of the housing stock. However, a sizable percentage of these properties are in fair to poor condition. The incentive for private investments to be made in owner-occupied homes in these neighborhoods is weakened by nearby rental units in disrepair. It is obvious that the upgrading of deteriorated vacant and rental property must be a critical element of overall neigh- borhood revitalization, as well as reinforcing the supply of decent afford- able housing for our citizens. Specifically, the purpose of the Neighborhood Stabilization and Enhancement Program (NSEPtion), as the name implies, is to concentrate effort in a small strategic residential neighborhood, in order to improve its overall condition and stabilize its market. The means to approach this rests on Code Enforcement. Inspectors seek to perform Building Maintenance Code inspections on all rental and vacant units. The owners are notified of violations that must be corrected and are informed of rehabilitation sub- sidies that may be available to help. NSEPtion began in December 1989 in a part of the Mountain View neigh- borhood of the Hurt Park Conservation Area. The rehabilitation financing dedicated to that effort was $313,000 from the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund (VHPF). Those funds have been supplemented with additional alloca- tions from the VHPF, CDBG, and Rental Rehabilitation. HOME funds of $60~000 are now also committed to the Program in Fiscal Year 1992-93. The Program will allow property-owners three funding options, providing flexibility to assist different situations. The general preference will be to provide for substantial rehabilitation, especially of vacant unpro- ductive buildings; to provide relatively small amounts of funding for individual proiects and encourage leveraging of additional funds fr~>m other, sources, and to provide for repayment of Program funds for eventual reuse. The Rental Rehabilitation Program will only support the rehabilitation of existing multi-family buildings for rental use. It is against the general policy and priorities of the City to encourage rental of single-family houses and the conversion of existing single-family buildings to multi- family use. Page 2 II, Program Design A. Form of Rehabilitation Subsidy Like the parallel Rental Rehabilitation Program, the NSEPtion Program will offer three forms of rehabilitation subsidy, from which an appli- cant may choose. In no case may the Program subsidy total more than $15~000 per unit. Grant equal to one-third of the rehabilitation expense. The owner will be required to provide the other two-thirds from other sources. Loan equal to one-half of the rehabilitation expense, bearing 0% interest rate, and with all payments deferred for 5 years. At the end of 5 years) the original amount of loan will be due and payable. The owner will be required to provide the other one-half from other sources. Loan for the full amount of the rehabilitation (up to $15~000 per unit) 0 6_~_~ interest, amortizing on a 15-year term, but with a balloon payment due after 5 years. It is expected that this array of options may be applied to a variety of different situations, including for existing owners of property with no current debt, property with existing mortgages, and new buyers of vacant buildings. The strong preference of the City will be for the first or second option presented above, due to the ease of admi- nistration, leveraging of outside funds, and suitability for substan- tial rehabilitation. The third option is included as a contingency for those desirable situations in which the owner cannot obtain out- side financing for a portion of the repair work, due to existing debt or other reasons. General Conditions 1. Each unit subsidized must be located in an area designated as an NSEPtion area. Each unit subsidized under the Program must be substandard according to Section 8 Housing Quality Standards (HQS) or the City's Building Code. Each unit subsidized under the Program must be renovated to at lease Section 8 HQS and qualify for a Certificate of Occupancy from the City Building Department. As part of the rehabilitation, improvement of the exterior appearance of the building w_ill be considered a priority. Any unit rehabilitated under the Program must receive work costing at least $6~000. 5. No unit rehabilitated under the Program may receive more than $15~000 of Program funds, not counting funds from the VHPF. Page 3 Each unit must be maintained at least to Section 8 HQS and Certificate oJ Occupancy standards Jor Jive years. There may be no discrimination against a prospective tenant because oJ receipt oJ a eligibility Jot housing assistance, or because oJ residence with a minor chi]d, Jot Jive years. Each property owner will agree to comply with applicable require- ments for nondiscrimination and "affirmative marketing" of units rehabilitated under the Program for five years. Guidelines and procedures for property owners will be developed jointly by the City and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to insure that each owner is aware oJ his/her obligations in this regard. Each property owner must agree to abide by occupancy and rent limitations of the Jederal HOME Program~ as supplemented by local Program requirements, for five years, including: -No HOME-assisted unit may be rented to a tenant with income exceeding 60% of the area median income at the time of occupancy; -No HOME-assisted unit may be rented at more than 30% of the income of a household at 65% of the area median income, including utilities, specifically: $353 for a l-bedroom unit $#16 for a 2-bedroom unit $520 for a 3-bedroom unit -At least 20% oJ the HOME-assisted units must be rented to tenants with income no more than 50% of the area median income at the time of the tenant's occupancy; -These units must rent for no more than 30% of the income of a household at 50% oJ the area median income, including utilities, specifically: $341 for a l-bedroom unit $411Jor a 2-bedroom unit $467 for a 3-bedroom unit -If a tenant's income increases to exceed 80% of the area median income during his/her lease period, the owner must increase the rent (including utilities to at least 30% of the tenant's adjusted income. Areas of Eligibility Currently, only a part oJ the Hurt Park Conservation Area is a designated NSEPtion area. This area has a high concentration oJ ren- tal property. In conjunction with on-going code enJorcement eJforts, the rehabilitation subsidies provided by the Program have made and are expected to continue to make a valuable contribution to the preser- vation and improvement of this historic neighborhood. Page D. Selection Criteria Generally it is expected that applications from the NSEPtion area which meet the basic general conditions may be processed on a "first-come first-served" basis. However, in the event more applications are received than funding is available, they will be selected competitively based on a number of considerations. The 100-point evaluation scale, outlined below, will give priority to projects leveraging other funds, receiving substan- tial rehabilitation, and currently under code enforcement orders. Evaluation Scale Factor Score 1. Leveraging -- percentage of rehabilitation paid from Program funds (20) a) No more than one-third b) More than one-third but not more than two-thirds c) More than two-thirds 2O 10 0 2. Requested terms of Program financing (7) a) Amortizing loan b) Deferred payment loan c) Grant 3. Extent of rehabilitation (20) a) $20,000 or more per unit b) $12,001 - $19,999 per unit C) $ 6,000 - $12,000 per unit 20 10 0 BONUS: Handicapped accessibility 5 Occupancy and condition (15) a) Vacant and condemned b) Vacant but not condemned c) Occupied and under code enforcement orders d) Occupied and not under orders 15 10 10 0 BONUS (except for Id]): Change in ownership 5. Loan to Value ratio (with rehabilitation financing) (10) a) 60% or less b) 61% - 85% c) 86% - 98% 10 5 0 · Page 5 6. Cash flow -- Proportion of debt service payments to proiected gross rental income (10) a) 60% or less b) 61% - 70% c) 71% - 80% 10 0 7. Mixed income project -- Proportion of total units in project which Program funds assist (8) a) No more than one-third of units assisted b) More than one-third but no more than two- thirds of units assisted c) More than two-thirds but not all units assisted d) All units assisted 8. Impact on community revitalization (10) BONUS: Community-based or other non-profit with demonstrated capacity 5 100 15 In some cases~ the scoring of some factors will have to be "prorated." For example, a triplex with two units occupied without code enforce- ment orders and one unit vacant and condemned would be rated 5 in the Occupancy category. All assistance provided by the Program will be secured by a deed of trust on the property. The total of all indebtedness against the pro- perty, including any grants or deferred payment loans from the Program, may not exceed 98 percent of the appraised value. Priority will be given to properties with lower loan-to-value ratios, thereby showing stronger financial feasibility and greater incentive to the property owner to abide by the terms of the deed of trust (e.g., main- tenance of the property to Section 8 standards). Each applicant will be counseled that the Program design is such that the feasibility of the rehabilitation must be based on market, unsub- sidized rents, and that if projected cash flow is not sufficient without subsidized rents, the rehabilitation may not be feasible. Informational sessions with the private financial community will be held as needed to explain the Program and to encourage them to par~ ticipate in the Program by making loans to property-owners in conjunc- tion with Program funds. III. Administrative Organization and Procedures The code enforcement aspect of the NSEPtion Program will be administered by the City Housing Development Office within the Building Department. That Office will perform Building Maintenance Code inspections~ issue Code violation notices~ and refer property-owners to the RRHA for possible assistance under the Program. The rehabilitation portion of the Program principally will be administered by the RRHA. Page Program Publicit¥~ Marketing~ and Outreach: The principal point of contact for information about financial assistance will be the RRHA. However, the City will also provide information regarding this in conjunc- tion with Code inspections. Receipt and Initial Screening of Preliminary Proposals: Preliminary propo- sals will contain basic information about the project, such as location, number and size of units to be rehabilitated, general description and rough estimation of cost of repairs, expected source of private financing, characteristics of current occupants, etc. The RRHA will review each of these basic proposals upon its receipt to determine completeness and basic eligibility. Prioritization and Selection: If a surplus of applications is received such that the Evaluation Scale must be applied to select, the RRHA and the Housing Development Office will do so at this point to determine which proposals appear to be best suited to the intent of the Program. Those receiving the highest rankings will be asked to refine the application packages, providing more detail about proposed projects, including detailed work write-ups and estimates by the applicant's contractors. Tentative Commitment: The RRHA will notify the applicant of the tentative acceptance of the proposal, contingent on verifications of information presented in the application. The inspector will conduct a rehabilitation inspection of the building and examine the work write-up and cost estima- tes included with the loan application, to verify that the work proposed is eligible, appropriate~ and sufficient to correct Code violations cited and to bring the property to HQ$, and that the estimate of costs or contractor's bid is reasonable. A funding commitment will be issued, sub- ject to obtaining private financing, if appropriate, or other contingencies. Verifications: The RRHA will request the necessary verifications of income, debt, credit, etc. The applicant will be asked to provide appraisal of after-rehab value based on the work write-up and specifica- tions. When determined that the proposal meets the criteria for the Programs the loan package will be finalized by the RRHA for closing and project set-up. Loan Closing: Upon approval of any supplemental financing, arrangements will be made to close both the loan from outside sources and from the RRHA of Program funds simultaneously. Closing will be held by an attorney selected for the Program, and appropriate disbursements will be made. Rehabilitation: Arrangement for rehabilitation work to be performed will be the responsibility of the applicant property owner. Periodic in-progress inspections will be held by the rehabilitation inspector, relative to compliance with the work write-up and workmanship standards, a~d by City building inspector(s), to assure compliance with code requirements. Final inspections will be performed to verify compliance with Section 8 Housing Quality Standards and to confirm Certificate of Occupancy quality. Page 7 Project Set-Up and Fund Disbursement: The RRHA will coordinate closely with the City Housing Development Office and Finance Department to arrange for project set-up from HUD's HOME funds accounts, and to make required construction draws from the HUD system. The RRHA will be authorized to set up projects in the system, but because all HOME funds will come through the City, it will be necessary for the RRHA to notify City Finance Department when a disbursement from a project account is needed. Post-Rehabilitation Monitoring: Property owners will be asked to submit brief periodic reports to the RRHA concerning the status of each project, especially concerning rents and tenants. Blank report forms will be sent by the RRHA to the owner for completion and return. In addition, on at least an annual basis, a Section 8 housing inspector, rehabilitation inspector, or City building inspector will perform an on-site inspection to verify that each unit is maintained in accordance with the terms of the deed of trust. The RRHA will be responsible for monitoring occupancy and rent of each project to verify its compliance with federal HOME regulations. Rental Rehabilitation Program Equal Opportunity and Nondiscrimination Policies and Guidelines General Policy: It is the Policy of the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) to administer the Rental Rehabilitation Program so that individuals of similar income have similar available housing choices~ regardless of race, color, religion, sex~ national origin, or handicap. Each property owner applying for participation in the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall agree to avoid any discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or handicap, and shall agree to market their vacant rental units in good faith to inform and attract eligible tenants from all racial, ethnic, and gender groups. A. The RRHA shall give a copy of these Policies and Guidelines to the following: I. Applicant property owners; 2. Current tenants and tenants applying to the RRHA for housing rehabilitated under the Program; Social service agencies, including Total Action Against Poverty (IAP), League of Older Americans (LOA), Legal Aid Society, and Roanoke Neighborhood Alliance; #. Resident organizations of affected/eligible neighborhoods; 5. General public, upon request. In addition, all advertisements, press releases, information packages, application forms, and written communications preparted by the RRHA relative to the Rental Rehabilitation Program shall include the Equal Housing Opportunity logo or statement. Each participating property owner shall seek to attract tenants regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or han- dicap, of all minority and majority groups, especially those unlikely to apply without special outreach, to units vacant after rehabilita- tion or that later become vacant. Unless excepted under Section C below, these marketing efforts shall include, at a minimum, the following: Advertisement of any and all vacancies in the Roanoke Times and World News and the Roanoke Tribune, such advertisement to include the Equal Housing Opportunity logo or statement. Such adver- tisements will specify that vacant units are available for, but not limited to, Section 8 tenants. Notification to the RRHA and TAP of any and all vacancies. This notice will be forwarded by the RRHA to other service agencies and organizations. 3. Posting of Equal Housing Opportunity poster, provided by the RRHA, on vacant premises and rental offices, if existing. A participating owner of a property of no more than 4 units may be excused from any or all of the affirmative marketing requirements outlined in paragraph B above, at the option of the RRHA. Documentation: Unless excepted under Section C above, each par- ticipating property owner shall document affirmative marketing, such records to include the following: 1. Copies of all advertisements, notices, and other outreach for all vacancies; 2. A log of all contacts with potential tenants, including raced sex, approximate age, and reasons for not accepting as tenants; Periodic reports to the RRHA, in a format provided by the RRHA, regarding the occupancy of all assisted units and marketing activities for any vacancies. The RRHA shall keep records including the following: 1. A log of vacancies reported by owners; 2. Copies or other evidence of notices regarding the Program and vacancies sent to agencies and/or organizations by the RRHA; 3. A log of referrals made to vacant units, including race, sex, and approximate age; #. Copies of advertisements placed by owners; 5. Records of characteristics of tenants occupying units, including race, sex, and approximate age. Assessment: The RRHA shall use the periodic reports filed by property owners to verify compliance with affirmative marketing and Equal Housing Opportunity requirements. In addition, the RRHA and/or the City may make other periodic inspections of the property owner's records concerning tenants and marketing activities, or ask for other information. Violations: Failure to comply with Equal Opprotunity, Nondiscrimination, or Affirmative Marketing requirements will result in a written notice from the RRHA to the property owner that specific provisions of the Deed of Trust between the two parties have been violated, defining what corrective actions, if any, are to be taken, and advising that further violations or failure to take the prescribed actions may require repayment of the assistance received from the Rental Rehabilitation Program. ATTACHHENT D ACTIVITY Direct Homeownership Assistance PRO3ECT Downpayment/Closing Cost Assistance PURPOSE Downpayment/Closing Cost Assistance will be provided to facilitate meeting the housing needs, strategies, priorities and objectives identified in Roanoke City's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. BACKGROUND The Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires that entitlement localities, like Roanoke, develop a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) in order to receive federal funding under the act. The City of Roanoke is required to prepare a CHAS in order to participate in federal community development and housin8 programs, such as-' COBG, houain$ assistance under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Supportive Housin8 for the Elderly, and the new HOME and HOPE programs. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Examination of local housing needs revealed that there has been a reduction in the proportion of owner-occupancy in the City. (In Roanoke, the rate of homeownership dropped from 59.a% in 1980, to 56.6% in 1990. This is a national trend as reflected by the drop in homeownership nationwide from 66% in 1980, to 6a% in 1990.) Therefore, emphasis will be placed on providing homeownership opportunities. STRATEGY On the basis of information gathered for its Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, the City o! Roamoke has determined that emphasis should be placed in the followin8 area~ 1. Homeownership ~.p. portunities - To assist low to moderate income persons in becoming first time home buyers, and facilitate property main- tenance for current home owners. e Fair HousinR - To encourage equal housin8 opportunities for ail citi- zens, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, handicap or familial statu~. _ Coordination of Resources - To provide supportive services to low to moderate income persons, in conjunction with housing assistance. (Such support is particularly important for homeless persons and other spe- cial needs populations). PRIORITY The CHAS established a priority that the City encourage and assist new homeownership across all income levels. OB3ECTIVE The CHAS established a one year objective that the City administer the Homeownership Assistance Resource Pool to provide low-interest mortgages, down payment/closing cost assistance, development financing, etc., for new home- buyers, especially subsidized tenants. RESOURCES The Homeownership Assistance Resource Pool is a flexible mechanism designed to create a~fordable homeownership opportunities by matchin8 available resources with the needs of potential low and moderate income homebuyers in order to over- come the barriers they face in becoming homeowners. Components of the Homeownership Assistance Resource Pool may include, but are not limited to the followin8 resources: 1. VHDA/UHOP and VHDA/HELP mortgage loans 2. Federal Housing Administration (FHA) 203K Mortgage Insurance 3. Virginia Housing Partnership Fund (VHPF) Rehabilitation Loans Community Homebuyers Education Programs Hou~ng Counselin8 6. HOME and HOPE funds 7. Private Rehabilitation Loan Program funds 8. CDBG funds OVERVIEW In order to reduce the cash requirements to purchase a home, and increase homeownership opportunities to eligible low and moderate income households (incomes not to exceed 80~ of area median income) throughout the City, the City wiU provide Downpayment and Closin8 Cost Assistance in conjunction with any FHA insured loan, any VHDA/FHA mortgage financing, or any public source of mortgage financing that wiU accept the City's Downpayment and Closin8 Cost Assistance to an eligible mortg~e applicant. Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance will be provided through a grant of CDBG funds and possibl~ HOME and HOPE funds as follows: l. Downpayment assistance not to exceed one-half of the eligible homebuyer's required downpayment; 2. Closing cost assistance for ail normal closing costs and PrePS_id items; 3. Total downpayment and closing cost assistance shall not exceed $3,500; Eligible households must demonstrate a need for downpayment and closing cost assistance, i.e., household liquid assets are $10,000 or less. 5. Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance must be f,,lly repaid to the City if the property is transferred within :3 years of purchase. LI(~UID ASSETS Household liquid assets include: 1. Cas~ 2. Amounts in savings and checking accounts~ 3. Stocks, bonds, savings certificates, money market funds, and other investment accounts; Cash value of trusts that are available to the households; 5. Assets which, although owned by more than one person, al;ow unrestricted access by the applicant; 6. Lump sum receipts such as inheritances, capital gains, lottery winnings~ insurance settlements, and other claims. APPLICANT CASH REC~UIREMENT Applicants must pay the greater o! one-half the required downpayment, or one- half of the applicants liquid assets. HOMEOWNERSHIP EDUCATION REC~UIREMENT Eligible applicants are required to complete a City approved Nomeownership Education program to receive Downpayment and Closin8 Cost Assistance. Should the eligible applicant be unable to attend or complete an approved Homeownership Education Program, this requirement may be met through individual homeownership counseling and training provided by City approved HUD certified housing counselor. ELIGIBLE TYPES OF PROPERTIES AND OWNERSHIP~ Eligible properties include single family houses, townhouses, and condominiums within the City of Roanoke. Eligible types o! ownership is limited to fee simple ownership of detached single-family dwellings, townhouses, and condominiums pro- vided that the property is subdivided to allowing sale to individual homeowners. TRANSFER OF PROPERTY Qualifying low-moderate income households receiving Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance must repay the full amount of the assistance if the household trans- fers the property within 3 yeats of closin8 the purchase of the property. Transfer is defined as an), coaveyance of the Property, whether by sale, lease, gift, descent~ deviser opera~t_m~_ of law or otherwise, other than the granting of a lien on the Property a~ security for a debt. ADMINISTRATIOI~ Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance administration and coordination will be the responsibility of the City's Housing Development Office in cooperation with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housin8 Authority (RRHA) as provided in the City's current contract for services with RRHA as follows: I. Outreach and Marketing - Housing Development Office will be responsible for program outreach and marketing. Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance information will be distributed through approved Homeownership Education programs, flyers, Roanoke's vacant House Catalog, press releases, classified advertising/open houses, mortgage lender, s, realtors, homebuilders, contractors, churches, and other agencies, Prescreeningt CounselinR and Referrals - Housing Development staff and RRHA staff will identify potential homebuyers who may be eligible for Oownpayment and Closing Cost Assistance. Housing Development staff and RRHA staff will precreen potential homebuyers by phone or in person to determine eligibility for Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance. Staff will complete Schedule I "Preliminary Information Form" for each potential homebuyer prescreened. RRHA staff will mail copies of each Schedule ! to Housing Development Office on a weekly basis, and main- tain original in a central file of potential homebuyers. Housing Development staff and RRHA staff will provide counseling to potential homebuyers to identify other available resources which could assist potential homebuyers in becomin8 homeowners, including estimates of price range, monthly housing costs, credit and cash requirements. Housing Development staff and RRHA staff will refer potential home- buyers to approved Homeownership Education Programs~ or to HUD cer- tified housing counselors. Staff will prepare and m=il Schedule 2 "Response Letter" to each potential Homebuyer prescreened. Staff will include appropriate program information with response letter for other available resources that may assist the potential homebuyer in becoming a homeowner. Housing Development staff will refer potential homebuyers to RRHA staff for intake and application processing for Downpaymeflt and Closing Cost Assistance. Housing Development staff and RRHA staff will advise potential homebuyers of eligibility requirements for appplying for and obtaining Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance. Intake/Application/Verification - RRHA staff will schedule applications for applicants who have,' 1, Been prescreened for eligibility by RRNA or Housing 0evelopment Staff~ 2. Completed the homeownership education program requirements or who have received individual homeownership counseling and training in lieu of completing a homeownership education program~ 3. Entered into a purchase agreement on a particular home, subject to obtaining Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistancel and 0. Made application for mortgage financing for the purchase of the property from a public mortgage lender. RRHA staff will advise applicants to bring photo identification, copy of purchase agreement, copy of Good Faith Estimate of Closing Costs from mortgage lender, and verificauon o! completion of homeownership education program with them to apphcat~on appointment. Applications will be processed by RRHA staff ut~hz~ng Schedule 3 "Downpayment and Clusin8 Co~t Assistance Application Form". I! applicant does not brin8 a copy oX verification of completion of Homeownership education program to appointment, RRHA staff will prepare Schedule 0 "Homeownership Education Verification Form". Schedule a may be mailed to the company or organization sponsoring the Homeownerghip Education Program (or individual Homeownership counseling & training), or may be given to applicant to obtain written certificauon o! completion of such program and then returned to be retained by RRHA in applicants file.- Schedule 5 "Authorization for Release of Information will be prepared and sent to applicant's mortgage lender for verification of all information requested, and returned to RRHA. RRHA staff will verify that infor- mation from mortgage lender on Schedule 5 is complete and meets all requirements for Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance. I In. Ii ible A lican! - If upon receipt and verification of Schedule ~ by RRHA staff, RRHA determines the applicant is ineligible to receive Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance, RRHA staff will prepare Schedule & "Letter of Ineli$ibility" and send it to applicant, and applicant's mortgage lender. Downpa),ment and Ciosinl~ Cost Assistance Commitment - Upon verification of Schedule ~ by RRHA staff, and determination that applicant is eli- gible for downpayment and closin8 cost assistance, RRHA staff will pre- pare Schedule 7 "Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance Commitment", and Schedule 8 "Applicant's Commitment Cover Letter". RRHA staff will mail Schedule 7 (with duplicate copy) and Schedule 8 to applicant. Upon applicant's execution and return of Schedule 7 to RRHA, staff will pre- pare Schedule 9 "Lender's Commitment Cover Letter" and Schedule 10 "Attorney's Instructions and Funds Request Letter". RRHA staff will mail Schedule 9, Schedule i0, and copy of executed Schedule 7 to applicant's mortgage lender. Processing Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance Agreement and Funds - Upon receipt of "Funds Request Letter" (Schedule 8) from closing attorney, RRHA staff will prepare Schedule 11 "Oownpayment and Closin8 Cost Assistance Agreement#, and prepare a check for payment to closin8 attorney for the amount of the Downpayment and Closin8 Cost Assistance grant to the appplicant. Return of Executed Downpayment and Closing Cost Assistance A~[reement~ Deed of Conve),ance~ and Settlement Statement - Upon receipt of executed Agreement (Schedule Ii), Deed~ and Settlement Statemantt RRHA staff will complete applicant's file. Monitoring - 'RRHA staff will maintain all applicant's files. RRHA staff will provide quarterly reports to the City of Roanoke Grants Monitorin8 Office with copies to the Housing Development Office. RRHA staff will provide any additional reports and ongoing monitoring as may be required by the City and/o~ HUD. Modification - This project description may be modified by the Housing Development Office from time to time as required for efficient project administration. RRHA staff will provide input and suggestions for modifications to project description/administration as they deem prudent. Attachment E OWNER-OCCUPIED REHABILITATION LOANS 1992-93 PROGRAM GUIDELINES I. Introduction The Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Loan Program is designed to facilitate the rehabilitation of houses occupied by low-moderate income homeowners. In large part, it is intended to address the purpose served previously by HUD's Section 312 Rehabilitation Loan Program as it applied to such borrowers, and to supplement repairs made through the Critical Home Repair component of the Limited Critical Repair Program. Funds will be allocated to the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) from the Indoor Plumbing/ Rehabilitation Program of the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund. The RRHA will package applications for DHCD funding from qualifying owners of homes not meeting Building Maintenance Code and Housing Quality Standards (HQS). Program funds may be used to pay for repairs to eliminate code violations and make energy-conserving improvements. In addition to funds allocated by DHCD, the City of Roanoke may allocate, at its discretion, up to $100,000 of its HOME funds to support this Program. II. Pro~ram Application The local Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Loan Program will be funded principally from the DHCD's Indoor Plumbing/ Rehabilitation Program. The RRHA will be the program applicant to DHCD for that program, instead of the City. The City will support the RRHA's program application to DHCD. III. Financin~ Package Assistance will be available in accordance with the Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program guidelines from the DHCD, in the form of grants or dererred payment loans, as determined by DHCD. Funding for individual project will be made directly by DHCD, which will hold any deeds of trust or grant agreements with homeowners. If additional funds are allocated to the Program by the City, the terms of that financing will parallel that of DHCD's assistance, except the RRHA will hold any deeds of trust or grant agreements, instead of DHCD. IV. Marketin~ and Application Procedures The RRHA will accept applications for the Program in conjunction with applications for the Critical Home Repair component of the Limited Critical Repair Program, in July 1992. The RRHA will package and process as many applications to DHCD for Program assistance as possible, in general order Page 2 of need of the homeowners. Due to the necessity of coordinating these funds with other programs of the City, the RRHA will keep the City closely informed of applications received, the status of their processing, and action by DHCD. When DHCD gives notice of the number of applications and projects approved for funding from its Indoor Plumbing/Rehabilitation Program, a conclusion will be reached by the City in consultation with the RRHA regarding use of the City's supplemental allocation of HOME funds. V. Eliqibility Determination Borrowing homeowners must have income not exceeding 60% of the area median income established by HUD, in accordance with DHCD guidelines. Houses must be occupied by the owner and must be in substandard condition, i.e. not meeting Section 8 Housing Quality Standards. Consistent with the procedures for the Critical Home Repair component of the Limited Critical Repair Program, assistance will be sought first for those houses in greatest need of repair. VI. Biddin~ Competitive bidding of the rehabilitation work will be required, in accordance with DHCD guidelines and requirements of the federal HOME funds. Bidding will be arranged and overseen by the Rehabilitation Specialists of the RRNA. VII. Loan Packaqin~ and Underwritin~ The RRHA will perform the loan packaging, including requesting verifications of income, title reports, etc., as required by DHCD. Because DHCD has indicated its intention to process and approve projects generally in the order received, the RRHA will seek to submit as many packages as quickly as possible, beginning September 1 or as soon as DHCD indicates it will accept proposals. VIII. Loan Disbursement As directed by DHCD, the RRHA will cooperate with DHCD in setting up a project account for HOME funds allocated to the State for each house assisted under the Program. As directed by DHCD, and in accordance with any agreements set with the rehabilitation contractor and the borrowing homeowner, a series of draws from directly from DHCD and the project account will be made as the homeowner, contractor and Rehabilitation Specialist jointly determine that specific stages of completion are reached. Page 3 IX. Loan Servicin~ Ail deeds of trust or grant agreements will be held by DHCD. Any repayments or foreclosures will be the responsibility of DHCD. All borrowers will be encouraged to participate in a training course, coordinated by the Housing Counselor in consultation with the City Housing Development Office, concerning major aspects of homeownership such as house- keeping and budgeting, but concentrating on on-going and preventive maintenance and repair. ATTA~ F TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COUNSELING .AND SERVICES In recognition of the immediate and long-term value of housing education and information, and the guidance many citizens need to improve or maintain their housing status, the City and the RRHA cooperatively shall provide advice and counseling to the public, including individuals, families, and groups, concerning housing concerns. Such assistance and services shall include but not be limited to the following: a. Assistance to tenants of condemned housing to find alternative shelter; b. Provision of general information concerning provisions of the Landlord-Tenant Act; c. Advice to citizens wishing to buy a home concerning approaches to do so, including finance and repair; be if repairs a~e -~2-~Jwaa= %mpllcations may repairs; ,,~ maue, an~ ways to pay for e. Providing basic technical assistance classes to ~ients_o~.various owner-occupied rehabilita- =ion s~sl~y programs (e.g. Critical Home Repair, Private Rehab Loan Program) concerning implications of homeownership and maintenance, and how to care for the improvements in order to keep the house well-maintained. The RRHA shall make arrangements to provide some of ~h~se services in conjunction with 8uil · ~nzorcement activiti ..... ding Maintenance Cod es of the Cl · necessary to cite Bu/ldin~ M----~ -n~n.the. C~ty finds it ~ ~==nance co~e violations on a rental PrOperty, the tenants may be referred to the RRHA for assis=ance and counseling re a ~pch an approach will r~--,~-- -,--- g r~lng alternatives. clty s HousingDevelo~x~ent office and the RRHA. As part of the strategic counseling and education activity, the RRHA shall cooperate closely with the city and other parties and Participate in the design of one or more educational course(s) for one or several different audience Such audiences may include: _ s. --aspiring first-time hOmebuyers lnter?sted in home lnt.nance · ,u~.juS= enter/ng independently the ½-,,-~ ..... u_ f -oo~u= un=er a subsidy program. as: Page 2 --neighborhood groups and residents --public school students --subsidized housing recipients. Course(s) developed and offered may address such topics --responsibilities and rights of tenants --how to rent housing --Preparing financially to buy and maintain a house --basic home maintenance and repair --responsible and profitable management of rental property. The RRHA and the City, in consultation with other parties, shall develop a general plan of courses to be developed or arranged during the year. The P, RHA shall cooperate in the preparation of an outline of st~bJects to be covered, and will share major responsibility With the City for the preparation and execution of a plan for presentation to intended target audiences. AT~AC]~ G page U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS "Section 3" Compliance in the Provision of Training, Employment and Business Opportunities: The work to be performed under this contract is on a project assisted under a program providing direct Federal financial assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and is subject to the requirements of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 170. Section 3 requires that to the greatest extent feasible opportunities for training and employment be given lower income residents of the project area and contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the area of the project. The parties to this contract will comply with the provisions of said Section 3 and the regulations issued pursuant thereto by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development set forth in 24 CFR 135, and all applicable rules and orders of the Department issued thereunder prior to the execution of this contract. The parties to this contract certify and agree that they are under no contractual or other disability which would prevent them from complying with these requirements. The contractor will send to each labor organization or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, if any, a notice advising the said labor organization or workers' representative of his commitments under this Section 3 clause and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment or training. The contractor will include this Section 3 clause in every subcontract for work in connection with the project and will, at the direction of the applicant for or recipient of Federal financial assistance, take appropriate action pursuant to the subcontract upon a finding that the subcontractor is in violation of regulations issued by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 24 CFR Part 135. The contractor will not subcontract with any subcontractor where it has notice or knowledge that the latter has been found in violation of regulations under 24 CFR part 135 and will not let any subcontract unless the subcontractor has first provided it with a preliminary statement of ability to comply with the requirements of these regulations. - Compliance with the provisions of Section 3, the regulations set forth in 24 CFR Part 135, and all applicable rules and orders of the Department issued hereunder prior to the execution of the contract, shall be a condition of the federal financial assistance provided to the project, binding upon the applicant or recipient for such ATTACHMENT' page 2 assistance, its successor and assigns. Failure to fulfill these requirements shall subject the applicant or recipient, its contractors and subcontractors, its successors and assigns to those sanctions specified by the grant or loan agreement or contract through which Federal assistance is provided, and to such sanctions as are specified by 24 CFR Part [35. Equal Employment Opportunity: Contracts subject to Executive Order 11246, as amended: Such contracts shall be subject to HUD Equal Employment Opportunity regulations at 24 CFR Part 130 applicable to HUD-assisted construction contracts. The Contractor shall cause or require to be inserted in full in any non- exempt contract and subcontract for construction work, or modification thereof as defined in said regulations, which is paid for in whole or in part with assistance provided under this Agreement, the following equal opportunity clause: "During the performance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows: The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided by the Contract Compliance Officer advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the contractor's commitment under this section and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations ~nd relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, lg65, and by the rules, regulations and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his books, records and accounts by the ATTACHMENT page 3 Department and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations and orders. In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of such rules, regulations or orders, this contract may be canceled, terminated or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or Federally-assisted construction contract procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulation or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. The contractor will include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (A) and the provisions of paragraphs (A) through (G) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 2¢, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the Department may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event a contractor becomes involved in or is threatened with litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the Department, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interest of the United States." The Contractor further agrees that it will be bound by the above equal opportunity clause with respect to its own employment practices when it participates in Federally-assisted construction work; provided, that if the Contractor so participating is a State or local government, the above equal opportunity clause is not applicable to any agency, instrumentality or subdivision of such government Which does not participate in work on or under the contract. The Contractor agrees that it will assist and cooperate actively with the Department and the Secretary of Labor in obtaining the compliance of contractors and subcontractors with the equal opportunity clause and the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor; that it will furnish the Department and the Secretary of Labor such compliance; and that it will otherwise assist the Department in the discharge of its primary responsibility for securing compliance. The Contractor further agrees that it will refrain from entering into any contract or contract modification subject to Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, with a contractor debarred from, or who has not demonstrated eligibility for Government contracts and Federally-assisted construction contracts pursuant to the Executive Order and will carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the equal opportunity clause as may be imposed upon contractors and subcontractors by the Department or the Secretary of Labor pursuant to Part II, Subpart D, of the Executive Order. In addition, the Contractor agrees that if it fails or refuses to comply with these undertakings, the Department may take any or all of the following actions: cancel, terminate or suspend in whole or in part the grant or loan guarantee; refrain from extending any further assistance to the Contractor under the Program with respect to which the failure or ATTACHMENT page 4 refusal occurred until satisfactory assurance of future compliance has been received from such Contractor; and refer the cause to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal proceedings. Nondiscrimination Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: This Agreement is subject to the requirements of Title U1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) and HUD regulations with respect thereto, including the regulations under 24 CFR Part 1. In the sale, lease or other transfer of land acquired, cleared or improved with assistance provided under this Agreement, the Contractor shall cause or require a covenant running with the land to be inserted in the deed or lease for such transfer, prohibiting discrimination upon the basis or race, color, religion, sex or national origin, in the sale, lease or rental, or in the use of occupancy of such land or any improvements erected or to be erected thereon, and providing that the Contractor and the United States are beneficiaries of and entitled to enforce such covenant. The Contractor, in undertaking its obligation in carrying out the program assisted hereunder, agrees to take such measures as are necessary to enforce such covenant and will not itself so discriminate. Obligations of Contractor with Respect to Certain Thtrd-pe~t~ Relationships: The Contractor shall remain fully obligated under the prowslons of the Agreement, notwithstanding its designation of any third party or parties for the undertaking of all or any part of the program with respect to which assistance is being provided under this Agreement to the Contractor. Any Contractor which is not the Applicant shall comply with all lawful requirements of the Applicant necessary to insure that the program, with respect to which assistance is being provided under this Agreement to the Contractor is carried out in accordance with the Applicant's Assurances and certifications, including those with respect to the assumption of environmental responsibilities of the Applicant under Section 104{h) of the Housing and Community Development Act of Interest of Certain Federal Officials: No member of or delegate to the Congress of the United States, and no Resident Commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or to any benefit to arise from the same. 6. Inti~t of F Ltmrst Officers or FJmplo)~; of Contractorm ~ ':rs of Local Gover~nt Bod~m or Other Public Officials: No member, officer or employee of the Contractor, or its designees or agents, no member of the governing body of the locality in which the program is situated, and no other public official of such locality or localities who exercises any functions or responsibilities with respect to the program during his tenure, or for one (1) year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or subcontract, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the program assisted under the Agreement. The Contractor shall incorporate, or cause to be incorporated, in all such contracts or subcontracts a provision prohibiting such interest pursuant-to the purposes of this section. Prohibition Against Pa)Iments of Bonus or C~.mt$$ton: The assistance provided under this Agreement shall not be used in the payment of any bonus or commission for the purpose of obtaining HUD approval of the application for such assistance, or HUD approval or applications for additional assistance, ATTACHMENT page 5 10. 11. 12. or any other approval or concurrence of HUD required under this Agreement, Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, or HUD regulations with respect thereto; provided, however, that reasonable fees or bona fide technical, consultant, managerial or other such services, other than actual solicitation, are not hereby prohibited if otherwise eligible as program costs. "Section 10~': This Agreement is subject to the requirements of Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). No person in the United States shall on the ground of race, color, religion, sex or national origin be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds available under this title. Access to Records and Site of FJmplo~ment: This Agreement is subject to the requirements of Executive Order 11246, Executive Order 1375, Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. Access shall be permitted during normal business hours to the premises for the purpose of conducting on-site compliance reviews and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material as may be relevant to the matter under investigation and pertinent to compliance with the Order, and the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto by the Contractor. Information obtained in this manner shall be used only in connection with the administration of the Order, the administration of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended) and in furtherance of the purpose of the Order and that Act. Records: All records pertaining to this Agreement and the services performed pursuant to it, shall be retained for a period of three (3) years after the expiration date of the Agreement. Appropriate City and/or HUD personnel shall have free access to those records during the Agreement duration and the following three-year time period. Termination for Convenience or for Cause: This Agreement may be terminated by either the City or the Contractor in Lhe event of a substantial failure to perform by either party. In the event of such termination, the Contractor shall be entitled to collect all sums for services performed as of the date of termination. This Agreement may be terminated for convenience in whole or in part by the City with the consent of the Contractor, in which case the two parties shall agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date and in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. Leg&l ~41ee for Contract ¥tolatton: If the Contractor materially fails ~o comply with any term of this Agre,,,,ent, whether stated in a Federal statute or regulation, an assurance, in a State plan or application, a notice of award, or elsewhere, the City may take one or more of the following action, as appropriate in the circumstances: 1) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction Jf the deficiency by the Contractor, 2) Disallow all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance, 3) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the current Agreement, or 4) Take other remedies that may be legally available. E:ATTACHMT.PRO 10/1/91 MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Vir$inia 2401 I Telephone: (703) 981o2541 August 28, 1992 Deputy City Clerk File #24A-86-54-5 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31168-082492 amending §6-22, Definitions, §6- 50, Procedure for declaring dog to be dangerous or vicious~ keeping of dRn~erou.~ dog~ destruction of vicious dog, and §6-53, Violations, Code of the City of R~)anoke (1979), as amended; said amended sections providing that a dog may be a dangerous dog or vicious dog without declaration of any court; providing for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty for failure to keep a dangerous dog in strict compliance with provisions of §6-52, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended; providing for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty for the owner when a dangerous dog wounds any person; providing that it shall be unlawful to keep a vicious dog within the City and for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty; and providing for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty when a vicious dog wounds any person. Ordinance No. 31168-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. /'~ ~"~ ~'Sincerely' ~~ . Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: The Honorable G. O. Clemens, Chief Judge, Circuit Court, P. O. Box 1016, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Kenneth E. Trabue, Judge, Circuit Court, 305 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Judge, Circuit Ceurt The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, Circuit Court Mr. W. Robert Herbert Page 2 August 28, 1992 pc: The Honorable Joseph M. Clarke, II, Chief Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Philip Trompeter, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Fred L. Hoback, Jr., Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Edward S. Kidd, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General District Court The Honorable Richard C. Pattisal, Judge, General District Court The Honorable Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney The Honorable Arthur B. Crush, III, Clerk, Circuit Court The Honoreble Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court Mr. Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate Ms. Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Administration and Public Safety Mr. M. David Hooper, Chief, Police Department Ms. Lauren G. Eib, Risk Management Officer Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest Virginia Buliding, Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President - Supplements, Municipal Code Corporation, P. O. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Ms. Mary K. Welch, 1836 Maiden Lane, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Ms. Jill B. Wright, 5113 Victoria Street, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Ms. Robin K. Johnson, 1301 Graybill Road, N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Ms. Angi Halienbeck, 3211 Old Salem Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31168-082492. VIRGINIA, AN ORDINANCE amending S6-22, Definitions, S6-50, Procedure for declaring dog to be dangerous or vicious; keeping of dangerous dog; destruction of vicious doq, and ~6-53, Violations, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended; the amended sections providing that a dog may be a dangerous dog or vicious dog without declaration of any court; providing for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty for failure to keep a dangerous dog in strict compliance with the provisions of ~6-52, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended; providing for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty for the owner when a dangerous dog wounds any person; providing that it shall be unlawful to keep a vicious dog within the City and for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty; providing for a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty when a vicious dog wounds any person; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows: 1. Sections 6-22, Definitions, 6-50, Procedure for declarinq dog to be dangerous or vicious~ keepinq of dangerous dog~ destruction of vicious doq, and 6-53, Violations, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, are amended and reordained as follows: S6-22. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Article, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Danqerous doq: Any dog (1) which causes a wound to any person without provocation on public or private property; (2) which, while off the property of its owner, kills a domestic animal; (3) which is owned or harbored primarily or in part for the purpose of dog fighting or any dog trained for dog fighting; (4) which, unprovoked, chases or approaches persons upon the streets, sidewalks or any public or private property other than the owner's property in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack; (5) which has a known propensity, tendency or disposition to attack unprovoked, to cause injury or otherwise to threaten the safety of human beings or domestic animals; or (6) which has been found dangerous by any general district court or circuit court of the Commonwealth. Any dog evidencing the characteristics or conduct described in subsections (1), (2), (3), (4) or (5) above shall be a "dangerous dog" even though not found dangerous by any court. Vicious doq': Any dog which (1) kills a person; (2) inflicts serious wound to a person, including multiple bites, disfigurement, impairment of health or impairment of any bodily function; (3) continues to exhibit the behavior which resulted in a previous finding by a court that it is a dangerous dog, or (4) which has been found vicious by any general district court or circuit court of the Commonwealth. Any dog evidencing the characteristics or conduct described in subsections (1), (2) or (3) above shall be a "vicious dog" even though not found vicious by any court. S6-50. Dangerous dog; vicious dog; penalties; procedures. (a) Dangerous dog. It shall be unlawful and a Class 1 misdemeanor to own, keep, harbor, act as custodian of or permit to remain on or about any premises any dog that the owner knew or reasonably should have known to be a dangerous dog, as defined by S6-22, except in strict compliance with S6-52 of this Division. If after hearing evidence, the court finds any dog to be a dangerous dog, the court shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed, order the dog's owner to comply with the provisions of S6-52. If any owner knew or reasonably should have known any dog to be a dangerous dog and such dog thereafter causes a wound to any person, such owner shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. (b) Vicious dog. It shall be unlawful and a Class 1 misdemeanor to own, keep, harbor, act as custodian of or permit to remain on or about any premises any dog that the owner knew or reasonably should have known to be a vicious dog, as defined by S6-22. If, after hearing evidence, the court finds any dog to be a vicious dog, the court shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed, order the animal warden to euthanize the dog. If any owner knew or reasonably should have known any dog to be a vicious dog and such dog thereafter causes a wound to any person, such owner shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. (c) Procedures. When a warrant has been obtained or a summons issued pursuant to this section, the animal warden may, in his discretion, confine the dog until such time as evidence shall be heard and a verdict rendered. The court may, through its contempt power, compel the owner of any dog to produce it for the animal warden. In the event any dog is found to be a dangerous dog or a vicious dog, the owner of such dog shall be responsible for payment to the City of any expenses of impounding and keeping the dog pending disposition of the case at the rate prescribed by City Council. S6-53. Violations and penalties. (a) It shall be a Class 1 misdemeanor for the owner of any dog which has caused a wound to any person to conceal or cause to be concealed such dog from any animal warden or police officer. (b) Any other violation of this Division shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor. municipal government, an emergency is deemed to ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon ATTEST: In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the exist, and this its passage. City Clerk. OFFICE OF THE CIty, ATToRNEy 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING ROANOKE, VI RGI N1~,.o2~401 WILBGRNC. DIBLING, JR. August 24, 1992 WILLIAM X. PARSONS MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS St'EVEN J. TALEVl KATHLEEN MARIE KRONAU ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: Danqerous and vicious doqs Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: At the City Council meeting of July 13, 1992, Council referred to this Office the request of Councilmember Harvey that a review be conducted of the dangerous and vicious dog ordinance to assure that the responsibility is placed on the owners of dogs to control their pets. It was also requested that the highest penalties available be imposed upon persons who act irresponsibly in the keeping of dangerous or vicious dogs. I am pleased to provide this report in response to City Council's request. The dangerous and vicious dog ordinance adopted by City Council on April 6, 1992, places the responsibility for controlling dogs just where it belongs, i.e. squarely on the "owners" (a term broadly defined to include anyone who keeps or harbors a dog or permits a dog to remain on or about his premises). The ordinance creates the three following categories of dogs: (1) most dogs which have not exhibited any characteristics which would cause them to be labeled as dangerous or vicious dogs; (2) dangerous dogs; and (3) vicious dogs. Under §6-22 of the current ordinance, a "dangerous dog" is one which has caused a wound to a person without provocation or which has killed another domestic animal off the property of its owner. The definition of "dangerous dog" also includes dogs which are owned for the purpose of dogfighting or which have been trained for dogfighting; dogs which, unprovoked, chase persons in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack; and dogs which have a known propensity or disposition to attack unprovoked. Thus, it ks not necessary that a dog have its first bite in order to be classified as "dangerous". "Vicious dog" is also defined by S6-22 of the current ordinance, and this term includes a dog which has killed a person; inflicted serious injury to a person; or continued to exhibit the behavior which resulted in a previous finding by a court that it is a dangerous dog. A "vicious dog" represents a much more serious threat to the public, and the ordinance provides that, when a dog reaches "vicious dog" status, it shall be euthanized. The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council August 24, 1992 Section §6-52 of the current ordinance imposes strict conditions and specifications under which a dangerous dog must be kept. Among the most important of these conditions is the requirement that the dog be securely confined indoors or, if kept outdoors, kept in a securely enclosed and locked pen which is described in detail in the ordinance. See S6-52(a). The owner of a dangerous dog must also carry and -~aintain public liability insurance in the amount of $50,000. See S6-52(c). Also, if any dangerous dog is taken off the proper~y of its owner, it must be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash. See ~6- 52(e). Under the current ordinance, if the owner of a dangerous dog violates the conditions for its keeping, the owner is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor (punishable by six months in jail and/or $1,000 fine) for a first violation. For a second violation, the owner is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor (punishable by 12 months in Jail and/or $2,500 fine). See S6-53. As requested by City Council, I have conducted a thorough review of the dangerous and vicious dog ordinance adopted by City Council on April 6, 1992. In order to reaffirm City Council's policy that the owners of dogs should be held strictly responsible for their actions and to impose the heaviest penalties permitted by law, I am recommending the following amendments to the dangerous and vicious dog ordinance: Clarify that a dog may be a dangerous dog or a vicious dog without a finding by a court. For example, if an owner knows that his dog has caused a "wound" (a defined term) to any person without provocation, then the dog is a dangerous dog which must be kept in strict compliance with the conditions established by ~6-52. Increase the penalty for not keeping a dangerous dog in strict compliance with the conditions of ~6-52 from a Class 2 misdemeanor to a Class 1 misdemeanor regardless of whether the infraction is a first or succeeding violation. A Class 1 misdemeanor is punishable by confinement in jail for not more than twelve months and a fine of not more than $2,500.00, either or both. Create a new offense of owning a dangerous dog which causes a wound to any person. Although it would be virtually impossible for a dangerous dog kept according to the required The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council August 24, 1992 conditions to injure any member of the public, the new offense recognizes that reckless or lawless persons may keep dangerous dogs without regard to the law. Prosecution of the owner of a dangerous dog that wounds any person would not preclude prosecution of the owner for the additional offense of failing to keep a dangerous dog under the conditions required by City Council in S6-52. Create a new offense carrying a Class 1 misdemeanor penalty of keeping a vicious dog within the City. Although the ordinance requires a vicious dog to be euthanized, the new offense recognizes the possibility that vicious dogs may be kept within the City unbeknownst to authorities. Create a new offense of owning a vicious dog which causes a wound to any person. Although no person should own a vicious dog kept within the City, the new offense again recognizes that reckless or lawless persons may evade the law. The attached ordinance, which I recommend to you, implements the foregoing amendments immediately. The Commonwealth's Attorney supports the proposed amendments and also recommends them to you. If City Council adopts the attached ordinance, the City Code will include the following Class 1 misdemeanor offenses relating to dangerous or vicious dogs: Keeping a dangerous dog except in strict compliance with conditions established by S6- 52; Owning a dangerous dog which causes a wound to any person; Keeping a vicious dog in the City; Owning a vicious dog which causes a any person; and wound to Concealing a dog which has caused a wound to any person. The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council August 24, 1992 4 As I am sure you are aware, a Class 1 misdemeanor carries the highest penalty which may be imposed by City Council. As was observed by Mr. Harvey in his letter to City Council, most serious dog bites can be traced back to irresponsible dog owners. The ordinance adopted by City Council on April 6, as amended by the attached ordinance, provides for careful regulation of dog ownership and punishes those owners who act irresponsibly. With kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney WCD:f Attachment cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager George C. Snead, Director, Public Safety M. David Hooper, Chief of Police The Honorable Donald $. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney Roanoke, Virginia Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mayor and Members of Council: Re: Animal Control At its meeting of July 27, 1992, Councilman Harvey requested that I examine the animal control ordinance and make recommendations concerning increased enforcement of the "dog leash law." On careful examination of our ordinance, I find in Article II, Section 6-22, that in order for an animal to be at large, he must roam, run or self hunt off the property of the owner or custodian while not under the owner's or custodian'S immediate control. While the ordihance prohibits running at la~ge, it does not specifically require that an animal be on a leash. The troublesome language is, of course, "under the owner's or custodian's i~u~ediate control." Our experience is that most dog owners who do not have their animals leashed would contend that the animal is under their immediate control through "voice command" or other gestures. If, in fact, the intent of Council is to routinely and consistently summons dog owners for walking on public streets and properties including public parks without an animal being leashed, it is incumbent upon us to modify the ordinance to require ,,physical control" as opposed to the language ,,immediate control." Our past enforcement history of Section 6-23, which prohibits dogs running at large, has been confined generally to those animals that are not accompanied by an owner and are allowed or permitted to run at large alone or in the company of other animals. Any such amendment to the code is likely to be a highly charged emotional issue. As you know, walking one'S pet is a common practice and the use of parks for exercise of pet animals is often a favorite pastime of both the animal and its owners. Thus careful consideration should be given to amending the Code to require all pets to be under ,,physical control." If there is additional work you would like to see undertaken in this regard please let me know. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Page 2 August 24, 1992 I would also like to make Council aware City staff is working on more clearly defining the number of dogs allowed to be kept on residential property in the City. Sincerely, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH/hw 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #24A-79-140 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia The Honorable Gordon E. Peters City Treasurer Roanoke, Virginia Gentlemen: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31169-082492 amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending subsection (g) of Section 32-283, Definitions, Section 32-285, Payment and collection of tax, Section 32-294, Duty of ~ finance, and~ubseetion (6) of Section 32-297, Exemptions~ of Article ~ ~ ~-~ ~-~pared Food and Beverage, of Chapter 32, TaxKtion; such amendments to amend the definition of "seller," to clarify that taxes collected by the seller are to be remitted to the Treasurer, to transfer authority for collection to the Director of Finance; and to clarify the exemption for nonprofit educational, charitable or benevolent organizations. Ordinance No. 31169-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, ~O-,~- Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Ene. pc: The Honorable G. O. Clemens, Chief Judge, Circuit Court, P. O. Box 1016, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Kenneth E. Trabue, Judge, Circuit Court, 305 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Joseph M. Clarke, II, Chief Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Mr. Gordon E. Peters Page 2 August 28, 1992 pc: The Honorable District Court The Honorable District Court The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable Mr. W. Robert Philip Trompeter, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Fred L. Hoback, Jr., Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Edward S. Kidd, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General District Court Richard C. Pattisal, Judge, General District Court Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney Arthur B. Crush, III, Clerk, Circuit Court Herbert, City Manager Mr. Robert H. Bird, Municipal Auditor Ms. Deborah J. Moses, Chief of Billings and Collections Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court Mr. Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate Ms. Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest Virginia Building, Roa/~oke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President - Supplements, Municipal Code Corporation, P. O. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304 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) 981-25~.1 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk September 9, 1992 File #79-24A-140 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: At the regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held on Monday, August 24, 1992, measures were enacted which are intended to enhance collection of the prepared food and beverage tax and business license, 'real estate and personal property taxes. Council Member White requested that you establish a base period, for example: six months prior to adoption of the above referenced ordinances to determine the amount of taxes collected during that six month period compared to the six month period following adoption of the measures to determine if there is a measurable increase in taxes collected by the City. Mr. White further requested that you report to Council within a period of eight months. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw pc: The Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31169-082492. AN ORDINANCE amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending subsection (g) of Sec. 32-283, Definitions, Sec. 32-285, Payment and collection of tax, Sec. 32-294, Duty of finance, a~d subsection (6) of Sec. 32-297, Exemptions,~ director of of Article XIV, Tax on Prepared Food and Beveraqe, of Chapter 32, Taxation; such amendments to amend the definition of "seller," to clarify that taxes collected by the seller are to be remitted to the Treasurer, to transfer authority for collection to the Director of Finance; and to clarify the exemption for nonprofit educational, charitable or benevolent organizations; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of 1. hereby 32-283, Roanoke that: The Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is amended and reordained by amending subsection (g) of Sec. Definitions, Sec. 32-285, Payment and collection of tax, Sec. 32-294, Duty of Sec. 32-297, Beveraqe, Sec. Exemptions, (g) of Chapter 32, Taxation, 32-283. Definitions. Seller: director of finance, and subsection (6) of of Article XIV, Tax on Prepared Food and to read and provide as follows: (1) Where the restaurant or catering business is a corporation, the president or a duly authorized agent of the corporation. (2) Where the restaurant or catering business is an unincorporated partnership or association, the general partner or partners or the managing agent of such unincorporated partnership or association. (3) Where the restaurant or catering business is a sole proprietorship, the owner or the managing agent of the proprietorship. (4) Where the restaurant or catering business is a non-profit or charitable organization, the organization or a duly authorized agent of the organization. Sec. 32-285. Payment and collection of tax~ Every seller or his agent or employee who sells food with respect to which a tax is levied under this article shall collect the amount of tax imposed under this article from the purchaser on whom the same is levied at the time payment for such food becomes due and payable, whether payment is to be made in cash or on credit by means of a credit card or otherwise. The amount of tax owed by the purchaser shall be added to the cost of the food by the seller or his agent or employee, and the seller shall pay the taxes collected to the city as provided in this article. Taxes collected by the seller shall be held in trust by the seller until remitted to the treasurer. Sec. 32-294. Duty of director of finance. The director of finance shall have the power and the duty of collecting the taxes imposed and levied hereunder and shall cause the same to be paid into the general treasury for the city. 2. 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 upon its passage. ATTEST: 2 City Clerk. CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITYAqq~ORNEY "'~ 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING _ ROANOKE, 'VIRGINIA 24011-1595 '~ WILBURN C. DIBUNG, JR. CITY ATTORNEY August 24, 1992 WILLIAM X PARSONS MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS STEVEN J. TALEVI KATHLEEN UARIE KRONAU Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: Prepared Food and Beverage assessment and collection taxes authority for Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: In an effort to enhance the administration of the prepared food and beverage tax by the City, I have been requested by City administration to make certain amendments to the City Code with respect to the assessment and collection of the prepared food and beverage tax. In order to accomplish the requested changes, I have prepared the attached ordinance amending certain sections of the City Code relating to the above tax. With respect to the above tax, the Code would be amended as follows: The definition of seller has been rewritten to ensure that the party responsible for the day-to- day operation of the restaurant or catering business is liable to the City for payment of the tax. o The section relating to payment and collection of tax has been amended to clarify that the tax shall be remitted to the City Treasurer. o Authority for assessment and collection of the tax will be transferred from the City Treasurer to the Director of Finance. Attached to this report is an ordinance effecting the above changes for your review and consideration. This ordinance is jointly reco~Rended to you by the City Treasurer, Director of Finance and me. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council August 24, 1992 Page 2 With kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, City Attorney WCDj/KMK:sm Attachment cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer Joel M. $chlanger, Director of Finance Robert H. Bird, Municipal Auditor Mary F. Parker, City Clerk MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 2,4011 Telephone: (?03) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk September 17, 1992 File #24A-70-140 Mr. Robert L. Laslie Vice President - Supplements Municipal Code Corporation P. O. Box 2235 Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Dear Mr. Laslie: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31171-082492 amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending Sec. 32-1, Definitions, and adding new Section 32-25, Duty to collect, of Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, and adding new Section 32-111, Duty to collect, of Article III, Tax on Tangible Personal Property Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation; said amendments to transfer, authority for collection of delinquent real estate tax and personal property tax from the Treasurer to the Director of Finance at the end of the respective tax year for each tax. Ordinance No. 31171-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August. 1992. No. 31171-082492. VIRGINIA, AN ORDINANCE amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending Sec. 32-1, Definitions, and adding new Sec. 32-25, Duty to collect, of Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, and adding new Sec. 32-111, Duty to collect, of Article III, Tax on Tanqible Personal Property Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation; such amendments to transfer authority for collection of delinquent real estate tax and personal property tax from the Treasurer to the Director of Finance at the end of the respective tax year for each tax; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. Section 32-1, Definitions, of Article II, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979)', as amended, is hereby amended and reordained to read and provide as follows: Sec. 32-1. Definitions. The following words, when used in this chapter, shall have the following respective meanings, unless the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Assessment: The act of determining and fixing, for tax purposes, the value of real estate situate within the corporate limits of the city. Assessor: The assessor of real estate for taxation, known in this city as the director of real estate valuation, and appointed pursuant to the provisions of sections 32-36 through 32-37.1 of this chapter. Commissioner: The commissioner of revenue of the city. Director of Finance: The director of finance of the city. License inspector: The license inspector of the city. Treasurer: The treasurer of the city. 2. Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, shall be amended and reordained by the addition of new Section 32- 25, Duty to collect, to read and provide as follows: Sec. 32-25. Duty to collect. The Treasurer shall be charged with the duty of collecting the taxes levied and imposed by this article through the thirtieth day of June of the tax year for which such taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. The Director of Finance shall be charged with the duty of collecting all taxes levied and imposed by this article remaining unpaid after the thirtieth day of June of the tax year for which the taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed'. 3. Article III, Tax on Tanqible Personal Property Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, shall be amended and reordained by the addition of new Section 32-211, Duty to collect, to read and provide as follows: Sec. 32-111. Duty to collect. The Treasurer shall be charged with the duty of collecting the taxes levied and imposed by this article through the thirty-first day of December of the tax year in which the taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. The Director of Finance shall be charged with the duty of collecting all taxes levied and imposed by this article remaining unpaid after the thirty-first day 2 of December of the tax year in which the taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. 4. 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 upon its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. 3 MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, $.W., Room 456 Roanoke. Virgin/a 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #24A-79-140 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia The Honorable Gordon E. Peters City Treasurer Roanoke, Virginia Gentlemen: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31170-082492 amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending Section 32-1, Definitions, of Article I, In General, and adding new Section 32-25, Duty to collect, of Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, and adding new Section 32-111, Duty to collect, of Article III, Tax on Tangible Personal Property Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation; such amendments to transfer authority for collection of delinquent real estate tax and personal property tax from the Treasurer to the Director of Finance at the end of the respective tax year for each tax. Ordinance No. 31170-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:sw Eno. pc: The Honorable G. O. Clemens, Chief Judge, Circuit Court, P. O. Box 1016, Salem, Virgi;.~ia 24153 The Honorable Kenneth E. Trabue, Judge, Circuit Court, 305 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Joseph M. Clarke, II, Chief Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Mr. Gordon E. Peters Page 2 August 28, 1992 pc: The Honorable Philip Trompeter, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Fred L. Hoback, Jr., Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Edward S. Kidd, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General District Court The Honorable Richard C. Pattisal, Judge, General District Court The Honorable Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney The Honorable Arthur B. Crush, III, Clerk, Circuit Court The Honorable Jerome S. Howard, Jr., Commissioner of Revenue Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Ms. Deborah J. Moses, Chief of Billings and Collections Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court Mr. Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate Ms. Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest Virginia Building, Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President- Supplements, Municipal Code Corporation, P. O. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31170-082492. AN ORDINANCE amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending Sec. 32-1, Definitions, of Article I, I__n General, and adding new Sec. 32-25, Duty to collect, of Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, and adding new Sec. 32-111, Duty to collect, of Article III, Tax on Tanqible Personal Property Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation; such amendments to transfer authority for collection of delinquent real estate tax and personal property tax from the Treasurer to the Director of Finance at the end of the respective tax year for each tax; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. Section 32-1, Definitions, of Article I, In General, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is hereby amended and reordained to read and provide as follows: Sec. 32-1. Definitions. The following words, when used in this chapter, shall have the following respective meanings, unless the context clearly indicates a different meaning: city. Taxation, Director of Finance: The director of finance of the Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, of Chapter 32, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, shall be amended and reordained by the addition of new Section 32- 25, Duty to collect, to read and provide as follows: Sec. 32-25. Duty to collect. The Treasurer shall be charged with the duty of collecting the taxes levied and imposed by this article through the thirtieth day of June of the tax year for which such taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. The Director of Finance shall be charged with the duty of collecting all taxes levied and imposed by this article remaining unpaid after the thirtieth day of June of the tax year for which the taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. 3. Article III, Tax on Tanqible Personal Property Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, shall be amended and reordained by the addition of new Section 32-211, Duty to collect, to read and provide as follows: Sec. 32-111. Duty to collect. The Treasurer shall be charged with the duty of collecting the taxes levied and imposed by this article through the thirty-first day of December of the tax year in which the taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. The Director of Finance shall be charged with the duty of collecting all taxes levied and imposed by this article remaining unpaid after the thirty-first day of December of the tax year in which the taxes were assessed or due to have been assessed. 4. 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 upon its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. 2 CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITYATTORNEY 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24011-15~5 TELECOPIER: WILBURN C. DIRLING, JR. CITY ATTOR#EY WILLIAM X PARSONS MARK ALLAN WILLIAMS STEVEN J. TALEVI KATHLEEN MARIE KRONAU August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: City Business License Tax, Real Estate Tax and Personal Property Tax - authority for collection Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: In an effort to enhance the administration of the business license, real estate and personal property taxes by the City, I have been requested by City administration to make certain amendments to the City Code with respect to the collection of the business license, real estate and personal property taxes. In order to accomplish the requested changes, I have prepared the attached ordinance amending certain sections of the City Code relating to the above taxes. With respect to these taxes, the Code would be amended as follows: 1. The definitions have been amended to add the term "director of finance". The section of the business license tax relating to payment and collection of tax has been amended to clarify that the delinquent tax is to be collected by the Director of Finance after December 31 of each year. The section relating to collection of the real estate tax has been rewritten to transfer authority for collection of the tax after June 30 of each year from the City Treasurer to the Director of Finance. The section relating to collection of tax on tangible personal property has been rewritten to transfer authority for collection of the tax after December 31 of each year from the City Treasurer to the Director of Finance. Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council August 24, 1992 Page 2 Ail the above taxes will be remitted to the City Treasurer as is currently the case. Attached to this report are two ordinances effecting the above changes for your review and consideration. These ordinances are jointly recommended to you by the City Treasurer, the Director of Finance and me. With kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, Wilburn C. Di ling, Jr. City Attorney WCDj/KMK:sm Attachment cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager The Honorable Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Robert H. Bird, Municipal Auditor Mary F. Parker, 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk September 9, 1992 File #79-24A-140 Mr. Joel. M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: At the regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held on Monday, August 24, 1992, measures were enacted which are intended to enhance collection of the prepared food and beverage tax and business license, real estate and personal property taxes. Council Member White requested that you establish a base period, for example: six months prior to adoption of the above referenced ordinances to determine the amount of taxes collected during that six month period compared to the six month period following adoption of the measures to determine if there is a measurable increase in taxes collected by the City. Mr. White further requested that you report to Council within a period of eight months. Sincerely, ~0.~-.~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw pc: The Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File//27 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31173-082492 accepting the bid of John A. Hall and Company, Inc., in the amount of $32,971.94, for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courtney Avenue, N. E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Ordinance No. 31173-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clark MFP: sw F. nc. po: Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Ms. Dolores C. Daniels, Assistant to the City Manager for Community Relations 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, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #27 Mr. John A. Hall, President John A. Hall & Company, Inc. 4925 Starkey Road, S. W. Roanoke, Virgii~ia 24014 Dear Mr. Hall: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31173-082492 accepting the bid of John A. Hall and Company, Inc., in the amount of $32,971.94, for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courtney Avenue, N. E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Ordinance No. 31173-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, 7~~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #27 Mr. M. D. Sensabaugh, Jr. Vice-President Adams Construction Co., Inc. P. O. Box 12627 Roanoke, Virginia 24027 Dear Mr. Sensabaugh: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31173-082492 accepting the bid of John A. Hall and Company, Inc., in the amount of $32,971.94, for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courtney Avenue, N. E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Ordinance No. 31173-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed project. Sincerely, ~~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:sw Eric. MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Vir ~inia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #27 Mr. William D. Gee, President H. & S. Construction Co. P. O. Box 6226 Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Dear Mr. Gee: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31173-082492 accepting the bid of John A. Hall and Company, Inc., in the amount of $32,971.94, for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courtney Avenue, N. E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Ordinance No. 31173-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behalf of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed project. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw gnc. 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #27 Mr. M. Wayne Hylton, Jr. Vice President S. R. Draper Paving Co. 4742 Old Rocky Mount Road, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Dear Mr. Hylton: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31173-082492 accepting the bid of John A. Hall and Company, Inc., in the amount of $32,971.94, for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courtney Avenue, N. E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Ordinance No. 31173-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. On behaff of the Mayor and Members of City Council, I would like to express appreciation for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed project. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno o IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31173-082492. VIRGINIA, AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated, for the construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, upon certain terms and conditions, and awarding a contract therefor; authorizing the proper City officials to execute the requisite contract for such work; rejecting all other bids made to the City for the work; and providing for an emergency. BE follows: 1. IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as The bid of John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated, made to the City in the total amount of $32,971.94, for the construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II: Courtney Avenue, N.E., and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W., as more particularly set forth in the report to this Council dated August 24, 1992, such bid being in full compliance with the City's plans and specifications made therefor and as provided in the contract documents offered said bidder, which bid is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, be and is hereby ACCEPTED. 2. The City Manager or the Assistant City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby authorized on behalf of the City to execute ana attest, respectively, the requisite contract with the successful bidder, based on its proposal made therefor and the City's specifications made therefor, said contract to be in such form as is approved by the City Attorney, and the cost of said work to be paid for out of funds heretofore or simultaneously appropriated by Council. 3. Any and all other bids made to the City for the aforesaid work are hereby REJECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each the City's appreciation for such bid. 4. municipal ordinance In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and this shall be in full force and effect upon its passage. 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #60-27 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31172-082492 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1992-93 Capital Fund Appropriations, providing for the transfer of certain funds in connection with award of a contract to John A. Hall and Company, Inc., in the amount of $32,971.94, for construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II, Courtney Avenue, N. E., and Hildebrand Road, N. W. Ordinance No. 31172-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Ene. Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. Jesse H. Perdue, Jr., Manager, Utility Line Services Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Ms. Sarah E. Fitton, Construction Cost Technician Ms. Dolores C. Daniels, Assistant to the City Manager for Community Relations Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31172-082492. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1992-93 Capital 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. Roanoke Appropriations, be, to read as follows, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of that certain sections of the 1992-93 Capital Fund and the same are hereby, amended and reordained in part: Appropriations Sanitation $ 2,277,958 Neighborhood Storm Drain - Phase II-92 (1-2) ......... 35,000 Capital Improvement Reserve 5,323,817 Public Improvement Bonds - Series 1988 (3) ........... 41,000 Capital Improvement Reserve (4) ...................... 301,600 1) Appropriation from General Revenue 2) Appropriation from Bond Funds 3) Storm Drains 4) Storm Drains (008-052-9683-9003) $ 28,759 (008--052-9683-9001) 6,241 (008--052-9603-9176) (6,241) (008-052-9575-9176) (28,759) BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: this City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Bid Committee Report Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II: Courtney Avenue, N.E. & Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Roanoke, Virginia I concur with the recommendations of the attached Bid Committee Report. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH/CMH/mm cc: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Director of Utilities & Operations City Engineer Manager, Utility Line Services Citizens' Request for Service Construction Cost Technician Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Bid Committee Report Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Courtney Avenue, N. E. Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. Roanoke, Virginia Phase II: Backqround: Bids, following proper advertisement, were publicly opened and read aloud before City Council on July 27, 1992, for the construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain facilities in the following areas: Courtney Avenue, N.E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. This project represents the fourth project toward addressing the 1990-94 Capital Improvement Program-Neighborhood Priority - Phase II program. Projects now completed are: Walnut Avenue Bridge, S.E., Fleming Avenue, N.W., Plantation Road, N.E., 14th Street (1200 block), S.E. and Westside Boulevard (1600 block), N.W. This project completes phase II of this program. Four (4) bids were received with John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated of Roanoke, Virginia, submitting the low bid in the amount of $32~971.94 and sixty (60) consecutive calendar days. C. Two (2) projects consist of the following work: Courtney Avenue, N.E. - consists of the installation of 829 linear feet of concrete curb & gutter CG-6, concrete driveway entrances and appurtenant paving necessary to direct storm water runoff, that presently enters dwellings and private property from the street right of way, into the existing storm drain system. Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. consists of installation of 529 linear feet of concrete curb CG-2, concrete driveway entrances and appurtenant paving to direct storm water runoff, that presently accumulates in the street endangering traffic flow and nearby residences, to the existing storm drain system. Page 2 II. III. Issues in order of importance are: Compliance of bidders with the requirements of the contract documents. B. Amount of the low bid. C. Fundinq for the project. D. Time of completion. Alternatives are: Award a unit price contract to John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated, of Roanoke, Virginia, submitting the low bid in the amount of $32~971.94 and sixty (60) consecutive calendar days for the construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain facilities: Courtney Avenue, N.E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. in accordance with the contract documents prepared by the Office of the City Engineer. Compliance of the bidders with the requirements of the contract documents was met. Amount of the low bid is acceptable. The low bid is 6% below the project estimate of $35,000.00. Fundinq for the project is available in the Public Improvement Bonds Series-1988 Storm Drains, Account Number 008-052-9603-9176 and Capital Improvement Reserve - Storm Drains, Account Number 008-052-9575-9176. Time of completion is 6--0 consecutive calendar days which is acceptable. Reject all bids and do not award a contract at this time. Compliance of the bidders with the requirements of the contract documents would not be an issue. Page 3 Amount of the low bid would probably increase if rebid at a later date. Fundinq would not be encumbered at this time. Time of completion would be extended. IV. Recommendation is that City Council take the following action: A. Concur with the implementation of Alternative "A". Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contractual agreement, in form approved by the City Attorney, with John A. Hall and Company, Incorporated for the construction of Neighborhood Storm Drain Projects, Phase II: Courtney Avenue, N.E. and Hildebrand Avenue, N.W. in accordance with the contract documents as prepared by the Office of the City Engineer in the amount of $32,971.94 and 6--0 consecutive calendar days. Authorize the Director of Finance to transfer the following funding for this project: Fundinq Required: Contract Amount Contingency & Advertisement $32,971.94 2~028.06 TOTAL $35,000.00 Fundinq Available: from Account #008-052-9603-9176, Public Improvement Bond Series-1988 Storm Drains $ 6,241.00 from Account #008-052-9575-9176, Capital Improvement Reserve - Storm Drains 28,759.00 $35,000.00 TOTAL to an account to be entitled Neighborhood Storm Drains, Phase II - 92. D. Reject the other bids received. Page 4 Respectfully submitted, William White, S?., Chairman William F. Clark Kit B. Kiser WW/PCS/mm Attachment: Tabulation of Bids cc: City Attorney Director of Finance Budget Administrator City Engineer Manager, Utility Line Services Citizens' Request for Service Construction Cost Technician TABULATION OF BIDS NEIGHBORHOOD STORM DRAIN PROJECTS, PHASE II WITH SEGMENTS AT COURTNEY AVENUE, N.E. & HILDEBRAND AVENUE, N.W. FOR CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA JOB NO. 6189 Bids opened before Roanoke City Council at its meeting on Monday, July 27, 1992 at 2:00 p.m. BIDDER BASE BID TIME BOND John A. Hall and Company, $32,971.94 60 YES Incorporated S. R. Draper Paving Company $41,063.72 60 YES H & S Construction Company $44,418.00 60 YES Adams Construction Company, Inc. $50,153.25 60 YES * Consecutive Calendar Days Engineer's Estimate: $35,000.00 W' li~a~ White, Sr., Chairman William F. Clark Kit B. Kiser Office of City Engineer Roanoke, Virginia August 24, 1992 MARY F. PA~KI~ City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, $.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 2,~011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #2-249-166 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31138-082492 providing for the sale and conveyance of City-.owned property located at 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue, S. W., to Roger R. Neel, Jr., and Thomas E. Wallace, in the amount of $120,000.00, as more particularly set forth in a report of the Water Resources Committee under date of July 27, 1992. Ordinance No. 31138-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, July 27, 1992, also adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, August 24, 1992, and will take effect ten days following the date of its second reading. Sincerely, ~O..~.~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: Mr. Barry L. Ward, Jr., Agent, Mastin, Kirkland, Bolling, Inc., 3801 Electric Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development Mr. Philiip F. Sparks, Economic Development Specialist Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. John R. Marlies, Chief, Community Planning Ms. Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural Review Board Mr. Willard N. Claytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31138-082492. VIRGINIA, AN ORDINANCE providing for the sale and conveyance of City- owned property located at 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue, S.W., upon certain terms and conditions. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The offer of Roger R. Neel, Jr. and Thomas E. Wallace to purchase the property located at 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue, S.W., located in the City of Roanoke for the consideration of $120,000.00, subject to and upon the terms and conditions set forth in the report from the Chairman of the Water Resources Committee to this Council dated July 27, 1992, is hereby accepted. 2. The City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute and attest, respectively, on behalf of the City of Roanoke, in form approved by the City Attorney, an appropriate contract and other documentation providing for the conveyance of this property to Roger R. Neel, Jr. and Thomas E. Wallace subject to and upon terms and conditions deemed appropriate and as more particularly set forth in the report from the Chairman of the Water Resources Committee to this Council dated July 27, 1992. ATTEST: City Clerk. July 27, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Campbell Avenue Historic Properties 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue The attached staff report was considered by the Water Resources Committee at its meeting on June 22, 1992. The Committee discussed the matter in Executive Session and as Chairman of the Committee, I now recommend that Council authorize the sale of the Campbell Avenue Historic Properties, 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue, in accordance with the conditions stated in the attached report. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairman Water Resources Committee ETB:PFS/kkd Attachment cc: City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Utilities and Operations INTERDEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION DATE: June 22, 1992 TO: Member~/ .Water Resources Committee FROM: ' Kit'B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations THROUGH: W. Rot~t Herbert, City Manager Subject: Campbell Avenue Historic Properties 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue I. BACKGROUND: City Council authorized by Ordinance No. 29372 dated November 26, 1988 the execution of Sale and Exchange Agreement will James L. and Muriel King Trinkle, providing that the City purchase property owned by the Trinkles at 120 and 122 Campbell avenue for $164,000, and further providing that the City exchange real estate owned at 124 Kirk Avenue for real estate owned by the Trinkles at 118 and 124 Campbell Avenue. Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources provided a $100,000 grant toward the acquisition of the Campbell Avenue Historic properties. The City of Roanoke agreed to donate historic preservation easements on the buildings to the Virginia Historic Landmarks Board (VHLB) or to require as a condition of sale that the purchaser or purchasers donate historic preservation easements to the VHLB, as required by the State Grant Agreement. The City of Roanoke prepared and submitted an acceptable register report to the Virginia Historic Landmark Board, and requested that the buildings be formally added to the State Register and nominated to the National Register of Historic Places. $225,000 was the estimated market value of the properties on December 19, 1990. Estimate provided by the City.!s Office of Real Estate Valuation. This value does not take into account any costs such as asbestos removal, brokerage fees, etc., that may be incurred in the process of marketing the property. $55,005 was the low bid for the removal of asbestos from the Campbell Avenue Historic Properties. (The asbestos has not been removed.) Water Resources Committee June 22, 1992 Page 2 II. CURRENT SITUATION: B4 $120,000 offer for 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue has been received from Mastin, Kirkland, Bolling Realtors, Inc. on behalf of Roger R. Neel, Jr. and Thomas E. Wallace. The following contingencies were requested: ii. iii. III. iv. Ninety days after agreement on conditions of sale to secure financing. Purchaser obtaining title insurance policy. Purchaser securing $5,000 grant from City's Historic Matching Grant Fund for each of the four buildings - total funds sought $20.000. Purchaser will pay commission to Mastin, Kirkland, Bolling Realtors, Inc. $194,600 is current assessed value of the Campbell Avenue Historic Properties. Purchaser will take the Campbell Avenue Historic Properties as they now exist, acknowledging existence of asbestos and responsibility for its removal. Third floor apartments, second floor offices and first floor retail are the envisioned uses of the property. 118 Campbell Avenue will be renovated first with 124 being immediately stabilized. ISSUES: Historic preservation. Downtown redevelopment. Timing. Water Resources Committee June 22, 1992 Page 3 IV. ALTERNATIVES: ho Committee recommend to City Council that it authorize the execution of necessary documents relating to the sale of 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue for a sum of $120.000 subject to the following conditions: Purchaser be given 90 days to secure identified financing including amount, term and interest rate. ii. Purchaser obtaining title insurance policy. iii. Purchaser securing $5.000 grant from City's Historic Grant Fund for each of the four buildings - total funds sought $20.000. iv. Purchaser pay commission relating to the sale. Prior to sale, City place, an historic preservation easement on the property in favor of Virginia Historic Landmarks Board. vi. Purchaser acknowledge responsibility for abatement of asbestos. Historic preservation will be maintained with the redevelopment of the Campbell Avenue Historic Buildings. Downtown Redevelopment will continue with new businesses locating into the renovated properties along with citizens seeking to live downtown. Timing will allow the City to convey ownership of the properties without having to incur additional expense to stabilize the buildings. Committee recommend to City Council that it not authorize the sale of 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue. Historic preservation will not be enhanced due to buildings' desperate need for renovation. Water Resources Committee June 22, 1992 Page 4 Downtown redevelopment will not be enhanced due to store fronts remaining empty, jobs will not be created and a missed opportunity for downtown housing. Timing will be negatively impacted due to the work the City will need to do to maintain the existing structures. For example, the roofs on 118 and 124 need to be replaced now before structural damage occurs. V. RECOMMENDATION: Committee recommend to City Council that it authorize the execution of necessary documents in form approved by City Attorney relating to the sale of 118, 120, 122 and 124 Campbell Avenue for a sum of $120.000 in accordance with Alternative "A" subject to the following conditions: ii. iii. iv. vi. Purchaser be given 90 days to secure identified financing including amount, term and interest rate. Purchaser obtaining title insurance policy. Purchaser securing $5.000 grant from City's Historic Grant Fund for each of the four buildings -total funds sought $20,000. Purchaser pay commission relating to the sale. Prior to sale, City place, an historic preservation easement on the property in favor of Virginia Historic Landmarks Board. Purchaser acknowledge responsibility for abatement of asbestos. Water Resources Committee June 22, 1992 Page 5 WRH:PFS/kkd cc: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Chief, Economic Development Civil Engineer II (Bane Coburn) CONTRACT OF SALE THIS CONTRACT OF SALE made and entered into by and between the City of Roanoke, a Virginia municipal corporation,F-hereinafter referred to as "Seller" and Thomas E. Wallace and Ro~ger R. Neel, Jr., hereinafter Jointly and severally referred to as "Purchasers," WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of One Hundred Twenty Thousand and no/100 dollars ($120,000.00), payable as follows: (a) $10,000.00 cash/check in hand on the signing of this contract, paid by Purchasers to Mastin, Klrkland, Bolling Inc. to be held in escrow until final settlement, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged; (b) $110,000.00 at time of closing, Purchasers agree to purchase from Seller and Seller agrees to sell to the Purchasers with General Warranty of Title and Modern English Covenants, subject to the terms contained herein, all that certain lot, tract or parcel of land with all appurtenances thereto belonging, lying and being in the City of Roanoke, Virginia and being generally described as 118, 120, 122, 124, West Campbell Avenue, and bearing Official tax nos. 1011512, 1011511, 1011510, and 1011509, respectively, and being more particularly described in the "Description of Sale Property" attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit "A", said property hereinafter referred to as the "Property", subject to all conditions, easements and restrictions of record and the exceptions identified in the excerpts from the Seller's Owner's Title Insurance Policies included on the attached Exhibit "A." This contract is subject to the following contingencies: (a) Purchasers being able to obtain, at their own expense, owner's title insurance on the Property from a nationally recognized title insurance company, subject to the exceptions identified above and other customary and usual exceptions not adversely affecting title such as real property taxes not yet due and payable; (b) Purchasers obtaining financing for /,'~/f{ ~,~ ~.,,w~ dollars ($ ~ ~D ) for a term of ~ _ y~ars at an interest rat~ not to exceed /0 %, on o~before ~ctober 1, 1992. Purchasers acknowledge and agree that the Property is in poor condition and that the Property contains asbestos and that the certification for the elevator at 120 Campbell Avenue has lapsed. Purchasers covenant and agree to accept the Property "AS IS" and, without limitation, covenant and agree to be responsible for any requSred abatement or removal of asbestos located on the Property and to be responsible for all repairs and maintenance and to keep the Property in good and substantial repair, such covenants to survive closing. 2 Purchasers agree to pay outside of closing to Mastln, Kirkland, Bolling Inc., REALTORS, cash for services, Brokerage on the sales price of the Property at a six (6%) percent rate. Such comJ~lssion shall be paid solely by Purchasers, and the sale proceeds to Seller shall not be reduced by such payment. Taxes to be prorated as of date of settlement. Risk of loss by fire or other casualty shall be upon Seller until settlement is completed. Neither Seller nor Agent has made any represent~tions as to the zoning or permitted uses of the above Property and Purchasers assume full responsibility for ascertaining same. Purchasers acknowledge and agree that, prior to closing, Seller intends to record historic preservation easements on the Property in favor of the Virginia Historic Landmarks Board or its successor, in substantially the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "B". Purchasers acknowledge and agree that they have read and understand said easements and agree that the Property shall be bound by the terms and conditions contained therein. Seller covenants and agrees that for a period of 6 months from date of closing on the Property, Seller shall reserve for Purchasers under the Roanoke City Historic Facade Grant Program 1 $5,000.00 grant for each of the 4 buildings located on the Property for a total of 4 grants in the total amount of $20,000.00, subject to Purchasers complying with the applicable terms, conditions, and requirements of said Historic Facade Grant Program. Purchasers and Seller hereby bind themselves, their heirs, assigns, successors, executors and/or .administrators, as applicable, for the faithful performance of the above agreement. Closing shall take place in the Office of the City Attorney, 464 Municipal Building, Roanoke, Virginia, within 90 days from the last date that this agreement is properly executed by Purchasers and Seller, or as soon thereafter as may be practicable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties have hereunto set their hands and seals the date indicated below. Purchasers: Thomas E. Wallace Ro~fger R. Noel, Jr. Seller= City of Roanoke By: W. Robert Herbert City Manager date: , 1992 Attest: Mary F. Parker City Clerk Agent: -~ar~ty L. Ward,~Jr. Mastin, Kirklahd, Bolling Inc. Listor: None Authorized by Roanoke City Ordinance No. Approved as to form: dated Assistant City Attorney Exhibit Description of Sale Property BEGINNING at a point on the :,o.t!: tide of Campbell Avenue Z7Z.50 feet welt of F[rdt Street, $.W.; thence with laid Campbell Avenue S. 84' 15' W, 25.00 feet to point; thence S. 1' Z8' E. 64. 16 f~t to ·halley; thence wt~ laid alley N, 85' E. ZS, 00 feet to a point; thence l * J7' W, ~4, 87 feet to the place of BEGINNING; and BEGIFlNING at a point on the louth llde et Campbell Avenue 197,30 feet Walt of Flret Street,.$.W.; thence $. 6° /.8' 58" E. 67.93 feet to· point on an alley; Ihence with laid alley FI. 88' 50' 13" W. 9.73 feet to& polnl~ thence with eald alley ~. 84' 58' 16" '~. Z0.00 feet to a point; thence N. Z' Z8~ 15" W. 66. Z9 feet to a polnl on ~e aouth aide of Campbell Rvenu.~; ~ence with Campbell Avenue N. 83' 31~ ~. ZS,00 feet tothe point of B~GI~ING, aa ahown on a plat of aurvey made by Jack G. Oeec. C. L. ~.. dated December 18. 1973; and All tho Grontor'e rl~.ht, till· and InMreet In And to that certain allay upon which the hereiMbove deecr~bnd I~rcala abut, enid &lieF IMlnf cio·ad L~y 18, 19Z8 by Ordin6nca No, 33~5 o( the Git)' of Ro~noka, VIrfinla. This being real estate at 118 and 124 Campbell Avenue, bearing Official Tax Nos. 1011512 and 1011509, and being Lots 11 and 8, Block 10, Official Survey SWl, respectively. c~OI~.I?/-I£.R.IV ?I?1~ .[.~'$1.I.R. AJV'C£ CORPORA?/O.~' OWNER'S POLICY SCHEDULE B Policy Number: File Number: H 103671 RB-3774-88 A & D This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: 1. Eas~nent granted C & P Telephone C~,~any by instrument dated November.28, 1916, recorded in Deed Book 292, page 105. 2. Rights of adjoining property owner to use the party wall as established in party wall agreement dated September 23, 1914, in Deed Book 270, page 301 and by agre~nt dated April 25, 1907, recorded in Deed Book 191, page 195, and terms and provisions of said agree~_nts relating to the use and maintenance thereof. 3. P~ements or claims of easements not shown by the public records, boundary line disputes, overlaps, encroach~_nts and any matters not of record which would be disclosed by a current, accurate survey and inspection of the premises. ¢~. ~o-~7.m) ORIGINAL IJEG"~I~NING a~ a poin~ on the oou~h side 09' N. 25 it. Lo ~ point; ~bonco S. 2G' 30" E, G~.49 ~* ~o nn n~Xoy; ~honco with said alley N. 04* 50' 16' to ~ point~ thence ~. ~= ~8' 15' W. GG.II ~t. ~o the place belltg keown as L20 Compbol[ ~venue~ IOI~51L, known ns Lot tO, Block lO, South Wes~ Section Oho, Ofikckal Survey. Parcel 2: of Campbell Avenue 247.5 ~irsk Streek, S.W., (formerly He~r~ Strook}; thonco wikh Campbell Avenue 04' 15' W. 25 f~. ko a point; %he~ce S. 10 ~7' E. 64.87 ft. wi'th said alloy N. ~5' ~. 25 ft. to a poink; ~henc~ N. tho place of BEGZNNZNG,and being known as ~22 Campbe~ Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia, Official Number 10X~St0, known as Lot 9, Dlock 10, South West Section One, Official Survoy. ~EDI~* with all ~ranCo~'s ~ighC, title and interest in a~ to ~he ~nCogl~ne o~ ~hat ~in alley u~n ~ich the hereina~ve desc~i~ ~1 a~ts, ~id alley ~inq clos~ ~y ~8, 1928, by Ogdi~nce ~. 3325, of ~he City Co~cil o~ ~e City o~ E~noke, Virginia. This being real estate at 120 and 122 Canpbell Avenue, bearing Official Tax Nos. 101151 an.1011510, and being Lots l0 and 9, Block 10, Official Survey, SW1, respectively. Policy Number: H 103670 FiFe Number: R~.3744-88 B & C OWNER'S POLICY This policy does not Insure against Io~ or damage by reason of the following: 1. Rights of t~e adjoining pto[~rcy o~ner to use the parley wa~l as estnh].L~hed Ln pazl:y ~a~l ~qt: da~ August: 28, 1906, recorded ~n Deed Book 180, page '258 and ~ and pL'ovt_si~ of sa~d acjreemant rela~lg to ~ use and ma~t:enance ~e_reof. 2. ~asemen~ granted C & P Tele[~cl~e C~any by /nstrument: dat_~_ June 19, 1917, recorded in Deed Book 299, page 189. 3. ~--~s or claims of eaaemente n~c shown by rJ~ public records, boundary line dt~cee, over[a.re, encr~__~haents and any mt:rets not: of record Which ~ld be disclosed by a ~C, accurate sunmy and /_nsgec~tc~ of ~e p~Laes. DUPLICATE ORIGINAL 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #51 Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney Woods, Rogers and Hazlegrove P. O. Box 14125 Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125 Dear Mr. Layman: I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 31140-082492 rezoning a tract of land located at 759 Welton Avenue, S. W., lying at the intersection of Welton Avenue, Lawnhili Street and Floyd Avenue, described as Official Tax No. 1250133, from RM-1, Residential Multi-Family, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multi-Family, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioner. Ordinance No. 31140-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August 10, 1992, aiso adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, August 24, 1992, and will take effect ten days following the date of its second reading. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw EHC. pc: Ms. Roswitha E. Nichols, 804 Welton Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. John H. Carroll, III, 1802 Lawnhill Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Cavalier Associates, 4725 Garst Mill Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Mr. and Mrs. Alexander G. Maxwell, 760 Welton Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. 'Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney Page 2 August 24, 1992 pc: Mr. and Mrs. Earl S. Vest, 754 Walton Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Ms. ELizabeth B. Faircloth, 2151 Broadway Avenue, S. W., Unit 2, Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Mr. Harlon W. Blankenship, 748 Walton Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin R. Case, 106 Pine Knob Road, Moneta, Virginia 24121 Mr. and Mrs. Charles W. Thompson, Jr., 736 Walton Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. and Mrs. Delmar M. Israel, 732 Welton Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. and Mrs. James T. Kesler, 5155 Roselawn Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph W. Smith, Jr., 1010 Second Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Mr. and Mrs. Clyde J. Stump and Mr. and Mrs. Kevin Clasbey, 716 Walnut Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Ms. Susan K. Nalms and Mr. Harold H. Halliburton, 209 Cassell Lane, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Mr. Martin E. HeLikamp, 608 Water Oak Road, N. E., Roanoke, Virginia 24019 The B Group, c/o Mr. Eugene Brady, 2920 Crystal Spring Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Messrs. Roy E. Hopson and Eari E. Hopson, 852 Kerns Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. and Mrs. Stephen P. Agee, 929 Floyd Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. William F. Clark, Director, PubLic Works Mr. John R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission Mr. Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairperson, City Planning Commission Mr. L. Elwood Norris, Chairperson, Board of Zoning Appeals Ms. Patricia Haynes, Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals Mr. Willard N. Claytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation Ms. Doris K. Layne, Real Estate Appraiser Aide Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31140-082492. VIRGINIA, AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 125, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant. WHEREAS, application has been made to the Council of the City of Roanoke to have the hereinafter described property rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, which after giving proper notice to all concerned as required by §36.1-693, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and after conducting a public hearing on the matter, has made its recommendation to Council; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by City Council on said application at its meeting on August 10, 1992, after due and timely notice thereof as required by ~36.1-693, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were given an opportunity to be heard, both for and against the proposed rezoning; and WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the aforesaid application, the recommendation made to the Council by the Planning Commission, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and the matters presented at the public hearing, is of the opinion that the hereinafter described property should be rezoned as herein provided. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 125 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, be amended in the following particular and no other: A tract of land located at 759 Welton Avenue, S.W., and designated on Sheet No. 125 of the Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke, as Official Tax No. 1250133, be, and is hereby rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, subject to those conditions proffered by and set forth in the Second Amended Petition, filed in the Office of the City Clerk on July 9, 1992, and that Sheet No. 125 of the Zone Map be changed in this respect. ATTEST: City Clerk. Office of Community Planning August 10, 1992 The Honorable David A. Bowers, and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Mayor Dear Members of Council: Subject: Request from Martin E. Hellkamp, represented by Daniel F. Layman, attorney, that property located at 759 Welton Avenue, S.W., described as Official Tax No. 1250133, be rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioner. I. Background: Purpose of the rezoning request is to place an existing nonconforming use into a conforming zoning district classification so that certain repairs and improvements can be made to the residential property. B. Petition to rezone was filed on May 13, 1992. Ce First amended petition to rezone was filed on June 23, 1992. The following conditions were proffered by the petitioner: No further development of multifamily dwelling units will be made on the property, although Petitioner reserves the right to develop single family and/or two-family residences on lots subdivided from the property, as consistent with proffer (b) below. The area along Welton Avenue marked "Frontage A" on Exhibit B to this petition will be developed, if at all, only with single-family residences on a maximum of ten (10) lots subdivided (in accordance with applicable ordinances) from the property. The area along Welton Avenue and Floyd Avenue marked "Frontage B" on Exhibit B to this petition will be developed, if at all, with single and/or Room 355 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2344 Members of Council Page 2 August 10, 1992 two-family residences on a maximum of ten (10) lots subdivided (in accordance with applicable ordinances) from the property. The exterior of the main house will not be materially altered except (i) as may be required for normal maintenance and repair; (ii) for the addition of one or more porches or decks in a manner architecturally consistent with existing conditions; (iii) in order to weatherproof doors and windows. No trees with a caliper of twelve inches (12") or greater (measured three feet from the ground) will be removed from the property unless diseased or damaged or unless necessary to permit construction on lots subdivided from the property in accordance with applicable ordinances. If a building permit for electrical system upgrade to be made to the mansion on the property is not obtained within one (1) year from the effective date of the ordinance rezoning the property, the zoning shall revert to RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District without further action of City Council. Planning Commission public hearinq was held on Wednesday, July 1, 1992. Mr. Daniel Layman, attorney, appeared before the Commission on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Layman informed the Commission of the history of the property, its various uses and the state of the property when his client purchased it through a bank foreclosure sale. He further stated that his client had already made approximately $50,000 worth of improvements to the old mansion and was prepared to have a substantial upgrade done to the house's electrical system when he found out the property was not correctly zoned for the existing apartments on the property. Mr. Layman then informed the Commision that after the rezoning request was filed, it was postponed for one month in order that he and his client could work with staff on the wording and need of certain proffers regarding the renovation of the mansion and future use/development of the property. Mr. Layman then reviewed the proffered conditions and informed the Commission of a proposed revision to the last proffer pertaining to the reversion clause and the completion of the electrical work to be done to the mansion. Mrs. Dorsey gave the staff report and stated that the purpose of the rezoning request was to place an Members of Council Page 3 August 10, 1992 existing nonconforming use into a conforming zoning district classification so that certain restoration and rehabilitation work could be done to the mansion and detached carriage house. She then reviewed the history of the property and the various non-residential uses of the subject property since 1954. Mrs. Dorsey stated that the rezoning of the subject property would be an asset to the neighborhood because it would facilitate the restoration of a significant structure and property in that area. She further stated that the planning staff recommended approval of the request finding that the existing use and proffered conditions, would not only preserve the existing structures but would serve to enhance the neighborhood as well as comply with the issues set forth in the comprehensive plan. Ms. Mamie Vest, 754 Welton Avenue, S.W., appeared before the Commission and stated that she felt the rezoning request was good and proper for the property and neighborhood. She further commented that the house was fabulous and on a wonderful piece of property and that she was very pleased with the rezoning and the work to be done to the property. Mrs. Martha Franklin, Secretary to the Commission, read into the record a letter received from an adjoining resident in the area. Mrs. Franklin noted that Ms. Ann Wilson of 1802 Lawnhill Avenue had concerns about the following items: 1) traffic increase in the area because of 30 additional families; 2) Floyd Avenue is narrow and you have to drive in the gutter to pass another vehicle; 3) density is usually 6 to 8 houses in a block, not 30 in two blocks; 4) did not want more traffic and cars parking across street from her; 5) all the back doors of the new development will face front doors in the area and she does not want to see overturned garbage cans; 6) property values will be lowered; and 7) two additional stoplights will be needed. Mr. Marlles stated that most of the concerns raised by Ms. Wilson dealt with the future development of the subject property and not so much the renovation and continued residential use of the mansion and carriage house. Mr. Larry Moore, local realtor, appeared before the Commission and stated that he represented his wife who owned the house next door to Ms. Wilson. He further stated that he felt the rezoning request, with the proffered conditions, would improve the neighborhood Members of Council Page 4 August 10, 1992 and not detract from it. He commented that he was in favor of the request. No one else appeared before the Commission to speak in favor or in opposition to the request. Second amended petition to rezone was filed on July 9, 1992. The following conditions were proffered by the petitioner: No further development of multifamily dwelling units will be made on the property, although Petitioner reserves the right to develop single family and/or two-family residences on lots subdivided from the property, as consistent with proffer (b) below. The area along Welton Avenue marked "Frontage A" on Exhibit B to this petition will be developed, if at all, only with single-family residences on a maximum of ten (10) lots subdivided (in accordance with applicable ordinances) from the property. The area along Welton Avenue and Floyd Avenue marked "Frontage B" on Exhibit B to this petition will be developed, if at all, with single and/or two-family residences on a maximum of ten (10) lots subdivided (in accordance with applicable ordinances) from the property. The exterior of the main house will not be materially altered except (i) as may be required for normal maintenance and repair; (ii) for the addition of one or more porches or decks in a manner architecturally consistent with existing conditions; (iii) in order to weatherproof doors and windows. No trees with a caliper of twelve inches (12") or greater (measured three (3) feet from the ground) will be removed from the property unless diseased or damaged or unless necessary to permit construction on lots subdivided from the property in accordance with applicable ordinances. If a building permit for electrical system upgrade to be made to the mansion on the property is not obtained and the permitted work completed and inspected and approved by City Building officials within (1) one year from the effective date of the ordinance rezoning the property, the zoning shall revert to RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Members of Council Page 5 August 10, 1992 Density District without further action to City Council. II. Issues: Zoninq of the subject property is RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District. The zoning pattern in the area is as follows: to the north, south, east and west adjoining the subject property is RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District; to the far east is LM, Light Manufacturing District; and to the far south is RS-3, Residential Single Family District. Land use of the subject property is currently an older, single family residence (the "Welton Mansion") which had been divided into six (6) apartments, a carriage house (also converted to an apartment) and a garage with the balance of the site being vacant, undeveloped land. Surrounding and uses in the area are as follows: to the north, south, east and west is a mixture of single family and two-family dwellings. Utilities are available and of adequate capacity to serve the existing development on the site. Storm drainage and erosion and sedimentation control as well as other engineering concerns on this site will be addressed and resolved during comprehensive site development plan and/or any future subdivision review of this property. Traffic/Access to this site is provided by the adjoining public streets, Welton Avenue and Floyd Avenue. The City Traffic Engineer has stated that given the previous and proposed continuance of the use of the site, that there would be no significant traffic impact on Welton Avenue. Neighborhood orqanization does not exist for this particular area. The planning office notified adjoining property owners by mail on Monday, June 1992. 22, F. Comprehensive Plan recommends that: Encourage variety of housing choice in existing neighborhoods through a balance of preservation, rehabilitation and new development; 2. Discourage insensitive new construction and demolition of usable units. Members of Council Page 6 August 10, 1992 III. Alternatives: A. City 1. B. City 1. Council approve the requested rezoning. Zoning of the subject property would become conditional, RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District and the renovation and rehabilitation of the existing residential structures on the property could occur. Land use would become multifamily residential and the existing (multifamily) residential structure and detached carriage house would be renovated and preserved. Utilities are available and of adequate capacity for the rehabilitation of the existing units on the property. All engineering or design concerns would be addressed during comprehensive development plan and/or subdivision review of the subject property for any further development of the site. Access to and from the site can be safely provided from the adjoining public streets. No traffic impacts are anticipated from the proposed continuation of the multifamily use on the subject property. Neighborhood realizes the benefit of the rehabilitation and restoration of the site through the renovation and preservation of the two existing (residential) structures on the property. Comprehensive Plan issues as set forth would be followed. Council deny the requested rezoning. Zoning of the subject property would remain RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District. The renovation and rehabilitation of the two older, deteriorating structures for multifamily purposes would not be permitted. Land use would remain residential and the existing nonconforming use of property as multifamily would have to be discontinued. 3. Utilities would be unaffected. Members of Council Page 7 August 10, 1992 Traffic/Access to the subject property would not be an issue. Neighborhood would continue to be affected by the deteriorating structures on the property that could be renovated and rehabilitated back into the previously existed multifamily use. Comprehensive Plan issues as set forth could be followed at a later date. IV. Recommendation: The Planning Commission, by a vote of 6 0 (Mrs. Coles absent), recommends aDDroval of the requested rezoning finding that the rezoning to allow for the continuation of the existing multifamily development on the subject property, coupled with the proffered conditions regarding the future development of the balance of the site, is in keeping with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan. Furthermore, the rezoning would provide for the rehabilitation, renovation and continued adaptive reuse of two (2) existing and possibly historically significant structures in the community. Respectfully submitted, Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairman Roanoke City Planning Commission CAP:EDD:mpf attachments cc: Assistant City Attorney Director of Public Works City Engineer Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Attorney for the Petitioner ROANOKE TIMES & WORLD-NEWS A~ NUMBER - 7220~996 PUBLISHER'S FEE - $110.~0 DANIEL F LAYMAN 10 S JEFFERSON ST SUITE 1~00 PO BOX 1~125 ROANOKE VA 2~038 STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF ROANOKE AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION It (THE UNDERSIGNED) AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TIMES-WORLD COR- PORATION, WHICH CORPORATION IS PUBLISHER OF THE ROANOKE TIMES & WORLD-NEWSy A DAILY NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED IN ROANOKE~ IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIA, DO CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED IN SAID NEWSPAPERS ON THE FOLLOWING DATES 07/2~/92 MORNING 07/31/92 MORNING WITNESS~ AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Pursuant to the provisions of Article VII of Chapter 36.1, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the Council of the City of Roanoke will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, August 10, 1992, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., on the question of rezoning from RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, the following property: A tract of land located at 759 Welton Avenue, S. W., designated as Official Tax No. 1250133, such rezoning to be subject to certain proffered conditions. A copy of this proposal is available for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, Room 456, Municipal Building. All parties in interest may appear on the above date and be heard on the question. GIVEN under my hand this 22nd day of July , 1992. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. Please publish in full twice in the Roanoke Times & World-News, once on Friday, July 24, 1992, and once on Friday, July 31, 1992. Send publisher's affidavit to: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Room 456, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536 Send bill to: Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney Woods, Rogers, and Hazlegrove P. O. Box 14125 Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125 SECOND AMENDED PETITION TO REZONE '92 ,J!_'L -9 :32 IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE~ VIRGINIA IN RE: Rezoning of a tract of land lying at the intersection of Welton Avenue, Lawnhill Street, and Floyd Avenue, S.W., bearing Official Tax No. 1250133, and known as 759 Welton Avenue, S.W., from RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions. TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE: 1. The Petitioner, Martin E. Hellkamp, owns land in the City of Roanoke containing 4.03 acres, more or less, located at 759 Welton Avenue, S.W., bearing Official Tax No. 1250133. Said tract is currently zoned RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District. A portion of the City of Roanoke Official Tax Map showing the property to be'rezoned is attached as Exhibit A. 2. Pursuant to Section 36.1-690, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the Petitioner requests that the said property be rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District to RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions, for the purpose of bringing the zoning of the tract into conformity with the use that has been conducted there for several years and permitting the Petitioner to make certain repairs and improvements to the property. M~106097 3. Attached to this petition as Exhibit B is a site plan showing the property and improvements. Improvements consist of a very large old home (the "Welton Mansion") which was converted by a previous owner into six (6) apartments some four years ago, a carriage house which is rented as a seventh dwelling unit, and a garage. (Attached to this petition as Exhibit C is a three-page floor plan showing the interior layout of the main house and carriage house. This plan is for informational purposes only, without representation that the interior layout will remain unchanged.) Portions of the electrical system in the mansion will be upgraded, with separate heating and alr-c0nditioning systems installed for several of the units. A~sthetic improvements will also be made to the exterior of the mansion. 4. Petitioner believes that rezoning.of this proper~ is' consistent with the intent and purposes of the City's Zoning Ordinance and comprehensive plan in that it will permit continued modernization and general upgrading of a classic old home and grounds while conforming the zoning classification to an existing (though unpermitted) use. The area is characterized by a mixture of modest single-family and duplex units which will not be disrupted by this rezoning, given the facts that the existing use will not change and that the subject tract is quite large and heavily wooded on all sides. 5. The Petitioner hereby proffers and agrees that if the said tract is rezoned as requested, the rezoning will be subject to, and the Petitioner will abide'by, the following conditions: M#106097 2 (a) No further development of multifamily dwelling units will be made on the property, although Petitioner reserves the right to develop single-family and/or two- family residences on lots subdivided from the property, as consistent with proffer (b) below. (b) The area along Welton Avenue marked "Frontage A" on Exhibit B to this petition will be developed, if at all, only with single-family residences on a maximum of ten (10) lots subdivided (in accordance with applicable ordinances) from the property. The area along Welton Avenue and Floyd Avenue marked "Frontage B" on Exhibit B to this petition will be developed, if at all, with singleI and/or two-family residences on a maximum of ten (10) lots subdivided (in accordance with applicable ordinances) from the property. (c) The exterior of the main house will not be materially altered except (i) as may be required for normal maintenance and repair; (il) for the addition of one or more porches or decks in a manner architecturally consistent with existing conditions-; (iii) in order to weatherproof doors and windows. (d) No trees with a caliper of twelve inches (12") or greater (measured three (3) feet from the ground) will be removed from the property unless diseased or damaged or unless necessary to permit construction on lots subdivided from the property in accordance with applicable ordinances. M#106097 (e) If a building permit for electrical system upgrade to be made to the mansion on the property is not obtained and the permitted work completed and inspected and approved by City building officials within one (1) year from the effective date of the ordinance rezoning the property, the zoning shall revert to RM-1, Residential Multifamily, Low Density District without further action of City Council. 6. Attached as Exhibit D are the names, addresses and tax numbers of the owner or owners of all lots or property immediately adjacent to, or immediately across a street or road from, the property to be rezoned. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner requests that t~e above-described tract be rezoned as requested in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Roanoke. Respectfully submitted this 30th day of June, 1992. Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove Dominion Tower, Suite 1400 10 South Jefferson Street P. O. Box 14125 Roanoke, VA 24038-4125 (703) 983-7653 Martin E. Hellkamp ~ 233 Hershberger Road Suite 200 Roanoke, VA 24012 M#106097 4 %./ Exhibit A /' .~HEE .~ 3A~D3 ..% .~z 77/MI ~- ~,o ~Loo~ c~oo Exhibit D 1250143 1251001 1251020 1251021 1251022 1251023 1251024 1251025 1251026 1251027 1251028 1.251029 Roswitha E. Nichols 804 Welton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 John H. Carroll III 1802 Lawnhill Street, Roanoke, VA 24015 S.Wo Cavalier Associates 4725 Garst Mill Road, Roanoke VA 24018 Cavalier Associates 4725 Garst Mill Road, Roanoke VA 24018 SoW. Bonnie S. and Alexander G. 760 Welton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke VA 24015 Earl S. and Mamie P. Vest 754 Welton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke VA 24015 Maxwell Elizabeth B. Faircioth 2151 Broadway Avenue, S.W., Unit 2 Roanoke VA 24014 Harlon W. Blankenship 748 Welton'Avenue, S.W. Roanoke VA 24014 Benjamin R. and Angela F. Case 740-742 Welton Avenue, $.W. ** Roanoke, VA 24015 Charles W. Thompson, Jr. Thompson 736 Welton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 and Mildred B. Delmar M. and June J. Israel 732 Welton Avenue, $.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 James T. and Ruth G. Kesler 728-730 Welton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 M#106097 1251030 1251031 1251032 1250152 1250156 1130613 1130612 Joseph Wysor Smith, 1010 Second Street, Roanoke, VA 24016 Jr. and Beth F. S.W. Smith Clyde J. Stump and Teresa W. Stump Kevin Clasbey and Sheila Clasbey 716-718 Welton Avenue, S.W. ** Roanoke, VA 24015 Susan K. Nelms and Harold H. 2427 Laburnum Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 Halliburton Martin E. Hellkamp 608 Water Oak Road, N.E. Roanoke, VA 24019 The B Group c/o Eugene Fo Brady 2920 Crystal Spring Avenue, S.W° Roanoke, VA 24014 Roy E. Hopson and Earl E. Hopson 852 Kerns Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 Stephen P. Agee and Janice C. 763 Oakwood Drive, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24015 Agee Note: These are property addresses but probably not correct addresses for property owners. No better addresses found. M#106097 , I B I :lllllll/ ~ Iht 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #514 The Honorable Arthur B. Crush, III Clerk of Circuit Court Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Crush: I am attaching a certified copy of Ordinance No. 31141-082492 authorizing the alteration and closing, by barricade, of Day Avenue, S. W., at its intersection with Franklin Road. Ordinance No. 31141-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August 10, 1992, also adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, August 24, 1992, and will take effect ten days following the date of its second reading. Sincerely, ~o-~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. 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 Deputy City C]erk August 28, 1992 File #514 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31141-082492 authorizing the alteration and closing, by barricade, of Day Avenue, S. W., at its intersection with Franklin Road. Ordinance No. 31141-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August 10, 1992, also adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, August 24, 1992, and will take effect ten days following the date of its second reading. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, Virginia 24153 Roanoke Mental Hygiene, 301 Elm Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Mr. Dale E. Barger, 5063 Falcon Ridge Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Mr. Richard P. Mardlan, 311 Day Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Mr. John N. Lampros, P. O. Box 12254, Roanoke, Virginia 24024 Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Ronald H. lVLiller, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Mr. John R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission Mr. Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairperson, City Planning Commission Mr. W. Robert Herbert Page 2 August 28, 1992 pc; Mr. Edward R. Tucker, City Planner Mr. Willard N. Claytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation Ms. Doris K. Layne, Real Estate Appraiser Aide IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The 24th day of Au§ust~ 1992. No. 31141-082492. AN ORDINANCE authorizing the alteration and closing by barricade of a certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as are more particularly described hereinafter. WHEREAS, an application to the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, in accordance with law, and close by barricade the hereinafter; and WHEREAS, the City Planning proper notice to all concerned as requesting the Council to alter public right-of-way described City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, public hearing on the matter, has made Council; and WHEREAS, public hearing was held on City Council on August 10, 1992, after Commission, which after giving required by §30-14, Code of the and after having conducted a its recommendation to said application by the due and timely notice thereof as required by S30-14, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, at which hearing all parties in interest and citizens were afforded an opportunity to be heard on said application; and WHEREAS, it appearing from the foregoing that the land proprietors affected by the requested closing of the subject public right-of-way have been properly notified; and WHEREAS, from all of the foregoing, the Council considers that no substantial inconvenience will result to any individual or to the public from altering and closing by barricade said public right-of-way, and that such alteration will promote the safety and welfare of those using the subject public right-of-way and the right-of-way in the vicinity of the right-of-way to be closed. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, that the public right-of-way situate in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, and more particularly described as follows: A certain right-of-way of Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., be, and hereby is, altered and closed by way of barricade as described above and in said Petition. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that lighting, reflectorization, and warning signs, if appropriate, be installed and maintained on both sides of said barricade and that appropriate signs be installed to indicate that the affected street is barricaded to through traffic. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Engineer be, and he is, directed to mark "altered and closed by barricade" on said right- of-way on all maps and plats on file in his office on which said right-of-way is shown, referring to the book and page of ordinances and resolutions of the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, wherein this Ordinance shall be spread. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Clerk deliver to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, an attested copy of this ordinance in order that said Clerk may make proper notations, if any, of the alteration as described above on all maps and plats S.W., appears. recorded in that office on which Day Avenue, ATTEST: City Clerk. Office of Community Planning August 10, 1992 The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Application of the City of Roanoke to alter and close by barricade, Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. I. Backqround: Franklin Road wideninq pro~ect resulted in the acquisition of abutting land to provide for additional lanes. Project Plan prepared by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) was coordinated with the City Traffic Engineer, and was presented to the public in the course of a public hearing on March 28, 1989. Increase in street qrade elevations, as a part of the project design, required the closure and barricading of Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. Construction of the widening project is currently underway. Day Avenue at the subject location has been physically barricaded by construction crews to facilitate the road construction work, consistent with the project plan. II. Current Situation: Application to close Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting of July 1, 1992. Room 355 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2344 Members Page 2 August of Council 10, 1992 B. Applicant requests that Day Avenue, S.W., be altered by closure with a barricade of the subject intersection without vacating any of the existing public right-of- way. C. Barricades at the terminus of Day Avenue, S.W. will be constructed in the form of a retaining wall and a guardrail. D. Planning Commission expressed its disappointment in the belated manner in which the street closure had been processed, in that the street had been physically closed before the Commission received or was presented with a petition for its official closure. III. Issues: A. Neighborhood impact. B. Traffic impact. C. Utilization within the public right-of-way. D. Creation of a dead end street. E. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. IV. Alternatives: Recommend that City Council approve the applicant's request to alter by closure with a barricade, Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. 1. Neighborhood impact. Closure by barricade at this intersection will not adversely affect the neighborhood. 2. Traffic impact. Closure will not affect or impede traffic or traffic needs in the area. Utilities with the public right-of-way. City has utilities within this area of the public right-of- way. Closure by barricade will have no effect on these utilities. Right-of-way is not to be vacated. Creation of a dead-end street. Barricade would create a dead-end street. VDOT project plans provide for the construction of a turnaround at the terminus of Day Avenue, S.W. Plans also Members of Council Page 3 August 10, 1992 Be provide for the construction of a proper stairway for pedestrian access between Day Avenue, S.W., and Franklin Road, S.W. Streets will be separated by a stone wall with a handrail at the top. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. Franklin Road widening project is a part of th~ 1995 Thoroughfare Plan. Thoroughfare Plan is an element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This request is therefore consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Recommend that City Council deny the applicant's request to alter by closure, Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. 1. Neiqhborhood impact would not be an issue. 2. Traffic impact. Re-opening of Day Avenue, S.W., would create a major problem for traffic, due to the acute differential that would exist in street grade elevations. Utilities with the public right-of-way would not be an issue. Creation of a dead-end street would not be an issue. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. Denial of the request would be inconsistent with the intent of the Franklin Road widening project plans. Leaving this intersection with Day Avenue, S.W., open to merge with an adjacent street of improper elevation would be inconsistent with public safety and orderly development and would therefore be inconsistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. We Recommendation Planning Commission by a vote of 4-1-1 (Mr. Buford voting against the motion, Mr. Sowers abstaining and Mrs. Coles absent) recommends that City Council approve alternative "A", thereby recommending that City Council approving the applicant's request to alter by closure with a barricade, Day Avenue, S.W., at its easterly intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by the Virginia Department of Transportation. Members of Council Page 4 August 10, 1992 CAP:ERT:mpf attachment cc: Assistant City Attorney Director of Public Works City Engineer Building Commissioner Sincerely, Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairman Roanoke City Planning Commission TIMES & W~RLD-NEWS AD NUMBER - 7220551,3 PUBLISHER'S FEE - $82.80 CITY OF ROANOKE C/O MARY F PARKER CITY CLERKS OFFICE ROOM 456 MUNICIPAL BLDG ROANOKE VA 24011 STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF ROANOKE AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION I, (THE UNOERSIGNED) AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TIMES-WORLD COR- PORATION, WHICH CORPORATION IS PUBLISHER OF THE ROANOKE TIMES & WORLD-NEWS, A DAILY NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED IN ROANOKE, IN THE STATE OF VIRGINIAt DO CERTIFY THAT THE ANNEXED NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED IN SAID NEWSPAPERS ON THE FOLLOWING DATES 07/24/92 MORNING 07/31/92 MORNING WITNESS, T.~ST .DAY OF AUGUST~ 1992 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Council of the City of Roanoke will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, August 10, 1992, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber in the Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., on an application to alter and close by barricade the following public right-of-way: A certain right-of-way of Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. the parties in interest may appear on the above date and be the question. GIVEN under my hand this 22nd day of July A copy of this proposal is available for public inspection in Office of the City Clerk, Room 456, Municipal Building. All heard on , 1992. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. Please publish in full twice in the Roanoke Times & World-News, once on Friday, July 24, 1992, and once on Friday, July 31, 1992. Send publisher's affidavit and bill to: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Room 456, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536 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 July 29, 1992 File #51-514 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: Pursuant to the authority contained in Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, I have advertised public hearings for Monday, August 10, 1992, at 7:30 p.m., on the following matters: A request of Mr. Martin E. Hellkamp that a tract of land located at 759 Welton Avenue, S. W., lying at the intersection of Welton Avenue, Lawnhill Street and Floyd Avenue, described as Official Tax No. 1250133, be rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multi-Family, Low Density District, to RM-2, Residentiai Multi-Family, Medium Density District, subject to certain conditions proffer, ed by the petitioner. Application of the City of Roanoke to alter and close by barricade, Day Avenue, S. W., at its intersection with Franklin Road. For your information, I am enclosing copy of the City Planning Commission reports with regard to the abovedescribed matters. If you desire additional information prior to the public hearings, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw EHe. The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council July 29, 1992 Page 2 pc; Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mr. Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney Mr. Willard N. Claytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Ronald H. Milier, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Mr. John R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission Mr. Ted Tucker, City Planner Ms. Doris Layne, Office of Real Estate Valuation 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 June 15, 1992 SANDRA H. EA ~N l~puty Citx cck File #514 Mr. Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairperson City Planning Commission Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Price: Pursuant to Section 30-14, Procedure for altering or vacating City streets or alleys; fees therefor, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of an application from the City of Roanoke, represented by Mr. W. Robert Herbert, requesting that Day Avenue, at its intersection with Franklin Road, S. W., be altered and closed by barricade, as more particularly described as a part of the Franklin Road Widening Project. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc' The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council The Honorable Delvis O. "Mac" McCadden, Council Member-Elect Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. John R. Marlles, Agent, City Planning Commission Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Mr. Edward R. Tucker, City Planner Mr. Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA IN RE: Application of the City of Roanoke to alter and close by barricade Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. ) APPLICATION FOR ALTERING AND CLOSING A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council: The City of Roanoke applies to have Day Avenue, S.W., altered and closed by barricade at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., pursuant to Section 30-14, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended. The street is more particularly described on the attached map. (Exhibit A.) The City of Roanoke, Virginia, states that the grounds for this application are as follows: The widening of Franklin Road, S.W., in connection with the Franklin Road Widening Project, combined with the slope of Day Avenue, S.W., at and near its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., require the closure of Day Avenue, S.W., as indicated on the attached map. (Exhibit A.) A list of the names and addresses of the persons owning property adjacent to the subject alley is attached. (Exhibit B.) WHEREFORE, the City of Roanoke, Virginia, respectfully requests that the above-described Day Avenue, S.W., be altered by closure with a barricade at its terminus with Franklin Road, S.W., as set forth in the attached map, in accordance with Section 30-14, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager ~ Date ) ~2 ABUTTING OWNERS - MAILIN ADDRESSES. 100 BLOCK-EAST Tax Numbers 1013007 - Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, VA 24153 1013008 - Richard P. Mardian, 311 Day Avenue, S.W., Roanoke 24016 1013009 - John N. Lampros, P. O. Box 12254, Roanoke, VA 24024 1020301 - Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, VA 24153 1020305 - Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, VA 24153 1020306 - Roanoke Mental Hygiene, 301 Elm Avenue, S.W., Roanoke 24016 1020307 - Dale E. Barger, 5063 Falcon Ridge Road, S.W., Roanoke 24014 Exhibit B MARY F. PAla KF~R City Clerk CITY OF ROANOK OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 R~anoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 June 15, 1992 SANDBA H. F_.AKIN D~uty City Clerk File #514 Mr. Charles A. Price, Jr., Chairperson City Planning Commission Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Price: Pursuant to Section 30-14, Procedure for altering or vacating City streets or alleys; fees therefor, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, I am enclosing copy of an application from the City of Roanoke, represented by Mr. W. Robert Herbert, requesting that Day Avenue, at its intersection with Franklin Road, S. W., be altered and closed by barricade, as more partieulariy described as a part of the Franklin Road Widening Project. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council The Honorable Delvis O. "Mac" McCadden, Council Member-Elect Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. John R. Mariles, Agent, City Planning Commission ~r. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator r. Edward R. Tucker, City Planner Mr. Steven J. Talevi, Assistant City Attorney IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA IN RE: Application of the City of Roanoke to alter and close by barricade Day Avenue, S.W., at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. ) APPLICATION FOR ) ALTERING AND ) CLOSING A PUBLIC ) RIGHT-OF-WAY To the Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council: The City of Roanoke applies to have Day Avenue, S.W., altered and closed by barricade at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., pursuant to Section 30-14, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended. The street is more particularly described on the attached map. (Exhibit A.) The City of Roanoke, Virginia, states that the grounds for this application are as follows: The widening of Franklin Road, S.~..~ in connection with the Franklin Road Widening Project, combined with the slope of Day Avenue, S.W., at and near its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W., require the closure of Day Ave~e, S.W., as indicated on the attached map. (Exhibit A.) A list of the names and addresses of the persons owning property adjacent to the subject alley is attached... (Exhibit B.) WHEREFORE, the City of Roanoke, ~irginia, respectfully requests that the above-described Day Avenue, S.W., be altered by closure with a barricade at its terminus with Franklin Road, S.W., as set forth in the attached map, in accordance with Section 30-14, ~ ~of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager LOCATION AB~G OWNERS - MAll,IN ADDRESSES. 100 BLOCK-EAST 1013007 - Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, VA 24153 1013008 - Richard P. Mardian, 311 Day Avenue, $.W., Roanoke 24016 1013009 - John N. Lampro$, P. O. Box 12254, Roanoke, VA 24024 1020301 - Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, VA 24153 1020305 - Commonwealth of Virginia, P. O. Box 3071, Salem, VA 24153 1020306 - Roanoke Mental Hygiene, 301 Elm Avenue, S.W., Roanoke 24016 1020307 - Dale E. Barger, 5063 Falcon Ridge Road, S.W., Roanoke 24014 Exhibit B PUBLIC TURNARO1 'GUARDRAIL ~.~ STEPS AND HANDRAIL % z~ DETAILS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ROANOKE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Roanoke City Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, July 1, 1992, at 1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., in order to consider the following: Request from the City of Roanoke, represented by W. Robert Herbert, City Manager, that Day Avenue, S.W., be altered and closed by barricade at its intersection with Franklin Road, S.W. A copy of said application is available for review in the Office of Community Planning, Room 355, Municipal Building. All parties in interest and citizens may appear on the above date and be heard on the matter. John R. Marlles, Agent Roanoke City Planning Commission Please run in newspaper on Tuesday, June 16, 1992 Please run in newspaper on Tuesday, June 23, 1992 Please bill and send an affidavit of publication to: Office of Community Planning Room 355, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24011 TO THE CITY CLERK OF TH CI,T~- PERTAINING TO THE STREET CLOSURE OF: VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA) ) TO-WIT: CITY OF ROANOKE ) The affiant, Martha Pace Franklin, first being duly sworn, states that she is Seretary of the City of Roanoke Planning Commission, and as such is competent to make this affidavit of her own personal knowledge. Affidavit states that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.1-341, Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended, on behalf of the Planning Commission of the City of Roanoke, she has sent by first-class mail on the 22nd day of June, 1992, notices of a public hearing to be held on the 1st day of July, 1992, on the plat vacation captioned above to the owner or agent of the parcels listed below at their last known address: Parcel Owner~ Agent or Occupant Address 1013007 Commonwealth of Virginia P.O. Box 3071 1020301 1020305 Salem, VA 24153 1020306 1020307 1013008 1013009 Roanoke Mental Hygiene Dale E. Barger Richard p. Mardian John N. Lampros 301 Elm Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24016 5063 Falcon Ridge Rd. Roanoke, VA 24014 311 Day Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24016 P. O. Box 12254 Roanoke, VA 24024 ~artna Pace Franklin SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, City of Roanoke, Virginia, this 22nd day of June, 1992. in the My Commission Expires: ~L~RY F. PARKER CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #28-468B-166-514 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31154-082492 providing for variation of an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir Roadway Access Easement, being approximately 30 feet wide and 700 feet in length located in Roanoke County and extending from Laurel Glen Lane in a northeasterly direction to the easement's intersection with Horsepen Mountain Road, adjoining a portion of Section 6, Falling Creek Subdivision aiong its northwesterly side, as more particularly set forth in a report of the Water Resources Committee under date of August 10, 1992. Ordinance No. 31154-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August 10, 1992, also adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, August 24, 1992, and will take effect ten days following the date of its second reading. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: Ms. Cindy F. Ross, 4008 Horsepen Mountain Road, Vinton, Virginia 24179 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. M. Craig Sluss, Manager, Water Department Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Richard V. Hamilton, Reai Estate Agent IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31154-082492. AN ORDINANCE providing for the vacation of an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir Roadway Access Easement upon certain terms and conditions. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that the City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute and attest, respectively, in form approved by the City Attorney, an appropriate instrument vacating, abandoning, and releasing the City's interest in an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir Roadway Access Easement being approximately 30 feet wide and 700 feet in length located in Roanoke County and extending from Laurel Glen Lane in a northeasterly direction to the easement's intersection with Horsepen Mountain Road, adjoining a portion of Section 6, Falling Creek Subdivision along its northwesterly side, as more particularly set forth in the report from the Water Resources Committee to this Council dated August 10, 1992. ATTEST: City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia August 10, 1992 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Abandon Old Roadway Access Easement Falling Creek Reservoir The attached staff report was considered by the Water Resources Committee at its meeting on July 27, 1992. The Committee recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to execute appropriate documentation in form approved by the City Attorney to vacate and abandon an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir Access Road in accordance with conditions stated in the attached report. ETB:KBK:afm Respectfully submitted, [z~beth T. Bowles, Chairman Water Resources Committee Attachment cc: City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Utilities & Operations Manager, Water Department Ms. Cindy F. Ross, 4008 Rorsepen Mtn. Rd., Vinton, VA 24179 INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: July 27, 1992 ~e~s.,~.ater Resources Committee W~. RoB~'~rK~ s ~ er ~b eD~ ~ ,~°Mf a nUat ~el ri t i e s ABANDON OLD ROADWAY ACCESS EASEMENT FALLING CREEK RESERVOIR & Operations, thru I. Background: ~ccess to Falling Creek Reservoir property, prior to the construction of Section 6, Falling Creek Subdivision, was via a thirty (30) foot wide roadway access easement from the end of Laurel Glen Lane. Dedication of Horsepen Mountain Drive (Route 1035) in Section 6, Falling Creek Subdivision, which extends in a northeasterly direction from Laurel Glen Lane and crosses the City's access easement approximately seven hundred (700') feet closer to the reservoir property, has caused that seven hundred (700') foot segment of the easement to be unnecessary and unused. II. Current Situation: Request that the City close and abandon the now unused segment of the access easement has been received from Ms. Cindy F. Ross of 4008 Horsepen Mountain Road whose property is affected by it. Water Department has not used this segment of access easement for several years and has no objection to its abandonment. C. Abandonment of access easement removes liability and potential maintenance problems for the City. Members, Water Resources Committee RE: Abandon Old Roadway Access Easement Falling Creek Reservoir Page 2 III. Issues: A. Need B. Timinq C. Cost to City D. Liability IV. Alternatives: Committee recommend to City Council that it vacate and abandon a thirty (30) foot wide, approximately seven hundred (700') foot in length roadway access easement located in Roanoke County extending from Laurel Glen Lane in a northeasterly direction to the easement's intersection with Horsepen Mountain Road, adjoining a portion of Section 6, Falling Creek Subdivision along its northwesterly side (see attached map). 1. Need by petitioner for removal of easement from property is met. Timinq to allow petitioner to proceed with survey and planning for use of property is met. 3. Cost to City is zero. 4. Liability for easement on the part of the City is eliminated. Committee not recommend to City Council that it close and abandon an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir roadway access easement. 1. Need by petitioner for removal of easement not met. 2. Timinq to permit petitioner to meet schedules not met. 3. Cost to City is continued responsibility for maintenance of easement. 4. Liability for easement remains with City. Members, Water Resources Committee RE: Abandon Old Roadway Access Easement Falling Creek Reservoir Page 3 Recommendation: Committee recommend to City Council that it authorize the City Manager to execute appropriate documentation in form approved by the City Attorney to vacate and abandon an unused portion of the Falling Creek Reservoir Access Road in accordance with Alternative "A". KBK/RVH/fm Attachments cc: City Attorney Director of Finance Manager, Water Department Ms. Cindy F. Ross, 4008 Horsepen Mtn. Rd. Vinton, Virginia 24179 June 12, 1992 Mr. Kit Kiser, Director Public Facilities Room 354, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Mr. Kiser: I am writing this letter to request Roanoke City to abandon an easement on the old Roanoke Water Road in the Falling Creek subdivision. This easement crosses only a corner of the Kessler tract shown on the attached map. As I am sure you know, this road has been abandon for a nt~nber of years and only the newer state road is used. If there are any questions' please feel free to call me at my home or office number listed below. Your time and consideration on the matter will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, 4008 Horsepen Mtn. Dr. Vinton, Va 24179 Phone 890-3211 Bus. Ph. 989-1906 Attached 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 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk August 28, 1992 File #77-102-166 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 31155-082492 providing for dedication of portions of Official Tax Nos. 1110713 and 2014008 to the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Transportation for use as street right-of-way needed for replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge, as more particularly set forth in a report of the Water Resources Committee under date of August ~, 1992. Ordinance No. 31155-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August 10, 1992, also adopted by the Council on second reading on Monday, August 24, 1992, and will take effect ten days following the date of its second reading. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: Mr. J. P. Orr, District Right-of-Way Manager, Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Transportation, p. O. Box 3071, Salem, Virginia 24153 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. William L. Stuart, Manager, Streets and Traffic Mr. Robert K. Bengtson, Traffic Engineer IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA The 24th day of August, 1992. No. 31155-082492. AN ORDINANCE providing for the dedication of portions of Official Tax Nos. 1110713 and 2014008 to the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Transportation for use as street right of way needed for replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge upon certain terms and conditions. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that the City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute and attest, respectively, in form approved by the City Attorney, for nominal consideration, an appropriate special warranty deed, plat or other documentation dedicating an approximate 658 square foot portion of Official Tax No. 1110713, Lot 14, block I, Official Survey SW-1 and an approximate 1337 square foot portion of Official Tax No. 2014008, Lot 8, block 23, Rogers, Fairfax & Houston, together with appropriate temporary construction easements to the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Transportation for use as street right of way needed for replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge, as more particularly set forth in the report from the Water Resources Committee to this Council dated August 10, 1992. ATTEST: City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia August 10, 1992 Honorable Mayor and City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Subject: Fifth Street Bridge Replacement Project Project U000-128-118, RW201 Parcels 003 and 009 Official Tax Nos. 1110713 and 2014008 The attached staff report was considered by the Water Resources Committee at its meeting on July 27, 1992. The Committee recommends that Council authorize the conveyance by special warranty deed, for nominal consideration, portions of two (2) City-owned lots identified by Official Tax NO. 1110713, Lot 14, Block 1, Official Survey SW-1 and Official Tax NO. 2014008, Lot 8, Block 23, Rogers, Fairfax & Houston, together with certain temporary construction easements, for use as street right-of-way needed for the replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge, in accordance with conditions stated in the attached report. Respectfully submitted, ~ Eliza~Seth T. Bowles, Chairman Water Resources Committee ETB:KBK:afm Attachment cc: City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Utilities & Operations Director of Public Works Manager, Signals & Alarms/Traffic Engineer J- P. Orr, District R.O.W. Manager, VDOT INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: July 27, 1992 ~F~.r~Water Resources Committee Mr. Kiser thru Mr. Her~,~~ Fifth Street Bridge Replacement Project Project U000-128-118, RW201 Parcels 003 and 009 Official Tax Nos. 1110713 and 2014008 II. Background: City Council, at its meeting on April 28, 1986, unanimously approved Resolution No. 28109 which requested that the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) program a project for the replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge over NS Railroad. Location and design of this project was approved by City Council at its meeting on September 17, 1990 by Resolution No. 30232-91790. VDOT then proceeded with final design and right-of-way acquisition. Current Situation: Fifth Street project is now ready to be advertised by VDOT for construction in September 1992, which is ahead of schedule. This work can be completed within several months and without delaying the start of construction for the Second Street/ Gainsboro Road project (now projected to begin in late 1993). Agreement associated with these two highway projects between City, VDOT, and Norfolk Southern Railway is expected to be finalized before September which will involve the relocation of Norfolk Southern's overhead signal, communication, and motive power facilities from overhead to underground in railroad right-of-way from Fifth Street to First Street (City Manager is already authorized to execute all railway agreements for this project). Cost will be split evenly between the two projects, with the City expected to pay its 2% share. Aesthetics of this area will greatly benefit from this action. Page 2 III. IV. Traffic will need to use alternate routes such as First Street Bridge, Second Street, and Tenth Street Bridge during the Fifth Street Bridge Project. Do Request to convey, by special warranty deed, for nominal consideration, portions of two (2) City- owned parcels, Nos. 003 and 009, needed for the project has been received from VDOT. Parcel 003 is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of 5th Street, S.W. and Norfolk Avenue, S.W. It was acquired by the City as a part of the Kroger Bakery property that was donated to the City. Parcel 009 is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of 5th Street, N.W. and Shenandoah Avenue, N.W. It was acquired by the City to be cleared and improve the intersection. (See attached maps.) Amount of property to be acquired by VDOT from Parcel 003 is approximately 658 square feet (shown in red on attached map) and also a 1,336 square foot temporary construction easement (dotted line). Amount of property to be acquired by VDOT from Parcel 009 is approximately 1,337 square feet (shown in red on attached map) and also a 1,269 square foot temporary construction easement (dotted line). Issues: A. Need B. Timinq C. Cost to City D. Income to City E. Provision of Planned Hiqhway Improvement Alternatives: Committee recommend to City Council that it authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute a deed conveying by special warranty deed, for nominal consideration, portions of two (2) City-owned lots identified by Official Tax No. 1110713, Lot 14, Block 1, Official Survey SW-1 and Official Tax No. 2014008, Lot 8, Block 23, Rogers, Fairfax & Houston, together with certain temporary construction easements, for use as street right of way needed for the replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge (see attached maps and deeds). Page 3 Need by VDOT for street right of way is met. Timinq to permit early advertisement of project is met. Cost to City for real estate dedication is zero. Provision of Planned Highway ImDrovement is met. Committee not recommend to City Council that it authorize the donation of City-owned property needed for the replacement of Fifth Street Bridge. 1. Need by VDOT for street right of way is not met. o Timinq to permit project to proceed immediately is not met. 3. Cost to City is zero. Income to City is zero. Provision of Planned Highway Improvement is not met. Recommendation: Committee recommend to City Council that it authorize the conveyance by special warranty deed, for nominal consideration, portions of two (2) City-owned lots identified by Official Tax No. 1110713, Lot 14, Block 1, Official Survey SW-1 and Official Tax No. 2014008, Lot 8, Block 23, Rogers, Fairfax & Houston, together with certain temporary construction easements, for use as street right of way needed for the replacement of the Fifth Street Bridge (see attached maps and deeds). KBK/RVH/mm Attachments CC: City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Manager, Signals & Alarms/Traffic Engineer J. P. Orr, District R.O.W. Manager, VDOT RAY O. PETHTEL COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P O 8OX 3071 SALEM, 24153 July 8, 1992 Mr. Bob Bengston, Traffic Engineer City of Roanoke Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.V. Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Mr. Bengston: RIGBT OF rAY: 5th Street-City of Roanoke Project U000-128-118, RV201 Parcels 003 and 009 As previously discussed, we are enclosin~ two (2) original deeds and one (1) marked set of plans detailin~ the acquisition of right of way and temporary easements from two (2) parcels o~ad by the City on 5th Street. Please present these documents to City Couacil for approval and execution by the proper official. It is requested that one si&ned and notarized deed be returned to our office so that we may finalize this acquisition. If you have any questions, please call. CBP/sn Enclosure Very truly yours, J. P. Orr District Right of Vey Manager By: V. g. Chtson Assistant District R/V Manager TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 2 IST CENTURy S/F-7 Revised 2-92 Exempted from recordation taxes or fees Under Sections 58.1-811(A)(3), 58.1-811(C)(4), 58.1-3315 and 25-249. T~IS DEED, Made this let day of July, 1992, by and between the City of Roanoke, Virginia, a Municipality, Grantor, and the COMMONVEALT~ OF VIRGINIA, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, Grantee; WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, at its meeting on -- , duly authorized the conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Transportation, of certain lands. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of $1.00 and Other good and valuable consideration, paid by the Grantee to the Grantor, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor hereby grants and convey unto the Grantee with special warranty the following described land, all of which lies in the City of Roanoke Virginia: PARCEL 003 Being as shown on Sheet 3 of the plans for Route 5th Street, State Highway Project U000-128-118, RW201, and lying on the west (left) side of and adjacent to the west existing right of way line of Present 5th Street from the north existing right of way line of Present Norfolk Avenue, opposite approximate survey and office revised centmrline Station 16.56, to the land of Norfolk and WeStern Railroad Company opposite approximate Station ~5+43, including connection with Present Norfolk Avenue, and contatntr~ 658 sq. ft., more or less, land, Together shown as being required for the proper construction containing 1,336 sq. ft., more or less. Said temporary easement will terminate at such the aforesaid project is completed; with the temporary right and easement to use the additional area of cut and/or fill slopes, time as the construction of P~CEL 009 Being as shown on Sheet ~ of the said plans and lying on the west (left) side of and adjacent to the west existing right of way line of Present 5th Street from the lands of Norfolk and Western Railway Company opposite approximate survey and office revised centarline Station 18+70, to the south existing right of way line of Shenandoah Avenue opposite approximate Station 19+97, including connection with present Shenandoah Avenue and containing 1,375 sq. ft., more or less, land, Together with the temporary right and easement to use the additional area shown as being required for the proper construction of cut and/or fill slopes, containing 1,269 sq. ft., more or less. Said temporary easement will terminate at such time as the construction of the aforesaid project is completed; Parcels 003 and 009 together contain 2,033 sq. ft., more or less, land; And being a part of the same lands acquired by the grantor from in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of said City. For a more particular description of the lands herein conveyed reference is made to photocopy of Sheets 3 and 4 showing outlined in REO the land conveyed in fee simple and in ORANGE the land conveyed for a temporary easement. The grantor by the execution of this instrument acknowledges that the plans for the aforesaid project as they affect its property have been fully explained to its authorized representative. The said grantor covenants that it has the right to convey the said land to the grantee; that it has done no act to encumber the same; and that it will execute such further assurances of the same as may be requisite. The said grantor covenants and agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, that the consideration hereinabove mentioned and paid to it shall be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation for land, and for damages, if any, to the remaining lands of the grantor-~hinh may result by reason of the use to which the grantee will put the land to be conveyed, including such drainage facilities as may be necessary. WITNESS the following signature and seal: CITY OF ROANOr~ VIRGINIA BY TIT~E State of City of The foregoing instrument vas acknowledged before me this 19_ , by of City of Roanoke~ Virginia. My Commission expires (SEAL) day of Notary Public 3 Flush 'Sur. TA. ->0.5' E*x~et. +95 .~ .~ ~ ~'k lumber ~torage ~'-~t i-st. Fr. &: metal MARY F. PABg~ City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue. S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 August 28, 1992 SANDRA H. FA. KIN Deputy City Clerk File #228-132 Mr. Donald J. Borut Executive Director National League of Cities 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20004 Dear Mr. Borut: I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 31175-082492 designating Mayor David A. Bowers and Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., respectively, as Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Meeting of the National League of Cities and any business meetings in connection with said Conference to be held on November 28 - December 2, 1992, at the 1992 Congress of Cities in New Orleans, Louisiana. Resolution No. 31175-082492 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, August 24, 1992. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: The Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor The Honorable Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Vice-Mayor 1992 .CONGRESS OF CITIES -- NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA To= Cha~rman~ Credential8 Coa~ittee National League of Cities 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.~. Washington, D.C. 20004 The official voting delegate and alternates of the City of are as follows: 1 The HOnorable Uavid A. VOTING DELgcA~ ~ ~o~ers · , Room 452 Fi ' · . . ~ ~ ~ di~zg~ zip COD~--'-'"--'-'~ 2. The ttonorable Beverly ~ T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. ~10 k.~, VlrolNl~ ,~ .... ~O..~ ~ ~ ALTEP~NATE VOTING DELEGATes 3. DATg: ~ Each direct me~ber city is entitled to one voting delegate and two alternate voting delegates. The number of VOtes which can be cast is based on the city's population as determined in the 1980 Census. PLEABE DO NOT FiLL IN SHADED APDA. THIS IS FOR ~C 0~I /~lease type or printyour cit - [l~ase type or print th nm y ~ ~n ~he s~ce pro id-~ ~Sg -e,egate and alte~ate(~), e, title, Cl,y, ,taLe anl z;; Code of your voting Please si~ the ~I~ fo~ ~ COpy to your State Lea ..... d retu~ to Chai~n C.~ --~ u~tC~Or; and keep pI~.~'u~nc[als C~ittee; send the ~LL~ SIGNED: TITLE: ~ / IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The 24th day of August. 1992. No. 31175-082492. VIRGINIA, A RESOLUTION designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Meeting of the National League of Cities. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows: 1. For the National League of Cities Conference to be held on November 28 through December 2, 1992, and any Business Meetings in connection with such Conference, the Honorable David A. Bowers, Mayor, and the Honorable Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Vice-Mayor, are hereby designated Voting Delegate, respectively. 2. Mary F. Parker, City action required by the National Delegate and Alternate Voting Clerk, is directed to take any League of Cities with respect to certification of the City's official Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate. ATTEST: City Clerk. August 5, 1992 To: From: Subject: National 1301 Penn~/i'~,ffrlia Av~enue N.W. League Washifi§ton, D.C. of 200i34 Cities (202) 626-3000 Officers Glenda E Hood Donald M Fraser City Clerks of Direct Member Cities Donald J. Borut, Executive Directo~ Designation of Voting and Alternate Voting Delegates, Annual Congress of Cities, November 28 - December 2, 1992 New Orleans, Louisiana The National League of Cities' Annual Business Meeting will be held Tuesday, December 1, 1992 at the Congress of Cities in New Orleans, Louisiana. Under the Bylaws of the National League of Cities, each direct member city is entitled to cast from one to 20 votes, depending upon the city's population, through its designated voting delegate at the Annual Business Meeting. The table on the reverse side of this memorandum shows the breakdown of votes by population categories. To be eligible to cast the city's vote(s), each voting delegate and alternate voting delegate must be designated by the city using the attached form which will be forwarded to NLC's Credentials Committee. NLC's Bylaws expressly prohibit voting by proxy. Thus, the designated voting delegates must be present at the Annual Business Meeting to cast the city's vote or votes. To enable us to get your credentials in order and to provide your voting delegates with proposed National Municipal Policy amendments and proposed Resolutions prior to the Congress of Cities, we ask that you return the WHITE copy of the completed form to NLC on or before October 2, 1992. A pre-addressed envelope is attached. Upon receipt of these names, NLC will send each voting and alternate voting delegate a set of instructions on registration and rules governing the conduct of the Annual Business Meeting. To assist your state municipal league in selecting delegates to cast votes on behalf of the state municipal league, please forward the YELLOW copy of the credential form to your state league office and keep the PINK copy for your records. If you have any questions, please contact Lesley-Ann Rennie at (202) 626-3020. NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES ANNUAL CONGRESS OF CITIES Number of Votes - Direct Member Cities Article IV, Section 2 of NLC's Bylaws specifies as follows the number of votes which each member city of the National League of Cities is entitled to cast at the Annual Congress of Cities: Under 50,000 1 vote 50,000 - 99,999 2 votes 100,000 - 199,999 4 votes 200,000 - 299,999 6 votes 300,000 - 399,999 8 votes 400,000 - 499,999 10 votes 500,000 - 599,000 12 votes 600,000 - 699,000 14 votes 700,000 - 799,000 16 votes 800,000 - 899,000 18 votes 900,000 and above 20 votes Note: Member cities are required by the Bylaws to cast unanimous votes.